Opinion ID: 1793652
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Should Foster have been allowed to present punitive damages evidence and instructions?

Text: To recover punitive damage from an insurer for amounts over and above policy benefits an insured must prove by a preponderance of the evidence either (1) that the insurer acted with malice or (2) that the insurer acted with gross negligence or reckless disregard for the rights of others. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co. v. Day, 487 So.2d 830 (Miss. 1986); Weems v. American Security Ins. Co., 486 So.2d 1222 (Miss. 1986); State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Simpson, 477 So.2d 242 (Miss. 1985). Quoting further from Day, this Court held: The Simpson opinion further enunciates that punitive damages are not mandated by the absence of an arguable reason ... because the denial of the claim could be the result of an honest mistake or oversight  ordinary or simple negligence. The absence of an arguable reason does not necessarily establish that the insurer acted with malice or with gross negligence or reckless disregard for the insured's rights. 487 So.2d at 832. Punitive damages are assessed as an example and warning to others and should be allowed only with caution and within narrow limits. Standard Life Ins. Co. of Indiana v. Veal, 354 So.2d 239, 247 (Miss. 1977); State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Simpson, 477 So.2d 242, 249 (Miss. 1985). The trial judge held, [T]his Court doesn't feel at this time that punitive damages would be allowed in this case. However, if some time during the remainder of the case, we look at it differently, I'll let you submit whatever proof that you would want to submit at this time. In Gardner v. Jones, 464 So.2d 1144, 1148 (Miss. 1985), this Court held, Punitive damages do not follow as the day the night every finding that a defendant has been guilty of fraud. Though fraud is frequently an ingredient of an award of punitive damages, it is clear from our cases that more is required. The same rationale may be applied to the instant case. Punitive damages are assessed only in extreme cases. Gardner v. Jones, 464 So.2d at 1148; Tideway Oil Programs, Inc. v. Serio, 431 So.2d 454, 460 (Miss. 1983). [P]unitive damages are recoverable where the defendant has done to the plaintiff such a wrong as to import insult, fraud, oppression or reckless disregard for the rights of the plaintiff. Gardner v. Jones, 464 So.2d at 1149. The trial judge in the instant case, exercising his sound discretion, determined the facts of this case were not so extreme as to warrant punitive damages instructions. I would concur that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion to refuse punitive damages instructions.