explicit clause to protect Trinity’s right of subrogation at all times could have been included in the policy. The most that can be said in favor of Trinity’s position is that the “Transfer of Rights” clause is ambiguous, but ambiguity must be construed in favor of the insured. See National Union Fire Ins. Co. v. Hudson Energy Co., 811 S.W.2d 552, 555 (Tex.1991). Nor can Trinity accept that part of a contract beneficial to it and deny the appli cation of other provisions that may be detrimental or disadvantageous. Daniel v. Goesl, 161 Tex. 490, 341 S.W.2d 892, 895 (1960) (one who accepts the benefit of a contract must also assume its burdens); see also RGS, Cardox Recovery, Inc. v. Dorchester Enhanced Recovery, Co., 700 S.W.2d 635, 639 (Tex.App.—Corpus Christi 1985, writ ref d n.r.e.) (<HOLDING>). The Trinity policy prohibited Dog Team from
holding that parties to joint venture had right to place whatever limitations upon themselves as they might agree to in their contract and that the provision might be burdensome or awkward is not a problem for the courts appellants agreed to the provision and appellees have the right to rely on compliance with the provision as agreed to by the parties holding that a provision of the constitution is to be construed in the sense in which it was understood by the framers and the people at the time of its adoption but that if new products or circumstances that did not exist at the time the constitutional provision was enacted fall within the meaning of the provision the constitutional provision applies to them holding that the court was bound to consider a contract provision that was plainly relevant to the central issue of contract interpretation raised on appeal despite the parties failure to cite or discuss the provision holding that defendants testimony that he did not see a provision in the agreement because the plaintiffcounterparty failed to direct him to the provision was insufficient as a matter of law to establish fraud and defendant was therefore bound to the terms of the provision holding that an indemnity provision need not be valid and enforceable to trigger obligations under the contract so long as the parties agreed to indemnity