Bad Faith Framework - All 50 States + DC
Purpose: Quick reference for bad faith standards, elements, and defenses Last Updated: August 2026 (verified against statute text and reported decisions)
Important Notes
- First-Party = Insured suing own insurer (property/coverage claims)
- Third-Party = Failure to settle within limits (liability claims)
- "Fairly Debatable" = Most common defense - if claim validity is reasonably disputed, bad faith fails
- Private Action = Whether policyholder can sue directly under the state's Unfair Claims Settlement Practices Act (UCSPA); separate bad-faith statutes (e.g., PA § 8371, GA § 33-4-6) are noted in the Key Case/Statute column
- Always verify current law - standards evolve through case law
Verification: Every master-table row was checked in August 2026 against the cited statute text or reported decision (source column). Rows marked "(not confirmed from text)" rest on secondary reporting or an opinion that could not be read in full and carry medium confidence. Downstream lists are recomputed from the master table; cells without a verified fact show "—".
Bad Faith Type Legend
| Type | Description |
|---|---|
| TORT | Independent tort cause of action |
| CONTRACT | Breach of implied covenant (contract damages only) |
| STATUTORY | Private right of action under statute |
| NONE | No first-party bad faith remedy |
Master Bad Faith Framework Table
| State | First-Party Type | Standard | Key Elements | Primary Defense | UCSPA Private Action | Key Case/Statute | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alabama | TORT | Intentional refusal without debatable reason | Bowen 5-element test: (1) contract+breach (2) intentional refusal (3) no debatable reason (4) actual knowledge (5) intentional failure to determine | Debatable reason (directed-verdict test) | NO (Ala. Code § 27-12-24) | Chavers v. Nat'l Security (1981); Bowen (1982); Brechbill (2013) | courtlistener.com |
| Alaska | TORT | Objectively unreasonable; negligence alone insufficient | Refused without reasonable basis (Nicholson; Hillman 1993) | Fairly debatable | NO (AS 21.36.125; O.K. Lumber) | State Farm v. Nicholson (1989) | courtlistener.com |
| Arizona | TORT | No reasonable basis + knew/reckless disregard | Unreasonable denial/handling + insurer knew or recklessly disregarded lack of basis (Noble; Zilisch 2000); 'evil mind' is the punitive test only (Rawlings 1986) | Fairly debatable (not complete if handling unreasonable, Zilisch) | NO (A.R.S. § 20-461(D)) | Noble v. National American (1981); Rawlings v. Apodaca (1986) | courtlistener.com |
| Arkansas | TORT | Dishonest, malicious, or oppressive | Affirmative misconduct; negligence/bad judgment insufficient; 12% penalty + fees under § 23-79-208 | Honest error / nonfeasance | NO (A.C.A. § 23-66-201 et seq.) | Columbia Nat'l v. Freeman (2002); Aetna v. Broadway Arms (1984) | courtlistener.com |
| California | TORT | Unreasonable withholding; no evil motive required | Unreasonable withholding of benefits | Genuine dispute (Wilson 2007) | NO (Moradi-Shalal 1988; § 790.03(h)) | Gruenberg v. Aetna (1973) | leginfo.legislature.ca.gov |
| Colorado | STATUTORY + TORT | Unreasonable delay/denial without reasonable basis | § 10-3-1115/1116: fees + costs + 2x covered benefit; common-law tort coexists (Savio 1985) | Reasonable basis | YES (§ 10-3-1116; UCSPA proper § 10-3-1104 has none) | C.R.S. § 10-3-1116; Travelers v. Savio (1985) | content.leg.colorado.gov |
| Connecticut | CONTRACT + CUTPA | Dishonest purpose / sinister motive (implied covenant) | CUIPA has no private action; CUTPA route needs CUIPA violation + general business practice (Mead v. Burns 1986) | Good faith / isolated act | NO (use CUTPA § 42-110g) | Mead v. Burns (1986); PSE Consulting (2004) | courtlistener.com (not confirmed from text) |
| DC | CONTRACT | Contract principles only | No independent tort (Choharis) | Contract defense | NO (D.C. Code § 31-2231.17) | Choharis v. State Farm (2008) | courtlistener.com |
| Delaware | CONTRACT | No reasonable justification | Implied covenant; sounds in contract; punitive if refusal malicious/egregious (Tackett) | Bona fide dispute | NO (18 Del. C. § 2304; Pierce 1996) | Tackett v. State Farm (1995) | courtlistener.com |
| Florida | STATUTORY | Not attempting in good faith to settle when it could and should have (totality) | 60-day civil remedy notice (§ 624.155(3)); 90-day tender safe harbor (2023); mere negligence insufficient (2023); no common-law first-party claim (Chalfonte 2012) | Totality of circumstances / cure within 60 days | YES (§ 624.155(1)(a)1) | Fla. Stat. § 624.155 | leg.state.fl.us |
| Georgia | STATUTORY | Bad faith refusal within 60 days of demand | Penalty up to greater of 50% of liability or $5,000 + fees; exclusive first-party remedy; no punitive | Reasonable and probable cause | NO (§ 33-4-6 is not the UCSPA; § 33-6-37 no private action) | O.C.G.A. § 33-4-6 | codes.findlaw.com |
| Hawaii | TORT | Unreasonable; conscious wrongdoing not required | Anderson test adopted: no reasonable basis + knowledge/reckless disregard | Fairly debatable | NO (HRS § 431:13-103; Hough 1996) | Best Place v. Penn America (1996) | courtlistener.com |
| Idaho | TORT | Intentional and unreasonable denial/delay | Robinson (2002): (1) intentional/unreasonable denial (2) not fairly debatable (3) not good-faith mistake (4) harm beyond contract damages | Fairly debatable | NO (Idaho Code § 41-1329) | White v. Unigard (1986) | legislature.idaho.gov |
| Illinois | STATUTORY | Vexatious and unreasonable | § 155 cap: greatest of 60% of recovery, $60,000, or excess over offer; no independent tort (Cramer 1996) | Bona fide dispute | NO (215 ILCS 5/154.6; § 155 exclusive) | 215 ILCS 5/155 | ilga.gov |
| Indiana | TORT | Conscious wrongdoing / dishonest purpose | (1) No legitimate basis (2) dishonest purpose/ill will (3) causation; negligence insufficient | Good-faith dispute / rational basis | NO (IC 27-4-1-4.5) | Erie v. Hickman (1993); Freidline (2002) | courtlistener.com (not confirmed from text) |
| Iowa | TORT | No reasonable basis + knew/reckless disregard | Intentional denial without reasonable basis | Fairly debatable | NO (Iowa Code ch. 507B; Seeman 1982) | Dolan v. Aid Insurance (1988) | courtlistener.com |
| Kansas | NONE | N/A | Statutory remedies adequate (Spencer); K.S.A. § 40-256 fees for refusal without just cause | N/A | NO (K.S.A. § 40-2404) | Spencer v. Aetna (1980); K.S.A. § 40-256 | ksrevisor.gov |
| Kentucky | STATUTORY + TORT | No reasonable basis + knew/reckless disregard | (1) Obligation to pay (2) no reasonable basis (3) knew/reckless disregard; outrageous conduct for punitive | Reasonable basis / fairly debatable | YES (KRS 446.070; Reeder 1988) | Wittmer v. Jones (1993); KRS 304.12-230 | apps.legislature.ky.gov |
| Louisiana | STATUTORY | Arbitrary, capricious, or without probable cause | § 22:1892(B): 50% penalty (min $1,000) + fees; § 22:1892(I) good-faith duty (former § 22:1973, repealed eff. 7/1/2024) | Probable cause / reasonable basis | NO (§ 22:1964 UTPA; § 22:1892 is the private remedy) | La. R.S. 22:1892 (Acts 2024 No. 3) | legis.la.gov |
| Maine | STATUTORY | Without just cause (no reasonable basis to contest) | § 2436-A enumerated acts; damages + costs + fees + 1.5%/month interest; no bad faith tort (Marquis 1993) | Just cause / reasonable basis | YES (24-A M.R.S. § 2436-A) | 24-A M.R.S. § 2436-A; Marquis (1993) | legislature.maine.gov |
| Maryland | STATUTORY | Lack of good faith (honesty and diligence) | Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 3-1701: actual damages + fees (capped 1/3) + interest; MIA exhaustion (Ins. § 27-1001) with exceptions | Good faith compliance | YES (§ 3-1701) | Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 3-1701; Ins. § 27-1001 | mgaleg.maryland.gov |
| Massachusetts | STATUTORY | c. 176D § 3(9) unfair claim settlement practice | c. 93A § 9 action; 30-day demand letter; 2x-3x actual damages if willful/knowing | Good faith / liability not reasonably clear | YES (c. 93A § 9) | Rhodes v. AIG (2012); c. 93A § 9; c. 176D § 3(9) | malegislature.gov |
| Michigan | NONE | N/A (contract damages only) | No first-party tort or mental-distress damages (Kewin 1980; Roberts 1985); MCL 500.2006 12% interest unless claim reasonably in dispute | Reasonably in dispute (§ 500.2006) | NO (Young 1984) | Kewin v. Mass. Mutual (1980); MCL 500.2006 | legislature.mi.gov |
| Minnesota | STATUTORY | No reasonable basis + knew/reckless disregard (§ 604.18 subd. 2) | Cannot plead initially; motion to amend; award = lesser of 1/2 proceeds above offer or $250K + fees up to $100K | Reasonable basis / fairly debatable | NO (ch. 72A, Morris; § 604.18 sole remedy) | Minn. Stat. § 604.18 | revisor.mn.gov |
| Mississippi | TORT | No legitimate or arguable reason | (1) Valid claim (2) no arguable reason; punitive needs malice/gross negligence; Veasley extra-contractual damages | Arguable reason | NO | Standard Life v. Veal (1978); Veasley (1992) | case-law.vlex.com (not confirmed from text) |
| Missouri | NONE | N/A (vexatious refusal = willful refusal without reasonable cause) | Contract or vexatious refusal only (RSMo 375.296/375.420: 20% of first $1,500 + 10% excess + fees) | Reasonable cause | NO | Overcast v. Billings (2000); RSMo 375.420 | revisor.mo.gov |
| Montana | STATUTORY (exclusive) | Violation of § 33-18-201 listed practices causing damages | Single violation suffices; no general business practice; common-law claim-handling bad faith barred (§ 33-18-242(3)); punitive under § 27-1-221 | Reasonable basis in law or fact (subd. 6) | YES (§ 33-18-242) | Mont. Code Ann. § 33-18-242 | mca.legmt.gov |
| Nebraska | TORT | No reasonable basis + knowledge/reckless disregard | Anderson-style test; no punitive damages (Neb. Const. art. VII § 5) | Fairly debatable | NO | Braesch v. Union Ins. (1991) | vlex.com (not confirmed from text) |
| Nevada | STATUTORY + TORT | Refusal without proper cause (Pemberton) | NRS 686A.310(2) damages for any listed practice; implied covenant tort; punitive uncapped for insurer bad faith (NRS 42.005(2)(b)) | Reasonable basis / proper cause | YES (NRS 686A.310(2)) | Pemberton v. Farmers (1993); NRS 686A.310 | leg.state.nv.us |
| New Hampshire | NONE | Contract; foreseeable consequential damages (Lawton) | No first-party tort; no punitive; RSA 417 action only after Commissioner finding (Bell 2001); CPA exempt | Contract defenses | Only after DOI finding (RSA 417:19) | Lawton (1978); Bell v. Liberty Mutual (2001) | case-law.vlex.com (not confirmed from text) |
| New Jersey | CONTRACT | Fairly debatable: no reasonable basis + knowledge/reckless disregard | Breach of implied covenant (Pickett); consequential damages; IFCA (N.J.S.A. 17:29BB, 2022) UM/UIM only | Fairly debatable | NO (N.J.S.A. 17:29B; IFCA UM/UIM only) | Pickett v. Lloyd's (1993) | case-law.vlex.com (not confirmed from text) |
| New Mexico | STATUTORY + TORT | Frivolous or unfounded refusal (UJI 13-1701) | Common-law tort + § 59A-16-30 action with damages and fees; punitive needs culpable mental state (Sloan); no cap | Reasonable basis / fairly debatable | YES (§ 59A-16-30) | Sloan v. State Farm (2004); NMSA § 59A-16-30 | case-law.vlex.com (not confirmed from text) |
| New York | CONTRACT | Breach of implied covenant; foreseeable consequential damages (Bi-Economy) | No independent first-party tort (NYU v. Continental); Pavia 'gross disregard' is the third-party standard | Good faith / reasonable basis | NO (Rocanova; Ins. Law § 2601) | Bi-Economy v. Harleysville (2008); Rocanova (1994) | case-law.vlex.com (not confirmed from text) |
| North Carolina | STATUTORY + TORT | § 58-63-15(11) violation = per se § 75-1.1 (Gray); tort needs aggravated conduct (Dailey) | § 75-16 mandatory treble + § 75-16.1 fees; no general business practice (Gray); tort: valid claim + bad faith refusal + aggravated conduct | Honest disagreement / innocent mistake | YES (Ch. 75; Gray) | Gray v. NCIUA (2000); Dailey v. Integon (1985) | ncleg.gov |
| North Dakota | TORT | Refusal without proper cause | Implied covenant breach sounds in tort (Corwin); ch. 26.1-04 private action undecided (Volk 1991; Dvorak 1993) | Fairly debatable / reasonable basis | Uncertain (undecided) | Corwin Chrysler-Plymouth (1979); Dvorak (1993) | scholar.google.com (not confirmed from text) |
| Ohio | TORT | No reasonable justification (Zoppo) | Refusal not predicated on circumstances furnishing reasonable justification; no intent element; punitive needs actual malice | Reasonable justification | NO (R.C. 3901.21; Strack 1986) | Zoppo v. Homestead (1994) | supremecourt.ohio.gov |
| Oklahoma | TORT | More than negligence, less than reckless (Badillo 2005) | Unreasonable, bad-faith withholding; punitive under 23 O.S. § 9.1 needs reckless disregard/malice by C&C | Legitimate dispute / fairly debatable | NO (Walker v. Chouteau Lime 1993) | Christian v. American Home (1977) | scholar.google.com |
| Oregon | CONTRACT + NEGLIGENCE | Negligence; ORS 746.230(1) supplies standard of care | Moody 2023: common-law negligence claim with emotional distress damages; no independent bad-faith tort | Reasonable investigation / no breach of ORS 746.230 | NO (Moody route is negligence, not statutory) | Moody v. Oregon Community Credit Union (2023) | scholar.google.com |
| Pennsylvania | STATUTORY | Clear and convincing (Terletsky two-prong) | (1) No reasonable basis (2) knew/reckless disregard; no ill-will motive required (Rancosky 2017); prime+3% interest, punitive, fees | Reasonable basis | NO (UIPA; § 8371 is a separate statute) | 42 Pa.C.S. § 8371; Terletsky (1994); Rancosky (2017) | legis.state.pa.us |
| Rhode Island | TORT + STATUTORY | No reasonable basis + knowledge/reckless disregard | Wrongful bad-faith refusal to pay/settle; § 9-1-33 compensatory, punitive, fees; Skaling 2002: comparative finding not conclusive | Fairly debatable / reasonable basis | YES (§ 9-1-33; ch. 27-9.1 itself none) | R.I. Gen. Laws § 9-1-33; Bibeault (1980); Skaling (2002) | webserver.rilegislature.gov |
| South Carolina | TORT | Bad faith or unreasonable action in processing claim | Consequential damages in tort (Nichols); § 38-59-40 fees (max 1/3) after 90-day demand | Reasonable ground for contesting claim | NO (Masterclean 2001) | Nichols v. State Farm (1983); Masterclean (2001) | scholar.google.com |
| South Dakota | TORT | Intentional tort: no reasonable basis + knowledge/reckless disregard | Anderson test (Champion); knowledge may be inferred from reckless disregard; SDCL 58-12-3 fees for vexatious refusal | Fairly debatable | YES (SDCL 58-33-46.1) | Champion v. USF&G (1987); SDCL 58-33-46.1 | sdlegislature.gov (not confirmed from text) |
| Tennessee | STATUTORY | Refusal not in good faith | § 56-7-105: 60-day demand; penalty up to 25%; no bad-faith tort (Chandler 1986) | Good faith / substantial legal grounds | NO (§ 56-8-104; § 56-8-113 exclusivity) | T.C.A. § 56-7-105; Chandler (1986) | codes.findlaw.com |
| Texas | STATUTORY + TORT | Liability reasonably clear (Giles 1997) | Ch. 541 treble for knowing violation; § 542.060 18% interest + fees; ch. 542A (weather) prime+5%; Menchaca 2018 rules | Bona fide coverage dispute | YES (§ 541.151) | Giles (1997); Menchaca (2018); Ins. Code chs. 541, 542, 542A | texas.public.law |
| Utah | CONTRACT | Breach of implied covenant (contract) | First-party duty is contractual (Beck); foreseeable consequential damages; no punitive absent independent tort | Fairly debatable / reasonable basis | NO (§ 31A-26-303; Pixton 1991) | Beck v. Farmers (1985) | scholar.google.com |
| Vermont | TORT | No reasonable basis + knew/reckless disregard (Anderson test) | (1) No reasonable basis (2) knowledge/reckless disregard; malice required only for punitive | Fairly debatable | NO (Wilder 1981; 8 V.S.A. §§ 4723-4724) | Bushey v. Allstate (1995); Wilder v. Aetna (1981) | scholar.google.com |
| Virginia | NONE | N/A (§ 38.2-209 'not acting in good faith') | Contract action; court may award fees and costs under § 38.2-209 for bad-faith denial | Reasonable / good-faith basis | NO (A&E Supply; § 38.2-510) | A&E Supply v. Nationwide (4th Cir. 1986); Va. Code § 38.2-209 | law.lis.virginia.gov |
| Washington | TORT + STATUTORY | IFCA: unreasonable denial; tort: unreasonable, frivolous or unfounded | IFCA: first-party claimant + unreasonable denial + 20-day notice; fees mandatory, treble discretionary; CPA per se (Kallevig) | Reasonable basis | YES (IFCA; CPA per se) | RCW 48.30.015; Smith v. Safeco (2003); Perez-Crisantos (2017) | app.leg.wa.gov |
| West Virginia | COMMON-LAW (contract-based) + STATUTORY | Substantially prevails (Hayseeds); UTPA general business practice (Jenkins) | Hayseeds: fees, net economic loss, aggravation; Jenkins: implied § 33-11-4(9) action; Dodrill: violations within one claim can show pattern | Single isolated violation; good-faith value dispute (§ 33-11-4a(g)) | YES first-party only (§ 33-11-4a bars third-party) | Hayseeds (1986); Jenkins (1981); W. Va. Code § 33-11-4a | code.wvlegislature.gov |
| Wisconsin | TORT | No reasonable basis + knowledge/reckless disregard (objective) | (1) Absence of reasonable basis (2) knew/reckless disregard; § 628.46 overdue-claim interest 7.5% | Fairly debatable | NO (§ 628.34 regulatory) | Anderson v. Continental (1978) | scholar.google.com |
| Wyoming | TORT | No reasonable basis + knowledge/reckless disregard | (1) Absence of reasonable basis (2) knew/reckless disregard; § 26-15-124(c) fees + 10% interest | Fairly debatable | NO (Herrig 1992; § 26-13-124) | McCullough v. Golden Rule (1990); § 26-15-124(c) | wyoleg.gov |
States by Bad Faith Type
TORT States (Independent Cause of Action)
AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, HI, ID, IN, IA, KY, MS, NE, NV, NM, NC, ND, OH, OK, RI, SC, SD, TX, VT, WA, WI, WY
STATUTORY States (Private Right Under Statute)
CO, FL, GA, IL, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MN, MT, NV, NM, NC, PA, RI, TN, TX, WA, WV
CONTRACT ONLY States (no bad-faith tort; CT adds CUTPA, OR adds common-law negligence)
CT, DC, DE, NJ, NY, OR, UT
NO FIRST-PARTY BAD FAITH States (statutory fee/penalty remedies only)
KS, MI, MO, NH, VA
"Fairly Debatable" Defense States
The "fairly debatable" defense means if the insurer had a reasonable basis to deny, bad faith fails:
| Named "Fairly Debatable" | Reasonable-Basis Equivalent | Other / No Bad-Faith Claim |
|---|---|---|
| AK, AZ, HI, ID, IA, KY, MN, NE, NJ, NM, ND, OK, RI, SD, UT, VT, WI, WY | AL, CO, DE, GA, IL, IN, LA, ME, MS, MO, MT, NV, NY, OH, PA, SC, TX, VA, WA | AR, CA, CT, DC, FL, KS, MD, MA, MI, NH, NC, OR, TN, WV |
Florida expressly rejects "fairly debatable" (totality-of-circumstances test; 2023 amendment excludes mere negligence).
States WITHOUT Private UCSPA Action
Most states do NOT allow direct private lawsuits under their Unfair Claims Settlement Practices Act:
No Private Action: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CT, DC, DE, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, LA, MI, MN, MS, MO, NE, NJ, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, SC, TN, UT, VT, VA, WI, WY
WITH Private Action: CO, FL, KY, ME, MD, MA, MT, NV, NM, NC, RI, SD, TX, WA, WV
Conditional / Undecided: ND (undecided by N.D. Sup. Ct.), NH (only after Commissioner finding, RSA 417:19)
Note: CA (Moradi-Shalal), PA (§ 8371 is separate from the UIPA), GA (§ 33-4-6 is separate from the UCSPA), and WY (Herrig) have private bad-faith remedies but NO UCSPA action.
Standard of Proof
| Standard | States |
|---|---|
| Preponderance | Default where no other standard is verified |
| Clear and Convincing (liability) | IN (Freidline), PA (§ 8371) |
| Clear and Convincing (punitive only) | AL (§ 6-11-20), CA (Civ. Code § 3294), HI (Masaki), OK (23 O.S. § 9.1) |
| Middle burden | WI (clear, satisfactory and convincing; WIS JI-Civil 2760) |
| Beyond Reasonable Doubt (punitive) | CO (§ 13-21-102) |
Punitive Damages Availability
Available on Bad-Faith Claim (requires malice / culpable mental state)
AL, AZ, CA, CO, CT, DE, HI, IN, KY, MS, MT, NV, NM, OH, OK, PA, RI, VT
NV: uncapped for insurer bad faith (NRS 42.005(2)(b)). NM: no statutory cap (Sloan). PA: no cap in § 8371.
Statutory Multiplier Instead
MA (2x-3x if willful/knowing), NC (mandatory treble, § 75-16), TX (treble for knowing ch. 541 violation), WA (IFCA treble discretionary, fees mandatory)
Not Available / Exclusive Statutory Remedy
FL, GA, IL, KS, MI, MN, MO, NE, NH, TN, UT, VA
FL: punitive requires general business practice (§ 624.155(5)). NE: barred by constitution. GA: § 33-4-6 exclusive. UT: none absent independent tort.
Not Verified This Pass
AK, AR, DC, ID, IA, LA, ME, MD, NJ, NY, ND, OR, SC, SD, WV, WI, WY
Emotional Distress Damages
Available Without Physical Injury (verified)
MS (Veasley damages), OR (Moody negligence claim), WV (aggravation and inconvenience, Hayseeds)
Consequential Damages Only (contract measure)
NJ (Pickett), NY (Bi-Economy), UT (Beck), NH (Lawton)
Generally Not Available
MI (no mental-distress damages, Kewin/Roberts), KS, MO, VA (no bad-faith tort)
Not Verified This Pass
All other states — earlier claims for CA, HI, OH, PA were not supported by the cited decisions and are withdrawn.
Third-Party Bad Faith Notes
| State | Third-Party Standard |
|---|---|
| Most states | Failure to settle within limits when liability reasonably clear |
| Alaska | O.K. Lumber bars suits by third-party claimants; insured's own failure-to-settle claim IS recognized |
| Kansas | Failure-to-settle bad faith recognized (Glenn v. Fleming 1990) despite no first-party tort |
| Michigan | Commercial Union (1986): arbitrary, reckless, indifferent, or intentional disregard |
| New York | Pavia (1993): gross disregard of insured's interests |
| North Dakota | Dvorak (1993): no good-faith duty owed to third-party claimants |
| West Virginia | § 33-11-4a (2005) abolishes third-party private UTPA actions |
| Washington | Olympic Steamship fees apply to first-party coverage disputes (not a third-party rule) |
Most Policyholder-Friendly States
- Washington - Tort + IFCA: mandatory attorney fees, discretionary treble
- Massachusetts - Chapter 93A 2x-3x if willful/knowing
- North Carolina - Chapter 75 mandatory treble + common-law tort (Dailey)
- Nevada - Express UCSPA private action + uncapped punitive
- New Mexico - Tort + § 59A-16-30; punitive with no cap (Sloan)
- Pennsylvania - § 8371 punitive, interest, fees; no cap
- California - Gruenberg: no evil motive required
- Hawaii - Best Place: conscious wrongdoing not required
- West Virginia - Hayseeds: fees when insured substantially prevails
- Montana - Single violation sufficient, express private action
Most Insurer-Friendly States
- Kansas - NO bad faith tort (Spencer); § 40-256 fees only
- Virginia - NO first-party tort; § 38.2-209 fees only
- Michigan - NO first-party tort (Kewin); 12% interest only if not reasonably in dispute
- Missouri - NO first-party tort; vexatious refusal penalty only (Overcast)
- New Hampshire - Contract only; RSA 417 action needs Commissioner finding
- Utah - CONTRACT ONLY (Beck), no punitive
- New York - CONTRACT ONLY; no first-party tort (NYU v. Continental)
- District of Columbia - Contract only, no tort (Choharis)
- Oregon - No bad-faith tort; negligence route only (Moody)
- Georgia - § 33-4-6 exclusive; no punitive
Key Cases Reference
| State | Landmark Case | Holding |
|---|---|---|
| AL | Chavers v. National Security (1981) | Established first-party bad faith tort |
| AK | State Farm v. Nicholson (1989) | Bad faith = tort |
| AZ | Noble v. National American (1981) | First-party bad faith tort; Rawlings (1986) evil-mind test for punitive |
| CA | Gruenberg v. Aetna (1973) | No evil motive required |
| CA | Moradi-Shalal v. Fireman's Fund (1988) | No private action under § 790.03(h) |
| CO | Travelers v. Savio (1985) | Common-law bad faith tort coexists with § 10-3-1116 |
| CT | Mead v. Burns (1986) | CUTPA claim needs CUIPA violation + general business practice |
| DE | Tackett v. State Farm (1995) | Implied covenant sounds in contract; punitive if malicious |
| FL | QBE v. Chalfonte (2012) | No common-law first-party bad faith; § 624.155 governs |
| HI | Best Place v. Penn America (1996) | Adopts Anderson test |
| IN | Erie v. Hickman (1993) | Bad faith tort; dishonest purpose required |
| KS | Spencer v. Aetna (1980) | NO bad faith tort |
| KY | Wittmer v. Jones (1993) | Private action via KRS 446.070; three-element test |
| MA | Rhodes v. AIG (2012) | Multiple damages on ~$11.3M underlying judgment, doubled |
| MI | Kewin v. Massachusetts Mutual (1980) | NO first-party bad faith tort; contract damages only |
| MS | Standard Life v. Veal (1978) | Arguable-reason test |
| MO | Overcast v. Billings (2000) | NO first-party tort |
| MT | § 33-18-242(3) | Common-law claim-handling bad faith barred; statutory remedy exclusive |
| NJ | Pickett v. Lloyd's (1993) | Implied covenant; fairly debatable standard |
| NM | Sloan v. State Farm (2004) | Punitive requires culpable mental state; no cap |
| NY | Bi-Economy v. Harleysville (2008) | Consequential damages for breach of implied covenant |
| NC | Gray v. NCIUA (2000) | § 58-63-15(11) violation is per se § 75-1.1 practice |
| ND | Corwin Chrysler-Plymouth (1979) | First-party breach of implied covenant sounds in tort |
| OH | Zoppo v. Homestead (1994) | Reasonable justification standard; no intent element |
| OK | Christian v. American Home (1977) | More than negligence standard |
| OR | Moody v. OCCU (2023) | Common-law negligence claim; ORS 746.230 as standard of care |
| PA | Terletsky (1994) | Two-prong test under § 8371 |
| RI | Skaling v. Aetna (2002) | Comparative-negligence finding not conclusively fairly debatable |
| SC | Nichols v. State Farm (1983) | First-party bad faith tort |
| SD | Champion v. USF&G (1987) | Intentional tort (Anderson test) |
| TX | Universe Life v. Giles (1997) | Liability reasonably clear standard |
| UT | Beck v. Farmers (1985) | Contract only |
| VT | Bushey v. Allstate (1995) | First-party bad faith tort (Anderson test); Wilder (1981) = no UCSPA action |
| VA | A&E Supply v. Nationwide (4th Cir. 1986) | NO first-party tort (Erie prediction) |
| WA | IFCA RCW 48.30.015 | Mandatory fees; discretionary treble |
| WV | Hayseeds (1986) | Fees when insured substantially prevails |
| WI | Anderson v. Continental (1978) | Origin of no-reasonable-basis + knowledge test |
| WY | McCullough v. Golden Rule (1990) | Two-element test; Herrig (1992) = no UCSPA action |
Disclaimer: This table is for reference only. Bad faith law evolves through case law. Always verify current standards before relying on this information.
Last Updated: August 2026 (verified against statute text and reported decisions)