A Texas bankruptcy trustee’s push to bring insurers back into a dismissed injury case hit a hard stop, highlighting risks around litigation timing and bankruptcy oversight.
On June 19, 2025, the Ninth Court of Appeals of Texas dismissed an appeal filed by Dewayne Murray, the Chapter 7 bankruptcy trustee for Sherman Robinson. Murray had attempted to revive claims against Schneider National Carriers, Inc., Old Republic Insurance Company, and INS Insurance, Inc., after those parties were dismissed from a 2017 lawsuit tied to a 2015 car accident.
The collision occurred on October 5, 2015. Sherman Robinson filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy on February 18, 2016, in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Louisiana. He signed a representation agreement with attorney George Tucker on March 2, 2016. Murray was appointed as trustee in September 2016, and in May 2017, the bankruptcy court approved the employment of Tucker as special counsel to pursue Robinson’s personal injury claim.
Robinson filed suit on October 4, 2017, in Jefferson County, Texas, naming Desmond Pollard - the driver - as well as Schneider, Old Republic, and INS as defendants. Though the petition was filed pro se, it listed Tucker’s address. Robinson alleged negligence against Pollard but did not specify claims against the insurers.
On November 3, 2017, Old Republic and INS filed a Rule 91a motion to dismiss, arguing that no specific claims had been made against them and that any direct action was premature without a determination of liability. Then, on November 28, Robinson filed a motion to nonsuit Schneider, Old Republic, and INS without prejudice. This filing came through newly appearing attorney Wendle Van Smith, who also filed a notice stating he was Robinson’s lead counsel. The trial court granted the nonsuit the next day, November 29, 2017.
On September 5, 2018, Murray moved to intervene, arguing that the tort claim belonged to the bankruptcy estate and that only he had the authority to pursue or dismiss it. A joint petition filed on September 10 by both Murray and Robinson sought to re-add the previously nonsuited defendants. Pollard opposed the amendment, pointing out that the statute of limitations had expired nearly a year earlier.
After a hearing in December 2020, the trial court agreed and, on January 5, 2021, dismissed the plaintiffs’ attempt to rejoin Schneider, Old Republic, and INS. These claims were later severed into a separate cause of action.
Years later, in August 2023, Murray filed an original petition for Bill of Review and alternatively moved to vacate the 2017 nonsuit, arguing that Van Smith lacked bankruptcy court approval to represent Robinson at the time and that Robinson had no authority to act on behalf of the estate. Murray contended the nonsuit was void due to lack of subject matter jurisdiction and asked the trial court to set it aside.
Pollard responded by arguing the Bill of Review was procedurally improper, filed too late, and failed to plead the required legal grounds such as fraud, accident, or official mistake. The trial court held a hearing on November 17, 2023, and on December 4, 2023, denied the trustee’s request. The court concluded that more than four years had passed since the nonsuit, and therefore the court lacked authority to grant the petition.
Murray appealed. But the appellate court dismissed the case, holding there was no final, appealable judgment in the original trial cause and that the order was not eligible for an interlocutory appeal under Texas law.
No insurance policy language or coverage issues were analyzed by the court. The case centered entirely on procedural rules, the trustee’s authority to act on behalf of the bankruptcy estate, and the timeline for challenging court orders.
For insurers and claims handlers, this case underscores how critical timing and proper representation can be - especially when bankruptcies are in play. A misstep early in the process can close the door for good, even when the underlying claim remains unresolved.
