Beaty v. Travelers Personal Insurance Company et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION
DEBBIE BEATY,
Plaintiff,
v.
TRAVELERS PERSONAL
INSURANCECO11PANYAND
BRENT DAUZAT,
Defendants.
§
§
§
§
§ 	Civil Action No. H-25-4713
§
§
§
§
§
§
ORDER
Pending before the Court is Travelers Personal Insurance Company's Motion
to Dismiss Brent Dauzat (Document No. 	2). 	Having 	considered the motion,
submissions, and applicable law, the Court determines that the pending motion
should be granted.
I. 	BACKGROUND
On August 14, 2025, Plaintiff Debbie Beaty ("Beaty") filed suit against
Defendants Travelers Personal Insurance Company ("Travelers") and Brent Dauzat
("Dauzat") 	in state 	court for 	an 	alleged underpayment 	of insurance benefits
compensating Beaty's property damage sustained from a weather event. Beaty
asserted claims against Travelers for violations of the Texas Insurance Code, fraud,
and breaches of the duty of good faith and fear dealings. Beaty also asserted claims
against Dauzat, in his individual capacity as a Traveler's insurance agent, for	" 	"
United States District Court
Southern District of Texas
ENTERED
November 14, 2025
Nathan Ochsner, Clerk
Case 4:25-cv-04713 Document 9 Filed on 11/13/25 in TXSD Page 1 of 3

violations of the Texas Insurance Code. On Octc;,ber 2, 2025, Travelers removed the
case to this Court pursuant to the Court's diversity jurisdiction. On that same date,
Travelers moved to dismiss Dauzat from the present case pursuant to Texas
Insurance Code §542A. Beaty failed to respond to Traveler's pending motion to
dismiss either by the original response deadline or the date of this order.
IL 	LAW & ANALYSIS
Travelers moves to dismiss Beaty's complaint against Dauzat, contending that
the Texas Insurance Code allows an insurance agent such as Dauzat to avoid civil
liability from a claimant if certain requirements are met. Beaty did not respond to
-the pending motion to dismiss, failing to rebut or offer evidence to counter any of
Defendants' contentions. Pursuant to Local Rule 7.4, failure to re.spond is taken: as a
representation ofno opposition. S.D. Tex. Local R. 7.4. The Court construes all pro
se filings liberally. See Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007). Regardless of
Beaty's failure to respond, the Court will consider the merits of Traveler's pending
motion.
Section 542A.006(a) of the Texas Insurance Code states, in relevant part, that
"an insurer that is a party to the action may elect to accept whatever liability an agent
might have to the claimant for the agent's acts or omissions related to the claim by
providing written notice to the claimant." Travelers contends that it provided the
requisite notice to Beaty on two separate occasions, and refers the Court to two
2
Case 4:25-cv-04713 Document 9 Filed on 11/13/25 in TXSD Page 2 of 3

••• •• -· 	exhibits confirming that notice absolving Dauzat of liability Was sent to Beaty on
May 31, 2025, and July 1, 2025. 1 Beaty offers no response.
Having considered the motion, submissions, and applicable law, the Court
finds that Travelers complied with the applicable provisions of the Texas Insurance
Code by providing Beaty with the requisite notice to absolve Dauzat of liability.
Accordingly, the Court finds that Traveler's motion to dismiss Dauzat with prejudice
should be granted.
IV. 	CONCLUSION
Based on the foregoing, the Court hereby ·
ORDERS that Travelers Personal Insurance Company's Motion to Dismiss
Brent Dauzat (Document No. 2) is GRANTED. The Court further
ORDERS that Plaintiff Debbie Beaty's claims ag•ainst Brent Dauzat are
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
SIGNED at Houston, Texas, on this _1! day of November, 2025.
~ 	W::tt..:DAVID HITTNER
United States District Judge
1 See Defendant Travelers Personal Insurance Company's Motion to Dismiss Brent
Dauzat, Document No. 2, Exhibits C & D (Proofs ofNotice).
3
Case 4:25-cv-04713 Document 9 Filed on 11/13/25 in TXSD Page 3 of 3