Carlos Mesa v. Clarendon National Insurance Company

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that any negligence by the insurer in failing to keep its insured advised “was not the cause of the excess judgment, and is therefore immaterial.”
• stating that a valid bad faith claim requires a causal connection between the damages claimed and the insurer’s bad faith
• affirming summary judgment where Plaintiff failed to provide sufficient evidence for a reasonable jury to find that insurer acted in bad faith
• affirming summary judgment and finding insurer’s negligence in failing to advise its insured of settlement opportunities did not equate to bad faith
• affirming summary judgment of no bad faith for failure to immediately tender policy limits for a catastrophic injury
• declining to find bad faith where insurer “immediately opened a claim file” upon receiving notice and “[w]ithin four days, . . . hired [a claims administrator] to conduct an investigation and adjust any potential claims”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).