However, it appears your supreme court appointment would be wrong as it could be found within the jury determination.Generally speaking jury verdicts are the general last word in a case.
Not necessarily, and certainly not generally.
A jury's decision is based on instructions given by the judge. The decision can be appealed based on erroneous instructions. The amount of the award is also subject to appeal. I suppose ineffective counsel could also be grounds.
That an award of punitive damages was included in the jury's decision is, in itself, grounds for appeal.
I sampled a couple of MS case decisions to see if any of them outlined exactly what the elements of bad faith were. Cases were too specific to reveal general rules.
In one case, punitive damages were reversed because they were awarded by the trial jury. The MS Supreme Court made the point that a breach of contract decision was the purview of the jury but the question of punitive damages for bad faith was the subject of a separate evidentiary hearing, not by the jury.
In another case a denial of a claim was ruled not bad faith even though the insurance company lost and the denial was overturned. The court ruled that the insurance company had a reasonable basis for the denial even though the denial was found to be in error, therefore no bad faith.
Rman, I know how you feel about the insurance business. Lately, I've been pretty pissed off at it myself. However, insurance is complex. Mistakes are made and bad faith does occur often. It's important to be able to tell the difference.
I'm always willing to discuss specifics with you.
