# Farmers Group, Inc. v. Williams

> Supreme Court of Colorado · February 4, 1991 · 15 Brief Times Rptr. 130

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9789476

## Case

- **Full name:** FARMERS GROUP, INC., a Nevada Corporation; And Mid-Century Insurance Company, a California Corporation, Petitioners and Cross-Respondents, v. Rodney Paul WILLIAMS and Jo Maria Gatewood, A/K/A/ Jo Maria Gatewood-Williams, Individually and as Husband and Wife, Respondents and Cross-Petitioners
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Colorado
- **Decided:** February 4, 1991
- **Citations:** 15 Brief Times Rptr. 130; 805 P.2d 419; 1991 Colo. LEXIS 44; 1991 WL 10856
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurring in part by Lohr
- **Judges:** Erickson, Vollack, Lohr, Yollack, Rovira
- **Cited by:** 173 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9789476

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that the treble damages provision of Colorado's No-Fault Act did not abolish the common law tort of bad faith breach of insurance contract and that the treble damages provision was a cumulative remedy available to an aggrieved claimant
- noting distinction between statutory civil penalty and exemplary damages, and concluding that provision of No-Fault Act that made treble damages award automatic once willful and wanton conduct was proved was simply a statutory civil penalty that could be established by prepond…
- holding that remedies under Colorado’s No-Fault Act are cumulative and do not preempt common law tort claims for bad faith breach of insurance contract

## Opinion text

Justice LOHR
concurring in part and dissenting in part:
I concur in parts II and III of the majority’s opinion. Because I believe that the plain language of section 10-4-708(1), 4A C.R.S. (1987 & 1990 Supp.), provides the exclusive remedy for the insured against the insurer who refuses to pay benefits in bad faith, I respectfully dissent from part I of the majority opinion.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9789476. Public record. Not legal advice.