in Re OOIDA Risk Retention Group, Inc., Certain Underwriters at Lloyds, and George Odom, 475 S.W.3d 905

Wells (insured) had a commercial auto policy with an appraisal clause (Condition 12) requiring each party to appoint an appraiser, and if they disagree the appraisers select an umpire; if they can’t agree on an umpire, a court may appoint one.
Wells’ truck burned on March 4, 2013; Relators (insurer) made settlement offers in March–April 2013 and provided the appraisal clause text to Wells and his fiancée.
Dispute developed over salvage and deductions for swapped tires; communications continued and Relators repeatedly invited use of the appraisal clause.
Wells sued on September 17, 2013. Relators invoked the appraisal clause on February 19, 2014; Wells later selected an appraiser and the appraisal process proceeded (reports and settlement offers exchanged). Relators later sought appointment of an impartial umpire under Condition 12.
Relators moved for a no-evidence summary judgment asserting Wells failed to satisfy the appraisal condition precedent. The trial court denied (1) the motion to appoint an umpire and (2) the motion for summary judgment. Relators sought mandamus relief.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Wells)	Defendant's Argument (Relators)	Held
Whether Relators waived the appraisal clause (and so cannot compel appraisal/umpire)	Waiver: insurer destroyed the truck and delayed invoking appraisal after suit, causing an impasse and prejudice	No waiver: destruction didn’t prevent appraisal; there was no mutual impasse when suit was filed; Relators invoked appraisal when reasonable and Wells participated	Court: No waiver. Trial court abused discretion by denying motion to appoint umpire; mandamus conditionally granted ordering appointment per policy
Whether denial of Relators’ summary judgment (based on noncompliance with appraisal clause) is reviewable by mandamus	Contended Relators had to enforce appraisal before suit; trial court allowed breach claim to proceed	Argued appraisal was a condition precedent and summary judgment should have been granted if no waiver	Court: Denial of summary judgment is not reviewable by mandamus absent extraordinary circumstances; petition on this issue denied

In re Universal Underwriters of Tex. Ins. Co., 345 S.W.3d 404 (Tex. 2011) (standards for waiver of appraisal clause: impasse, unreasonable delay, prejudice)
In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d 124 (Tex. 2004) (mandamus standards and adequacy of appellate remedy)
Otis Elevator Co. v. Parmelee, 850 S.W.2d 179 (Tex. 1993) (absence of reporter’s record of non-evidentiary hearing is not fatal)
Am. Cent. Ins. Co. v. Terry, 26 S.W.2d 162 (Tex. 1930) (insurer conduct can constitute waiver of arbitration/appraisal)
In re United Servs. Auto. Ass’n, 307 S.W.3d 299 (Tex. 2010) (mandamus generally unavailable to review denial of summary judgment; extraordinary circumstances required)
In re McAllen Med. Ctr., Inc., 275 S.W.3d 458 (Tex. 2008) (same principle regarding mandamus and summary judgment)
In re Labatt Food Serv., L.P., 279 S.W.3d 640 (Tex. 2009) (deference to trial court factual findings; review of legal conclusions de novo)