Case Explained: Brent King, Receiver v. Texas Insurance Company

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit Filed: 2026-07-30 The eighth-circuit affirmed the district court’s dismissal of Brent King’s breach of contract and vexatious refusal to pay claims against Texas Insurance Company. The court held that King, acting as receiver for Empirical Prime, LLC, failed to plausibly allege a “Claim” or “Loss” under the Directors and Officers Liability Policy, which are prerequisites for coverage. Under Missouri law, a breach of contract claim requires proof of a valid contract and its breach; here, the policy defined a “Claim” as a written demand against the insured, but King’s letters were demands directed at the insurer rather than the insured entity. Furthermore, the policy defined “Loss” as an amount the insured is legally obligated to pay, yet the complaint lacked allegations that any judgment or legal obligation to pay had been established against Empirical or its officers. Because the underlying receivership action had not resulted in such a legal obligation, no Loss occurred. The court also rejected King’s argument that the district court acted sua sponte, finding that Texas Insurance Company sufficiently raised the issues regarding the absence of a Claim and Loss in its motion to dismiss. Additionally, the court affirmed the denial of leave to amend as futile, noting that any amended complaint would fail to cure these fundamental defects under the policy terms. Consequently, King’s vexatious refusal claim, which is derivative of the breach of contract claim, also failed. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.