Notrica

Notrica v. State Compensation Insurance Fund

Good Law
1999 Cal. App. LEXIS 210·70 Cal. App. 4th 911·83 Cal. Rptr. 2d 89·99 Daily Journal DAR 2503·64 Cal. Comp. Cases 378
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 17, 1999B097529California6,746 words

Opinion

Opinion

Hastings, J.

Introduction

Joe Notrica, doing business as Notrica’s 32nd Street Market (Notrica), sued his workers’ compensation insurer, State Compensation Insurance Fund (SCIF, sometimes State Fund or Fund), to recover in tort and for unfair business practices, based on allegations relating to SCIF’s case reserve and claims handling policies and practices. In a bifurcated proceeding, the jury awarded Notrica $478,606 in compensatory damages and $20 million in punitive damages; the trial court enjoined SCIF from various business practices and awarded $333,319.65 in attorney fees. SCIF appeals from the judgment. We conclude that the punitive damages award must be reduced to $5 million and otherwise affirm.

Procedural Background

In its complaint against SCIF, Notrica asserted two causes of action here pertinent: tortious breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, to be determined by the jury; and unfair, unlawful, or fraudulent business practices (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 17200), to be determined by the trial court.

The implied covenant cause of action alleged the following pertinent facts.

SCIF is the state’s largest workers’ compensation carrier, created in 1914…

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.