Price v. Mid-Continent Casualty Co.

T1 I must respectfully dissent. My reasons are both procedural and substantive. First, neither Mid-Continent in its Brief in Chief, nor the majority in reversing the trial court's judgment, sets forth with requisite specificity what the trial court did that would constitute reversible error.

12 Mid-Continent asserts, in the most general terms, "(tlhe trial court erred in permitting Plaintiffs ... to base a claim for bad faith on delay of payment because Mid-Continent had a legitimate dispute and was entitled to exhaust its appeals on the question of law." - Mid-Continent, however, fails to…