You’ve probably seen this mentioned on the Court’s own press release or maybe in Texas Lawyer. No one who has followed the Court’s recent burst of insurance decisions can really doubt the Texas Supreme Court’s importance to insurance law.

In about a year, according to the press release, the Texas Supreme Court handed down sixteen insurance-related decisions. And, in an analysis that may surprise people on both sides of the bar, Lexis breaks down the results as perfectly split between insurers and the insureds.

I think Lexis stretched a bit in running up the overall total — with questionable examples being the First American case (about taxes imposed by the government on insurers, not an insured-insurer dispute — opinion docket) and Perry Homes v. Cull (about the enforcement of an arbitration clause between a homebuilder and homebuyer — opinion docket). That said, Lexis counted First American as a win for “insureds” and Perry Homes as a win for “insurers,” so those two didn’t affect the balance.

But, as Tex Parte noted, the Entergy case is counted as a win for “insureds,” which suggests some weakness in Lexis’s analytical approach to this scorecard. (( Lexis originally said that granting rehearing was “probably a good sign for claimants, who in the previous opinion were precluded from recovering more than workers compensation benefits in most circumstances.” But then when rehearing left the judgment unchanged, Lexis counted the result as a win for “insureds.” It’s true that Entergy Gulf States was the “insured” under its workers compensation insurance policy, but the loser in the case was the injured worker. At least in cases involving third-party claimants, Lexis’s scorecard is a bit simplistic. )) If anyone has walked through these cases and done a more sophisticated count, please let me know.