Mazik

Mazik v. Geico Gen. Ins. Co.

Good Law
247 Cal. Rptr. 3d 450·35 Cal. App. 5th 455
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 17, 2019B281372California7,189 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Lui, J.

*458 GEICO General Insurance Company (GEICO) appeals from a judgment against it awarding punitive damages to respondent Michael Mazik for GEICO's bad faith breach of an insurance contract. A jury concluded that GEICO unreasonably delayed paying its policyholder Mazik the policy limits of $ 50,000 on an underinsured motorist policy after Mazik was injured in a serious automobile accident. The jury awarded compensatory damages of $ 313,508 and punitive damages in the amount of $ 4 million. The trial court subsequently reduced the punitive damages to $ 1 million.

GEICO appeals only the punitive damages award. It argues that (1) the evidence is insufficient to show that any "officer, director, or managing agent" was involved in any act of bad faith ( Civ. Code, § 3294, subd. (b) ); 1 (2) even if a managing agent was involved, the evidence is insufficient to show that such an agent personally engaged in "oppression, fraud, or malice," or authorized or ratified such conduct by other employees, as required to support a punitive damages award ( ibid. ); and (3) the punitive damages award was excessive, even as reduced by the trial court.

We reject GEICO's arguments and affirm. There is…

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.