Skip to main content
Please enter a legal issue and/or a location
Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select

Find a Lawyer

More Options

Denial of Capital Habeas Petition Affirmed, and Insurance Matter

By FindLaw Staff on August 30, 2010 | Last updated on March 21, 2019

In Paredes v. Thaler, No. 07-70009, a capital habeas matter, the court affirmed the denial of petitioner's habeas petition, holding that 1) the Texas courts did not unreasonably apply clearly established federal law as determined by the U.S. Supreme Court because whether the jury charge at issue went beyond the limits of how a state may define a single offense of multiple murder was not clearly established; and 2) petitioner could not establish prejudice from the disjunctive jury charge because the jury was also permitted to conclude that he was criminally responsible for the murders under Texas's law of parties even if he did not personally shoot any of the victims.

DPC Indus., Inc. v. Am. Int'l Specialty Lines Ins. Co., No. 09-20634, concerned an action seeking additional insurance coverage against a liability insurer.  The court affirmed summary judgment for defendant on the grounds that 1) nothing in the policy or an additional endorsement required that an insured property be actually owned or operated by the specific entity seeking coverage related to that facility; and 2) the record contained uncontradicted evidence that defendant provided indemnity coverage to plaintiff.

Related Resources

You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help

Meeting with a lawyer can help you understand your options and how to best protect your rights. Visit our attorney directory to find a lawyer near you who can help.

Or contact an attorney near you:
Copied to clipboard