Hale

*686 Opinion

Plaintiff Arthur L. Hale brought suit against his insurance company Farmers Insurance Exchange, its attorney-in-fact, Farmers Underwriters Association (hereafter Farmers), their Orange County claims supervisor, defendant Eugene J. Penasa, and their claims examiner, defendant Sally Lawrence, for bad faith refusal to pay medical benefits due plaintiff under his automobile insurance policy.

A jury verdict was returned October 27, 1972, in favor of plaintiff and against the defendants in the total sum of $212,659.03. Judgment on the verdict was entered and included the following individual verdicts:

Defendants moved for a new trial and for judgment notwithstanding the verdict.

The trial court granted the motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict assessing $200,000 punitive damages against defendant Farmers, but denied the motion for judgment n.o.v. as to defendants Lawrence and Penasa.

The trial court’s order on the motion for new trial was entered as follows:

Plaintiff filed a remittitur of $650 damages for breach of contract and, accordingly, the motion for new trial was deemed denied as to that portion of the verdict, leaving judgment against defendant…

I am in full accord with the majority decision reversing the judgment notwithstanding the verdict. Similarly, I have no difficulty in concurring with the decision to retry the general damage issue as there may be some question as to the amount of compensatory damages awarded by the jury and that issue could be simply and quickly resolved in the trial forum.

But I strongly disagree with the majority in depriving the insured (plaintiff) of the $200,000 punitive damage award against the insurer (Farmers) and in further depriving the insured of the $3,000 punitive damage award against the claims supervisor (Penasa). Simply stated, the punitive damage awards should be upheld.

The jury impliedly found that the claims manager acted oppressively, maliciously and in bad faith in the handling of plaintiff’s claim. The trial judge also so found. In addition, the majority correctly notes that there is substantial evidence supporting that determination. Notwithstanding the findings and the evidence, the trial judge and the majority rationalize that Farmers failed to authorize or ratify the tort and is therefore not punitively liable. The majority go further and conclude that not even the…

Plaintiff Arthur L. Hale brought suit against his insurance company Farmers Insurance Exchange, its attorney-in-fact, Farmers Underwriters Association (hereafter Farmers), their Orange County claims supervisor, defendant Eugene J. Penasa, and their claims examiner, defendant Sally Lawrence, for bad faith refusal to pay medical benefits due plaintiff under his automobile insurance policy.

A jury verdict was returned October 27, 1972, in favor of plaintiff and against the defendants in the total sum of $212,659.03. Judgment on the verdict was entered and included the following individual verdicts:

1. $2,557.97 plus accrued interest of $601.06 against Farmers for breach of contract;

2. $5,000 compensatory damages against all defendants for bad faith;

3. $200,000 punitive damages assessed against defendant Farmers;

4. $3,000 punitive damages assessed against defendant Penasa;

5. $1,500 punitive damages assessed against defendant Lawrence.

Defendants moved for a new trial and for judgment notwithstanding the verdict.

The trial court granted the motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict assessing $200,000 punitive damages against defendant Farmers,…