(traditional summary judgment). 11 . Smart, 597 S.W.2d at 337. 12 . See Keck, Mahin & Cate v. Nat’l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, PA, 20 S.W.3d 692, 695-96 (Tex.2000). 13 . Id. 14 . Id. at 696. 15 . Mid-Continent Ins. Co. v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 236 S.W.3d 765, 774 (Tex.2007) (emphasis added); see also Galbraith-Foxworth Lumber Co. v. Long, 5 S.W.2d 162, 167 (Tex.Civ.App.-Dallas 1928, writ ref'd); Lancer Corp. v. Murillo, 909 S.W.2d 122, 127 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 1995, no writ) (identifying Texas cases that granted equitable subrogation rights to sureties, guarantors, and creditors and concluding that a self-insured manufacturer was likewise entitled to equitable subro-gation). But see Excess Underwriters v. Frank's Casing Crew & Rental Tools, Inc., 246 S.W.3d 42, 47 (Tex.2008) (<HOLDING>). 16 . Smart, 597 S.W.2d at 338-39. 17 . Id. at
recognizing that the determination is an equitable one recognizing equitable subrogation holding that equitable tolling principles apply to suits against the united states in the same manner as they apply to private parties recognizing rule recognizing the longstanding rule that insurers may not apply equitable subrogation against their insureds