In Texas Industries, Inc. v. Factory Mutual Ins. Co., 2007 WL 1376337 (C.A.5 (Tex.)), an insured cement plant sued its insurer to recover under its business-interruption policy after the insured experienced fire damage to a kiln during a previously-planned shutdown of the kiln for maintenance and there was a dispute over the proper calculation of the deductible. The lower court entered summary judgment in favor of the insured, and the insurer appealed.

The Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court's judgment.

According to the court, the insured reasonably construed the provision regarding the calculation of the deductible to require dividing the expected production by the entire period of nonproductivity, while the insurer reasonably construed the provision to require dividing the expected production by the entire period of nonproductivity minus the 10-day shutdown period. Under Texas law, a court faced with multiple reasonable interpretations of an insurance contract does not choose which interpretation is more reasonable, but resolves the uncertainty by adopting the construction that most favors the insured. Further, when an insurance policy can be given multiple reasonable interpretations, it will be interpreted and construed liberally in favor of the insured and strictly against the insurer.