Texas Tech Law Review     

Comment by Jon Platt

In the early 1970s, the Texas Legislature created the Texas Windstorm Insurance Association (TWIA), which was designed to provide owners of coastal property with windstorm and hail insurance when such insurance was unavailable in the market.  The TWIA, however, no longer serves as an insurer of last resort.  Recent hurricanes have caused tremendous liability to private insurers, and many of those insurers have now ceased from issuing policies in coastal regions.  Thus, the liability of the TWIA has increased from $280 million at its inception, to an estimated $60 billion today.  Under the current structure for funding the TWIA, insurers licensed to write property insurance in Texas could be required to pay large sums in order to cover the TWIA’s liability, a prospect that could lead to widespread insurer insolvency.  This comment addresses the dire need to alter the TWIA’s funding structure in light of its ballooning liability and suggests some possible reforms to that structure.

Comment by Elizabeth Henderson

This comment provides an insightful overview of § 41(e) of the Texas Probate Code, which prevents a parent from inheriting from a deceased child when the parent has committed “bad acts” against the child, such as child abuse and abandonment.  Henderson analyzes the flaws in the language of  § 41(e); particularly that § 41(e) only applies to parents, rather than uncles, aunts, and grandparents and that it uses too broad a definition of the word “child.”  The author also analyzes the constitutionality of § 41(e), concluding that it is unconstitutional in light of the prohibition on forfeiture of inheritances by the Texas Constitution.  Henderson offers a logical solution that maintains the goal of  § 41(e) but amends the statute and the Texas Constitution to rectify the statute’s flaws.  

Comment by Julie C. Caskey

In this comment, Caskey discusses the potential negative consequences of recently passed Texas Senate bill 617.  Senate Bill 617 amended several sections of the Texas Family Code and § 377 of the Texas Probate Code in an attempt to prevent a parent from depriving a minor child of necessary support upon his or her death.  In effect, S.B. 617 makes the obligor’s estate liable for future child support obligations that are based on a court order.  Before offering a relatively simple solution to S.B. 617’s shortfalls, Caskey breaks down S.B. 617’s unintended consequences by using straightforward hypothetical situations.  For example, S.B. 617 could potentially allow one heir to consume the decedent’s entire estate thus leaving other children whose support obligation is based upon common law or statute with inadequate support.  In addition, S.B. 617 runs the potential risk of mismanagement by the obligee parent because it provides future child support to be in one lump-sum payment.  Overall, this comment outlines the negative deficiencies of S.B. 617 as it relates to the liability of an obligor’s estate to pay future child support.  Further, Caskey addresses each downfall with a proposed solution.