The insured’s attorney was sanctioned for pursuing claims that were factually and legally unfounded. Wright v ASI Lloyds, No. 3?22-cv-357, Order (S.D. Texas Aug. 5, 2025).

ASI moved for sections against the insured’s counsel, Eric B. Dick of the Eric Dick Law Firm, PLLC, requiring payment of fees, costs and expenses reasonably incurred in defending the insured’s action. The evidence revealed that the complaint was founded upon falsities. Dick either knew or should have know when filing the complaint the following:

• The complaint alleged vandalism damaged the insured’s property, but the insured did not believe vandalism caused the damage.
• The complaint alleged the property was the insured’s primary residence, but she had lived elsewhere since 2000 and the property had been vacant for two years at the time she discovered the damage.
• The complaint alleged the property was well-maintained prior to the loss, but the city cited the property as a nuisance, unsanitary, and unfit for human habitation a year before the alleged date of loss.