Insuring for Punitive Damages Doesn't Violate Public Policy

In an opinion that could be one of Texas' most important insurance coverage rulings in years and spark even more debate about damage awards, the 2nd Court of Appeals ruled that insuring for punitive damages does not violate public policy.

15 minute read September 09, 2003 at 12:01 AM
By
John Council
Insuring for Punitive Damages Doesn't Violate Public Policy

In an opinion that could be one of Texas' most important insurance coverage rulings in years and spark even more debate about damage awards, the 2nd Court of Appeals ruled that insuring for punitive damages does not violate public policy.

This premium content is locked for LawJournalNewsletters subscribers only

ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN LawJournalNewsletters

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

Already have an account? Sign In Now

For enterprise-wide or corporate access, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or call 1-877-256-2473.

NOT FOR REPRINT

© 2026 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.

Continue Reading

Adverse Possessor Provided Insufficient Evidence to Support TackingTown’s Installation of Guardrails Did Not Constitute a TakingMortgagee Entitled to Deficiency JudgmentLandowner Adequately Alleged Trespass During Renovation

August 13, 2026

Agentic AI introduces risks that are novel and complex, but the most effective response is a familiar one. Zero Trust answers the problem of when an AI agent misfires on its own by constraining what an agent can do rather than betting on how it will behave.

July 31, 2026