 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Harmon v. James11/17/1994
.
This action for bad faith breach of an insurance contract was initiated by plaintiff, Carla M. Harmon, against defendant, Fred S. James & Co. of Colorado, Inc., as the result of a series of disputes over the processing of her workers' compensation claim during a three-year period. The trial court held that the applicable statute of limitations, § 13-80-102, C.R.S. (1987 Repl. Vol. 6A), barred recovery for conduct that occurred more than two years before she filed her complaint. Plaintiff appeals the partial summary judgment entered as a result of this ruling, and we affirm.
In January of 1987, the plaintiff suffered serious injuries while on the job and subsequently filed a claim for workers' compensation benefits from her employer, El Paso County. The defendant adjusted the claim and provided benefits on behalf of the self-insured, El Paso County Workers' Compensation Pool.
Disputes between plaintiff and the defendant regarding late payment of benefits began soon after the claim was filed. The plaintiff received letters from creditors demanding payment and threatening collection procedures. On October 19, 1987, the plaintiff's attorney sent a letter to the insurer claiming that the insurer was acting in bad faith regarding vocational rehabilitation benefits, delayed payment of medical bills, and in failing to provide promptly benefits which had been prescribed for the plaintiff. When the disputes persisted, the plaintiff filed a complaint alleging bad faith breach of an insurance contract on June 4, 1990.
The trial court granted defendant's motion for partial summary judgment, ruling that recovery based on defendant's alleged bad faith conduct that occurred prior to June 4, 1988, was barred by the two-year tort statute of limitations. The court also ruled that evidence of the time-barred conduct could be admitted under CRE 404(b) for the limited purposes of showing absence of mistake and the motive of the insurer. The trial proceeded to a jury which awarded the plaintiff no damages. This appeal followed.
Bad faith breach of an insurance contract occurs in a first- party context when an insurer unreasonably denies or delays making payment on a valid claim of its insured. The plaintiff must show that the insurer acted unreasonably and with either knowledge or reckless disregard of the unreasonableness of the conduct. Travelers Insurance Co. v. Savio, 706 P.2d 1258 (Colo. 1985).
Since the claim sounds in tort, it is barred under § 13-80-102, C.R.S. (1987 Repl. Vol. 6A) unless it is brought within two years after the cause of action accrues, i.e., within two years after the date on which both the injury and its cause are known or should have been known through the exercise of reasonable diligence. Section 13-80-108(1), C.R.S. (1987 Repl. Vol. 6A). See Mastro v. Brodie, 682 P.2d 1162, 1168 (Colo. 1984) ("The statute of limitations begins to run when the claimant has knowledge of the facts which would put a reasonable person on notice of the nature and extent of the injury and that the injury was caused by the wrongful conduct of another").
On appeal, the plaintiff contends that the standard set forth in § 13-80-108(1) for determining the accrual date of a claim should be construed so that the statute of limitations on a claim for bad faith breach of an insurance contract does not begin to run until either: (1) the Conclusion of the underlying workers' compensation claim or (2) the date of the last incident of bad faith conduct. The plaintiff argues that, because of the unique n
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Colorado Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|