Botma

MEMORANDUM *

Botma and Himes appeal from the district court’s summary judgment in favor of Safeway Insurance Company (Safeway) on the issue of bad faith. We affirm.

Several factors of the eight-part “equal consideration” test set forth in Clearwater v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 164 Ariz. 256 , 792 P.2d 719, 722-23 (1990) support the district court’s summary judgment. There is no evidence that Safeway attempted to induce Botma to contribute to a settlement or to reject an offer, nor did Safeway reject the advice of its own attorney or agent. See id. at 722. In addition, Safeway reasonably attempted to contact Botma shortly after receiving the first settlement offer.

Furthermore, the final factor of the Clearwater test indicates that the court should consider “any other factors tending to establish or negate bad faith on the part of the insurer.” Id. Here, Himes’ counsel, Guerrero, specifically stated in his first communication to Safeway that it “should not settle any claims arising from this accident.” In addition, the parties do not dispute that Safeway did not receive documentation of Castano’s medical condition until Guerrero made the first settlement offer in October…