IN RE: ALLSTATE FIRE AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY (2021)

In this suit between an insurance carrier and its insured involving the latter's entitlement to benefits under an uninsured/underinsured motorist policy, the trial court denied the insured's motion to compel the deposition of the carrier's corporate representative. The court of appeals granted the insured's petition for writ of mandamus in part, holding that the insured was entitled to conduct a deposition “narrowly focused in scope to matters relevant to [the carrier's] defenses in the pending lawsuit.” No. 13-20-00254-CV, 2020 WL 5494503, at *6 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi–Edinburg Sept. 10, 2020, orig. proceeding). The carrier now seeks mandamus relief here.

Both the trial court and the court of appeals ruled without the benefit of our opinion in In re USAA General Indemnity Co., 624 S.W.3d 782 (Tex. June 18, 2021) (orig. proceeding) [No. 20-0281], issued today. We believe the trial court should have the opportunity to reconsider its order in light of that opinion. Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus without prejudice to give the trial court that opportunity.

PER CURIAM