Bad Faith Blog

Summary: Stonebridge Life provided hospital indemnity coverage to Nickerson who was hospitalized for 109 days after a severe leg fracture. The trial court directed a verdict for Nickerson on the breach of contract claim, entered judgment on the jury verdict for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and imposed a $19,000,000 punitive damages award. The parties stipulated to attorneys’ fees (Brandt fees) of $12,500 to be imposed by the trial court post-verdict. The trial court reduced the punitive damages award to $350,000, 10 times the compensatory damages, but did not include the Brandt fees in that calculation. The California Supreme Court reversed and found the Brandt fees were incurred to recover the insurance benefits so were properly a component of compensatory damages. Accordingly, they were properly included when calculating the ratio of punitive to compensatory damages to determine whether the punitive damages award satisfied due process.

Summary: Williams was injured in a car accident, settled with the at-fault driver’s insurance company for the policy limits of $25,000, and then made a claim against her own insurance policy under the underinsured motorist (UIM) provision. Her Owners Insurance Company (“Owners”) policy provided $100,000 of UIM coverage. Claiming medical expenses in excess of $50,000 and lost wages in excess of $60,000, she demanded the policy limits, but her demand was rejected. Williams then filed suit against Owners alleging breach of contract and both common law and statutory bad faith delay in processing her claim. The district court granted Owners’ motion for summary judgment after finding that Williams failed to produce evidence showing the unreasonableness of Owners’ conduct. On Williams’s appeal, the United States Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit affirmed on all counts.

Summary: Thomas and Allison Missler’s home was destroyed in a fire on June 1, 2011. While the fire department was responding to the fire, the Misslers’ State Farm insurance agent, Theresa Chapman, arrived at the scene. The Misslers had purchased a homeowners insurance policy from State Farm which provided dwelling coverage, personal property coverage and coverage for additional living expenses. After arriving, Chapman contacted Indiana Restoration & Cleaning Services (“IRCS”), a State Farm preferred vendor. The Misslers became dissatisfied with IRCS and State Farm. They then filed suit against both and appealed after State Farm prevailed on its motion for summary judgment. State Farm prevailed on appeal.

Summary: The New York Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s denial of Seneca Specialty Insurance Company’s (“Seneca Specialty”) motion to dismiss. Seneca Specialty relied upon New York’s restrictive bad faith requirements for this commercial property loss even though the insured’s building was located in Ohio. The prevailing conflicts of law rule provides that whenever the insured risk is located entirely within one state, that state’s law will control the litigation.

Summary: Kelly Paton was injured when her vehicle was struck by an underinsured driver (“UIM”). At the time, Paton was covered by an insurance policy issued by GEICO. GEICO failed to pay the full amount due under the UIM provision and Paton filed suit. Paton obtained a jury verdict in her favor on a breach of contract and a bad faith claim. As the prevailing party, Florida’s bad faith law entitled Paton to attorneys’ fees. Paton then served discovery requests on GEICO seeking to obtain GEICO’s billing and time records and lodestar fee interrogatories. GEICO objected, arguing that the records were privileged and irrelevant. The trial court overruled GEICO’s objection, but the Court of Appeals quashed the trial court’s orders requiring GEICO to produce the time records.