- Updated: Pedestrian killed during traffic collision on I-55 (10/21/16)4
- Scott County Sheriff Rick Walter faces challenge from criminal investigator Wes Drury (10/21/16)8
- Shooting injures two people in Cape early Tuesday (10/19/16)34
- 18-year-old killed in one-car crash Thursday morning (10/21/16)1
- Man arrested after dispute at school spurs brief lockdown (10/21/16)6
- Perry County: A great place to find home away from home (10/14/16)
- 'I feel for them' (10/20/16)1
- Tours provide a glimpse of Cape Girardeau's supposedly haunted past (10/17/16)1
- Benton man accused of statutory rape, selling pot (10/20/16)1
- Crews are working on the new Drury Hotel (10/21/16)1
Court hits State Farm with $145 million judgment
SALT LAKE CITY -- The Utah Supreme Court reinstated a $145 million jury award against State Farm for underpaying insurance claims, cheating customers and destroying crucial documents. A lower court found State Farm had even investigated the sex life of a company whistleblower.
The case involved State Farm's refusal to pay $50,000 to settle a claim involving a 1981 Utah car accident that killed one driver and left another driver disabled.
The insurer wouldn't settle even though one of its investigators determined a State Farm policyholder, Curtis Campbell, was at fault for the accident.
Campbell, 83, was found at fault by a trial jury and held liable for $130,000 more than his $50,000 policy limit. State Farm eventually paid all the damages, including Campbell's personal liability, but Campbell still sued, alleging its refusal to settle was part of a companywide scheme to limit payments on claims.
A Utah jury awarded Campbell and his wife $145 million in punitive and $2.6 million in compensatory damages.
Those amounts were later reduced on an appeal to $25 million in punitive damages and $1 million in compensation.
Friday's 4-1 decision by the Utah Supreme Court reinstated the punitive award to $145 million and kept the compensation at $1 million.
Paul Belnap, State Farm's Utah lawyer, said the company was considering its options and could appeal. The company denies any improper dealings.