CVN screenshot of plaintiff attorney Kimball Jones delivering his closing argument
Las Vegas, NV - A Nevada state court jury hit Progressive Corp. with a $100 million punitive damages verdict on Friday in a bad faith lawsuit stemming from the insurer’s alleged unnecessary delays in reimbursing medical bills for a man who sustained severe injuries after being struck by a car in a crosswalk.
Plaintiff Hal Goldblatt and his wife Shawn sued Progressive after a 2022 accident that left Goldblatt with major fractures throughout his body and a traumatic brain injury which required extensive time in an intensive care unit and a lengthy recovery. In an initial phase of the trial a Clark County jury found the driver who struck Goldblatt, Lamonte Cunningham, liable for roughly $7 million in damages.
However in a second phase of the trial involving Progressive, the Goldblatts' attorneys accused the insurer of needlessly delaying payment for their mounting medical bills for months, which they claim forced them to incur significant debt while taking out loans to pay for Hal’s at-home care. Progressive argued they followed industry-standard practices for a complex claim involving significant medical expenses and necessarily required extensive documentation, but the jury saddled the company with $1 million in compensatory damages and $100 million in punitive damages.
The full trial was recorded gavel-to-gavel by Courtroom View Network. Subscribers to CVN’s online trial video library get unlimited on-demand access the full proceedings, including hundreds of other trials featuring top plaintiff and defense attorneys from throughout Nevada and the rest of the United States.
Attorney Kimball Jones of Bighorn Law told CVN after the trial the Goldblatts are “thrilled and validated” by the verdict, and that jurors responded to a series of “systemic failures” in the handling of the Goldblatts’ claim.
A Progressive spokesperson told CVN the insurer is “…surprised and disappointed by the verdict, which we believe does not reflect our dedication to our customers,” and is considering an appeal.
Jones told CVN Progressive rejected a $1.9 million settlement offer and never made any counteroffer.
“I requested they do so on several occasions,” Jones said.
The fact Progressive did eventually pay out the claim presented a challenge in presenting his bad faith argument to jurors, but Jones said the harm the Goldblatts’ incurred during that period was impossible to ignore.
“Progressive's delay could be argued to have been only 5-7 months, so putting the harm in context for a significant verdict was a challenge,” he said.
Jones repeated an argument he made at trial that Progressive “slow-rolled” the Goldblatts’ claim because the older Orthodox Jewish couple requested payment on a basic form letter, rather than on an attorney's letterhead.
“It was clear that by not having an attorney involved from the beginning caused Progressive to not take their claim seriously,” Jones said. “Moreover, Progressive admitted this was the way their system was set up and they had no plans to change their system.”
Jones expressed hope that a $100 million punitive verdict in a case with no dispute over liability should send a message to insurance companies that payment delays in what should be a straightforward cases can have serious consequences.
“People should not need an attorney to get fair treatment from their insurance company,” he said.
The case is captioned Hal Goldblatt v. Lamonte Cunningham, case number A-23-868786-C in Clark County Circuit Court.
E-mail David Siegel at dsiegel@cvn.com
