Insurer’s Appeal of Jury Verdict Rejected by Tenth Circuit

    After a jury awarded damages related to the insurer’s delayed payment under the claim and the insurer’s post trial motions to set aside the verdict were denied, the Tenth Circuit affirmed. US General, LLC v. GuideOne Mut. Ins. Co., 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 34066 (10th Cir. Dec. 12, 2022). 

    Crossroads American Baptist Church submitted a claim to GuideOne for hailstorm damage. Crossroads hired US General as the general contractor to perform the repairs and later assigned its interest in the insurance policy to US General.

    Numerous disputes arose between Crossroads and GuideOne regarding the cost of the repairs. There were delayed payments and portions of the repairs were never paid for. The delayed payments meant GuideOne’s ability to begin making the repairs was hindered because it was more expensive to start and stop a project. 

    Crossroad brought suit. It alleged breach of contract based on GuideOne’s refusal to pay $70,000 requested for electrical and HVAC work, and for unreasonable delay of payment under a Colorado statute. US General was joined as a plaintiff.

    The case proceeded to a jury trial. The district court drafted jury instructions and the verdict form. GuideOne said it had no objections. The jury verdict form required the jury (1) to indicate whether GuideOne was liable on each of US General’s two claims, and (2) to state the amount of damages for each claim on which it found liability.

    The jury returned a verdict in favor of US General on both claims. On the breach of contract claim, the jury found that US General had not suffered any general damages, but awarded $1 in nominal damages. On the unreasonable delay claim, the jury found that GuideOne had unreasonably delayed payment of $155,700 in insurance benefits before the date the complaint was filed and $136,700 after that date. GuideOne did not object or argue that it was inconsistent.

    In GuideOne’s motion to amend the judgment under Rule 59 (e), Fed. R. Civ P., it argued that (1) US General could obtain only $1 for unreasonable delay damages because the jury found only $1 of nominal damages on the breach of contract claim, and (2) insufficient evidence supported the unreasonably delay claim. The district court denied GuideOne’s motion to amend the judgment and awarded US General’s motion for double damages and attorney fees under the Colorado statute. GuideOne appealed.

    The Tenth Circuit first found that GuideOne waived the argument on damages for unreasonable delay by failing to object to the verdict when the jury rendered it. When a jury returned its verdict, a party that believed the verdict was inconsistent had to object before the jury was discharged. 

    The Tenth Circuit also affirmed the award of attorneys fees. The district court accepted US General’s calculation of fees based on the hours billed and the proposed hourly rates. On appeal, GuideOne did not show that the district court erred in finding the fees to be reasonable. Therefore, the fees award was affirmed.