Choharis v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that D.C. law does not recognize an independent tort of bad faith
• observing that \the mere disappointment of plaintiff's hope to receive his contracted-for benefit\ would not support fraud claim even in the presence of bad faith
• explaining that “[disputes relating to the respective obligations of the parties to an insurance contract should generally be addressed within the principles of law relating to contracts” and that “bad faith conduct can be compensated within those principles”
• affirming summary judgment where plaintiff's \assertions [regarding \fraudulent or negligent misrepresentation\] directly related to an obligation arising under the contract\
• finding no negligent misrepresentation claim where “statements and any duty with respect thereto related directly to the question of interim living expenses provided for in the contract”
• denying punitive damages even where, if proved, the breach was willful, wanton or malicious

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).