Burge Hulett v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company

974 F.2d 1342 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Burge HULETT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee. No. 91-56031. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted July 8, 1992. * Decided Sept. 11, 1992. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California; No. CV-91-2978-JMI, James M. Ideman, District Judge, Presiding. C.D.Cal. REVERSED. Before FARRIS, WIGGINS and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** BACKGROUND 2 In 1987, a vehicle driven by Burge Hulett was hit by another vehicle driven by an underinsured motorist. Hulett was insured against underinsured motorists by State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company. Hulett alleges that, although his claim was clearly valid and State Farm had no reason to oppose it, State Farm intentionally delayed in paying the claim for over two years. After this long delay, Hulett finally succeeded in getting State Farm to…