Stewart

Stewart v. Truck Insurance Exchange

Good Law
17 Cal. App. 4th 468·1993 Cal. App. LEXIS 774·21 Cal. Rptr. 2d 338·93 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5672
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 23, 1993B055991California7,535 words

Opinion

Opinion

Croskey, J.

In this “Royal Globe” bad faith action, Truck Insurance Exchange (Truck), the defendant below, appeals from the order of the trial court (1) granting the motion of the plaintiff, Jerome T. Stewart (Stewart), for a new trial on the issue of punitive damages, which had previously been eliminated by an order of nonsuit, and (2) denying Truck’s motion for a new trial as to the issue of its liability for compensatory damages. While the record in this case demonstrates substantial evidence of Truck’s bad faith conduct, it does not support Stewart’s claim for punitive damages, given the “clear and convincing” burden of proof which such a claim must satisfy. In addition, the trial court failed to comply with Code of Civil Procedure section 657 when it granted a new trial on the punitive damage issue without setting forth, in writing, the reasons therefore. We therefore will reverse the trial court’s order granting Stewart’s motion for a new trial as to punitive damages but will otherwise affirm.

Factual and Procedural Background

The following chronology of events, which necessarily form the factual basis of Stewart’s bad faith claim, are not in substantial dispute. However, as…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.