This published opinion from the Sixth Appellate District reverses a trial court’s determination that an insurer did not act in bad faith, but it affirms the trial court’s determination that the insurer’s conduct, although tortious, did not warrant punitive damages.

The decision reaffirms a 1990s opinion (Tomaselli v. Transamerica), which held that a plaintiff in an insurance bad faith case must do more than prove that the insurer’s conduct was unreasonable, in order to obtain punitive damages. The plaintiff must present clear and convincing evidence that the defendant acted ” ‘with the intent to vex, injure, or annoy.’ “

Not every jurisdiction follows this rule. In New Mexico, for example, a plaintiff who proves insurance bad faith need not show that the insurer acted with an additional culpable mental state. (See Sloan v. State Farm).