Hangarter

ORDER DENYING JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW OR NEW TRIAL

FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FINDING VIOLATION OF CAL. BUS. & PROF. CODE § 17200

INTRODUCTION

Defendants’ Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law or for a New Trial came on for hearing on June 5, 2002. Appearing for Plaintiff were Ray Bourhis, Alice Wolf-son, David Lilienstein, and Daniel U. Smith. Appearing for Defendants was Horace Greene and Evan Tager, who participated by telephone from Washington, D.C. After reviewing the parties’ extensive briefs and the record in this case and hearing oral argument, the court concludes that Defendants’ motion should be denied. The jury’s verdict was based on substantial admissible evidence of Defendants’ bad faith breach of the insurance contract with Plaintiff, including evidence that Plaintiff was totally disabled under California law, that Defendants conducted a biased investigation of her claim and that her benefits were wrongfully terminated. The court committed no prejudicial error by admitting or excluding either evidence or witness testimony or in the jury instructions. The verdict reflected the weight of the evidence. The awards for compensatory and punitive…