Hudson Insurance Company v. BVB Partners ( 2015 )

ACCEPTED
13-15-00163-CV
THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS
CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS
5/1/2015 6:26:47 PM
DORIAN RAMIREZ
CLERK
NO. 13-15-00163-CV
IN THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS
FILED IN
13th COURT OF APPEALS
CORPUS CHRISTI/EDINBURG, TEXAS
5/1/2015 6:26:47 PM
DORIAN E. RAMIREZ
HUDSON INSURANCE COMPANY, Appel/antClerk
v.
BVB PARTNERS, Appellee
Appealed from the County Court at Law No.4 of Hidalgo County, Texas
Cause No.: CL-14-3125-D
BRIEF OF APPELLANT
HUDSON INSURANCE COMPANY
STEVE E. COUCH
State Bar No. 04875650
KEN E. KENDRICK
State Bar No. 11278500
3050 Post Oak Blvd., Suite 200
Houston, Texas 77056-6570
Telephone: (713) 595-6000
Facsimile: (713) 595-6001
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT
HUDSON INSURANCE COMPANY
ORAL ARGUMENT REQUESTED
IDENTITY OF PARTIES AND COUNSEL
Pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 38.1(a), Appellant Hudson Insurance Company
submits the following list of names of all parties to the case, as well as the names
and addresses of their counsel.
1. Defendant/Appellant:
Hudson Insurance Company
Counsel
Steve E. Couch
State Bar No. 04875650
Ken E. Kendrick
State Bar No. 11278500
Kelly, Sutter & Kendrick, P.C.
3050 Post Oak Blvd., Suite 200
Houston, Texas 77056-6570
Telephone: (713) 595-6000
Facsimile: (7l3) 595-6001
2. Plaintiff/Appellee:
BVB Partners
Counsel
David E. Wood
Attorney at Law
l317 E. Quebec Ave
McAllen, TX 78503
Telephone: 956-618-0115
Facsimile: 956-581-4457
11
TABLE OF CONTENTS
IDENTITY OF PARTIES AND COUNSEL ............................... 11
TABLE OF CONTENTS ...................................................... 111
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES................................................... IV
RECORD REFERENCES AND PARTY ABBREVIATION ............ x
STATEMENT OF THE CASE ................................................ X111
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION ........................................ xv
STATEMENT REGARDING ORAL ARGUMENT...... ................ XVI
PREAMBLE AND PRELIMINARY STATEMENT....................... XV111
ISSUES PRESENTED.......................................................... XIX
STATEMENT OF FACTS....................................................... 1
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT.................................................. 5
ARGUMENT AND AUTHORITIES........................................... 9
CONCLUSION AND PRAYER...................................... .......... 32
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE ................................................... 34
iii
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES
CASES:
United States Supreme Court
Mitsubishi Motors Com. v. Soler ChryslerlPlymouth, Inc.,
473 U.S. 614,105 S.Ct. 3346 (1985) ............................................................ 19
Moses H. Cone Memorial Hasp. v. Mercury Constr. Com.,
460 U.S. 1, 103 S. Ct. 927, 941-942 (1983) .................................................. 11
Federal Appellate Courts
Ace Property & Cas. Ins. Co. v. Federal Crop Ins. Com.,
440 F.3d 992 (8 th Cir. 2006) ......................................................................... xix
Alliance Ins. Co. v. Wilson,
th. ) .•• •
384 F.3 d 5 47 (8 Clr. 2004 ................................................................ XVlll, XIX
American Growers Ins. Co. v. Federal Crop Ins. Com.,
532 F.3 d 797 (8 t hClr.
·
2008 ) ....................................................................... XVlll
•••
Bane One Acceptance Com. v. Hill,
367 F.3d 426 (5th Cir. 2004) ........................................................................ 19
Meyer v. Conlon,
162 F.3d 1264 (lOth Cir. 1998) .................................................................... 26
Primerica Life Ins. Co. v. Brown,
304 F.3d 469, (5th Cir. 2002) ........................................................................ 9
Williams Farms of Homestead v. Rain & Hail Ins. Services, Inc.,
121 F.3d 630 (lIth Cir. 1997) ...................................................................... 26
iv
Federal District Courts
Bissette v. Rain & Hail, LLC,
2011 WL 3905059 (E.D. N.C. 2011) ............................................................ 17
Midland Farms, LLC v. U.S. Dep't of Agriculture,
2014 WL 3672134 (D.S. D. 2014) ............................................................... xix
Newpark Shipbuilding v. Rig Pan Producer,
267 F. Supp. 2d 756 (S.D. Tex. 2003) ....................................................... 6,24
Nobles v. Rural Community Ins. Services,
122 F. Supp. 2d 1290 (M.D. Ala. 2000) ..................................................... 7,25
Nobles v. Rural Community, Ins. Services,
303 F. Supp. 2d 1292 (MD. Ala. 2004) ............................................... 8, 26, 27
Texas Supreme Court
Allied-Bruce Terrninix Co. v. Dobson,
513 U.S. 265, 115 S. Ct. 834 (1995) ........................................................ 14, 16
Cantella & Co., Inc. v. Goodwin,
924 S.W.2d 943 (Tex. 1996) (orig. proceeding) (per curiam) ..................... 11
Capital Income Properties - LXXX v. Blackmon,
843 S.W.2d 22 (Tex. 1992) ........................................................................... 27
Don's Bldg. Supply, Inc. v. OneBeacon Ins. Co.,
267 S.W.3d 20 (Tex. 2008) .......................................................................... 23
Forest Oil Corp. v. McAllen,
268 S.W.3d 51 (Tex. 2008) ............................................................................. 9
In Re D. Wilson Const. Co.,
196 S.W.3d 774 (Tex. 2006) (orig. proceeding) ................... 10, 11, 12, 19,31
In Re FirstMerit Bank, N.A.,
52 S.W.3d 749 (Tex. 2001) (orig. proceeding) ................................. 13,20,32
v
In Re Halliburton,
80 S.W.3d 566 (Tex. 2002) (orig. proceeding) ............................................... 1
In Re Kellogg Brown & Root, Inc.,
166 S.W.3d 732 (Tex. 2005) (orig. proceeding) ............................................. 9
In Re L & L Kempwood Associates, L.P.,
9 S.W.3d 125 (Tex. 1999) ................................................................. 14, 15, 16
In Re Labatt Food Service, LP,
279 S.W.3d 640 (Tex. 2009) ..................................................................... 9, 10
In Re Macy's Texas, Inc.,
291 S.W.3d 418 (Tex. 2009) (orig. proceeding) (per curiam) ............... 12, 17
In Re Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc.,
315 S.W.3d 888 (Tex. 2010) (orig. proceeding ............................................ xv
In Re Oakwood Mobile Homes, Inc.,
987 S.W.2d 571 (Tex. 1999) (per curiam) ............................................. 12, 18
In Re Palm Harbor Homes, Inc.,
195 S.W.3d 672 (Tex. 2006) ......................................................................... 12
In Re Poly-America, LP,
262 S.W.3d 337 (Tex. 2008) (orig. proceeding) ..................................... 10, 19
In Re Rubiola,
334 S.W.3d 220 (Tex. 2011) (orig. proceeding) ........................................... 12
In Re Weekley Homes, L.P.,
180 S.W.3d 127 (Tex. 2005) ................................................................... 29,31
1.M. Davidson, Inc. v. Webster,
128 S.W.3d 223 (Tex. 2003) ......................................................................... 32
National Fire Union Ins. Co. v. CBI Indus. Ins. Co.,
907 S.W.2d 517 (Tex. 1995) ......................................................................... 23
VI
Prudential Securities, Inc. v. Marshall,
909 S.W.2d 896, 898 (Tex. 1995) (orig. proceeding)
(per curiam) ......................................................................... 11, 18, 19,20,28
Rachal v. Reitz,
403 S.W.3d 840 (Tex. 2013) ................................................................... 30,31
Richmont Holdings, Inc. v. Superior Recharge Systems, LLC,
392 S.W.3d 633, (Tex. 2013) (per curiam) .................................................. 13
Texas Courts of Appeals
Ameriprise Financial Services, Inc. v. Farias,
2013 WL 6175330 (Tex. App. - Corpus Christi-Edinburg 2013,
pet. denied) (Mem. Op.) .......................................................................... xv, 16
Ascendant Anesthesia PLLC v. Abazi,
348 S.W.3d 454 (Tex. App. - Dallas 2011, no pet.) .................................. 12
Associated Glass, Ltd. v. Eye Ten Oaks Investments, Ltd., 1
47 S.W.3d 507 (Tex. App. - San Antonio 2004, no pet.) .......................... 10
Baumeister v. Reagan,
2013 WL 530976 (Tex. App. -Fort Worth 2013,
no pet.) (Mem. Op.) ................................................................................ 20,28
Buckner Glass Mirror v. Pritchard,
697 S.W.2d 712 (Tex. App. - Corpus Christi 1985, no writ) ..................... 26
Dish Network, L.L.C. v. Brenner,
2013 WL 3326640 (Tex. App. - Corpus Christi-Edinburg 2013,
no pet.) (emphasis added) (Mem. Op.) ......................................................... 13
F.D. Frontier Drilling (Cypress) Ltd. v. Didmon,
438 S.W.3d 688 (Tex. App. - Houston [1st Dist.] 2014,
pet. denied) .. '" ............................................................................................... 10
In Re American National Cty. Mut. Ins. Co.,
384 S.W.3d 429 (Tex. App. - Austin 2012, orig. proceeding)
(Mem. Op.) .................................................................................................... 27
VII
In Re Bath Junkie Franchise, Inc.,
246 S.W.3d 356 (Tex. App. - Beaumont 2008, orig. proceeding) ............. 16
In Re Chevron, USA, Inc.,
419 S.W.3d 318 (Tex. App. - El Paso 2010, orig. proceeding) ................. 16
In Re Conseco Finance Servo Com.,
19 S.W.3d 562 (Tex. App. - Waco 2000, orig. proceeding) ...................... 18
In Re Education Management Corp., Inc.,
14 S.W.3d 418 (Tex. App. - Houston [14th Dist.] 2000,
orig. proceeding) ........................................................................................... 14
In Re Frost National Bank,
2008 WL 4889836 (Tex. App. - Corpus Christi-Edinburg 2008,
orig. proceeding) (Mem. Op.) ....................................................................... 18
In Re Great Western Drilling, Ltd.,
211 S.W.3d 828 (Tex. App. - Eastland 2006, orig. proceeding) ............... 27
In Re Profanchik,
31 S.W.3d 381 (Tex. App. - Corpus Christi 2000)
(orig. proceeding) ................................................ 12, 15, 16, 18, 19,20,27,28
Maverick Engineering, Inc. V. Nadkarni,
2009 WL 1974757 (Tex. App. - Corpus Christi-Edinburg 2009,
orig. proceeding) (Mem. Op.) ..................................................... 14, 19, 20, 28
Neatherlin Homes, Inc. V. Love,
2007 WL 700996 (Tex. App. - Corpus Christi-Edinburg 2007,
orig. proceeding) (Mem. Op.) ........................................................... 17, 18, 20
Vlll
STATUTES:
7 U.S.C. § 150 1 ..................................................................................................... xvii
7 U.S.C. § 1503 ..................................................................................................... xvii
9 U.S.C. § 2 ....................................................................................................... 14, 17
9 U.S.C. § 16 ........................................................................................................... xv
Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 51.016 ................................................................... xv
REGULATIONS:
7 C.F.R. § 457.8 ..................................................................................................... xiii
27 C.F.R. § 457.8 .................................................................................................... 17
ix
RECORD REFERENCES AND PARTY ABBREVIATIONS
References in Appellant's Brief are shown as follows, with specific page
numbering in parenthesis unless otherwise noted:
Appendix: References to the Appendix are by notation "App.", e.g., App.
1, p.I
Clerk's Record: References to Volume 1 of the Clerk's Record from the
Hidalgo County Court at Law No. 4 filings and proceedings are by page
number using the notation: "CR", e.g., CR: 1. References to Volume 2 of
the Clerk's Record are by volume and page number using the notation:
"CR: Vol. _ at _", e.g., CR: Vol. 2 at 1.
Reporter's Record: References to the Reporter's Record reflecting
hearings held in the Hidalgo County Court at Law No.4 are by volume and
page number using the notation: "RR: Vol. _ at _", e.g. RR: Vol. 1 at 1
The Order: References to "the Order" or "the Trial Court's Order", unless
otherwise noted, shall refer to the Trial Court's March 17,2015 Order which
denied Hudson Insurance Company's Motion to Compel Arbitration and
Motion to Stay.
"Hudson": References to "Hudson" shall mean Appellant Hudson
Insurance Company.
x
"Plaintiff': References to "Plaintiff", unless otherwise noted, shall refer to
Plaintiff, BVB Partners.
"CropGuard": References to "CropGuard", unless otherwise noted, shall
refer to Defendant Crop Guard Group, Inc.
"Parties": References to "parties" or "the parties", unless otherwise noted,
shall refer to Plaintiff and Hudson, collectively.
"Trial Court": References to "Trial Court", refers to the Hidalgo County
Court at Law No.4, Judge Fred Garza Presiding, the Court in which the
Plaintiff filed this lawsuit/cause.
Xl
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
This case anses from the premium which the Plaintiff was ultimately
charged for its Multiple Peril Crop Insurance Policy for the crop year 2013
(sometimes referred to as "the Policy"). (CR: 4-7; CR: Vol. 2 at 91-92) Plaintiff
disagreed with the charged premium and it filed suit seeking recovery of the
premium amount which it was allegedly overcharged. (CR: 4-7)
Hudson Insurance Company issued crop insurance policies to the Plaintiff
from crop year 2008 through crop year 2013. (CR: 28-29; CR: Vol. 2 at 71) This
case involves the policy for the crop year 2013 (sometimes hereafter referred to as
"the Policy"). (CR: 4-7, 28-29; CR: Vol. 2 at 91-02) CropGuard Group, Inc. was
the Plaintiffs insurance agent, as well as Hudson's agent with respect to the crop
year 2013 policy. (CR: 4-7)
As discussed below, crop insurance policies are unique; the Basic Provisions
are written by the Federal Government (the Risk Management Agency of the
United States Department of Agriculture) and the policies are re-insured by the
Government. (CR: 28-29, 48, 78) The Basic Provisions, which include the
arbitration provision, are then published in the Code of Federal Regulations. (CR:
28-29,48, 78) (See also Preamble and Preliminary Statement)
Xli
The arbitration agreement contained in the Plaintiffs crop year 2013 policy
pertinently states that:
"If you [the insured] and we [Hudson] fail to agree on any
determination made us [Hudson] ... , the disagreement must be
resolved through arbitration in accordance with the Rules of the
American Arbitration Association". (CR:7S-79) (emphasis added)
Under its crop year 2013 policy, the Plaintiff submitted seven (7) claims and
Hudson paid Plaintiff the total amount of $347,289 pursuant to those claims. (CR:
Vol. 2 at 71-74, 73) Thus, the Plaintiff sought and obtained very substantial
benefits under its 2013 crop year policy. (CR: Vol. 2 at 4-S, 71-74)
Plaintiff alleges that Hudson (and CropGuard) provided misinformation to it
regarding the lower premium enterprise unit system. (CR: 4-7) Subsequently,
Hudson determined that Plaintiff was not entitled to the lower premium and
Hudson then determined the premium/applicable premium rate and charged the
premium on the Policy. (CR: 4-7; CR: Vol. 2 at 91-92) Plaintiff has alleged that it
was charged $25,000 more in premium than it should have been. (CR: 4-7) At the
March 4,2015 hearing, Plaintiffs counsel explained that Hudson denied Plaintiffs
premium subsidy claim. (RR: Vol. 3 at 14-16) Hudson does not agree with
counsel's characterization, but this further shows that, inevitably, Plaintiff
disagreed with Hudson's premium determination and it then filed this lawsuit. In
xiii
this lawsuit, Plaintiff seeks the premIUm amount which it was allegedly
overcharged -- the $25,000 -- as its actual damages. (CR: 4-7)
On November 21,2014, Hudson filed its Motion to Compel Arbitration and
Motion to Stay (sometimes hereafter referred to as "Hudson's Motion"). (CR: 11-
198) On February 3,2015, Hudson filed a Supplement to its Motion. (CR: Vol. 2
at 4-74)1 Plaintiff filed a Motion to Continue the February 4,2015 hearing. (CR:
Vol. 2 at 75-76) At the February 4, 2015 hearing, the Honorable Fred Garza,
Presiding Judge of the County Court at Law No.4 of Hidalgo County, announced
deadlines for Plaintiff to file a Response and for Hudson to file a Reply (to
Plaintiff's Response), and the hearing was reset to March 4, 2015. RR: Vol. 2 at 1-
12; CR: Vol. 2 at 136)
After Plaintiff filed a Response and Hudson filed its Reply in the Trial
Court, a hearing was held on March 4, 2015, before Presiding Judge Garza. (RR:
Vol. 3 at 5-43; CR: Vol. 2 at 136) After the hearing, the parties filed additional
and supplemental briefing. (CR: Vol. 2 at 93-121) On March 17,2015, the Trial
Court, Presiding Judge Garza, signed an Order denying Hudson's Motion. (CR:
Vol. 2 at 122) On April 2, 2015, Hudson filed its Notice of Appeal. (CR: Vol. 2 at
123-126)
I In the Clerk's Record, the Exhibits to Hudson's Supplement to its Motion are out of order.
Exhibit "A" to Hudson's Supplement, the Affidavit of Ammie Martinez, appears at pages 70-74.
(CR: Vol. 2 at 70-74) Exhibit "1" to the Affidavit are at pages 12-31 (CR: Vol. 2 at 12-31);
Exhibit "2" to the Affidavit are at pages 32-69 (CR: Vol. 2 at 32-69).
XIV
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION
This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to Texas Civil Practice and Remedies
Code Section 51.016 and 9 U.S.C. § 16. Specifically, when the Federal Arbitration
Act ("FAA") applies, as it does here, Section 51.016 authorizes an immediate
appeal of an interlocutory order "under the same circumstances that an appeal from
a federal district court's order or decision would be permitted by 9 U.S.C. Section
16". Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 51.016; 9 U.S.C. § 16; In Re Merrill Lynch &
Co., Inc., 315 S.W.3d 888, 891, n. 3 (Tex. 2010) (orig. proceeding); Ameriprise
Financial Services, Inc. v. Farias, 2013 WL 6175330 at *2 (Tex. App. - Corpus
Christi-Edinburg 2013, pet. denied).
xv
STATEMENT REGARDING ORAL ARGUMENT
Appellant believes that oral argument would be beneficial to the Court in
resolving any questions which it may have. At the same time, Appellant believes
that, in view of applicable and controlling law and the evidence of record, it is
clear that the Trial Court was required to order/compel arbitration of Plaintiffs
alleged claim against Hudson.
xvi
PREAMBLE AND PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
Since this case concerns crop insurance policies, which are unique, Hudson
briefly outlines the background regarding the Federal Crop Insurance Program.
In 1938, the United States Congress passed the Federal Crop Insurance Act
("FCIA"). 7 U.S.C. § 1501. The FCIA began the Federal Crop Insurance
Program, and under the authority of the FCIA, the Federal Crop Insurance
Corporation ("FCIC") was created. Id. at § 1503. The FCIC is a wholly-owned
corporation of the Federal Government which, along with the United States
Department of Agriculture, administers and regulates the Federal Crop Insurance
Program. See id.; Alliance Ins. Co. v. Wilson, 384 F.3d 547, 549 (8 th Cir. 2004).
In 1996, Congress created the RMA to operate and manage the FCIC and to
administer the Federal Crop Program. American Growers Ins. Co. v. Federal Crop
Ins. Corp., 532 F.3d 797,798 (8th Cir. 2008).
In 1980, Congress revised the FCIA to encourage the FCIC to contract with
approved, private insurance companies to sell and service crop insurance policies
and to have the FCIC reinsure those policies. Ace Property & Cas. Ins. Co. v.
Federal Crop Ins. Corp., 440 F.3d 992, 994 (8 th Cir. 2006). Thus, crop insurance
policies can now be issued through approved, private insurance providers and the
policies are reinsured by the FCIC, rather than being issued directly by the FCIC.
Wilson, 384 F.3d at 549
xvii
Hudson is an approved private insurance provider and thus, authorized to
issue crop insurance policies, like the crop policies which it issued to the Plaintiff.
(CR: 28-29) The 2013 crop year policy which Hudson issued to the Plaintiff
was/is re-insured by the FCIC. (CR: 28-29, 48)
The terms and conditions of crop insurance policies, i.e., the "Basic
Provisions", are written by the RMA and then published in the Code of Federal
Regulations. 7 C.F.R. § 457.8 Midland Farms, LLC v. U.S. Dep't of Agriculture,
2014 WL 3672134 at *1 (D.S. D. 2014) The Basic Provisions, which become part
of all crop insurance policies reinsured by the FCIC, contain a mandatory
arbitration provision. (CR: 28-29, 48) As a part of the Basic Provisions, the
arbitration provision appears in the Code of Federal Regulations. See 7 C.F.R. §
457.8 (CR: 28-29, 48)
XVlll
ISSUES PRESENTED
1. The Trial Court Erred In Failing To Compel Arbitration Because Hudson
Established That The Parties' Valid Arbitration Agreement Encompasses
The Plaintiffs Claim
A. Hudson Established That The FAA Governs The Parties' Arbitration
Agreement
B. Hudson Established That A Valid Arbitration Agreement Exists
Between It And The Plaintiff
C. The Plaintiffs Alleged Claim Falls Within The Scope Of The
Arbitration Agreement
II. Independently, Because The Plaintiff Undisputably Obtained Substantial
Benefits Under Its 2013 Crop Year Policy, The Trial Court Inevitably
Abused Its Discretion In Failing To Compel Arbitration Under The Direct
Benefits Estoppel Doctrine
XIX
NO. 13-15-00163-CV
IN THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS
HUDSON INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant
v.
BVB PARTNERS, Appellee
Appealed from the County Court at Law No.4 of Hidalgo County, Texas
Cause No.: CL-14-3125-D
BRIEF OF APPELLANT
HUDSON INSURANCE COMPANY
TO THE HONORABLE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS:
Pursuant to Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 28 and 38, Appellant,
Hudson Insurance Company, now files its Appellant's Brief.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
Hudson, an approved insurance provider of multiple peril crop insurance
policies, issued crop insurance policies to Plaintiff BVB Partners from crop year
2008 through crop year 2013. (CR: 28-29; CR: Vol. 2 at 71) The policies were
reinsured by the FCIC. (CR: 28-29, 48) The Basic Provisions of the policies,
which include the arbitration provision, are written by the Federal Government
(RMA) and are then published in the Code of Federal Regulations. (CR: 28-29,
48) This case concerns the Plaintiffs policy for the crop year 2013. (CR: 407, 28-
29; CR: Vol. 2 at 91-92) CropGuard was Plaintiffs insurance agent, as well as
Hudson's agent, with respect to the Plaintiffs crop year 2013 insurance policy.
(CR: 4-7)
The Policy contains the following arbitration provision:
"if you [the insured] and we [Hudson] fail to agree on any
determination made us [Hudson] ... , the disagreement must be
resolved through arbitration in accordance with the Rules of the
American Arbitration Association". (CR:78-79) (emphasis added)
Under the Policy, the Plaintiff submitted seven (7) claims and Hudson paid
Plaintiff $347,289 pursuant to those claims. (CR: Vol. 2 at 71-74, 73) Thus, the
Plaintiff sought and obtained very substantial benefits under its 2013 crop year
policy. (CR: Vol. 2 at 4-8,71-74)
This case arises from the premium which Plaintiff was ultimately charged
for its 2013 crop year policy. (CR: 4-7; CR: Vo!' 2 at 91-93) In its Original
Petition, Plaintiff alleges that in January, 2013, Hudson (and CropGuard) provided
misinformation about planting in one unit (instead of two), which pertained to
whether it qualified or would qualify for a lower premium enterprise unit system.
(CR: 4-7) Plaintiff was then charged a policy premium and Plaintiff alleges that it
was charged $25,000 more than it should have been charged, and it seeks the
$25,000 as its actual damages. (CR: 4-7) To this extent, Hudson determined that
2
the Plaintiff did not qualify for the enterprise unit system and it then determined
and charged the premium/applicable premium rate. (CR: 4-7; CR: Vol. 2 at 91-92)
While Hudson does not concede to liability to any extent, its determinations
resulted in the higher premium amount for which Plaintiff allegedly seeks
recovery. (CR: 4-7; CR: Vol. 2 at 91-92)
When Hudson filed its Original Answer, it asserted that the Plaintiff's
alleged claim(s) falls within the scope of the parties' valid and enforceable
arbitration agreement contained in the Policy. (CR: 8-10) On November 21 2014,
Hudson filed its Motion to Compel Arbitration and Motion to Stay, establishing
that the parties' valid arbitration agreement encompasses the Plaintiff's alleged
claim. (CR: 11-198) On February 3, 2015, Hudson filed a Supplement to its
Motion in which, among other things, it additionally demonstrated that Plaintiff's
alleged claim must also be arbitrated because Plaintiff undisputably sought and
obtained substantial benefits under its 2013 crop year policy. (CR: Vol. 2 at 4-74)
On February 4, 2015, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Continue the hearing, which had
been set for February 4, 2015. (CR: 200; CR: Vol. 2 at 75-80)
On February 4, 2015, a hearing was held at which Hudson's counsel
provided the Trial Court with some background information and preliminary
comments regarding Hudson's arguments; otherwise, the Court reset the hearing to
March 4,2015 and provided a briefing schedule for the Plaintiff to file a Response
3
to Hudson's Motion and Supplement thereto, and for Hudson to file a Reply to the
Plaintiffs Response. (RR: Vol. 2 at 4-11; CR: Vol. 2 at 136)
Subsequently, on March 4, 2015, the Trial Court heard arguments of
counsel. (RR: Vol. 3 at 5-43; CR: Vol. 2 at 136) During the hearing, Plaintiffs
counsel admitted that Hudson made a determination in charging the policy
premium (or determining the premium rate), but counsel asserted that "we're not
complaining about any determination that you [Hudson] made". (RR: Vol. 3 at 14-
16) But yet, in this lawsuit, Plaintiff solely seeks the determined higher premium
amount, which it asserts is $25,000, as its alleged damages. (CR: 4-7) As
explained by Plaintiffs counsel at the hearing, Hudson denied Plaintiffs
"premium subsidy" claim. (RR: Vol. 3 at 14-15) While Hudson does not agree
with this characterization, such explanation further shows that Plaintiff inevitably
disagreed with Hudson's ultimate premium determination, which resulted in
Plaintiff filing this lawsuit to recover the higher premium amount. (RR: Vol. 3 at
14-16; CR: 4-7; CR: Vol. 2 at 91-92)
After the hearing, the parties filed additional and supplemental briefing.
(CR: Vol. 2 at 93-121) On March 17, 2015, the Trial Court signed the Order
denying Hudson's Motion. (CR: Vol. 2 at 122) On April 2, 2015, Hudson filed its
Notice of Appeal. (CR: Vol. 2 at 123-126)
4
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT
The law strongly favors arbitration and a presumption exists in favor of
agreements to arbitrate under the FAA.
Here, Hudson established that its arbitration agreement with the Plaintiff is
governed by the FAA and this issue was not disputed in the Trial Court. Hudson
then proved the parties' valid arbitration agreement and the Plaintiff did not
dispute its validity or enforceability. Also, the Plaintiff did not attempt to either
raise a defense or prove a defense; it exclusively contested that its alleged claim
falls within the scope of the arbitration agreement.
Because Hudson established the parties' valid arbitration agreement, any
ambiguities or doubts regarding the arbitrability of Plaintiffs claim must be
resolved in favor of arbitration. In fact, as this Court and the Texas Supreme Court
have recognized, when there is an interpretation supporting the arbitrability of a
claim, as there is here, the "compelling" federal policy favoring arbitration
requires that the claim be arbitrated.
The arbitration agreement here applies when the parties disagree about "any
determination" made by Hudson. This is a broad agreement; there is no limiting
language. Plaintiff has alleged that it was "charged" a higher premium by $25,000
for its 2013 crop year policy than it should have been, and Plaintiffs alleged
damages solely comprise this higher premium amount. Inevitably and necessarily,
5
Hudson detennined and charged the Policy premium, and Plaintiff obviously
disagreed with it, which dictates that its claim must be arbitrated.
Specifically, Hudson detennined that the Plaintiff did not qualify for the
enterprise unit system and it then determined the premium/premium rate which
was ultimately charged. In other words, Hudson made a "determination" which
resulted in the higher premium, which Plaintiff asserts is $25,000 - the alleged
damage Plaintiff seeks in this lawsuit. As Plaintiffs counsel explained it at the
March 4,2015 hearing, Hudson denied its "premium subsidy" claim; Hudson does
not agree with this characterization, but this further shows that Plaintiffs claim is
necessarily based on Hudson's premium detennination. And Plaintiff obviously
disagreed with the premium determination; thus, this lawsuit. In fact, when a
plaintiff attempted to avoid arbitration in another case and argued that there was no
"dispute" despite filing the lawsuit, the Federal Court's response was: "obviously,
a lawsuit is a dispute". Newpark Shipbuilding v. Rig Pan Producer, 267 F. Supp. 2d
756, 758 (S.D. Tex. 2003)
While the Plaintiff asserts that its claim is solely based on the alleged
misinformation regarding whether it qualified for the enterprise unit system, until
Hudson determined and charged the premium/premium rate on the Policy, the
Plaintiff had no damage and thus, no ripe claim. Through counsel, Plaintiff
admitted that Hudson determined the premium/premium rate, but counsel asserted
6
that Plaintiff does not disagree with it because it was dictated by the prior alleged
misinformation that the Plaintiff plant in just one unit; however, contrary to
common sense and the plain meaning of the terms of the arbitration agreement, this
means that the Plaintiff somehow agreed with the determination, but not the result
of it. Necessarily, one disagrees with a "determination" if it disagrees with the
results or consequences of it. Beyond that, the arbitration agreement contains no
language which limits when a determination must be made; likewise, there is no
language which says that a "determination" is not made if it is allegedly based on,
dictated by, or preceded by the alleged provision of misinformation.
Even further, if Hudson had ultimately determined to charge a lower
premium, then despite the alleged prior misinformation, there would have been no
disagreement and no lawsuit. In other words, as evidenced by this lawsuit and the
alleged damage sought by Plaintiff, it inevitably disagreed with Hudson's premium
determination, which dictates the arbitrability of its claim.
In addition, in the Trial Court, consistent with Plaintiff's misguided attempt
to somehow avoid the reach of the arbitration agreement, after representing that
several cases were "dispositive", when Hudson then demonstrated that the cases
were clearly distinguishable, or if anything, supportive of Hudson's position,
Plaintiff subsequently admitted that the leading case upon which it relied (Nobles
v. Rural Community Ins. Services, 122 F. Supp. 2d 1290 (M.D. Ala. 2000)) had
7
been "mistakenly cited". Plaintiff then cited another Nobles case (reported at 303
F. Supp. 2d 1292) as actually the "dispositive" one, but the court there did not even
address arbitration because the previously-ordered arbitration had been completed
and the case was in a post-arbitration posture. See Nobles v. Rural Community,
Ins. Services, 303 F. Supp. 2d 1292, 1294-1296 (M.D. Ala. 2004)
Clearly, in view of the Plaintiffs allegations and Hudson's inevitable
determinations which resulted in the higher premium (including the determination
admitted-to by Plaintiffs counsel) and the Plaintiff filing this lawsuit to solely
recover the higher premium amount as its alleged damages, the Plaintiffs claim
falls well within the scope of the arbitration agreement. At an absolute minimum,
because there is an interpretation supporting arbitrability, the Trial Court was
required to order/compel arbitration of Plaintiffs claim; therefore, the Trial Court
erred in failing to do so.
Independently, in the Trial Court, Hudson submitted evidence establishing
that pursuant to multiple claims which Plaintiff made under its crop year 2013
policy, Hudson paid the Plaintiff the substantial sum of $347,289 under the Policy.
The Plaintiff did not dispute this evidence. The Texas Supreme Court has
established that under the rule/doctrine of direct benefits estoppel, when a party
seeks and obtains substantial benefits under a contract containing an arbitration
agreement, that party "cannot equitably object" to such arbitration agreement.
8
Because the Plaintiff here undisputably sought and obtained very substantial
benefits under the Policy, it cannot equitably object to the arbitration
agreement/provision contained in the Policy. Accordingly, the Trial Court
inevitably failed to properly apply the law of direct benefits estoppel to the
undisputed evidence and thus, abused its discretion in failing to compel/order
arbitration for this additional and independent reason.
ARGUMENT AND AUTHORITIES
The Standard Of Review
The Texas Supreme Court has recognized that "[w]hen an appeal from a
denial of a motion to compel arbitration turns on a legal determination ... we apply
a de novo standard". Forest Oil Corp. v. McAllen, 268 S.W.3d 51, 55 n. 9 (Tex.
2008); In Re Labatt Food Service, LP, 279 S.W.3d 640, 643 (Tex. 2009) ("we
review the trial court's legal determinations de novo") Also, the Fifth Circuit has
stated that a "court reviews de novo the grant or denial of a petition to compel
arbitration pursuant to § 4 of the FAA". Primerica Life Ins. Co. v. Brown, 304
F.3d 469, 471 (5th Cir. 2002).
Here, as to Issue No.1, under the FAA, Hudson was required to show, and
did show, that (a) there was a valid arbitration agreement between it and the
Plaintiff, and (b) the Plaintiff's alleged claim falls within the scope of the
agreement. In Re Kellogg Brown & Root, Inc., 166 S.W.3d 732, 737 (Tex. 2005)
9
(orig. proceeding). These are legal questions and thus, reviewed de novo. In Re
LaBatt Food Service, 279 S.W.3d at 643. Specifically, "[w]hether a valid
arbitration agreement exists is a legal question subject to de novo review".l In Re
D. Wilson Const. Co., 196 S.W.3d 774, 781 (Tex. 2006) (orig. proceeding)
Likewise, whether claims fall within the scope of an arbitration agreement is a
legal question, also reviewed de novo. Associated Glass, Ltd. v. Eye Ten Oaks
Investments, Ltd., 147 S.W.3d 507, 512 (Tex. App. - San Antonio 2004, no pet.);
F.D. Frontier Drilling (Cypress) Ltd. v. Didmon, 438 S.W.3d 688, 693 (Tex. App.
- Houston [1st Dist.] 2014, pet. denied). "In a de novo review, the trial court's
decision is given absolutely no deference". Ascendant Anesthesia PLLC v. Abazi,
348 S.W.3d 454,458 (Tex. App. - Dallas 2011, no pet.).
As to a trial court's factual findings or determinations, deference is given if
they are supported by evidence. In Re LaBatt Food Service, LP, 279 S.W.3d at
643. Also, a trial court abuses its discretion if it fails to (a) properly apply the law
to the facts, (b) properly determine the applicable law, or (c) properly analyze and
apply the law. In Re D. Wilson Const. Co., 196 S.W.3d at 781; In Re Poly-
America, LP, 262 S.W.3d 337, 349 (Tex. 2008) (orig. proceeding). Additionally,
the Texas Supreme Court has stated that under the FAA, an abuse of discretion
I In the Trial Court, the Plaintiff did not challenge the validity or enforceability of the parties'
arbitration agreement; it exclusively argued that its alleged claim does not fall within the scope
of the agreement. (CR: Vol. 2 at 75-80, 7S-79, 102-110, lOS, IIS-121; RR: Vol. 3 at 15, 34)
10
occurs "when a party is erroneously denied its contracted-for arbitration rights .... "
In Re D. Wilson Const. Co., 196 S.W.3d at 780.
With regard to Issue No.2, the evidence in the Trial Court was undisputed
that the Plaintiff sought and obtained substantial benefits under its 2013 crop year
insurance policy. (CR: Vol. 2 at 4-74,75-80,102-110,118-121; see RR: Vol. 3)
Therefore, the Trial Court inevitably abused its discretion in failing to properly
apply the law of direct benefits estoppel to the undisputed facts and evidence. In
Re D. Wilson Const. Co., 196 S.W.3d at 781.
Issue No.1
I.
The Trial Court Erred In Failing To Compel Arbitration
Because Hudson Established That The Parties' Valid
Arbitration Agreement Encompasses The Plaintiffs's Claim
The United States Supreme Court and the Texas Supreme Court have
recognized that federal and state law strongly favor arbitration. Moses H. Cone
Memorial Hosp. v. Mercury Constr. Com., 460 U.S. 1,24-25, 103 S. Ct. 927, 941-
942 (1983); Cantella & Co., Inc. v. Goodwin, 924 S.W.2d 943, 944 (Tex. 1996)
(orig. proceeding) (per curiam) In fact, "a presumption exists in favor of
agreements to arbitrate under the FAA". Goodwin, 942 S.W.2d at 944 (citing
Prudential Securities, Inc. v. Marshall, 909 S.W.2d 896, 898 (Tex. 1995) (orig.
proceeding) (per curiam)
11
Under the FAA, which applies here, a party seeking to compel arbitration
must establish that (a) a valid arbitration agreement exists, and (b) the claims
alleged against it fall within its scope. In Re Rubiola, 334 S.W.3d 220, 223 (Tex.
2011) (orig. proceeding); In Re Oakwood Mobile Homes, Inc., 987 S.W.2d 571,
573 (Tex. 1999) (per curiam) "The FAA contains no requirements for the form or
specificity of arbitration agreements except that they be in writing; it does even
require that they be signed". See In Re Macy's Texas, Inc., 291 S.W.3d 418, 419
(Tex. 2009) (orig. proceeding) (per curiam)
In determining the validity of an arbitration agreement under the FAA,
generally, state-law principles regarding the formation of contracts are applied. In
Re Palm Harbor Homes, Inc., 195 S.W.3d 672, 676 (Tex. 2006) Once a valid
arbitration agreement is shown to exist, in determining whether claims fall within
its scope, the strong presumption favoring arbitration "requires that [this Court]
resolve [any] doubts as to the scope of the agreement[ s] in favor of coverage". In
Re D. Wilson Const., 196 S.W.3d at 782 (emphasis added); In Re Profanchik, 31
S.W.3d 381,385-386 (Tex. App. - Corpus Christi 2000) (orig. proceeding)
Once a party establishes the existence of an arbitration agreement which
encompasses the claims, a trial court "must compel arbitration ... unless the party
opposing arbitration proves a defense precluding enforcement." Dish Network,
L.L.C. v. Brenner, 2013 WL 3326640 at *3 (Tex. App. - Corpus Christi-Edinburg
12
20l3, no pet.) (emphasis added); In Re FirstMerit Bank, N.A., 52 S.W.3d 748,
753-754 (Tex. 2001) (orig. proceeding)
Here, as discussed below, in the Trial Court, Hudson demonstrated that the
FAA applies to the parties' arbitration agreement and this was not disputed.
(CR: 11-29) Hudson then established (a) the validity of the arbitration agreement,
and (b) that the Plaintiff's alleged claim falls within its scope. (CR:II-198,28-29,
78-79) The Plaintiff did not attempt to either raise a defense or prove a defense; it
exclusively contested that its alleged claim falls within the scope of the
agreement. 2 (CR: Vol. 2 at 75-80, 102-110, 118-121; RR: Vol. 3)
As discussed below, Hudson amply demonstrated in the Trial Court that the
Plaintiff's alleged claim falls well within the scope of the agreement. In fact, when
properly applying the strong and "compelling" presumption favoring arbitration
and the liberal standards favoring arbitrability, at an absolute minimum, because
there is an interpretation supporting the arbitrability of Plaintiff's alleged claim, the
Trial Court was required to order/compel arbitration even if it had a doubt about it.
Therefore, the Trial Court erred in failing to order/compel arbitration of Plaintiff's
alleged claim.
2 In Plaintiffs Supplemental Brief, Plaintiff commented that ordering its claim to arbitration
would be "needlessly time-consuming and wasteful". Even if this comment somehow pertains to
any valid defense (which it does not), Plaintiff never provided any argument, authority, or any
evidence of this or any defense. (CR: Vol. 2 at 75-80, 102-110,118-121; RR: Vol. 3 at 1-44)
Therefore, Plaintiff cannot attempt to argue any defense to the enforceability of the arbitration
agreement in this appeal. Richmont Holdings, Inc. v. Superior Recharge Systems, LLC, 392
S.W.3d 633,634-635 (Tex. 2013) (per curiam)
13
A.
Hudson Established That The FAA Governs
The Parties' Arbitration Agreement
The FAA governs all written agreements to arbitrate In transactions
involving or affecting interstate commerce. 9 U.S.C. § 2; In Re L & L Kempwood
Associates, L.P., 9 S.W.3d 125, 127 (Tex. 1999). The FAA is construed broadly
and "extends to any contract affecting commerce, as far as the Commerce Clause
of the United States Constitutional will reach". L & L Kempwood, 9 S.W.3d at
127; Maverick Engineering, Inc. v. Nadkarni, 2009 WL 1974757 at *2 (Tex. App.
- Corpus Christi-Edinburg 2009, orig. proceeding) (citing Allied-Bruce Terminix
Co. v. Dobson, 513 U.S. 265, 272-274, 276-278, 115 S. Ct. 834 (1995)) "If just
some ... aspects of a transaction affect interstate commerce", then the FAA
applies. In Re Education Management Corp., Inc., 14 S.W.3d 418, 423 (Tex. App.
- Houston [14th Dist.] 2000, orig. proceeding).
Courts have been very liberal in finding that transactions involve or affect
interstate commerce such that the FAA applies.
In Allied-Bruce Terminix Companies v. Dobson, where an Alabama
homeowner hired a local Alabama Terminix franchise store to inspect his home for
termites, the United States Supreme Court held that the transaction involved
interstate commerce because of the multi-state nature of Terminix's business,
coupled with the local franchise's purchase of treatment materials from outside
14
Alabama. 513 U.S. at 282, 115 S. Ct. 834. In L & L Kempwood, the Texas
Supreme Court found that the contract affected or involved interstate commerce
because the contracting parties "reside[d] in different states" and the renovation
work on the Houston apartments was done for out-of-state owners. 9 S.W.3d at
127. In In Re Profanchik, where a minority shareholder sued the majority
shareholder and the corporation in a dispute over his ownership interest, even
though the parties were Texas residents and the corporation was formed in Texas
and had its principal office in Texas, this Court held that the FAA applied because
the corporation installed telephones in other states (Oklahoma and New Mexico)
and thus, conducted business in other states. 31 S.W.3d at 384-385
Here, the Plaintiffs alleged claim arises from its disagreement with
Hudson's premium determination on its 2013 crop year policy. (CR: 4-7; RR: Vol.
3 at 14-16) In view of this and Courts' liberal approach in finding that transactions
involve or effect interstate commerce, Hudson established the FAA's applicability
through the following evidence, which Plaintiff did not dispute:
• Plaintiff resides in Texas. (CR: 4-5)
• Defendant Hudson was incorporated in Delaware; and Hudson's
principal place of business is in New York. (CR: 28)
• Hudson is licensed in all 50 states; thus, Hudson issues and sells
insurance policies, and conducts business nationwide. (Id.)
• With respect to the Plaintiffs premium for the crop year 2013,
Plaintiff paid the premium, from Texas, to Hudson, in New York.
(CR: at 28-29)
15
Clearly, in view of the multi-state residence of the parties, the nationwide/
multi-state nature of Hudson's business, and the payment of the premium(s) across
State lines, unquestionably, the arbitration agreement/provision here affects or
involves interstate commerce; therefore, the FAA applies to the parties' arbitration
agreement. See Allied-Bruce Terminix, 513 U.S. at 282, 115 S. Ct. 834; L&L
Kempwood,9 S.W.3d at 127; In Re Profanchik, 31 S.W.3d at 384-385.
In addition, when this issue is not disputed in the trial court, appellate courts
routinely accept the FAA's applicability. See In Re Bath Junkie Franchise, Inc.,
246 S.W.3d 356, 363 (Tex. App. - Beaumont 2008, orig. proceeding); In Re
Chevron, USA, Inc., 419 S.W.3d 318, 325 (Tex. App. - EI Paso 2010, orig.
proceeding); Ameriprise Financial Services, Inc. v. Farias, 2013 WL 6175330 at *5
n. 3 (Tex. App. - Corpus Christi-Edinburg 2013, pet. denied). Here, Plaintiff
never disputed the applicability of the FAA. (CR: Vol. 2 at 75-80, 102-110, 118-
121)
Clearly, Hudson established, and it was not disputed, that the FAA governs
the parties' arbitration agreement.
B.
Hudson Established That A Valid Arbitration
Agreement Exists Between It And The Plaintiff
It is worth reiterating that the arbitration agreement/provision here was
written by the Federal Government (the RMA) and is published in the Code of
16
Federal Regulations as part of the Basic Provisions of crop insurance policies. See
27 C.F.R. § 457.8 As Hudson pointed-out in the Trial Court (CR: 17-18), it has
been recognized that the "mandatory arbitration provisions in crop insurance
policies are valid and enforceable". Bissette v. Rain & Hail, LLC, 2011 WL
3905059 at *2 (E.D. N.C. 20 II) Again, under the FAA, the only requirement for a
valid arbitration agreement is that it be in writing; there are no form or specificity
requirements. In Re Macy's Texas, 291 S.W.3d at 419; see 9 U.S.C. § 2
Here, in the Trial Court, Hudson proved-up the Plaintiff's 2013 crop
insurance policy which contains the mandatory arbitration agreement/provision.
(CR: 11-21,28-29, 78-79) With this, the FAA provides that arbitration agreements
are "valid, irrevocable, and enforceable unless "grounds ... exist at law or in equity
for the revocation of any contract". 9 U.S.C. § 2; In Re Halliburton, 80 S.W.3d
566,568 (Tex. 2002) (orig. proceeding)
Further, the Plaintiff did not contest either the existence or the validity of the
arbitration agreement. (CR: 75-80, 102-110, 108, 1I8-12l; RR: Vol. 3 at p. 15,
33-34) In open court, Plaintiff's counsel stated that "[w]e don't even dispute that
there is a valid arbitration agreement". (RR: Vol. 3 at p. 34) This independently
established the existence of the valid arbitration agreement. In Neatherlin Homes,
Inc. v. Love, 2007 WL 700996 (Tex. App. - Corpus Christi-Edinburg 2007, orig.
proceeding), because "[t]he plaintiff's arguments ... [did] not deny the existence
17
of [the arbitration] agreement", this Court concluded that "[the movant] has
established the existence of a valid arbitration agreement", Id. at *3; see also In Re
Frost National Bank, 2008 WL 4889836 at *2 (Tex. App. - Corpus Christi-
Edinburg 2008, orig. proceeding) (the plaintiffs did not "deny the existence of the
arbitration agreements at issue", and this Court concluded that "[the movant] has
established a valid agreement to arbitrate").
In short, Hudson proved-up the arbitration agreement and Plaintiff neither
denied its existence nor disputed its validity. Thus, the parties' valid arbitration
agreement was established. In Re Oakwood Mobile Homes, 987 S.W.2d at 573; In
Re Conseco Finance Servo Corp., 19 S.W.3d 562, 569 (Tex. App. - Waco 2000,
orig. proceeding); Love, 2007 WL 700996 at *3; In Re Frost National Bank, 2008
WL 4889836 at *2.
C.
The Plaintiff's Alleged Claim Falls Within
The Scope Of The Arbitration Agreement
In determining whether a claim or claims falls within the scope of an
arbitration agreement, the focus is on the factual allegations, not the labels
assigned to the claims. Marshall, 909 S.W.2d at 900; In Re Profanchik, 31 S.W.3d
at 385. Because Hudson established its valid arbitration agreement with the
18
Plaintiff, "the strong federal presumption in favor of arbitration" applies. 3 In Re
Poly America, 262 S.W.3d at 348; In Re D. Wilson Const. Co., 196 S.W.3d at 782;
In Re Profanchik, 31 S.W.3d at 385-386. Thus, courts "must pay careful attention
to the strong federal policy favoring arbitration and must resolve all ambiguities in
favor of arbitration". Bane One Acceptance Corp. v. Hill, 367 F.3d 426, 429 (5th
Cir. 2004). Accordingly, courts are to liberally construe an arbitration agreement
in favor of arbitrability. Mitsubishi Motors Corp. v. Soler Chrysler/Plymouth, Inc.,
473 U.S. 614, 626,105 S.Ct. 3346 (1985); see Marshall, 909 S.W2d at 899; In Re
Profanchik, 31 S.W.3d at 385-386.
Ultimately, because the federal policy favoring arbitration is "compelling",
this Court and the Texas Supreme Court have recognized that "a court should not
deny arbitration 'unless it can be said with positive assurance that an arbitration
clause is not suspectible of an interpretation which would cover the dispute in
issue"'. In Re Profanchik, 31 S.W.3d at 386 (citing and quoting Marshall, 909
S.W.2d at 899 (emphasis added); Maverick Engineering, 2009 WL 1974757 at *5.
And to that extent, even if there is any doubt that an interpretation supports the
arbitrability of a claim, such doubt "must be resolved in favor of arbitration".
3 When an arbitration agreement/provision is "broad", such as when arbitration is required of
"any dispute arising between the parties" or "any controversy or claim arising out of or relating
to the contract", the presumption of arbitrability is particularly potent. Maverick Engineering.
Inc. v. Nadkami, 2009 WL 1974757 at *5 (Tex. App. - Corpus Christi-Edinburg 2009, orig.
proceeding) (Mem. Op.).
19
Marshall, 909 S.W.2d at 899; In Re FirstMerit Bank, N.A., 52 S.W.3d 749, 753
(Tex. 2001) (orig. proceeding); In Re Profanchick, 31 S.W.3d at 385-386.
The case of Baumeister v. Reagan, 2013 WL 530976 (Tex. App. - Fort
Worth 2013, no pet.) illustrates the effect of the liberal standards favoring
arbitrability. There, because the appellate court acknowledged that the arbitrability
of the claims was a "close" case, and that it must "defer on the side of
arbitrability", it could not "say with positive assurance that [the plaintiffs'] claims
[were] not arbitrable". Id. at *4-*6. Thus, the appellate court was compelled to
hold that the claims were arbitrable and as such, it reversed the trial court's denial
of arbitration. See id.
Here, the arbitration agreement/provision applies when there is "a
disagreement" about "any determination" made by Hudson. (CR: 28-29, 78-79)
(emphasis added) "Broad" arbitration clauses include those which are triggered
when there is any dispute or controversy arising out of or relating to the contract in
question. See Maverick Engineering, Inc. v. Nadkami, 2009 WL 1974757 at *5
(Tex. App. - Corpus Christi-Edinburg 2009, orig. proceeding) (Mem. Gp.); Love,
2007 WL 700996 at *4. The agreement here broadly requires arbitration when
there is any "disagreement" about "any" determination made by Hudson; there is
no limiting language. (CR: 28-29, 78-79)
20
In view of the language of the arbitration agreement and the liberal approach
regarding arbitrability, the Plaintiffs allegations and claims unquestionably fall
well within its scope. In its Original Petition, Plaintiff alleges that (a) it purchased
the 2013 crop insurance policy from Hudson via the local agent CropGuard, (b)
Hudson (and CropGuard) misinformed the Plaintiff about qualifying for the lower
premium enterprise unit farming system, (c) the Plaintiff was allegedly "charged" a
higher premium (by $25,000) for its insurance policy than it should have been, and
(d) Plaintiffs alleged damages solely comprise the $25,000. (CR: 4-7) It is quite
apparent that the Plaintiff attemped to plead around the parties' arbitration
agreement, but inevitably and necessarily, Hudson made a premium
"determination" such that it "charged" the premium/premium rate, and Plaintiff
obviously disagreed with it; thus, this lawsuit. (CR: 4-7; RR: Vol. 3 at 14-16)
In fact, Hudson made two determinations - first, it determined whether
Plaintiff qualified for the lower premium enterprise farming system; and second, it
then determined the premium/premium rate which was ultimately charged. (CR:
4-7; CR: Vol. 2 at 91-92; RR: Vol. 3 at 14-16) Plaintiffs filing this lawsuit and
seeking the premium amount which was allegedly overcharged ($25,000) is proof
positive that it disagreed with a Hudson's determination, which means that its
claim falls within the scope of the arbitration agreement. (CR: 4-7, 78-79) The
Plaintiff cannot avoid the arbitration agreement by attempting to carefully confine
21
its claim to the alleged misinformation because until Hudson's premIUm
detemination and the charging of the premium, the Plaintiff had no damage, no ripe
claim, and thus, no lawsuit. (CR: 4-7; CR: Vol. 2 at 91-92; RR: Vol. 3 at 14-16)
Moreover, at the March 4,2015 hearing, as Plaintiffs counsel explained it,
Hudson denied its "premium subsidy" claim. (RR: Vol. 3 at 14-15) Again,
Hudson does not agree with this characterization, but this further shows that
Hudson necessarily made a determination regarding Plaintiffs premium with
which Plaintiff obviously disagreed by filing this lawsuit. (RR: Vol. 3 at 14-16;
CR: 4-7) At the hearing, counsel asserted that Plaintiffs claim is solely based on
the alleged misinformation, but again, it is inescapable that until Hudson
determined and charged the premium/premium rate, the Plaintiff had no damage
and no ripe claim at all. Also, the Affidavit submitted by Plaintiff does not and
carmot change this;4 regardless of how the Plaintiff may have been allegedly
misinformed regarding its planting, until the premium was charged (or subsidy
denied per Plaintiff), Plaintiff did not sustain the alleged loss ($25,000) which it
seeks in this case. (CR: Vol. 2 at 102-103)
In the Trial Court, Plaintiffs counsel admitted that Hudson made a
determination regarding the charged premium/premium rate, but counsel then
4 Also, as Hudson also pointed out, the Affiant's general testimony regarding his purported
experience with farmers and the typical dispute "between the farmer and his or her crop
insurance company" is entirely unrelated to the Plaintiffs alleged claim and thus, irrelevant.
(CR: Vol. 2 at 115-116; see also CR: Vol. 2 at 102-103)
22
disingenuously asserted that Plaintiff does not disagree with that determination
because it was dictacted by the prior alleged misinformation of planting in one unit
(instead of two). (RR: Vol. 3 at 14-16) Contrary to basic common sense, this
would mean that Plaintiff agreed with the determination, but not the results or
consequences of it. Similarly, accepting the Plaintiff's argument would also mean
that it agreed with Hudson's determination to charge the higher premium/premium
rate (which Plaintiff asserts amounted to $25,000), but it filed this lawsuit anyway,
seeking the higher amount ($25,000) as its alleged actual damages. (CR: 4-7)
Naturally and sensibly, the import of any determination is the result or
consequence of it; therefore, the common and plain meaning of the terms of the
arbitration agreement dictate that Plaintiff obviously disagreed with a
determination made by Hudson. See Don's Bldg. Supply, Inc. v. OneBeacon Ins.
Co., 267 S.W.3d 20, 23 (Tex. 2008) (undefined insurance policy terms are given
their "ordinary and commonly understood meaning"); National Fire Union Ins. Co.
v. CBI Indus. Ins. Co., 907 S.W.2d 517, 520 (Tex. 1995) (the plain meaning of the
words/terms used are given effect)
Even further, the arbitration agreement contains no limitation on when the
"determination" must be made, and likewise, contains no language that there is no
"determination" if it is based on, dictated by, or preceded by the provision of
alleged misinformation. (CR: 28-29, 78-79)
23
The fatal fallacy in Plaintiffs argument is that regardless of the alleged
misinformation that was initially provided, if Hudson had subsequently determined
to charge the lower premium, then there would have been no disagreement and no
lawsuit. Hudson is not attempting to recast the Plaintiffs claim; rather, it is
demonstrating that Plaintiff has not and cannot pen its way around the arbitration
agreement and Hudson's inevitable "determination" regarding the Policy
premium/premium rate - and Plaintiff manifestly disagreed with it by filing suit
to seek the higher premium amount charged.
For obvious reasons, it is rarely argued that there is no "dispute" or
disagreement despite a lawsuit, but another plaintiff unsuccessfully attempted to
avoid arbitration by making the novel argument in Newpark Shipbuilding v. Rig
Pan Producer, 267 F. Supp. 2d 756 (S.D. Tex. 2003). In that case, the plaintiff ship
repair company filed suit against a semi-submersible drilling rig in rem and its
owner to recover payment for ship repairs and refurbishment. Id. at 757-758
Despite filing the lawsuit, the plaintiff asserted that there was no "dispute" to
trigger arbitration because the defendants' obligations were clear; the Federal
District Court's response is telling: "[o]bviously, a lawsuit is a dispute". Id. at
758 (emphasis added)
Even beyond all of this, at the March 4, 2015 hearing, after Hudson's
Motion had been on file for approximately 3% months, Plaintiffs counsel argued
24
that the case of Nobles v. Rural Community Ins. Services, 122 F. Supp. 2d 1290
(M.D. Ala. 2000) was "dispositive". (RR: Vol. 3 at 16-18) Hudson then pointed
out that the Court there granted the insurer's motion to compel arbitration and
found that "the arbitration provision is mandatory". rd. at 1296; (CR: Vol. 2 at 93-
95, 113) Also, as Hudson discussed in the Trial Court, the Federal District Court
there considered the former version of the arbitration provision contained in a 1999
crop insurance policy which was more narrow than the current provision contained
in Plaintiffs policy. Id. at 1292-1293. (CR: Vol. 2 at 94-96) The prior version
addressed in Nobles stated as follows:
"If you and we fail to agree on any factual determination, the
disagreement will be resolved in accordance with the rules of the
American Arbitration Association". Id. at 1293 (emphasis added)
In accordance with this more narrow version, the carrier's factual determination
regarding whether 5,000 acres of the plaintiffs' land/crop was insurable and should
have been included as a part of their claim, was ordered to arbitration. s rd. at
1295-l300.
5 Because the Nobles case involved the former and more narrow version of the arbitration
agreement, the "factual determination" was arbitrated and then the arbitration panel's findings
and rulings were then applied to assess their preclusive effect on the plaintiffs' claims. 303
F. Supp. 2d at 1298-1303.
25
The current arbitration agreement/provision - and the one contained in
Plaintiffs 2013 policy - states that:
"If you and we fail to agree on any determination made by us
[Hudson] .. , the disagreement ... must be resolved through
arbitration in accordance with the rules of the American Arbitration
Association .... " (CR: 78-79) (emphasis added)
These underscored language changes made to the current provision reflects the
RMA's obvious intention to broaden the reach of the arbitration provision. See
generally Buckner Glass Mirror v. Pritchard, 697 S.W.2d 712, 714 (Tex. App. -
Corpus Christi 1985, no writ) (when a law is amended, it is presumed that a change
was intended)
After the hearing, when the Plaintiff submitted its Supplemental Brief (CR:
Vol. 2 at 104), it claimed that the following cases were/are also "dispositive with
regard to defendant's motion", although the Courts there did not even address
arbitration. See Meyer v. Conlon, 162 F.3d 1264, 1266-1275 (lOth Cir. 1998) and
Williams Farms of Homestead v. Rain & Hail Ins. Services, Inc., 121 F.3d 630,
631-635 (11th Cir. 1997).
And then, in subsequent briefing, Plaintiff conceded that the Nobles case had
been "mistakenly cited" and it then argued that another Nobles case, reported at
303 F. Supp. 2d 1292, was actually the "dispositive" one. (CR: Vol. 2 at 118) But
in that Nobles case, the Federal District Court did not even address whether the
plaintiffs claims should be arbitrated; the arbitration had already been ordered and
26
completed, and the case was in a post-arbitration posture. 303 F. Supp. 2d at 1294-
1296.
Finally, it is also worth noting that in this insurer-insured context, Texas
courts have recognized that any claim of an insured "necessarily arises from the
contractual relationship between the parties". In Re American National Cty. Mut.
Ins. Co., 384 S.W.3d 429, 438 (Tex. App. - Austin 2012, orig. proceeding)
(emphasis added) When the nature of the parties' relationship is established and
governed by an agreement, as is true here, "their disputes are more likely to fall
within the scope of the arbitration provision". In Re Great Western Drilling, Ltd.,
211 S.W.3d 828, 838 (Tex. App. - Eastland 2006, orig. proceeding) (citing
Capital Income Properties - LXXX v. Blackmon, 843 S.W.2d 22 (Tex. 1992».
In the Trial Court, Plaintiff did not contest that its claim is based on the
Policy and arises from the parties' contractual relationship. (CR: Vol. 2 at 78-79,
106) As amply demonstrated above, despite the Plaintiff's crafting and labeling of
its claim, the "gravaman" of its claim is that it was allegedly overcharged a
premium by $25,000 (which inevitably, and as Plaintiff has admitted, occurred
when Hudson determined the premium/premium rate which was then charged) and
it seeks the $25,000 as damages. (CR: 4-7; RR: Vol. 3 at 14-16) See generally In
Re Profanchik, 31 S.W.3d at 383-387 (although minority shareholder plaintiff's
claims did not arise from the agreement containing the arbitration provision ["the
27
agreement"] and his ownership interest in the corporation was re-purchased
pursuant to a separate letter agreement, because this Court found that the
"gravaman" of his claims was that he had been wrongfully deprived of his
ownership interest and the stock transfer of his interest was executed pursuant to
the agreement, this Court held that the claims were arbitrable).
In summary, for all of the reasons outlined above, Plaintiff's alleged claim
falls well within the scope of the parties' arbitration agreement. Certainly, in view
of the compelling federal policy favoring arbitration, because there is an
interpretation which supports the arbitrability of Plaintiff's claim, the Trial Court
was required to order/compel arbitration. Marshall, 909 S.W.2d at 899; In Re
Profanchik, 31 S.W.3d at 386; Maverick Engineering, 2009 WL 1974757 at *5. At
an absolute minimum, even if this was/is a "close" case (which it is not), then an
interpretation supporting arbitrability necessarily cannot be ruled-out, and the Trial
Court was still required to order/compel arbitration. See~, Baumeister, 2013
WL 530976 at *4-*7
28
Issue No.2
II.
Independently, Because The Plaintiff Undisputably Obtained
Substantial Benefits Under Its 2013 Crop Year Policy, The Trial
Court Inevitably Abused Its Discretion In Failing To Compel
Arbitration Under The Direct Benefits Estoppel Doctrine
Because Hudson has amply demonstrated that the parties' valid arbitration
agreement encompasses the Plaintiff's alleged claim, the Court need not reach this
issue. But independently, because the evidence is undisputed that the Plaintiff
sought and obtained very substantial benefits under its 2013 crop year policy
($347,289), the Trial Court inevitably abused its discretion by failing to properly
apply the law of direct benefits estoppel and order/compel arbitration for this
additional reason.
In In Re Weekley Homes, L.P., 180 S.W.3d 127 (Tex. 2005), the Texas
Supreme Court established that under the direct benefits estoppel doctrine, even
when a non-signatory to a contract obtains substantial benefits under a contract
which contains an arbitration provision, that party cannot "equitably object" to the
arbitration provision. Id. at 132-133. In that case, the adult child of the purchasers
of a home sought meaningful repairs under the home purchase contract containing
an arbitration provision: she successfully got the builder to make repairs; she was
living in the home for a period of time; and she was reimbursed expenses which
she allegedly incurred while the repairs were made. Id. at 132-133.
29
Subsequently, the plaintiff sued the homebuilder, alleging that she developed
asthma due to the dust from the repair work. Id. at 129, l31-l33. Notably, the
plaintiff was not pursuing a claim under the home purchase contract, and the Texas
Supreme Court recognized that her tort claim was independent of the contract. Id.
at 132. Nevertheless, the Court granted mandamus relief and held that because the
adult child sought and obtained substantial benefits under the contract, she "cannot
equitably object to the arbitration clause [contained in the contract]". Id. at l33
(emphasis added) The Court succinctly recognized that a party "cannot have both
his contract and defeat it too". rd. at 135
Similarly, in Rachal v. Reitz, 403 S.W.3d 840 (Tex. 20 l3), where the
plaintiff accepted benefits under a trust and then sued to enforce its terms, the
Texas Supreme Court held that "the doctrine of benefits estoppel applies to bar [the
plaintiffs] claim that the arbitration provision in the trust is invalid." rd. at 847
(emphasis added) The Court also recognized that "direct benefits estoppel ...
promote[s] fairness by holding a party to its position in the performance of an
agreement .... " Id. at 848
Here, in the Trial Court, Hudson proved through its Claims Processing
Manager, Ms. Ammie Martinez, that under its 2013 crop year policy, Plaintiff
reported and made multiple claims (7 claims) and Hudson paid the substantial sum
of $347,289 to the Plaintiff pursuant to those claims. (CR: Vol. 2 at 71-74)
30
Specifically, Ms. Martinez testified that Hudson paid the following amounts to the
Plaintiff under the Policy (CR: Vol. 2 at 73):
• April 2, 2013: $14,096.00; Claim No. 12009917
• June 10,2013: $15,227.00; Claim No. 12009693
• June 26,2013: $783.00; Claim No. 12009693
• July 12,2013: $103,405.00; Claim No. 12010065
• July 23, 2013: $182,703.00; Claim No. 12009744
• October 8, 2013: $648.00; Claim No. 13005987
• January 14,2014: $30,427.00; Claim No. 13003927
Total: $347,289.00
Plaintiff did not dispute this evidence. (CR: Vol. 2 at 77-81, 102-110, 118-121)
Because the Plaintiff undisputably sought and obtained very substantial
benefits under its 2013 crop year insurance policy, it "cannot equitably object" to
the arbitration agreement/provision contained therein. In Re Weekley Homes, 180
S.W.3d at 133; Rachal, 403 S.W.3d at 847. Therefore, the Trial Court inevitably
failed to properly apply the law of direct benefits estoppel to the undisputed
evidence and thus, abused its discretion in failing to compel/order arbitration for
this additional and independent reason. In Re D. Wilson Const. Co., 196 S.W.3d at
781.
31
CONCLUSION AND PRAYER
Hudson established that its valid arbitration agreement with the Plaintiff
encompasses its alleged claim. Therefore, the Trial Court erred in failing to
order/compel arbitration. I.M. Davidson, Inc. v. Webster, 128 S.W.3d 223, 227
(Tex. 2003); In Re FirstMerit Bank, 52 S.W.3d at 753-754.
Independently, because the Plaintiff undisputably obtained very substantial
benefits under its 2013 crop year policy, it "cannot equitably object" to the
arbitration agreement/provision contained in the Policy. Therefore, the Trial Court
inevitably failed to properly apply the law of direct benefits estoppel and thus,
abused its discretion in failing to order/compel arbitration for this additional and
independent reason.
For these reasons, this Court should reverse the Trial Court's Order denying
Hudson Motion to Compel Arbitration and Motion to Stay and remand this case to
the Trial Court for the entry of an Order which properly compels arbitration of
Plaintiffs alleged claim against Hudson, and stays the underlying case/cause
pending the arbitration of such claim.
32
Respectfully submitted,
KELLY, SUTTER & KENDRICK, P.C.
By: /s/ Steve E. Couch
STEVE E. COUCH
scouch@ksklawyers.com
State Bar No. 04875650
KEN E. KENDRICK
kkendrick@ksklawyers.com
State Bar No. 11278500
3050 Post Oak Blvd., Suite 200
Houston, Texas 77056-6570
713-595-6000 - Telephone
713-595-6001 - Facsimile
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT
HUDSON INSURANCE COMPANY
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.4, Appellant's counsel,
Steve E. Couch, certifies that Appellant's Brief was computer-generated via a
proportionally spaced typed-facing using Microsoft Word 2000 in 14 pt Times
New Romans Font. This will further certify that, per the computer program, the
total word count is 7,213. In accordance with Rule 9.4(i), the total word count
does not include the identifY of parties and counsel, table of contents, index of
authorities, record references and party abbreviation, statement of jurisdiction,
statement of the case, statement regarding oral argument, preamble and
preliminary statement, issues presented, this certificate of compliance,
certificate/proof of service, and Appellant's appendix.
/s/ Steve E. Couch
STEVE E. COUCH
33
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
This is to certify that on the 1st day of May, 2015, a true and correct copy of
this pleadingldocumentlmotionlinstrument was served to counsel of record via as
follows:
Mr. David Wood Via E-File and CMIRRR
Attorney at Law
1317 East Quebec Avenue
McAllen, Texas 78539
Attorneys for Plaintiff
lsi Steve E. Couch
STEVE E. COUCH
34
NO. 13-15-00163-CV
IN THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS
HUDSON INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant
v.
BVB PARTNERS, Appellee
Appealed from the County Court at Law No.4 of Hidalgo County, Texas
Cause No.: CL-14-3125-D
APPENDIX TO BRIEF OF APPELLANT
HUDSON INSURANCE COMPANY
STEVE E. COUCH
State Bar No. 04875650
KEN E. KENDRICK
State Bar No. 11278500
3050 Post Oak Blvd., Suite 200
Houston, Texas 77056-6570
Telephone: (713) 595-6000
Facsimile: (713) 595-6001
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT
HUDSON INSURANCE COMPANY
CONTENTS
EXHIBIT/TAB
I. Trial Court's March 17, 2015 Order Denying Hudson Insurance
Company's Motion to Compel Arbitration and Motion to Stay
2. Federal Arbitration Act (Sections: 9 U.S.C. § 1 - 9 U.S.C. § 6; 9
U.S.C. §16)
3. Affidavit of Hudson's Mr. Dan Gasser with attached Declarations
Pages and excerpts of Basic Provisions of Plaintiffs 2013 crop
year policy (which contains the arbitration agreement! provision
between Hudson and Plaintiff)
4. Affidavit of Hudson's Ms. Ammie Martinez (and exhibits thereto),
which proves the substantial benefits obtained by Plaintiff under its
2013 crop year policy
EXHIBIT "1"
~ccepted by: Norma Harlow Electronically Submit!,
3/17/20152:08:34 f
Hidalgo County Clerks Olli
CAUSE NO. CL-I4-3125-D
BVB PARTNERS § COUNTY COURT AT LAW
v. § NO·4
CROP GUARD GROUP, INC., and
HUDSON INSURANCE COMPANY § HIDALGO COUNTY, TEXAS
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT HUDSON INSURANCE COMPANYS
MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION AND MOTION TO STAY
The Court has considered defendant's motion to compel arbitration and
motion to stay.
The Court finds that said motions should be denied, and it is therefore
ordered that said motions are denied.
March
Signed on February 17 ,2015.
~_:~_;_:_~..,;::_L;_._7_-_<-_".. :_ =-_
'=;::
__
122
EXHIBIT "2"
§ 1. "Maritime transactions" and "commerce" defined; exceptions to ... , 9 USCA § 1
United States Code Annotated
Title 9. Arbitration (Refs & Annos)
Chapter 1. General Provisions (Refs & Annas)
9 U.S.C.A. § 1
§ 1. "Malitime transactions" and "commerce" defined; exceptions to op{"ration of title
Currentness
"Maritime transactions", as herein defined, meanS charter parties, bills of lading of water carriers, agreements relating to
wharfage, supplies furnished vessels or repairs to vessels, collisions, or any other matters in foreign commerce which, if the
subject of controversy. would be embraced within admiralty jurisdiction; "commerce", as herein defined, means commerce
among the several States or with foreign nations, or in any Territory of the United States or in the District of Columbia, or
between any such Territory and another, or between any such Territory and any State or foreign nation, or between the District
of Columbia and any State or TerritOlY or foreign nation. but nothing herein contained shall apply to contracts ofell1ployment
of seamen, idilroad employees, or any other class of workers engaged in foreign 01' interstate commerce.
CREDlT(S)
(July 30,1947, c. 392, 61 Stat. 670.)
Notes of Decisions (246)
9 U.S.C.A. § t, 9 USCA § I
Current through P.L. 113-296 (excluding P.L. 113-235, 113-287, and 113-291) approved 12-19-2014
End ()fl)!I\:U)I\r.'ul
'"c" .
§ 2. Validity, irrevocability, and enforcement of agreements to arbitrate, 9 USCA § 2
United States Code Annotated
Title 9. Arbitration (Refs & Annos)
Chapter I. General Provisions (Refs & Annos)
9 U.S.C.A. § 2
§ 2. Validity, irrevocability, and enforcement of agreements to arbitrate
Currentness
A written provision in any maritime transaction or a contract evidencing a transaction involving commerce to settle by arbitration
/t, e State of k'.4HJUJ
Page 4 of4
74
EXHIBIT "1"
12
Hudson Insurance Company
Notice of Prevented Planting or Damage or Loss
(Dl:!~!),~(?!"
7300 West 11 oth Street, Suite 400
Overtand Pari<, KS 66210
Ph I F" (866) 450-1 •• 51 (913) 345-1671
Print Date: 01/30/2015
.
Insured's Name. Mailing or Street Address and Other Agency and Agent Contact Information Crop Year Claim Number Polley Number
Contact Information
Bvb Partners CropGuard Group Inc. (48-008)
C Casey Clipson (2080)
2012 12002393 48-595-1003701
PO 8ox403
Hargill, TX 78549 2315 W Expressway 83 State Code I Name
Ste 102
San Benito. TX 78586 48 Texas
Phone: (956) 33()..6129 Cell (956) 845-6682 Office Phone: (956) 361-5550 Agency (956) 361-5550 IIgent I am an Agent. Empfoyee, or Contractor affiliated with the
Email: Email: cdipson@cropguardgroup.com Federal crop insurance program?
Authorized Representative: NONE
C'aims Supervisor: Ben Hanawa
power of Attorney: NONE
Adjuster. Juan Leal
DYes o No
Best time to contact insured:
Check one: o This is a notice of prevented planting. o This Is a nota of damage only {appears that produC1ion wUi exceed the guarantee at this time}.
00 This is a notice of probable lass_ O Immediate inspection is requested. If checked, explain why:
County: Willaey (489) Crop: Grain Sorghum Date Reported: .. 7/912012
Unit Acres legal Description- Estimated Production Cause of Damage Date of Damage Expected Harvest Date
Insured's Intention (check one):
Orougm
I 71912012
If the intent is to replant and a replanting payment
00 To harvest o To chop/silage o Leave for cover o Destroy o Plant to another crop o Pasture o Hay is applicable, is the acreage greater than 50 acres
afthe unit?
o Crop will be direC1 marketed o Replant o Unknown at this time o Other (Explain}: oVes o No
County: Crop: Date Reported:
Unit Acres Legal Description- Estimated ProdUction Cause of Damage Date of Damage Expected Harvest Oate
Insured's Intention Icheck one':
I tf the intent is to replant and a replanting payment
o To harvest o To chopfsilage o leave for cover o Destroy o Plant to another crop o Pasture o Hay is applicable, is the acreage greater than 50 acres
of the unit?
o Crop wiJI be direct marketed o Replant o Unknown at this time o Other (Explain); Cl Ves o No
County: Crop: Date Reported;
Unit Acres legal Descrlptlon* Estimated Production Cause of Damage Date of Damage Expected Harvest Date
Insured's Intention (check one):
I If the intent is to replant and a replanting payment
o To harvest o To chop/silage o leave for caver o Destroy o Ptant to another crop o Pas1ure o Hay is applicable. is the acreage greater than 50 acres
of the unit?
o Crop will be direct marketed o Replant o Unknown at this time o Other (Explain): DYes o No
Remarks:
contactll(956)845-6682
_. --_. - - -------
II
* Legal DeScription = Section. Township, Range & Other Land Identifiers (e.g. Spanish land grants. metes & bounds, etc.)
I '"
~ .,
M911 (Rev. 03-2014) See Last Page of Notice of Prevented Planting or Damage or Loss for Required Statements Page 1 of2
13
Notice of Prevented Planting or Damage or Loss Hudson Insurance Company
f:Dtr~![)S9!,"
7300 West 110th Street. Suite 400
Ove~.nd Pari<, KS 66210
Ph / Fx: (866) 450-1445/ (913) 345-1671
Print Date: 01 (3012015
Insured's Name Adjuster's Name Crop Year Claim Number Poltcv Number
Bvb Partners Juan Leal 2012 12002393 48-595-1003701
I request authorization to commingle produc1ion from two or more units or commingle production between insured and uninsured acreage within the same structure and to use my load records, structure
markings, or combine monitor records to determine production between units or production (rom insured/uninsured acreage. Do you agree to follow your insurance prov;der's written criteria and instructions
to do this? DYes 0 No
Written or oral authorization and written criteria and instructions must be received from your Insurance provider before production can be commingled. I understand that if authorization is given, my insurance provider wil!
annually provlde written criteria and instructions for the use of load or combine monitor records to separate such production, and if I fail to follow all instructions, my optional unit structure will be collapsed.
If you have less than 100% share, is the other share insured under a Federal crop insurance program? If so, list the person's name, name of AlP for which they carry a Federal crop insurance and pOlicy
number if known.
~-
Collection of Information and Data (prtvacy Act) Statement
Agents, Loss Adjusters and Policyholders
The fellowing statements are made in accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a}: The RiSk Management Agency (RMA) is authonzed by the Federal Crop Insurance Act (7 U.S.C. 1501 1524) or ether Acts, and the
M
regulations promulgated thereunder, to solicit the information requested 00 documents established by RMA 01' by approved insurance providers (AlPs) t11at have been approved by the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation (Fele)
to detiver Federal crop insurance. The information is necessary for AlPs and RMA to operate the federal crop insurance program, determine program eligibility, conduct statistical analysis, and ensure program integrity
Information provided herein may be furnished to other FedercD, State, or local agencies, as required or permitted by law, law enforcement agencies, courts or adjudicative bodies, foreign agencies, magistrate, administrative
tribunal, AlPs contractors and cooperators, Comprehensive Information Management System (elMS), congressional OffIceS, or entities under contract with RMA. For insurance agents. certain inrormation may also be disclosed
to the public 10 assist Interested individuals in locating agents in a particular area.. Oi«i09uro of the- infonnation requested is vnlunta.ry ~ver, failure to correctly report the reQuested information may result in thQ rejection of
this document by the AlP or RMA jn accordance with lhe Standard ReinSUrance Agreement between the AlP and FCIC, Federal regu.ations, or RMAMapproved procedures and the denial of program eligibility or benefits derivec
therefrom. Also, failure to provide true and correct Information may result jn civil suit or criminal prosecution and the assessment of penalties or pursuit of other remedies.
Non..oiscriminatlon Statement
Non-Discrimination Policy - The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discriminatiOn against its customers, employees, and applicants for employment on the basis 01 race, color, national origin. age, disability, sex,
gender fdentity, rellgloo, replisal, and where applicable, political beliefs, marital status, familial or parental status. sexual orientation, or all or part of an Individual's irn:ome is derived from any public assistance program, or
protected genetic mformatlon in employment or in any program or activity conducted or funded by the Department. (Not all prohibited basis will apply to an programs and/or emptoyment activities.)
To File a Program Complaint ·If you wish to file a Civil Rights program complaint of discrimination, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Fonn, found online at
http://www.ascr.usda,goVlcomplainUiling_aJsthtml, or at any USDA office, Of call (856) 632-9992 to request the fonn. You may also write a letter containing all of the information requested In the form. Send your completed
comPlaint form or letter by mail to ttle U.S. Department of Agriculture, Director, Office of Adjudication, 1400 Independence Avenue. S.w., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410, by fax (202) 69()..7442 or email at
program.intake@usda.gov.
Persons with Disabilities -Individuals who are deaf. hard of heartng or have speech disabilities and wish to file either an EEO or program complairn please cornad USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-6339 or
(800) 845-6136 (in Spanish). Persons with disabUffies, 1Nh0 wish to me a program complaint. please see information above on how to contact the Department by mail directly or by email. If you require altemative means of
communication for program infOfmaUon (e.g.. Braille. large print, audiotape, etc.) pHiase contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 72()"2600 (voice and TOO).
Hudson Insurance Privacy Policy
When you apply 10 any of the Hudson Insurance Group companies for any Iype of insurance, you disclose informallon about yoursetf to us. The coUec1ion, use and disdosure of such information is regulated by law. Hudson
Insurance Group, its agents, affiliates and subsidiaries mainlain physical. electronic and procedural safeguards that comply with state and federal regulations to guard your personal information. We also limit employee access to
certain personal information, to those with a business reason for knowing such mformation. Hudson Insurance Group also instructs its employees so that they will understand the importance of the confidentiality Of personal
Information, and takes appropliate measures to enforce employee privacy responsibilities,
Certification Statement
I certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief all of the information on this form is correct. I also understand that failure to repor1 completely and accuratety may result in sanctlons under my policy, including
but not limited to voidance of the policy, and in criminal or civil penalties (18 U.S.C, §1 006 and §1014;.7 U.S.C. §tS06; 31 U.S,C, §3729, §3730 and any other applicable federal statutes),
Insured's Printed Name Insured's Signature Date of Notice
Bvb Partners
Refer to, the Basic Provisions and the specific Crop Provisions for more details on notice requirements for acreage prevented from planting and notice requlmments for damage or loss requirements.
M911 IRev. 03-2014)
II
[!] - -.
Page 2 of2
14
7300 West 110th Street, Suite 850
Loss Statement
€) ~:! ~J}:,``?!"
Overland Park., KS 66210
Phon@~ (8S6) 450..1445
This Loss Statement represents all acreages that have been finalized. Fax: (913) 345·1571
Claims are subject to audit by the company. Print Date: 1011912012
PO 80x403
Hargill. TX 78549
(956) 845-6682
11 1 1-
! 100%
1NSIH 1 $7,714.521 $7
100%
177.60
11 1
• 100%
I NSIH
t4781 Blk 5 100%
0001-0005 OU 1 YA 73.00
T74 100%
111
100% I NSIH 1
$13.656.991 NIAI $4,745.61
1 $8,911.381 $8.911.
• Legal DeSCription = Section, Township, Range & Other Land Identifiers (e.g. Spanish Land grants, metes & bounds, etc.)
,.. Guarantee Per Acre (GPA) ':;:; Bushels, Pounds, Tons, Hundred Weight, Boxes, Revenue Guarantee. or Dollars
POL (Rev. 12-2011) Page 1 of2
15
Loss Statement 7300 west , 10th Stree1, Suite 850
~ lj``I?,S()i'J
Overland Park. KS 66210
Phone: (B66) 450-1445
This Loss Statement represents all acreages that have been finalized. Fax: (913} 345-1671
Claims are subject to audit by the company. Print Date: 10119/2012
'. ..,.,. ;:",!">'lillillnii!;Sllllftj@!ltlilif., ,-" .... i' :'.'." 'A~cy$11j~atlon ti':'" :·'Ctl!Ii\Xear .:.'i. ;. .;C •.• ·~alm:Nunibiiti S':: ." ::)``;liili",~
CropGuard Group, Inc. (17-663)
Bvb Partners 2012 12002393 48-595-1003701
C Casey Clipson (2080)
Stage Codes: Cause of Loss Codes: Total Indemnity $50,249.00
P2 = Prevented Plant with Standard Coverage 1 :: Low Harvest Price 41 :: Frost 64 = Tomado 95:: Polebum
PF = Prevented Plant with Standard Coverage .J. 5% 2 :: Low Market Price 42 = Freeze 71 = Insects 96:: Fruit Set Original Loss Amount $50,249.00
PT = Prevented Plant with Standard Coverage + 10% 10 = Drought Deviation 43 = Cold Winter Kill 72 =Medffy 97 :: Earthquake Increase/Overpayment $0.00
H = Harvested 11 == Drought 44 =Cold Wet Weather 81 =Disease 98 =Volcanic ErupUon Current Claim Amount $50,249.00
UH == Unharvested 12 =Excessive Hea1 45 == Insufficient Chill 82 = Aflatoxin 99 =: Other
R= Replant 13 = Irrigation Failure 51 =: Flood 90 = Force Fire Previous Transactions
1 =: Stage I 14 =Failed lIT Equip 55 = GRP Revenue 91 = Fire Previous Paid Amounts $0.00
2::: Stage II 21 == Hail 61 =Wind 92 =Hurricane Overpaid Loss Recoveries $0.00
3:= Stage III 31 = Precipitation 62 = Hot'Mnd 93 = 'MIdi". Amount Remaining $50,249.00
4 =Stage IV 32 := Poor Drainage 63 = Cyclone g4 =Srosion
Current Disbursements
Recovery to Other Claims $0.00
Current Loss Credits $26,853.00
Check Amount $23,396.00
-
Processed BatCh: 547 On TiJ:19·io12, CneCk#2SM
• Legal Description = Section, Township, Range & Other Land Identifiers (e.g. Spanish Land grants. metes & bounds. etc.)
." Guarantee Per Acre (GPA) = Bushels, Pounds, Tons, Hundred Weight, Boxes, Revenue Guarantee, or Dollars
POL (Rev. 12-2011) Pa9. 2 of2
16
rot!~;:.);~(:.N Notice of Prevented Planting or Damage or Loss Hudson Insurance Company
7300 West 110th Street, Suite 400
Overtand Pari<, KS 66210
Ph I Fx: ~866) 450-14451 (913) 345-1671
Print Date: 01/30/2015
Insured's Name, Mailing or Street Address and Other Agency and Agent Contact Information Crop Year Claim Number Policy Number
Contact tnfomudlon
Bvb Partners CropGuard Group Inc, (48-008)
C Casey Clipson (20aO) 2012 12000306 48-595-1003702
PO Box 403
HargH!, TX 78549 2315 W Expressway 83 State Code I Name
Ste 102
San Benito, TX 78586 4a Texas
Phone: (956) 330-6129 Cell (9SS) 848-6682 Office Phone: (956) 361-5550 Agency (956) 361-5550 Agent I am an Agent. Employee, or Contrador affdia(ed with the
Email: Email: cdipson@cropguardgroup.com Federal crop insurance program?
Authortzed Representative: NONE
Claims SUpeMSOr: Ben Hanawa
power of Attorney: NONE
Adjuster. Juan Guajardo
DYes o No
Best time to contact insured:
Check one: o This is a notice of prevented planting. o This is a notice of damage only (appears that production will.exceed the guarantee at this time).
~ This Is a notice of probable loss. o Immediate inspection is requested. If checked, explain why:
County: Hidalgo (215) Crop: Grain Sorghum Date Reported: 3121/2012
Unk Acres Legal Descr.ption- Estimated Production Calfse of Damage Date of Damage Expected Harvest Date
InsuredTs Intention (check one):
VVind/Exees3 V\IInd
I 3/21/2012
If the intent is to replant and a replanting payment
00 To harvest o To chop/silage o Leave for cover o Destroy o Plant to another crop o Pasture o Hay is applicable, is the acreage greater than 50 acres
of the unit?
o Crop will be direct marjc:eted o Replant o Unknown at this time o Other (Explain): DYes o No
County: Crop: Date Reported:
Unk Acres Legal Description- Estimated Production Cause of Damage Date of Damage Expected Harvest Date
Insured's Intention (check one):
I If the intent is to replant and a replanting payment
o To harvest o To chop/silage o Leave for cover o Destroy o Plant to another crop o Pasture o Hay is applicable, is the acreage greater than 50 acre~
of the unit?
o Crop wilt be direct marketed o Replant o Unknown at this time o Other (Explain): DYes o No
County: Crop: Date Reported:
Unn Acres Lega. Description· Estimated Production Cause of Damage Oate of Damage Expected Harvest Date
Insured's Intention (check onel:
I If the intent is to re~ant and a replanting payment
o To harvest o To cnop/silage o Leave (or cover o Destroy o Plant to another crop o Pasture o Hay is applicable, is the acreage greater than 50 acre!
of the unit?
o Crop will be direct marketed o Replant o Unknown at this time o Other (Explain): DYes o No
Remarks:
contact # 956--845-6682
------ --
``
• Legal Description =- Section, TownShip, Range & Other land Identifiers (e.g. Spanish Land grants, metes & bounds, etc,)
M911 (Rev. 03-2014) See Last Page of Notice of Prevented Planting or Damage or loss for Required Statements
lrft~Page1of2
17
Notice of Prevented Planting or Damage or Loss Hudson Insurance Company
€J IjV,P,S(:!" 7300 west 11 Dth Str.et, Su~e 400
Overtand Park, KS 66210
Ph / Fx: (866) 450-1445/ (913) 345-1671
Print Date: 0113012015
Insurad's Name Adluster's Name CropVe.r Clalm Number Policy Number
Bvb partners Juan Guajardo 2012 12000306 48·595·1003702
I request authorization to commingle production from two or more units or commingle production between insured and uninsured acreage within the same structure and to use my load records, structure
markings, or combine monitor records to determine production between units or production from insuredJuninsured acreage. 00 you agree to follow your insurance provider's written criterja and instructions
to do this? o Yes 0 No
Written or oral authorization and written ctiteria and instructionS must be received from your insurance provider before produdion can be commingled. I understand that if authorization is given, my insurance provider will
annually provide written criteria and instructions for the use of load or combine monitor records to separate sum production, and if , fail to follow all instructions, my optional unit strudure wiU be coUapsed,
If you have less than 100% share, is the other share insured under a Federal crop insurance program? If SO. list the person's name, name of AlP for which they carry a Federal crop insurance and potlcy
number if known.
---- --- ---- ---
cotlection of Information and Data {Privacy Act) Statement
Agents, Loss Adjusters and Policyholders
The foUoVoling statements are made in accordance 'lAth the Prtvacy Ad of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a): The Risk Management Agency (RMA) is authorized by the Federal Crop Insurance Ad (7 U.S.C. 1501-1524) or other Acts, and the
regulations promulgated thereunder, to soliCit the information requested on documents established by RMA or by approved insurance providers (AlPs) that have been approved by the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation (Fete)
to deliver Federal crop insurance. The information is necessary for AtPs and RMA to operate the Federal crop insurance program. determine program eligibility, conduct statistical analySis, and ensure program integrity
Information provided herein may be fumished" to other Federal, State, or locaf agencies, as required or permitted by law, law enforcement agencies, courts or adjudicative bodies. foreign agencies, magistrate, administratiVe
tribUnal, AlPs contractors and cooperators. Comprehensive Information Management System (elMS). congressional offices, or entilles under contract wlth RMA. FOr insurance agents, certain information may also be disclosed
to the pubfic to assist interested individuals in locating agents In a palt"lcular area. Oisdosure of the information requested is voluntary. However, failure to correctly report the requested information may resutt in the rejection of
this document by the AlP or RMA in accordance With the Standard Reinsurance Agreement between the AlP and FCtC, Federal regu!ations, or RMA-approved proCedures and the denial of program eligilXllty or beneFits deriVe<:l
therefrom. Also, failure to provide true aod correct information may result in civil suit or criminal prosecution and the assessment of penalties or pursuit of other remedies.
Non-Discrimlnatlon Statement
Non-DiscriminatiOn Policy - The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination against its customers, employees, and appUcants for employment on the basis of race, color, national origin. age, disability, sex.
gender identity, religion, reprisal, and where applicabfe, political beliefs, mantal status, familial or parental status. sexual orientation, or all or part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program, or
protected genetic Information in employment or in any program or activity conducted or funded by the Department (Not an prohibited basis will apply to all programs and/or employment activities.)
To File a Program Complaint - It you wish 10 file a Civil Rights program complaint or discrimination, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, found online at
http://w.Nw.ascr.usda.gov/complainUilinQ_custhlml, or at any USDA offrce, or call (866) 632-9992 to request the form. You may also 'Mite a letter containing all of the information requested in the form. Send your completed
complaint fonn or letter by mail to the U.S. Department of Agricullure, Director, OffIce of Adjudication. 1400 Independence Avenue. S.W., Washington. D.C, 20250~941 0, by fax (202) 690~7442 or email at
program.intake@usda.gov.
Persons with Disabilities ~ Individuals who are deaf, hard of hearing or have speech dIsabilities and wish to file either an EEO Of program complaint please contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (SOO} 877 -B339 or
(BOO} 845-6136 (in Spanish). Persons wi1h disabilities, who wish to file a program complaint, please see information above on how to contact the Department by mail dIrectly or by email. II you require alternative means of
communication for program information (e.g., Braille, farge print. audiotape, etc.) please contact USDA's TARGET Center at (lO2) 720-2600 (voice and TOO).
Hudson Insurance Privacy Policy
When you apply to any of the Hudson Insurance Group companies for any type of insurance, you disdose information about yourself to us. The collection, use and disclosure of such information is regulated by law. Hudson
Insurance Group, its agents. affiliates and subSidiaries maintain physical, electronic and procedural safeguards that compfy With state and federal regulations to guard your personal infonnation. We also limit employee access to
certain personal information, to those ¥lith a business reason fOr knO'Ning suCh infonnation. Hudson Insurance Group also inslructs its employees so that they will understand the importance of the confidentiality of personal
information, and takes appropriate measures to enforce employee privacy responsibilities.
Certification Statement
I certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief all of the information on this form is correct. I also understand that failure to report completely and accurately may result in sanctions under my policy, including
but not limited to voidance of the poHcy, and in crtminal or civil penalties (18 U.S.C. §1006 and §1 014: 7 U.S.C. §1506; 3' U.S.C. §3729, §3730 and any other applicable federal statutes).
Insured's Printed Name InSured's Signature Date of Notice
Bvb Partners
Refer to the Basic provisions and the specific Crop Provisions for more details on notice requirements for acreage prevented from planting and nol1ce requiremems for damage or loss requirements.
M911 (Rev, 03-2014)
II
[!]
18
. .
Page 2 of2
rolj~!.~?~9!::
7300 West 110th Street. Suile 850
Loss Statement Overland Park, KS 66210
Phone: (866) 45Q...1445
This Loss Statement represents all acreages that have been finalized. Fax: (913) 345-1671
Claims are subject to audit by the company. Print Date: 08120/2012
Clipson (2080)
2315 W Expressway 83, Sts 102
San Benito. TX 78586
(956) 361-5550
ritdipson@cropguardinsurance.com
931
IR
100%
$0.00
64 = Tornado 95 =Poleburn
PF =Prevented Plant with Standard Coverage + 5% 2 ::;: Low Market Price 42::: Freeze 71 = Insects 96 = Fruit Set
PT ::: Prevented Ptant with Standard Coverage + 10% 10 ::: Drought DeViation 43::; Cold Winter Kill 72 ::: Medfly 97 '" Earthquake
H ::: Harvested 11 =Orough1 44 =Cote! Wet Weather 81::: Disease 98::: Volcanic Eruption
UH ::; Unharvested 12 ::;: Excessive Heat 45 ::: Insufficient Chill 82 =Aflatoxin 99 = Other
R::;: Replant 13 = Irrigat'lon Fallure 51:;: Flood 90::: Force FIre
1 <::: Stage I 14 :; Failed Ifr Equip 55 :;; GRP Revenue 91::: Fire
2 = Stage It 21 ::: Hail 61 =Wind 92 ::: Hurricane
3 = Stage III 31 ::: Precipitation 62::: Hot Wind 93 =IMldl~e
4 = Stage IV 32 = Poor Drainage 63 =Cyclone 94:::; Erosion
• Legal Description = Section, Township, Range & Other Land Identifiers (e.g. Spanish Land grants, metes & bounds, etc.)
,.,.. Guarantee Per Acre (GPA) ::; Bushels, Pounds, Tons, Hundred Weight. Boxes. Revenue Guarantee, or Doflars
POL (Rev. 12-2011) Page 1 of 1
19
Notice of Prevented Planting or Damage or Loss Hudson Insurance Company
~t!~;:l),\(:~
7300 West 11 oth Street. Suite 400
Ove~and Pall<, KS 66210
Ph I Fx; (866) 450-1445 I (913) 345·1671
Print Date: 01130/2015
'nBured's Name, Mailing or Street Address and Other Agency and Agent Colltaa Information Crop Year Claim Number Policy Number
Contact InfonnaUon
Bvb Partners Crop Guard Group Inc. (48-008)
PO 80)1;403 C Casey Oipson (20BO) 2012 12002392 48-595-1003702
Hargill, TX 78549 2315 W Expressway 63 State Code I Name
Ste 102
San Benito, TX 78586 48 Texas
Phone: (956) 330-{)129 Cell (956) 845-6682 Office Phone: (956) 361-5550 Agency (956) 361-5550 Agent I am an Agent, Employee, or Comractor affitiated with the
EmaH: Email: cclipson@cropguardgroup.com Federal crop insurance program?
Authorized Representative: NONE
Power of Attorney: NONE Claims Supervisor: Ben Hanawa
DVes o No
Best time to contact Insured: Adjuster: Juan Leal
Chei:k one: oThis is a notice of prevented planting. o This is a notice of damage only (appears that produc1ion will exceed the guarantee at this time).
00 This is a notice of probable loss. o Immediate inspedion is requested. If checked, explain why:
County: Hidalgo (215) Crop: Grain Sorghum Date Reported: 719/2012
Unit Acres Legal DesCription" Estimated ProdUction Cause of Damage Date of Damage Expected Harvest Date
Insured's Intention (check one):
I I I Drought 719/2012
If the intent is to replant and a replanting payment
00 To harvest o To chop/silage o Leave for cover o Destroy o Plant to another crop o Pasture o Hay is applicable, is the acreage greater than 50 acres
arthe unit?
o Crop will be direct marketed o Replant o Unknown at this time o Other (Explain): DYes o No
County: Crop: Date Reported:
Unit Acres Legal Descrlptlon* Estimated Production Cause of Damage Date of Damage Expected Harvest Date
tnsured's Intention (check one):
I I I If the intent is to replant and a replanting payment
o To harvest o To chop/silage o Leave for cover o Destroy o Plant to another crop o Pasture o Hay is applicable, is the acreage greater than 50 acres
of the uni1?
o Crop will be direct marketed o Replant o Unknown at this time o Other (Exp~ain): o Yes o No
County: Crop: Date Reported:
Un~ Acres Legal Description'" Estimated Production Cause of Damage Date of Oamage Expected Harvest Date
Insured's Intention (check one):
I I I tf the intent is to replant and a replanting payment
o To harvest o To chop/silage o Leave for cover o Destroy o Plant to another crop o Pasture o Hay is applicable. is the acreage greater than 50 acres
of the unit?
o Crop will be direct marketed o Replant o Unknown at this time o Other (Explain): DYes o No
Remarks:
contact# (956)845-ll682
.. Legal Description = Section, TownShip, Range & Other Land Identifiers (e.g. Spanish Land grants, metes & bounds, etc.)
M911 (Rev. 03-2014) See Last Page of Notice of Prevented Planting or Damage or Loss for Required Statements
20
Notice of Prevented Planting or Damage or Loss Hudson Insurance Company
Q Ij l!,~),S(:.N 7300 West 110th Street, Suite 400
Overtand Part<, KS 66210
Ph I Fx: (866) 450-14451 (913) 345·1671
Print Date: 01130/2015
Insured's Name Adjustor's Name era)) Year Claim Number Policy Number
Bvb Partners Juan Leal 2012 12002392 48·595·1003702 I
I request authorization to commingle production from two or more units or commingle production between insured and uninsured acreage within the same structure and use my load records, structure'0
matidngs, or combine monitor records to determine production between units or production from insured/uninsured acreage. Do you agree to follow your insurance provider's written criteria and instructions
to do this? o Yes 0 No
Written or oral authorization and wrllten criteria and instructions must be received from your insurance provider before production can be commingled. I understand that jf authorization is given, my insurance provider will
annually provide written criteria and instructions for the use of load or combine monitor records to separate such production, and if I fail to follow all instructions. my optional unit structure will be collapsed.
•
If you have less than 100% share, is the other share insured under a Federal crop insurance program? If so, list the person's name, name of AlP for which they carry a Federal crop insurance and policy
number if Known,
Collection of Information and Data (Privacy Act} Statement
Agents, Loss AdjusterS and Policyholders •
The following statements are made in accordance wi1h the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U,S.C. 552a): The RiSk Management Agency (RMA) is authorIZed by the Federal Crop Insurance Act (7 U.S.C. 1501 1524) or other Ads. and the
M
regulations promulgated thereunder, to solicit the information requested on documents estabtished by RMA or by approved Insurance providers (AlPs) that have been approved by 1he Federal Crop fnsurance Corporation (Fele)
to deliver Federal crop insurance. The infonnafion is necessary for AlPs and RMA to operate the Federal crop insurance program, determine program eligibility, condud statistical analysis, and ensure progmm integrity
Information provided herein may be furnished to other Federal, State. or local agendes, as required or pennitted by law, law enforcement agencies, courts or adjudicative bodies, foreign agendes, magistrate, administrative
tribunal, AlPs contractors and cooperators, Comprehensive Information Management System (elMS), congressional offices, or entilies under contract 'Hilh RMA. For insurance agents, certain informallon may also be dlsdosed
to the public to assist intWAs.lad individuals in locAting agents in a particular area Disclosure of the information requested is voluntary However. railure it') correctly f'P.pnrt thE'! rentlf!:!'rtf!,d information may ~ult in th~ rejection of
thjs docUment by the AlP Of RMA in accordance with the Standarn Reinsurance Agreement between the AlP and FeIC. Federal regulations, or RMAMapproved procedUffiS end the denial of program eligibility or benenls derived
therefrom. Also, failure to provlde true and correct information may resuff in civil sui1 of criminal prosecution and the assessment of penalties or pursuit of other remedies.
Non~lscrimination Statement
NooMDiscrimination Policy - The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USOA) prohibits discrimination against Jts customers. employees, and applicants for employment on the basis of race. color, national angin, age, disability, sex.
gender identity, religion, reprisal, and vmsre applicable, poJitical beliefs. marital s1atus, famlllal Of parental status. sexual onentatron, or all or part of an Individual's income is derived from any public assistance program, or
protected genetic information In employment or in any program or activity conducted or funded by the Department. (Not all prohibited basis will apply to all programs and/or employment activities.)
To File a Program Complaint If y<:Ju Wish to file a Civil Rights program complaint of discrimination, compJete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Fonn, found online at
M
http://wv.M'.asct'.usda.gov/complalnUiling_cust.l1tml, or at any USDA office, or call (866) 632-9992 to request the form. You may also write a letter containing aU of the information requested in the form. Send your completed
complaint form or leHer by mail to the V.S. Department of Agrtcl)tture, Director, Office of Adjudication, 1400 Independence Avenue, S. W, Washington, D.C. 202$0-9410. by fax (202) 690-7442 or emai1 at
program. in1ake@usda.gov.
Persons with Disabilities - Individuals who are deaf, hard of hearing or have speech disabUities and wish to file either an EEO or program complaint please contact USDA 'through the Federal Relay Service at (BOO) 877-8339 or
(BOO} 845-6136 (in Spanish). Persons with disabilities. who Ylish 10 file a program compfaint. please see information above on how to contact the Department by mail directly or by email. If you require alternative means of
communication for program information (e.g .. Braille. large print. audiotape, etc.) please contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 72(}'2600 (vdee and TDD).
Hudson Insurance Privacy Potlc.y
When you apply to any of the Hudson Insurance Group companies for any type of insurance. you disclose infonnation about yourself to us. The collection. use and disclosure of such information is regulated by taw. Hudson
Insurance Group, lts agents, affiliates and subsidiaries maintain physical, eJectronk, and procedural safeguards that comply with state and federal regulations to guard your personal information. We also limft. employee access to
certain personal information, to those with a business reason for knowing such information. Hudson Insurance Group also instructs its employees so that they will understand the importance ot the confidentiality of personal
Information, and takes appropriate measures to ooforce employee privacy responsibilities.
Certification Statement
I certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief aU of the information on this form is correct. I also understand that failure to report completely and accurately may result in sanctions under my policy, Including
but not limited to voidance of the policy, and in criminal or civil penalties (18 U,S.C. §1006 and §1014: 7 U.S.C. §1506; 31 U.S.C. §3729, §3730 and any other applicabJe federal statutes).
Insured's Printed Name Insured's Signature Date of Notice
Bvb Partners
Refer to the Basic Provisions and the specifIC Crop Provisions for more details on notice requirements for acreage prevented from planting and notice requiremenls for damage or loss reqUirements.
M911 (Rev. 03-2014)
21
ro l:i~!Di~)!'i
Loss Statement
This Loss Statement represents all acreages that have been finalized.
Claims are subject to audit by the company.
7300 Wes111 OIh Sireet, Suite 850
Overland Park, KS 66210
Phone: (866) 450.1445
Fax: (913) 345.1671
Print Date: 10112/2012
No Type
23510 Fletcher T-
137069
I 11 I
100%
I NS/H
Specified I 100%
Orchard &
Irrigated
FletcherT
3051
0001-0029 OU I VA 18.40
11 I
I 100%
I NS/H
134797 100%
0001-0030 OU IVA 243.00
11 I
! 100%
I NS/H I I $33,352.31
9404 100%
• Legal Description = Section. Township, Range & Other Land Identifiers (e.g. Spanish Land grants. metes & bounds, etc.)
"'* Guarantee Per Acre (GPA) = Bushels, Pounds, Tons, Hundred Weight, Boxes. Revenue Guarantee, or Dollars
POL (Rev. 12-2011) Page 1 of 2
22
7300 West 110th Street, Suite 850
Loss Statement
€)f:j\!P;)~)!'l
Overland Park, KS 66210
Phone: (866) 450·1445
This Loss Statement represents all acreages that have been finalized. Fax: (913) 345·1571
Claims are subject to audit by the company. Print Date: 1011212012
.. ··.·,;,IM!Ji'id:!iJi\fO~lIon.;:;~!\q;, J3K'~;,}liD';:i>;;.·. ,;,;;:i;i~.rtli!``"i/iifonnatlon .. i:··.d.;rop';r:~lItS7'~:j; .:,·;:~I~lm:!'Iuiill\jf/ .• ,., ·{;I:,·,,:{,~b1lCy;fllljliiberi
'::j,:;."
r,~,"·'':' i".:'
CropGuard GrouP. Inc. (17-£63)
Stage Codes:
Bvb Partners
I
Cause of Loss Codes:
C Casey Clipson (2080)
2012 12002392
Total Indemnity
48-595-1003702
$38,392.00 '
P2 =Prevented Plant with Standard Coverage 1 =low Harvest Price 41 = Frost 64 = Tomado 95 = Poleburn
PF = Prevented Plant with Standard Coverage + 5% 2 = Low Market Price 42 = Freeze 71 :: Insects % = FruitSe! Original Loss Amount $38,392.00
PT = Prevented Plant with Standard Coverage + 10% 10 = Drought Deviation 43 = Cold Winter Kill 72= Medfly 97 =Earthquake Increase/Overpayment $0.00
H =Harvesletl 11 =Drought 44 -= Cold Wet Weather 81 = Disease 98 = Volcanic Eruption Current Claim Amoun! $38,392.00:
UH -= Unharvested 12 = EXcessive Heat 45 = Insufficient Chill 82 = Aflatoxin 99 = Other ;
R =Replant 13 =Irrigation Failure 51 = Flood 90 = Force Fire Previous Transactions
1 = Stage I 14" Failed 1fT Equip 55 = GRP Revenue 91 :: Fire Previous Paid Amounts $0.00
2 = Stage II 21 =Hall 61 = Wind 92 =Hurricane Overpaid Loss Recoveries $0.00
3 = Stage Itt 31 = Precipitation 62:: Hot Wind 93 = \N1ldlife Amount Remaining $38,392.00
4 = Stage IV 32 = Poor Drainage 63= Cydnnp 94 l:- Erosion
Current Disbursements
Recovery to other Claims $0.00
Current Loss Credits $38,392.00;
Check Amount $0,001
Processed BatCh: St4-0nlO";f2-=2of2"
• Legal Description = Section, Township, Range & Other Land Identifiers (e.g. Spanish Land grants, metes & bounds, etc.)
*" Guarantee Per Acre (GPA) ; Bushels, Pounds, Tons, Hundred Weight, Boxes, Revenue Guarantee, or Dollars
POL (Rev. 12-2011) Page 2 012
23
Notice of Prevented Planting or Damage or Loss Hudson Insurance Company
7300 Wesl110ih Street. Suite 400
11\'\
~,
HUDSON
I"~'
... ,\q-.--,..
Overtand Park, K5 66210
Ph 1 Fx: (866) 450-14451 (913) 345-1671
Print Date: 0113012015
Insured's Name, MaWng Or' Street AddntSS and Other Ageney and Agent Contact Information Crop Year Claim Number Policy Number
Contact Infonnatlon
Svb Partners CropGuard Group Inc. (48-D08)
C Casey Clipson (21)80)
2012 12004424 48-595-1003702
PO 80x403
Hargill, TX 78549 2315 W Expressway 83 state Code' Name
51e102
San Benito, TX 78586 48 Texas
Phone: (956) 33()-6129 Cell (956) 845-6682 Office Phone: (956) 361-5550 Agency (956) 361-5550 Agent I am an Agent, Employee, or Contractor affiliated with the
Email: Email: cdipson@cropguardgroup,com Federal crop insurance prog.ram?
Authorized Representative: NONE
CJaims Supervisor: Ben Hanawa
Power of Attorney: NONE
Adjuster: Juan Leal
DYes o No
Best time to contact insured:
Check one: o
This Is a notice of prevented planting. o This is a notice of damage only (appears that production will exceed the guarantee at this time).
I!l This Is a notice of probable loss. o Immediate inspection is requested. Jf checked, explain why:
County: Hidalgo (215) Crop: Cotton .DaIllReported: 812912012
Legal Description"
I I
Unit Ac ..... Estimated Production Cause of Damage Date of Damage Expected Harvest Date
Insured's Intention (check one):
I I Drought 812912012
If the intent Is to replant and a repJanting payment
I
I!I To harvest o To chop/silage o Leave for cover o Destroy o Plant to another crop o Pasture o Hay Is applicable, is the acreage greater than 50 acres
of the unit?
o Crop will be direct marketed o Replant o Unknown at this time o Other(Explaln): DYes DNa
County: Crop: Oalll Reported:
Unn Acres Legal Description- Estimated Production Cause of Damage Date of Damage Expected Harvest Date
~nsured's
I
Intention (check one):
I I I If 1he intent is to replant and a replanting payment
o To harvest o To Chop/silage o Leave for cover o Destroy o Plant to another crop o Pasture o Hay is applicable, is the acreage greater than 50 acres
of the unit?
o Crop will be direct marketed o Replant o Unknown at this time o other (Explain): DYes o No
County: Crop: Date Reported:
Unit Acres Legal Description" Estimated Production Cause of Damage Date of Damage Expected Harvest Date
I
Insured's Intention (check ona):
I I I If the intent is to replant and a replanting payment
o To harvest o To chop/silage o Leave for cover o Destroy o Plant to another crop o Pasture o Hay is applicable, is the acreage greater than 50 acres
of the unlt?
o Crop will be direct marketed o Replant o Unknown at this time o Other (Explain): DYes o No :
Remarks:
contact#(956)845-€682
-- - -
&I
• Legal Description = Section. Township, Range & Other land Identifiers (e.g. 'Spanish Land grants, metes & bounds, etc.)
".
[!J..
- -.
M911 (Rev. 03~2014) See Last Page of Notice of Prevented Planting or Damage or Loss for Required Statements Page 1 of 2
24
Notice of Prevented Planting or Damage or loss Hudson Insurance Company
~ lj\}P.~(:!"
7300 West 110th Street, $u~e 400
Ov.~and Parl<, KS 66210
Ph I Fx: (866) 450·1445 1(913) 345·1671
Plint Date: 01/3012015
Insured'S Name Ad uster"s Name Crop Year Claim Number Policy Number
Bvb Partners Juan Lea! 2012 12004424 48-595-1003702
I
I reques1 authorization to commingle production kom two or more units or commingle production between insured and uninsured acreage within the same structure and to use my load records, structure
markings, or combine monitor records to determine production between units or production from insured/uninsured acreage, Do you agree to follow your insurance provider's written criteria and instructions
to do this? DYesD No
written or oral authorization and written criteria and instructions must be received from your insurance provider before production can be commingled. I understand 1hat jf authorization is given, my Insurance provider will
annually provide written crtteria and instruc1lons for the use of load or combine monitor records to separate such production, and If I fail to follow all Instructions, my optional unit structure will be collapsed.
If you have less than 100% share, is the other share insured under a Federal crop insurance program? If so, list the person's name, name of AlP for which they carry a Federal crop insurance and policy
number jf known.
Collection of tnformation and Oata (Prlvacy Act~ Statement
Agents, Loss Adjusters and Policyholders
The following statements are made in accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a): The Risk Management Agency (RMA) is authOrized by the Federal Crop Insurance Act (7 U.S.C. 1501~1524) or other Acts, and the
regulations promulgated thereunder, to solicit the information requested on documents established by RMA or by approved insurance providers (AlPs) that have been approved by the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation (FCIC)
to deliver Federat crop insurance. The information is necessary for AlPs and RMA to operate the Federal crop insurance program, determine program eligibility, conduct statistical analysis, and ensure program integnty
Information provided herein may be fumished to other Federal, State, or local agendes, as required or permitted by law, law enforcement agencies, courts or adjudicative bodies. foreign agendes, magistrate, administrative
tribunal, AlPs contractors and cooperators, Comprehensive Information Management System {CIMS}, congressional offices, or entities under contract with RMA. For insurance agents, certain information may also be disclosed
to the pubOc to assist interested individuals in locating agents in a particular area Disdosure of the infOrmation requested is voruntary. However, failure to correctly report the requested informaflon may result in the rejection of
this document by the AlP or RMA in accordance INith the Standard ReInsurance Agreement between the AlP and FCIC, rederal regulations, or RMA-approved procedures and the denIal of program eligibility or benefits derivec
therefrom. Also, failure to provide true and correct information may resuft In civil suit or crimina! prosecution and the assessment of penalties or pursUit Of other remedies.
Non..oiscrimlnation Statement
Non~Discrimination Policy ~ The U.S. Department of Agricufture (USDA) prohibits disaimination against its customers, employees, and applicants for employment on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, sex,
gender identity, religion, reprisal, and 'INhere applicable, political beliefs, marltal status, famillal or parental status, sexual orientalion. or all or part of an Individual's income is derived from any public assistance program, or
protected genetic Information in employment or in any program or activity conducted or funded by the Department. (Not an prohibited basis wnl apply 10 all programs andfor employment activities.)
To File a Program Complaint - If you wish to file a CMI Rights program complaint of discrimination, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, fOund online at
http://www.ascr.usda.govlcomplainUilinSLcost.html. or at any USDA office, or call (866) 632·9992 to request the form. You may also write a tetter containing all of the information requested in the fOrm. Send your completed
com~aint fonn or letter by mail to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Director, Office of Adjudication. 1400 Independence Avenue, S. W., Washington, D.C. 20250~941 0, by fax (202) S9Q..7442 at email at
program.lntake@usda.gov.
Persons with Oisabilities ~ Individuals who are deaf, hard of hearing or have speech -disabilities and wish to file either an EEO or program complaint please contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339 or
(800) 845-6138 (In Spanish). Persons With disabiUties, who wish to file a program complaint, please see informatiOn above on how to contad the Department by mail directly or by email. If you require afternative means of
communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print. audiotape, etc.) please contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TOO).
Hudson Insurance Privacy Policy
When you apply to any of the Hudson Insurance Group companies for any type of insurance, you disdose information aboUt yourself to us. The collection, use and disclosure of such information is regulated by law. Hudson
Insurance Group, its agents, affiliates and subsidiaries maintain physical, electronic and procedural safeguards that comply with state and federal regulations to guard your personal information. We also ilmit employee access to
certain personal information, to those with a buSiness reason for knowing such information. Hudson Insurance Group also instructs its employees so that they wiU understand the importance of the confidentialily of personal
information, and takes appropriate measures to enforce employee privacy responsibili1ies.
Certification Statement
I certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief all of the information on this form is correct. I also understand that failure to report completely and accurately may result in sanctions under my policy, including
but not limited to voidance of the policy, and in criminal or civil penalties (18 U.S.C, §1006 and §1014; 7 U.S,C. §1S06; 31 U.S.C. §3729, §3730 and any other applicable federal statutes),
InslIred's Printed Name Insured's Signature Date of ffOiTce
Bvb Partners
Refer to the Basic Provisions and the specific Crop Provisions for mora details on notice requirements for acreage prevented from planting and notIce requirements for damage or loss requirements.
M911 (Rev. 03~2014)
II
"
13
Page
25
..
2 of 2
.
7300 West 1 HHh Street. Suite 850
Loss Statement
~) 1:!~:![),~9~
Overland Park. KS 66210
Phone: (866) 450-1445
This Loss Statement represents all acreages that have been finalized. Fax: (913) 34S-1S71
Claims are subject to audit by the company. Print Date: 0110412013
PO 60x403
Hargill. TX 78549
(956) 845-<6682
11 f
1 NSfH 1 _. _____ .1 .... 1 ___ . __ .1 $13.008.001 $1
100%
11 f
1 NSfH 1 .. 1
_____ J $2.266.01
100% -- --- -j
11 f
100°/1'1
! NSfH
11 f
I 100%
1 NSfH 1 - .1 1 .. __ - _I $1
100%
• Legal Description = Section. TownshiP. Range & Other Land Identifiers (e.g. Spanish Land grants. metes & bounds. etc.)
.. Guarantee Per Acre (GPA) = Bushels, Pounds, Tons, Hundred Weight. Boxes, Revenue Guarantee. or Dollars
POL (Rev. 12-2011) Page 1012
26
7300 West 110th Street, $one 850
Loss Statement
~ lj~lI?;~9!'l
Overland Park, KS 66210
Phone: l866} 450-1445
This Loss Statement represents all acreages that have been finalized. Fax: (913} 345-1671
Claims are subject to audit by the company. Prinl Oale: 0110412013
I ;'.;. .' dFh';tthiidrwjC'~iIr~ap1!!!'tJ;i/ ,'i', :":.01: ";{i.t:'" :,::;:;,;AUO!'9fsJiifOnnallon,.; ,,;,,: :.; :.:,":.;1 m::~:H1::"P;y~t;.UjL·:~lwi;'·'1l~lllri'fNIl~r.::d81;@·;:··F'. .:.,': ;;':~'~ <·':J:;~';:,>ltge~cy~s_::ll1ffj~ation ::,',;.;- -, ,<'.· 48-595·1003702
Ha,gln, TJ( 78549 2315 W Expressway 83 Sta!a Code 1 N.....
Ste 102
San Benito. TJ( 78585 48 Tex..
Phon.: (956) ~129 cen (956) 845-6662 Office Phone: (956) 361·5550 Agency (956) 361-5550 Agent lam an Agent. Employee. or Contractor affiliated with lhe
Email: EmaIl: cdipson@cropguardgroup.com Federal crop Insurance program?
Authorized Roprosantatlve: NONE
Powe' of Attorney: NONE Claims Supervisor: Ben Hanawa
DYes DNo
Best Ume to contact Insured: Adjuster: Juan Guajardo
Chockono: 00 This Is a nollce of prevented planting. o This Is a notice of damBlJ" only (appears that production will exceed 1I1e guarantee al this time).
o This Is a notice of probable loss. o Immedlale Inspection Is requested. If checked, explain why:
County: Hidalgo (215) Crop: Collon Diite'R.~d: 3/1312013
Unit Acres Logal Doscrlptlon" Esflmatad Production Cau.e of Domage Data of Damage Expected Harve.t Date
Failure of Irrigation SUpply 311312013
Insurod's Intention (chock one): If the Intent Is to replanl and a replanting payment
o To harvest o To chop/sllalJ" o Leave far cover o Destroy o Plant to another crop o P..ture o Hay Is applicable. Is 1t1e acreage greater !han 50 acre.
ofthe unit?
o Crop wi! be direct marketed o Replant o Unknown at 1I1iS time 00 Other (Explain): Prevented Planting DYes o No
County: Hidalgo (215) Crop: Com Date Reported: 3/1312013
Unit Acres Legal Doscrlptlon' E s t _ ProductIon Cause of Damage Date of Damage Expectod Harvest Dato
FaRure of Irrigation Supply 311312013
Insured's Intention (check one): If 1t1e Intent is to replant and a replanting payment
o To harvesl o To chop/sllage o leave for cover o Destroy o Plant to another crop o Pasture o Hay 18 applicable, Is lhe acreage greater than 50 acres
of the unR?
o ClOP wiD be d~ect markeled o Roplam o Unknown at this time 00 Other (explain): Prevented Planllng. DYes o No
County: Crop: Date Reported:
Unit Ac.... LeglllDescriptlon· Estimated Production Ca .... of Damage Date of Damag. Expected Harvest Dat.
Insu",d'. IntonUon (check one): ~ 1t1e Intent Is to replant and a replanting payment
o To harvest oTo chop/sllage o Leave for cover o Destroy o Plant to anolher crop o Pasture o Hay is appRcable, is the acreage greater lhan 50 a""
of1t1e uM?
o Crop will be direct marketed o
Reolant o Unknown at this time o Other (Explain): DYes D No
Remarks:
Contact # 956-845-6682 Conlact # 956-845-6682
---- ---------------- ---------
" Legal Description' SeeIIon, TownShip, Range & Other Land Identlfler1! (e.g. SpaniSh Land grants, metes & bounds, etc.)
M911 (Rev. 03-2014) See last Page of Notice of Prevented Planting or Damage or loss for Required Slatements
Notice of Prevented Planting or Damage or Loss Hudson Insurance Company
€ t1Y-(?,~2~ 7300 West 1101h Street. Sune 400
Overtand Part<. KS 66210
Ph 1 Fx: (666) 450-14451 (913) 345-1671
Print Date: 0113012015
InsunHl's Name AdJustor'S NIU119 e", V••r Clafm Number PalleyNum_
BIIb Partners Juan Gua/an:to 2013 12009744 48-595-1003702
I request authorization to commingle production from two or more units or commingle production between InsUN!d and unlnsUN!d acreage within the same structure and to usa my load records. structure
markings. or combine monnor records to determine production between unlls or producllon from Insured/uninsured acreage. Do you agree to follow your insurance provtde(s wrttten crHeria and Instructions
to do this? [] Yes [] No
WrItten or oral authorization and written criteria and instructions must be receWed from your insurance provider before production can be commingled. I understand that if authorizatiOn Is given. my Insurance provtder wlH
annually provide written criteria and instructions for the usa of load or combine monitor records to separate sUCh production, and ff I faU to foJIow aM instructions. my optional unit structure wiD be cofJapsed.
~ you havaless then 100% share. Is the other share Insured under a Federal crop Insurance program? If so. list the person's name. name of AlP for which they cony a Federal crop Insurance and pelley
number If known.
Collection of lnformatlon and Data (Privacy Act) Statement
Agents. Lou Adjusters and Policyholders
The folloYl'ing statements are made in accordance with the Privacy Ad of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a): The Risk Management Agency (RMA) is authorized by the Federal Crop fnsurance Act (7 U.S.C. 1501-1524) or other Acts. and tttE
regulations promulgated thereunder, to solicit the informetlon requmed on documents established by RMA or by approved insurance providers (AlPs) that have been approved by the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation (FCIC)
to deliver Federal crop insurance. The information Is necessary for AlPs and RMA to operate the Federat crop insurance program. determine program eligibility. conduct stallsflcalanaJysls. and ensure program Integrity
Information provided herein may be fumished to other Federal. State, or local agencies. as required or permitted by law, law enforcement agencies. courts or adjudicative bodies. forejgn agencies, magistrate. administrative
tribunal, AlPs contractors and cooperators. Compt'ehenslve Information Management System (CIMS), congressional offices, or entities under eontfact with RMA. For insurance agents, certain Information mey elso be disclosed
to the pubfic to 88sist Intere:5ted mdlviduels in Joceting agents In a pertk:ular area. Disclosure ofthe Infofmatioo requested is \/OJuntaf)'. However, rallure to comtdly ",port the requQated Information may result 10 the rt!ljectlon 01
this document by the AlP or RMA in accordance v.ith the Standard Reinsurance Agreement between the AlP and Fete. Federal regulations, or RMA-approved procedures and the dental of program eUglblllty or benefits derivee
therefrom, Also, faOure to provide true and correct Information may result in eivit suit or crimina' prosecutton and the assessment of penalties or pursuit of other remedies.
Non-Dlacriminatlon Statement
Non--Oisaimination Polley. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibtts discnminatlon against its customers, employees. and applcants for empfoyment on the basis of race, color, national origin, age. dlsabmty. sex,
gender identity, religion, reprisal, and where 8ppJicable. political beliefs. marital status. famAiBl or parental status. sexual orientation, or all or part of an Indlviduars. Income is derived from any public Bssislanee program, or
protected genetic information in employment or In any program or activIty conducted or funded by the Department (Not aU prohibited basis win apply to an programs and/or employment actMtles.)
To File a Program Complaint - If you wish to tile a eMf Rights program complaint of discrimination, complete the USDA Program Oiscrimlnatlon Comptaint Form. found online at
http://www.ascr.usda,gov/comptaintJiling_CU&thtml. or at any USDA offlce, or call (866) 632-9992 to request the form. You may also write a letter containing aU of the information requested in the form. Send your completed
compialnllonn or leiter by maN to !he U.S. Department of Agocuilure. Director. Oftice of Adjudlcallon. 1400 Independence Avenue. S.w.. Washington. D.C. 20250-9410. by fax (202) 690-7442 or emaR at
program.intake@usda.gov.
Persons with DisabUities -Individuals who are deaf, hard of hearing or have speech disabilities and wish to file either an EEO or program complaint please contact USDA through the Federal Relay ServIce at (800) an-8339 or
(800) 845-6136 (in Spanish). Pemms wtth cUsabilities, who wish to file 8 program complaint, please see Information above on how to oontact the Department by mait directly or by email, If you require alternative means of
communication for program informatton (e.g., Braille, large priolo audiotape, etc.) pteasa contact USDA's TARGet Center at (202) 720·2600 (voice and TOO).
Hudson Insurance Privacy Policy
When you apply to any of the Hudson tnsurance Group companies for any type of insurance. you disdose infonnatlon about yoursetf to us. The collection. use and ::: 'i'i;h~flI :!h'/'" IIlIY.\NlliIibWi;.? I
R\lh Dart"6~ CropGuard Group Inc. (48 ----
14530/1
23510 I
14527/1 131
Grain I Irrigated I
235101 100% 100% INS/P21 $19767 _J •.. .1 •••J $O.oq $19,
1452713
235101
1452712
23510 I
14527 I
004 EU/YA 15.10
131
INS/P2
Grain I Irrigated 100% 100%
l/YP 59.20
131
100%
131
100%
INS/P21 _••• , ,J .... 1 _••J $o.oq $3,321
131
INS/P2
100%
131
INS/P2
100% 100% t
Legal Description = Section, Township, Range & Other land Identifiers (e.g. Spanish Land grants, metes & bounds. etc.)
•• Guarantee Per Acra (GPA) = Bushels, Pounds. Tons. Hundred Weight Boxes, Revenue Guarantee, or Dollars
POL (Rev. 12-2011) f~ge2 015
Loss Statement 7300 West 110th Street, Suite 850
~ t!~9,~2,::;
Over1artd Park. KS 66210
Phone: (SSS) 450-1445
This Loss Statement represents all acreages that have been finalized. Fax: (913) 345-1671
Claims are subject to audit by the company. Print Date: 0712312013
``Il'~Cllfl:IliiIOit:i'i.WiiJ;::'·'i ";;i;'i'X;1~p\!iI'r:i'('
,Guard Group Inc. (48-008)
137268/1
235101
137268/2
235101
No Type 13726811 131
235101 1 P2
Specified I 100% 100%
137005/1
Irrigated
235101
137265/
23510 I
13700412
23510/
137268/1
235101
137266/2
235101
No Type 13726611 131
Specified 1 235101
100% 100% INS/. -I $10,851
Irrigated
137005/1
235101
1372651
235101
13700412
23510/
26211 I
)UIYA, SE 73.40
No Type ,3510 I
137263 /1
I.T134791
Shorty
,137
131
INSI
Specified I 1nn°t. 100%
Irrigated
Legal Description = Section, Township, Range & Other Land Identifiers (e.g. Spanish Land grants, metes & bounds, etc.)
•• Guarantee Per Acre (GPA) = Bushels, Pounds, Tons, Hundred Weight. Boxes, Revenue Guarantee, or Dollars
POL (Rev. 12-2011)
J'd'lle 3 of5
7300 West 11 Oth Street, Suite 850
Loss Statement
~ t!\;S,~9,~
Overtand Parf(, KS 66210
Phone: (866) 45()"1445
This Loss Statement represents all acreages that have been finalized. Fax: (913) 345--1671
Claims are subject to audij by the company. Prlnt Dale: 07/2312013
131
100%
13051
1
23510/
10987/1
NO Type 23510 I 131
100% NSI
Specified I 137426/1 100%
Irrigated 13335
1
13249
1
13659
13051
1
23510 I
10987/1
NO Type
Specified!
23510 I
137426/1
I 100%
131
100%
!P2
$4,603.
Irrigated 13335
1
13249
1
13659
``YA,~SE 55.10
NO Type 131 / P2
Specified I 100% 100%
Irrigated
Legal Description = Section, Township, Range & Other Land Identifiers (e.g. Spanish Land grants. metes & bounds, etc.)
•• Guarantee Per Acre (GPA) = Bushels, Pounds. Tons. Hundred Weight, Boxes, Revenue Guarantee, or Dollars
POL (Rev. 12-2011) 4'1'ge40!5
7300 Wesl110th Street. Suite 850
Loss Statement
~ tt;l,8,~S?,~
Overfand Park, KS 66210
Phone; (886)450-1445
This Loss Statement represents all acreages that have been finalized. Fax: (913) 34>1671
Claims are subject to audit by the company. . 0712312013
,,-.
131
100%
131
100%
131
100%
P2 : Prevented Plant with standard Coverage 1 m Low Harvest Price 41 = Frost 64 = Tornado 95 : Potebum
PF : Prevented Plant v.ilh standard Coverage + 5% 2 = LOW Market Price 42 : Freeze 71 = Insects 96 = Fruit Set
PT = Prevented Plant with Standard Coverage + 10% 10' Drougtrt Deviation 43. Cold Winter KIll 72 =Medlly 97 : Earthquake
H • Harvested 11 • Drought 44 • Cold Wet Weather 81. Disease 98 : Volcanic eruption
UH - unharvested 12 I: Excessive Heat 45' InsuffiCient Chill 82 • Aftatoxfn 99: Other
R: Replant 13 : Irrigation Failure 51: Rood 90 : Force Fire
1 = Stage I 14' Failed Irr Equip 55 • GRP Revenue 91 = Rre
2· Stage II 21 : Hall 61 =Wind 92 =Hurricane
3 = Stage III 31 • Precipitation 62- Hot Wind 93 • Wildlife
4 = Stage IV 32 := Poor Drainage 63' Cyclone 94 III Erosion
• legal Description: Section, Township, Range & Other land Identifiers (e.g. Spanish land grants, metes & bounds, etc.)
•• Guarantee Per Acre (GPA) : aushels, Pounds, Tons, Hundred Weigh~ Boxes, Revenue Guarantee, or Dollars
POL (Rev. 12-2011) f~ge50f5
Notice of Prevented Planting or Damage or Loss Hudson Insurance Company
Q!j~&,~S;~
7300 wast I100h S1reet, SUtte 400
OVert.nd P.r!<, KS 66210
Ph 1 Fx: (866) 45G-1445 1 (913) 345-1671
Prtnt Date: 01/3012015
Insufttd"a Hemo, MaHlng or Street Address and Other Agency and Agent Contact tnformaUon CropYaar Claim Number Polley Number
Contact tnfolTllatlon
BVb Partners CropGuard Groop Inc, (48-008)
C Casey Cllpson (2080)
2013 12010066 48-595·1003702
PO Box 403
HargW, "IX 78549 2315 W Expressway 83 State Coda I Name
SIel02
San Benllo, "IX 78586 48 Texas
Phone: (956) 330~129 Cell (956) 845-6682 OfIice Phone: (956) 361-5550 Agency (956) 361-5550 Agent I am an Agen~ Employee, or Contractor affIllated With the
Email: Email: cclIp80n@cropguardgroup.com Federal crop insurance program?
Authorized Representatlve: NONE
CIaI", Supervisor: Ben Hanawa
Power 01 Attorney: NONE [] Yes [] No
Best time to conlacllnsured: Adju.ter: Cartos Guajardo
Check one: o This 18 a notice of pre...nted planting, o This Is a notice of damage only (appear. Ihat production will exceed tile guarantee althl. time).
00 This Is a nolice of probable loss. o Immediate Inspection is requasled. If checked, explain Why:
County: Hidalgo (215) Crop: Com Data.Reported: 4/1312013
Unit Acres legal oescrtptlon" Estimated Production Cau.e of Damage 0810 of oarnege Expected Harvest 0810
Orooghl 411312013
Insured'slntanUon (chock one): KIhe Intent Is to replant and a repl,mting payment
o Toh.rvest o To chop/silage OLe.... lor cover 00 Deslroy o P1ant to anolher crop o Pasture o H.y Is applicable, )s the acreage greater Ihan 50 acre!
01 the unft?
o Crop will be direct m.r!1671
Claims are subject to audit by the company. Prtnt Date: 0711512013
Bvb Partners 12010066 48-595-1003702
P2 = p"",nted Plant with Standard Coverage 1 :: Low Harvest Price 41· Frost 64= Tomado 95· Polebum
PF = Prevented Plant with Standard Coverage + 5% 2 = Low Market Price 42 = Freeze 71 = Insects 95 = Fruit set
PT = Prevented Plant with Standard Coverage + 10% 10· Drought Deviation 43. Cold V>lnter KIll 72 = Medtly 97 • Earthquake
H e Harvested 11 = Drought 44 = Cold Wet Weether 81 = Disease 98 • Volcanic Eruption
UH = Unharvested 12 = Excessive Heat 45 • Insufficient Chili 82 = Aflatoxin 99= Other
R = Replant 13 • Irrtgation Failure 51 = Flood 90 :: Force Fire
1 = Stage I 14 = Faitad Irr Equip 55 = GRP Revenue 91 = File
2 = Stage II 21 = Haft 61 = Wind 92 :: Humcane
3" Stage III 31 = PrecipQation 62 = Hot V>lnd 93 = Wlldllre
4' Stage IV 32 :: Poor Drainage 63 = Cyclone 94= Erosion
• Legal DescripHon = SecHon, Township, Range & Other Land Identiflers (e.g. Spanish Land grams, metas & bounds, etc.)
.. Guarantee Per Acre (GPA) = Bushels. Pounds, Tons. Hundred Weight. Boxes, Revenue Guarantee. or Dollars
POL (Rev. 12-2011) 4'?ge 3 013
Notice of Prevented Planting or Damage or Loss Hudson Insurance Company
€ !j``?,~2,~ 7300 West 110th Street. SuRe 400
ClVeI1and Pari<, KS 66210
Ph / Fx: (866) 450-1445/ (913) 345-1671
Print Date: 01I30I2015
Insured's Namo, Mailing or Street Address and Other Agency and Agent ConJactlnfonnallon Crop Year Clam Number Policy Number
Contact Information I
8vb Partners CropGuaRl Group Inc. (48-008)
C Casey Cllpson (2080)
2013 '.12010066 48-595-1003702
PO Box 403
Harglil. TX 78549 2315 W Expressway 83 S_ Coda I Noma
Ste 102
San BenKo. TX 78586 48 Texas
Phona: (956) 330-6129 Cell (956) 845-6562 Office Phone: (956) 361-5550 Agency (956) 361-5550 Agent I am an Agent. Employee. or Contractor affiliated with the
Email: Email: ccllpson@cropguaRlgroup.com Federal crop Insurance program?
Authorized Representative: NONE
Power of Attorney: NONE Claim. Suparvlsor: Ben Hanawa
DYes DNa
Beat ~meto contact Insu",: Adjustor: Ben Hanawa
Chock 0...: oThis Is a notice of prevented planting. o This Is a notloa of damage only (appears thai producHon will exceed the guarantee at this time). .
Il!I Thlsls a notice of probable loss. o Immediate Inspactlon Is "'QUested. If checked. explain why:
County: Hidalgo (215) Crop: Grain Sorghum Date.Reported: 4/1312013
Un~ Acres Legal Description" EstImated Production Cause of Damage Data of Damage Expected Harvest Date
Drought 411312013
Insurod's Intention (chack on~):
I
If the Intent Is to replant and a replanting paymenl!
o To harvesl o To chop/silage o leave for cover Il!I Destroy o Plant to another crop o Pasture o Hay is applicable, Is lhe acreage greater than 50 acres
of the unit?
o Crop will be direct markeled o Replant o Unknown at Ihls time o Other (explain): DYes o No
County: Crop: Date Reported:
Unit Acres Lega' Descrlptlon" estimated Production Cause of Darrutgo Date of Damage Expacled Ha""'t Dato
Insurod's Intanllon (check one): If the Intent Is to replant and a repfantlng paymenl
o To hervest o To chop/silage o Leave for cover o Destroy o Plant 10 another crop o Pasture o Hay i. appUcable,1s the acreage greater Ihan 50 acres
of the unH?
o Crop wiD be direct marketed o Replant o Unknown al this time o other (Explain): DYes DNa
County: Crop: Date Reported:
Unit Acres Legal Description" Estimated Produc"on Cause of Damage Date of Damage Expoeled Harvest Date
Insured's 'ntentlon (check ono): If the Intent Is 10 replant and • replanllng payment
o To harvest o To chop/silage o leave for cover o Destroy o Plant 10 another crop o Paslure o Hay Is applicable, Is the acreage greater then 50 acres
oflha unil?
o Crop win be direct markeled o Replanl o UnknoWn al this time o Other (explain): DYes o No
Remarks:
.~--- ----
• Legal Description. Section. Township, Range & Other Land Identlflers (e.g. Spanish Land grants, metes & bounds, etc.)
M911 (Rev. 03-2014) See Last Page 01 Notlca of Prevented Planting or Damage or Loss for Required Statements
Notice of Prevented Planting or Damage or Loss Hudson 1nsurance Company
€ !j.\!9,~y',;;; 7300 West I 10th Street, SUite 400
Overtand Pari<, KS 66210
Ph I Fx: (866) 450-1445/ (913) 345-1671
Print Date: 01/3012015
Bvb Partners Ben Hanawa 480$XX-XXXXXXX
I request authorization to commingle production from two or more un~. or commingle production between Insured and uninsured acreage within ttoe ",ii,,,, "trucliiie and to use ",y1O.d ....ord., structure
markings, or combine monitor records to detennine production between un~s or production from Insured/uninsured acreage. Do you agree to follow your Insurance provlde(s wrl!!en cr~ria and Instructions
to do !his? 0 Yes 0 No
Written or oral authorization and Written criteria and instructions must be received from your insurance provider before production can be commingled. I understand that if authorization Is given, my Insurance provider will
annuaUy provide written criteria and Instructions fOr the use of toad or combine momtor records to separate such production, and if I fail to fotJow all instructions, my opnonal un" structure wilJ be collapsed.
If you have less lhan 100% .hare, I. the other share InBured under a F_ral crop Insu",rice-program? Hso, list the person'. name, name of AlP lOr which lhey carry a FedeiiiJ c::ropln"Unlnce and poliCY
number tf known.
Collection of information and Data (Privacy Act) Statemem
Agents. LOIS Adjusters and Policyholders
The foHowing statements are made in accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 5528): The Risk Management Agency (RMA) ts authorized by the Federal Crop fnsurance ~ (7 U.S.C. 1501·1524) or other Acts, and th!!
regulations promulgated thereunder, to soicit the information requested on documents established by RMA or by approved Insurance providers (AlPs) that have been approved by the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation (FCIC)
to deliVer Federal crop Insurance. The information Is necessary for AlPs and RMA to operate the Federal crop Insurance program. determine program eDgibilfty, conduct statistical analysts. and ensure program Integrity
Information provided herein may be fumished to other Federal. Slate, or local agencies, as reqwred or permitted by law, law enforcement agencies, courts or adjudicative bodies, fomign agencies, magistrate, administrative
tribunal, AlPs contractors and cooperators, Comprehensive Infonnation Management System (elMS). congressional offices, or entities under contract with RMA. For insurance egenl5, certain information may also be disclosed
to tho public to as&ist intorusted individuals in 10catlng agenb In a partfwlar area. DIsclosure uf the ImonnaUon Teqwsted Is voluntary. However, tallun:t to correotl-y report the requested InfOrml!tlon may tesun In me rejection ot
thfs document by the AlP or RMA In accordance with the Standard Reinsurance Agreement between the AlP and FCIC. Federal regulations, or RMA-approved procedures and the denlal of program eligibility or benefits derlvec
therefrom. Also, failure to provkte true end COfTeCt information may resutt in civil suit or crimina' prosecution and the assessment of penaltJes or pursuit of other remedies.
Non--Dlscflmlnation Statement
Non-Discrimination Policy ~ The U,S. Department of Agricutture (USDA) prohibits dJscrimination against its customers, employees, and appncants for employment on the basis of race. color, national origin, age, disability, sex.
gender identity, reUglon, reprisal, and where applicabfe, political beliefs. marital status, famHial or parenlal status. sexual orientation, or an or pal1 of an individual's income Is derived from any public assistance program, or
protected genetic information in employment or in any program or activity conducted or funded by the Department. (Not an prohlblted basis will apply to atl programs andlor employment activities.)
To File 8 Program Complaint - " you wish to file a Civil Rights program complaint of discrimination, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complalnt Form. found onlme at
http://YMW.ascr.usda.gov/comptainUitl"Lcust.html, or at any USDA office, or can (866) 632-9992 to request the form. You may 81so write 8 letter containing aU of the information requested in the form. Send your completed
complaint form or letter by mail to the U.S. Department of Agricutlure, Director, Qfflc:e of Adjudication. 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., washington, D.C. 20250-9410, by fax (202) 69()"7442 or email at
program.intake@usda.90v.
Persons with Disabilities ~ IndMdua!s who are deaf. hard of hearing or have.speech di88billties and wish to file either an EEO or program complaInt pk1ase contact USDA through the Federat Relay Service at (800) 877-8339 or
(800) 845-6136 (in Spentsh). Persons wtth disabilities. who wish to fUe 8 program complaint, please see Informaflon above on how to contact the Department by maU directly or by email. If you require alternative means of
communication for program informatiOn (e.g., Braille. large print, audiotape, etc.) please contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720~2600 (voice and TOO).
Hudson Insurance Privacy Policy
When you apply to any of the Hudson Insurance Group companies for any type of insurance, you disclose Informatlon about yourself to us. The collection. use and disdosure of such information Is regulated by law. Hudson
Insurance Group, its agents, affiliates and subsidiaries matntain phYl;lical, electronic and procedural safeguards that comply with state and federal regulatIOns to guard your personal information. We atso Hmit empfoyee acoess to
certain personal information. to those with a business A!sson for knowing such Information. Hudson Insurance Group afso instructs itS employees so thallhey' wi" understand the importance of the confidentiality of personal
information, and takes appropriate measures to enforce employee privacy responSibilities.
Certfflcation Statement
I certify lhat lo1he best of my knowfedge and betlef an of lhe InformaUon on lhls fonn is correct 1also understand lhat failure to report comptelety and accuretety may result In sanctions under my poRcy, including
bul not limHed to voidance of1he policy, and In crtmlnal or civil penalbes (18 U.S.C. §1006 and §1014; 7 U.S.C, §1506; 31 U,S.C. §3729, §3730 and any other appHcablefederalstahJtes).
Inoured'. prtnted Name Insured's Signature Date-of Nolice
Bvb Partners
Refer to the Basic ProvIsions and the specific Crop Provisions for more details on notioe requirements for acreage prevented from planting lind notice requirements for damage or loss requirements.
M911 (Rev, 03-2014)
EIi) - _
41l'age 2 of2
7300 West 110th street. Suite 400
Loss Statement
fX) t!~{9,~S:.::;
Overfand Park;, KS 66210
This Loss Statement represents all acreages that have been finalized. Phone: (866) 450-1445
Fax: (913) 345~1e71
Claims are subject to audit by the company.
Print Date: 0111412014
11 I
235101 NITTLERT- 100%
I NSIH
100%
133863/2 133863
0001-0013 OU IYA 19.40
11 I
I NS/H
-.L
244261
134797 11
I Caiman 100%
100%
0001-0014 OU I YA 144.90
231441
NoType
Specified 1 Non-
I 137259/1
231441
134098/1
1-11329
134098 100%
111
100% I NS/H I I $27,015.231 $27
Irrigated 137259
231441
11329
"legal DascripHon = Saction, Township, Range & Other Land Identifiers (e.g. Spanish Land grants. meles & bounds, etc.)
" Guarantee Per Acre (GPA) = Bushels, Pounds, Tons, Hundred Weigh~ Boxes, Revenue Guarantee, or Dollars
POL (Rev. 12-2011) serge 1 012
7300 West 110th Street, Suite 400
Loss Statement
fD t!~;P,~2,~ This Loss Statement represents all acreages that have been finalized.
Claims are subject to audij by the company.
Ovet1and Pal'k. 1<
2=Stagell 21 = Hall 61 =V\lnd 92 0: Hurricane pverpaid loss Recoveries $0.0(
3 = Stage III 31 =Preclpltatlon 62 • Hot V\lnd 93 =Wildlife IAmount Remaining $30,42T.l1(
4 = stage IV 32 -= Poor Dralnage 63 =Cyclone 94. Erosion
Furrent Disbursements
~ecovery to Other Claims $OJ><
~urrent 109!lCiildHs. ' .•...•.' ., .... $O.{)(
PheckAmount ....
Dr".............. OM......• '.)1'Ir::.R nn IH_4A_'ln1A
'.,,';';'.
,.. ..........
'" $30;427.01
4~t:.4'7
• Legal Description = Section, Township. Range & Other Lend Identifiers (e.g. Span'lSh Land grants, metes & bounds. etc.)
•• Guarantee Per Acre (GPA) = Bushels. Pounds, Tons. Hundred Weight. Boxes. Revenue Guarantee, or Dollars
POL (Rev. 12.2011) 5-/,ge 2 of2
Notice of Prevented Planting or Damage or Loss Hudson Insurance Company
~ ti,~.:8,~2~
7300 Wesl 110!h Stree~ Sulle 400
Overland Pall<. KS 66210
Ph 1 Fx: (866) 450-14451 (913) 345-1671
PnnIDate:Ol~015
Ineuracrs Name, MaIling or street Add..... and Other ! Agency and Agent Contaet Informallon CropV...r Claim Number POlicy Number
Contact Information
BvIl Partners CropGuard Group Inc. (48·008)
C Casey COpson (2080)
2013 13005987 48-595-1003702
PO Box 403
Hargin, 1)( 78549 2315 W Expressway 83 State Code 1 Name
Sle 102
San Ben~o, TX 78566 48 Texas
Phone: (966) 330-6129 Cell (956) 845-6682 OflIce Phone: (966) 361-5550 Agency (958) 361-5550 Agent I am an Agent. Employee, or Contractor aflill.led with Ihe
Email: Email: cclipson@cropguardgroup.com Federal crop insurance program?
Authortzed Representetlve: NONE
Power of Attorney: NONE Claims Supervisor: Ben Hanawa
[J Yes [J No
Best time to contact Insured: Adjuster: Bany Zuber
Check one: o This Is a nollce of prevented planting. o This Is a notIce of damage only (appears that production win exc6ed the guarantee al1his time).
I!I This Is a nollce of probable 10••• o Immediate Inspection I. requested. If checked, explain why.
County: Hidalgo (215) Crop: Cotton Date ROported: 91612013
Unll Acres Legal Description' EsHmated Producllon eeuse 01 Demage Dote of oemage Expected Harvest Dote
Heat 91612013
Insured'. I_on (check one): If!he Inlent Is to replant and a replanting payment
Ill! To harvest o To choplsllage o Leave for cover D Destroy D Plant to Molhar crop D Pasture o Hay Is applicable, Is the acreage greater Ihan 50 acre,
alth. untt?
o Crop wlR be direct mar1 Partne .. Barry ZUber 2013 13005987 48-596-1003702
I request authorization to commingle production from two or more unit9 or commingle production belween Insured and uninsured acreage within the same structure and 10 use my load recordS, structure
markings, or combine monllor records to determine production belween unHs or production from insured/uninsured acreage. Do you agree to follow your insurance provlde(s written erHerta and Instructions
to do this? o Ves [J No
Written or oral authorization and written criteria and Instructions must be received from your insurance provlder before production can be commingled. I understand 'hal if authorization ls given, my Insurance provider will
annually provide written criteria and Instructions for the use of load or combine monitor records to separate such production. and if J rail to follow all instructions. my optional unit structure witl be coflapsed.
If you have less than 100% share. Is the other share Insured under a Federal crop Insurance program? If so. list the person's name. name of AlP for which they C8ITY • Federal crop Insurance and policy
number if known.
Collection of Information and Data (privacy Act) Statament
Agento, Loss Adjusters and Pollcyholdars
The following statements are made In accordance wtth the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 5528): The Risk ManagementAgency (RMA) is authorized by the Federal Crop Insurance Act (7 U.S.C. 1501-1524) or other Acts, and the
regulations promutgated thereunder, to solicit the information requested on documents established by RMA or by approved insurance providers (AlPs) that have been approved by the Federal Crop Jnauranc:e Corporation (FCIC)
to deliver Federat crop insurance. The information is necessary for AlPs and RMA to operate the Federal crop Insurance program. determine program eligibility, conduct statistical anatysis, and ensure program integrity
Information provided herein may be fumtshed to other Federal. State, or local agencies, as required or permitted by law, law enforcement agencies, courts. or adjudicative bodies, foreign ageneies. magistrate, administrative
tribunal, AlPs contractor:& and cooperators, Comprehensive Information Management System (elMS), congressional offices, or entllie$ under contract with RMA. For insurance agents, certain Information may also be dle:ctosed
to H1e pubtic to aSSiSt Interested IndIVIduals In toeatIng agents In a panlcutar area. Olsctosure of the infOrmation requested is VOluntary. However, failUre to correctIy!'9port ~ne reqUMte(f InformatiOn may resuft In tne rejection of
this document by the AlP or RMA in acc:ordance with the Standard Relnsurance Agreement between the AlP and FetC. Federal regulations, or RMA-approved procedures and the denial of program eftgiblRty or benefits derivec
therefrom. Also, faitur& to provide true and c:orreet Information may result in civil suit or criminal prosecution and the assessment of penatties or pursuit of other remedies.
Non-DlscrlmmatJon Statement
Non-.Oiscrimination Policy· The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits dlsaimination against its customers, employees, and applicants for employment on Ihe basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, sex,
gender identity, religion, reprisal, and where appticable. political beliefs, marital status, familial or pafental status, sexual orientation. or an or part of an individual's income is derived from any pubfie assistance program, or
protected genetic Infonnation In employment or in any program or actMIy conducted or funded by the Department. (Not all prohibited basis wUJ apply to an programs and/or employment adMttes,)
To File a Program Complaint. ffyou wish to file a Civil Rights program complaint of ctiscnmlnation, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Fonn, found onltne at
http://www.ascr.usda.govfeompJainLfi1inQ_cust.html, or at any USDA office. or cal (866) 632·9992 to request the form. You may also write a letter containing all of the Information requested in the form, Send your completed
complaint form or letter by mall to the U.S. Department of Agricullure, Director, Office of Adjudication, 1400 Independence Avenue. S.W.. Washtngton, D.C. 20250..94 HI. by fax (202) 690-7442 or smatt at
program.intake@usda.gov.
Persons with Disabilities - Jndividl.lala who are deaf. hard of hearing or have speech disabilities and wish to file either an EEO or program complaint pleafle contact USDA through the Federal ReJay Service at (800) 877~8339 or
(800) 845-6136 (in Spanish), Persona with disabilities. who wish to file a program complaint, please see infoTmation above on how to contact the Dep8rtmen~ by mall directty or by email. tf you require altarnative means of
communication for program information (e.g.• 8raille.lafge prinlaudkltape, etc.) please contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (VOice and TOO).
Hudson Insurance Privacy Policy
VVhen you apply to any of the Hudson Insurance Group companies for any type of Insurance. you disclose Information about yourself to us. The collection. use end disclosure of such information is regulated by law. Hudson
Insurance Group, Its agents, affiliates and subsidiaries maintain physical, electronic and procedural safeguards that comply with state and federal regulations to guard your personal information. We also limit employee access to
certain personal information, to those with 8 business reason for knowing such Information. Hudson Insurance Group atso instructs fts emptoyees 80 that they wilt understand the tmponance of the confldentlanty of persona.
infonnation, and takes appropriate measures to enforoe employee privacy responsibHities.
Certification Statement
I certify that to the best of my knd!3/4120}3
Un" Acres Legal Descrlptlon* Estimated Production cause of Oemage Date of Damage Expected Harvest Date
Wind/Excess Wind 31412013
Insured's 'ntenUon (cheek one): If the Intent is to replant and Ii repfantlng payment
o To harvest o To chop/silage o leave for cover o Destroy o Plant to another crop o Pasture o Hay is applicable, Is the acreage greater than 50 acres
of the unit?
o Cr"l'wlil be direct marketed I!J Replant o Unknown at this time o Other (Explain): [] Yes o No
County: Crop: Date Reported:
Unit Acres Legal Description· Estlmated Productlon Cause of Damage Dam of Damage Expected Harvest Date
Insured's Intention (chock one): If the intent is to replant and a replanting payment
o To harvest o To chop/sllage o Leave for cover o Destroy o Plant to another crop o Pasture o Hay is appllcabfe. is the acreage greater than 50 acres
of the unH?
o crop will be direct marketed o Replant o Unknown at this time o other (Explain): Cl Yes o No
County: Crop: Date Reported:
Untt Acres Legal Doscrlption* E!Jtimated Production Cause of Damage Date of Damage Expected Harvest Date
Insul'Qd's Intention (cheek one}: If lhe intent is to replant and a replanting paymenl
o To harvest o To chop/silage o Leave for cover o Destroy o Ptant to another crop o Pasture o Hay 1$ applicable. is the acreage greater than 50 ac~
of the untt?
o crop will be direct marketed o Replant o Unknown at thi$ time o other (Explain): Cl Yes o No
Remarks;
contact 956-845-6682
Spoke with insured 9:30am on 314/2013. Notified him about adjuster schoot 1n denver. Adjuster will contact and make appointment.
II
* Legal Description = Section, TownShip, Range & Other land Identifiers (e.g. Spanish Land grants. metes & bounds, etc.)
iii ..
M911 (Rev. 03-2014) See last Page of NOfice of Prevented Planting or Damage or loss for Required Slatements 55Page10f2
Notice of Prevented Planting or Damage or Loss Hudson Insurance Company
~ tl,!!'5l~2,::;
7300 West 110th Street, Suite 400
Overland Park, KS 65210
Ph 1 Fx: (866) 450-14451 (913) 345-1611
Prtnl Date: 0210112015
. : _Imurec:f's Name . ....... Adjuster's Name Crop Vear Claim Number .. .. Policy Number
Bvb Partners Cartos Guajardo 2013 12009693 48-595-1003701
I request authorization to commingle production from two or more units or commingle production between insured and uninsured acreage within the same structure aOO to use my load records, structure
markings, or combine monitor records to determine prOduction between units or production from insured/uninsured acreage. Do you agree to follow your Insurance provider's written criteria and instructions
10 do this? o Ves 0 No
Written or oral authorization and written criteria and instructions must be received from your insurance provider before production can be commingled. I understand that if authorization is given, my insurance provider will
annually provide Wlitten criteria and instructions for the use of load or combine monitor record$ to separate such production. and if I faH 10 fofIow all insrrucUons. my optional unit structure will be cotlapsed.
If you have less than 100% share. is the other share insured under a Federal crop insurance program? If so, list the person's name. name of AlP for which they carry a Federal crop insurance and policy
number if known.
--- --
Cofleetlon of information and Data {Privacy Act) Statement
Agents, Loss Adjusters and Policyholders
The foRowing statements are made in accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a): The Risk Management Agency (RMA} is authorized by the Federal Crop Insurance Act (7 U.S.C. 1501-1524) 0'1' other Acts, and the
regulations promulgated thereunder. to solicit the information requested on documents established by RMA or by approved insurance providers (AlPs) thai have been approved by the Federm Crop Insurance Corporation (FCIC)
to deliver Federal crop insurance. The information is necessary fOr AlPs and RMA to operate the Federal crop insurance program, determine program eligibility, conduct statistical anBlysis, and ensure program integrity
Information provided herein may be furnished to other Federat. State. or local agencies, as required or permitted by law. Jaw enforcement agencies, courts or adjudicative bodies, foreign agencies, magistrate, administrative
tribunal. AlPs contractors and cooperators, ComprehenSive Information Management System (CIMS). congressional offices, or entities under con1ract with RMA. For insurance agents. certain information may aOO be disclosed
to the pUbfiC to assist interested individuals in locating agents in a particufa,r area. Disclosure of the information requested is voluntary. However, failure to correctly report the requested information may result in the rejection of
this document by the AI? or RMA in accordance with the Standard Reinsurance Agreement between the AlP and FCIC. Federal regulations. or RMA--approved procedures and the denial of program eligibility or benefits derivec
therefrom. Atso. failure to provide true and correct information rna)' rasuH: in civil suit or criminal prosecution and the assessment of penalties or pursuit of other remedies.
Non-Discrimination S1atement
Non-Discrimination Policy - The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA} prohibits discrimination against its customers. employees. and app~cant$ for employment on the basis of race. ooIor, national origin, age, disability. sex,
gender identity, refigkm, reprisal. and where appticabJe. poliUcal beliefs. marital status. familial or parental status. sexual Orientation, or all or pari of an individuars income is derived from any publk: assistance program. or
protected genetk informatlonln employment or in any program or activity conducted or funded by the Department. (Not all prohibited basis will apply to all programs and/or employment actMties.)
To File a Program Complaint If you wish to file a Civil Rights program complaint of discrimination. complete the USDA program Discrimination Complaint Form, found online at
p
http://WWW.ascr.usda.gov/compiaint,.Jiling_cuslhtml, or at any USDA Office. or calf (866) 632-9992 to reque$~ the fonn. You may also write a letter containing aU of the information requested in the form. Send your completed
comptalnt form or letter by mail to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Director. Office of Adjudication. 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 2025()'9410, by fax {202} 690-7442 or email at
program.intake@usda.gov.
Persons with Disabilities ~ Individuals who are deaf. hard of hearing or have speech disabilities and wish to file either an EEO or program complaint please contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339 or
(800) 845-6136 (in Spanish). Persons with disabilities, who wish to file a program complaint. p~ase see information above on how to contact the Department by mail directly or by email. H' you require alternative means of
communication for program infomlafion (e.g., BraiHe. large print, audiotape, etc.) please comact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TOO).
Hudson Insurance Privacy Policy
W1en you apply to any of Ihe Hudson Insurance Group companieS for any type of insurance. you disclose information 8OOu1 yourself to us. The collection. use and disclosure of such information is regulated by law. Hudson
Insurance Group, its agents, affiliates and subsidiarieS maintain physical, electronic and procedural safeguards that comply with state and federal regulations 10 guard your persona$ information. We also limit emptoyee a~ss to
certain personal information, to those with a business reason for knowing such information. Hudson Insurance Group also instructs its employees so that they will understand the importance of the confidentiality of personal
information. and takes appropriate measures. to enforce employee privacy responsibilities.
Certification Statement
I certify that to the best of my knowledge and bertef at! of the information on this form is correct. I also understand that falrure to report completely and accurately may result in sanctions under my policy. mcluding
but not limited 10 voidance althe policy. and In crtminal or cIVil penalties (18 U-S.C. §1006 and §1014; 7 U.S.C. §1506: 31 U.S.C. §3729, §3730 and any other applicable federal slaMes).
Insured's Printed Name :Insured's Signature bille of NoliCiI
Bvb Partners
Refer to the Basic Provisions and the speeffic Crop Provisions for more details on notice requirements fOr acreage prevented from planflng and no{lce requirements for damage or loSS requirements.
M911 (Rev. 03-2014)
II
1!1. '.
56 Page 2012
7300 West 110th Street, Suile 850
Loss Statement Overtana Park, KS 66210
~ !t\!g.~gt'i- This Loss Statement represents all acreages that have been finalized.
Phone: (866) 450-1445
Fax: (913) 345.1671
Claims are subject to audit by the company.
611
No Type IR
100%
Specified 1 Non- 100% $2,100.
Irrigated
0001-0001 OU 1 VA, TA 76.00
611
No Type IR $2,157
100%
Specified 1 Non- 100% $2,157.
Irrigated
Legal Description::: Section. Township, Range & Other land Identifiers (e.g. Spanish Land grants. metes & bounds, etc.)
•• Guarantee Per Acre (GPA) = Bushels. Pounds, Tons, Hundred Weight, Boxes, Revenue Guarantee, or Dollars
POL (Rev. 12-2011) 5~age 1 of 3
7300 West 110th Street, SuIte 850
Loss Statement
~t!``r,``~
Ovenand Park, KS 66210
Phone: (8SS) 4S0~1445
~/ This Loss Statement represents all acreages that have been finalized. Fax: (913) 3"5~1671
Claims are subject to audit by the company.
7300 West 110th Street. Suite 8S{)
Loss Statement
(g)ti~!!G~9t!
Overland Park., KS 66210
Phone: (866) 450.-1445
This Loss Statement represents all acreages that have been finalized. Fax'. (Si3) 345 w 1671
Claims are subject to audit by the company.
i!1}';;':.?i·;: ':::~;'*;:<'l1i``J!!"``ii!'!!i~I!'!I':W:ii:i/:'')"./:/i :, " '",,;:';:;:.:: >;;';!\'iili,!cr,II;1hfC!l'iiiitloll:';:.>;;:',; ::':.:.;;·:;l;
Bvb Partners CropGuard Group Inc. (48-008)
P2 = Prevented Plant with Standard Coverage 1 = Low Harvest Price 41 = Frost 64:1: Tornado 95;Polebum
PF = Prevented Plant with Standard Coverage + 5% 2 =- low Market Price 42 = Freeze 71::1 Insects 96 = Fruit Set
PT = Prevented Plant with standard Coverage + 10% 10 = Drought Oeviation 43 = Cold VVinter Kill 72= Medfly 97 ... Earthquake
H ". Harvested 11 = Drought 44 = Cold Wet Weather 81 = Disease 98 = Volcanic Eruption
UH :; Unharvested 12 = Excessive Heat 45 = Insullcient Chili 82 = Aflatoxin 99 = Other
R = Replant 13 = Irrigation FaHure 51 = Flood 90 = Foree Fire
1 = Stage I 14 = Failed Irr Equip 55 = GRP Revenue 91 = Fire
2 = Stage II 21 =Hall 61 = Wind 92 = Hurricane
3 = Siage III 31 = P recipitalion 62 ~HotWind 93 =WiidlWe
4::1 Stage JV 32 = Poor Drainage 63 = Cyclone 94 I:: Erosion
* Legal Description = Section, Township. Range & Other land Identifiers (e.g. Spanish land grants. metes & bounds, etc.)
Guarantee Per Acre (GPA) = Bushels, Pounds, Tons, Hundred Weight, Boxes, Revenue Guarantee, or Dollars
,..*
POL (Rev. 12-2011) 5§age3013
7300 West 110tfl S1reet. Suite 850
Loss Statement Overfl!!lnd Park, KS 66210
Ii.'\. HUDSON
~; IN\\'M"~:f.(il\Ol'P This Loss Statement represents all acreages that have been finalized.
Phone: (866) 450-1445
Fax: (913) 345~1671
Claims are subject to audit by the company. I',tIrttDl\I~:'i(l61l!flI2'O"j3'
Clipson (2080)
Expressway 83. Ste 102
Benito, TX 78586
361-5550
No Type 611
IR
100%
Specified 1 Non- 100%
Irrigated
0001-0001 OU 1 VA, TA 76.00 $1
No Type 611
IR
100%
Specified 1Non- 100%
Irrigated
Legal DeScription = Section, Township, Range & Other land Identifiers (e.g. Spanish land grants, metes & bounds, etc.)
•• Guaranlee Per Acre (GPA) = Bushels, Pounds, Tons, Hundred Weight, Boxes, Revenue Guarantee. or Dollars
POL (Rev. 12-2011) 6Bage 1 of4
730(} West 110th Street, Suite 850
Loss Statement
~ !j~p'"S.Z(j
Overtand Park, KS 66210.
Phono: (866) 450-1445
This Loss Statement represents all acreages that have been finalized. FI\X'. (913) 345-1671
Claims are subject to audtt by the company. Prim Date: 0612612013
g~\N,1
611
No Type IR
100%
Specified I Non· 100% $2.000.
lITigated
2.60
No Type
611
IR $83
Specified I Non·
100%
100%
Irrigated
Legal Description::;: Section, Township. Range & Other Land fdentifiers {e.g. Spanish land grants, metes & bounds, etc.}
•• Guarantee Per Acre (GPA) ~ Bushels. Pounds. Tons. Hundred Weight, Boxes, Revenue Guarantee, or Dollars
POL (Rev. 12·2011) c (866) 450-14451 (913) 345-1671
Print Date: 02101/2015
Agency and Agent Contact Information Crop Year I.CIaII1lNumber ....... Policy Number
Insured's Name, Mailing or Street Address and Other
Contact Information
!
! .... " . i ......... ..............< I·····.··.·•.
BIIi:> partners CropGuard Group Inc. (48-()08)
C Casey Clipson (2080)
2013 12010065 .... 48-595.1003701
PO Box 403
Hargill. TX 78549 2315 W Expressway 83 State COde 1 Name--. .
St. 102
San Benito. TX 78586 48 Texas
Phone: (956) 330-6129 CeR (956) 845·6682 Office Phone: (956) 361-5550 Agency (956) 361-5550 Agenl I am an Agent. Employee, or Contractor affiliated with the
Email: Email: cdlpson@cropguardgroup.com federal crop Insurance program?
Authorized Representative: NONE
Ctalms Supervisor: Ben Hanawa
Power 01 Attorney: NONE DYes 0 No
Bast time to contact Insured: Adjuster: Carlos Guajardo
Check on9: o This Is a notice of prevented planting, o This is a notice of damage omy (appears that production will exceed the guarantee at this time).
I!l This Is a notice of probable lass_ O Immediate Inspection Is requested. If checked, explain why:
County: Willacy (489) Crop: Cotton Oata!R~rted:!A/1312013'
Unit ACr9s Legal Descrlpllon' EsUmated Production Cause of Damage Dato of Damage Expaetod Harvest Date
Drought 411312013
Insured·s I.....ntlon (check one): if the Intent is to replant and a replanting payment
o To harvest o To choplsilage o leave for cover 00 Destroy o Plant to another crop o Pasture o Hay is applicable, is the acreage greater than 50 acres
of the unit'?
o Crop will be direct marketed o Reptant o Unknown at this time o Other (Explain): -
o Yes o No
County: Willacy (489) Crop: Grain Sorghum Date Reported: 411312013
Unit Acres legal Descriptioni' Estimated Production Cause of Damage Date of Damage Expacted Harvest Date
Drought 411312013
Insured's Intention (check one): If the Intent is (0 replant and a replanting payment
o To harvest o To chop/silage o Leave fOr cover I!I Destroy o Plant to another crop o Pasture o Hay is applicable, is the acreage greater than 50 acres
of the unit?
o Crop win be direct marketed o Replant o Unknown a1 this time o Other (Explain): DYes o No
County: Crop: Date Reported:
Unit Acres Legal Descrlpllon' Estimated Production cause of Damage Date of Damage Expected Harvest Date
Insured's Intention (check one): If the intent ts to replant and a replanting payment
o To harvest o To chop/silage o leave for cover o Destroy o Plant to another crop o Pasture o Hay is appUcable. is the acreage greater than 50 acre!
of the untt?
o Crop will be direct marketed o Reptant o Unknown at this lime o Other (Explain): DYes o No
Remarks:
--_.- --- _ ... _-
... Legal Descnption = Sectlon, Township, Range & Other land Identifiers (e.g. Spanish Land grants, metes & bounds. etc.)
M911 (Rev. 03-2014) See last Page of Notice of Prevented Planting or Damage or Loss for Required Statements
Notice of Prevented Planting or Damage or Loss Hudson Insurance Company
~HUDSON
~i IN\tlll./l.l\'Cf(:\t()l!;'
7300 west 110th Street, Su~e 400
Ove~and Park, KS 66210
Ph 1 Fx: (866) 450-14451 (913) 345-1671
Pnnl Dale: 0210112015
Insured's Name Adjuster's Namo Crop Vea, Claim Number Polley Numbe, .
Bvil Partners Cartos Guajardo 2013 12010065 48-595-1003701
I request authorization to commingle production from two or more units or commingle productlon between insured and uninsured acreage within the same structure and to use my load records, structure
markings, 0' combine monllor records to determine production between units or production from insured/uninsured acreage. Do you agree to follow your Insurance provider's written criteria and Instructions
10 do this? o Ves 0 No
Written or oral authorization and written crfteria and instructions must be received from your Insurance provider before production can be commingled. I understand thal if authorization is given, my insurance provider will
annually provide written criteria and instructions for the use of foad or combine monitor records to separate such produttiOn. and if I fail to follow air il1structions. my optional unit struc1ure will be coflapsed.
If you have Jess than 100% share. is the other share Insured under a Federal crop Insurance program? If so, list the person's name, name of AlP for which they carTY a Federal crop Insurance and policy
number if known. -_.
-- -- ---- --- - -------- --------- ----
Collection of Information and Data (Privacy Act) Statement
Agents, Loss Adjusters and Poli~holders
The foIlowin-g statements are made in accordance with the Pri....acy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a): The Risk Management Agency {RMA} is authorized by 1he Federal Crop Insurance Act (7 U.S.C. 1501R1524) or other Acts, and the
regulations promulgated thereunder, to solicit the information requested on documents established by RMA or by approved ill$urance providers (AlPs) that have been appro....ed by the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation (FCle)
to deliver Federal crop insurance. The information is necessary for AlPs and RMA to operate the Feder31 crop insurance program. determine program etigfbility, conduct statlsticsl analysis. and ensure program integrity
Information provided herein may be fumished to other Federal, State. or local agencies, as required or permitted by law. law enforcement agencies, courts or adjudicative bodies, foreign agencies, magistrate. administrative
tribunal, AlPs contractors and cooperators, Comprehensive Information Management System (elMS), congressional offices, or entities under contract with RMA. For insurant".a ~OAnts. C9rtain information may algo bQ di$cloged
10 the public to assist interested individuals in locating agents in a particular area. Disclosure of the information requested is ....oluntary. However. failure to correctly report the requested Information may result in the rejection 01
this document by the AlP or RMA in accordance with the standard Reinsurance Agreement between the AlP and FCtC, Federar regulations, or RMA-8pproved procedures and the denial of program eligibility or benefits derivec
therefrom. Also, failure to provide true and correct information may result in civil suit or criminal prosecution and the assessment of penalties or pursuit of other remedies.
Non-Discrimination Statement
Non-Discrimination Policy - The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination against its customers, emplOyees, and applicants for employment on the basis of race, color, national origin, age. disability, sex,
gender identity. religion. reprisal. and where applicable, political beliefs, marital status. familial or parental status, sexual orientation, or aU or part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. or
protected genetic information in employment or in any program or activity conducted or funded by the Department (Not aU prohibited basis 1MU apply to all programs and/or employment activities.)
To File a Program Compfaint -If you wish to fite a Civil Rights program complaint of discrimination, complete the USDA program Discrimination Complaint Form, round online at
http:/twww.ascr.usda,gov/complainUllfng_custhtml, or at any USDA office, or call (866) 632-9992 10 request the form. You may also write a letter containing all of the information requested in the form, Send your compteted
complaint form or reHer by mail to tile U,S. Department of Agriculture, Director. OffIce of Adjudication, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington. D. C. 2025(}"9410, by fax (202) 690-7442 or email at
program.intake@usda.gov.
Persons with Disabilities .Indlviduafs who are deaf, hard of hearing or have speech disabilities and wish 10 file either an EEO or program complaint please contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) a77..s339 or
(800) a45-6136 (in Spanish). Persons with disabilities, who wish to file a program complaint, please see information above on how to contact the Department by mail directfy or by email. If you require alternative means of
communication for program Information {e.g" Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.} please contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720~2600 (voice and TOO).
Hudson Insurance Privacy Poliey
When you apply to any of the Hudson Insurance Group companies for any type of insurance, you disclose information about yoursetf to us, The collection, use and disclosure of such information is regulated by law. Hudson
Insurance Group, its agents, affiliates and subsidiaries maintain physical, ffiectronic and procedural safeguards that comply with state and federal regulations to guard your personal information. We a'so limit employee access to
certain personal information, to those with a business reason for knOwing such informatkln. Hudson Insurance Group also instructs its employees so that 1hey will understand the importance of the confidentlaltty of personal
informa1lon, and 1akes appropriate measures to enforce employee privacy responsibiJities.
Certification Statement
I certify that to Ihe besl of my knowledge and belief aR of the information on this form Is correct. I also understand that failure to report completely and accurately may result in sonclions under my policy, including
but not limlted to voidance of the policy, and in criminal or civil penanies (18 U.S.C. §1006 and §1014; 7 U.S.C, §1S06; 31 U,S,C. §3729, §3730 and any other applicable federal statutes).
Insured's Printed Name nsured's Signature Date of Notice
Bvb Partners
1
Refer to the Sask Pro....isions and the specific Crop Provisions for more details on notice requlrements for acreage prevented from planting and notice requiremen1s for damage or loSs requirements.
M911 (Rev. 03-2014)
II65P'ge 2 01'2
7300 West 110th Street, Suite 850
Loss Statement
@ tl];!2,~2t!.
Ovedand Park, KS se210
Phone; (866) 450-1445
This Loss Statement represents all acreages that have been finalized. Fax: {913} 345--1671
Claims are subject to audit by the company. PrlntDat!WlJ7nZl2013'
111
100%
No Type
Specified I Non-
I l"~_~L '3"~v~ 'll``'Ug ...~vv I 10flO/r.
11 I
100%
Irrigated
I I
on/YP 0001-0005 EU IYA, SE 71.00
111
100%
r- -, $22,
$
11 I
100%
11 I
100%
11 I
100% 100%
." legal Description = Section, Township, Range & Other Land Identifiers (e.g. Spanish Land grants, metes & bounds, etc.)
•• Guarantee Per Acre (GPA) = Bushels, Pounds, Tons, Hundred Weight, Boxes, Revenue Guarantee, or Dollars
POL (Rev. 12-2011) 6gage 1 of 4
7300 West 110tn Street. Suite 850
Loss Statement
{D tt~£~90t:!.
Overland ParK, KS 66210
Phone: (866) 45(1..1445
This Loss Statement represents all acreages that have been finalized. Fax: (913) 345-1671
Claims are subject to audit by the company.
1
4792/42361
2
4792/47801 111
No Type $11.f!>!>.Ut> $11
1 100%
Specified I Non- 100% $11,
4792/4779
Irrigated
1
4792/4779
3
14779
2
0001-0001 OU IYA, TA 62.50
11 I
No Type
100%
Specified 1 Non- 100%
Irrigated
• Legal Description = Section, Township, Range & Other Land Identifiers (e.g. Spanish Land grants. metes & bounds. etc.)
•• Guarantee Per Acre (GPA) = Bushels. Pounds, Tons, Hundred Weight, Boxes. Revenue Guarantee. or Dollars
POL (Rev. 12-2011) 6~age 2 of 4
7300 West 110th Street, Suite 850
Loss Statement
~ ti~£;~2,r:!
Overland Park, KS 56210
Phone: (866) 450-1445
This Loss Statement represents all acreages that have been finalized. Fax: (913) 345-1671
Claims are subject to audit by the company. Plinl Date: 0711212013
:',T}""'i'9::~):ilr1sllitil!``~itljj~\i:",' :4.: ' , : " "ii',:,AjI8fi'Cy:S'!lllf6fflillllljll'}y"::": i,.,:::,". "';\'iJ"'~l:6ll''Y:iiiiI';::if:*:, (\![(i~;p!arill'iffii``~?'I~\1 s}l,:!:;':'d,~Cllley1~UiT
Rut. P~"A'" CropGuard Group Inc, (48-008) ?n1~ 1 ?01 nAA!i ,,"_"o".• nn'
11 I
No Type $41
100%
Specified I Non- 100% $41
lnigated
* Legal Description = Section. Township. Range & Other Land Identifiers (e.g. Spanish Land grants, metes & bounds, etc.)
- Guarantee Per Acre (GPA) = Bushets, Pounds, Tons, Hundred Weight, Boxes, Revenue Guarantee, or Dollars
POL (Rev. 12-2011) 6gage 3 of4
7300 West 110th Street Suite 850
Loss Statement
{D tl~g,~S?~
Ovel1and Par!(, KS 66210
Phone;(866)45~1445
This Loss Statement represents all acreages that have been finalized. F", (9'3) 3...,67'
Claims are subjed to audit by the company. Print Date: 07/1212013
;:·jt\'·':~·':::!i!!;);ln\l!,``Jljf!!'t!!iIi``\·::,·,•........ ..\
,.'0 :L;-;". .......,<.'i""""·s··'ilf6tiiiiitlbn·
,'";-",, \<". ",~!!,":"I :'_, ,'.
C,"," ``~:::,.':. ..
;:,::,;C:'.> ':_:;,,::~
.,_." __ , ___
,···Cto"'··".,,,··,
"";'l:.~:;:l\n,:" . ·,,",·,!·,,'
.i``_;_.; _·,i~;;';~.:z::~,r~
< • • -'... , . . .
,,·'. . C··l""·
;b;\'\.\::s." ..,"'fiIi·r. "j·:)I".',":."·~···.'·::·..~"~.·"·,..'''",·-'''!····. '."""
.~_.r.'!?_!``"~=~:1~\'\~f;````\;'K~f£r~,,~,.,;i~,':!~.``i1~:#·;!;/~':;;':'~
CropGuard Group Inc. (48-008)
Bvb Partners 2013 12010065 48-595-1003701
C Casey Clipson (2080)
Stage Codes: Cause of Loss Codes: l~iiliif,1'lItleffll:\iIy":',+J?4;P ·'::5 C'" .' "CC;,' :1}:':\1$;!25;~65iOO
P2 : Prevented Plant with Standard Coverage 1 = Low Harvest Prlce 41 ~ Frosl 64 = Tornado 95 = Poleburn
PF = Prevented Plant with standard Coverage + 5% 2 :::; Low Market Price 42 = Freeze 71 = Insects 96 : Fruit Set ~iginal Loss Amount $0.0
PT ;:;: Prevented Plant with standard Coverage + 10% 10 =Drought Deviation 43 =Cold W1nter Kill 72 =Medfty 97 : Earthquake ncrease/Overpayment $O.O(
H : Hanreste