New trial ordered after jury’s award of $500,000 in punitive damages shocked the conscience of the court, given the compensatory damages of $28.22, and plaintiff’s summation inflamed the jury.

On behalf of an estate, the plaintiff prevailed at trial in a bad faith insurance action against AmGuard Insurance Company. The jury found that AmGuard unreasonably delayed paying the decedent’s workers’ compensation wage benefits of $7,300 for 72 days and awarded $500,000 in punitive damages. With interest, the compensatory damages were capped at $28.22. Post-trial, AmGuard moved for judgment as a matter of law and a new trial, or in the alternative, remittitur. The court did not consider AmGuard’s motion for judgment as a matter of law because it did not raise this motion at the close of all the evidence. However, as to its motion for a new trial, the court granted a new trial because $500,000 in punitive damages shocked the court’s conscience, given the disproportionality between the compensatory and punitive damages. The court also found that the plaintiff’s summation likely inflamed the jury. While AmGuard only raised objections to the summation in its post-trial motion, plaintiff’s counsel’s remarks included: (1) AmGuard stole from the decedent; (2) it used "dirty lies" and "strategies"; (3) it used "filthy business practices"; (4) AmGuard "lights their cigars with [the amount of] money [at issue here]";and (5) it had a "filthy devotion to money, which they elevate over human life and human safety and human welfare." The court found: “Because the jury’s verdict likely resulted from passion or prejudice caused by the estate’s summation, it likely impacted the jury’s liability finding.”

Case Law Alerts, 2nd Quarter, April 2020 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. Copyright © 2020 Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, all rights reserved. This article may not be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm.