Aon asserted against the remaining claims were election of remedies and judicial estoppel. Because the remedies, rights, and facts Horizon alleges in this case are not inconsistent with the remedies, rights, and facts Horizon alleged in the English suit and because any such inconsistency would not be so unconscionable, dishonest, contrary to fair dealing, or so stultifying to the legal process or trifling with justice as to be manifestly unjust, the trial court erred in granting summary judgment based on the election-of-remedies doctrine. Because none of the statements upon which Aon relies as a basis for judicial estoppel satisfy the requirements for judicial estoppel, the trial court erred to the extent it g , F.A., 923 S.W.2d 112, 116 (Tex.App.Houston [14th Dist.] 1996, no writ) (<HOLDING>); Stephanz v. Laird, 846 S.W.2d 895, 901-02
holding the agency relationship ceases on execution and delivery of the policy to the insured holding that agreements established agency relationship holding averments of defendants sufficient to refute agency relationship recognizing that the existence of an agency relationship is ordinarily a question of fact holding that the special relationship exception does not apply to the relationship between a student and a school