Lloyd’s, Inc. Second, Appellants argue that because State Farm discussed the possibility of mediating the claims, the statute of limitations did not begin to run until January 2005. However, State Farm had communicated a final determination on all the Martinezes’ claims by February 8, 2002, when State Farm sent the last of a series of letters to Appellants describing its decisions. There is no evidence that State Farm was attempting to string the insureds along “without denying or paying a claim ...” Murray v. San Jacinto Agency, Inc., 800 S.W.2d 826, 828 n. 2 (Tex.1990). Thus, the Martinezes’ cause of action began to accrue, at the latest, upon the issuance of the February 8, 2002 letter. See Mangine v. State Farm Lloyds, 73 S.W.3d 467, 470-71 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2002, pet. denied) (<HOLDING>). In order to bring suit under Texas law, a
holding issuance of building estimate constituted a denial of claim and triggered the running of the limitations period holding that limitations period on employment discrimination claim triggered on date of discharge not on date of discovery of discriminatory intent holding that the running of the statute of limitations is an affirmative defense holding neither a lack of prejudice to the defendant nor the running of the statute of limitations constitutes good cause holding that a timely petition for administrative review stops the running of the statute of limitations