Legal Opinion · Dissent

Clement v. Farmers Insurance Exchange

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided November 22, 1988No. 17004Published

1DissentHuntley, Justice

I respectfully and forcefully dissent. The issue before the Court is whether a cause of action lies in Idaho for a wrongful and bad faith termination of an “at will” insurance agency contract.

The majority opinion holds that such wrongful, bad faith conduct is not actionable, which is a strange principle for a court of justice to embrace.

Since the majority opinion omits some of the most poignant facts which, if included, would make its result difficult to reach, I restate the facts and procedural history.

The Factual and Procedural Background

George Clement appeals the district court’s granting…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Fortune v. National Cash Register Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1977
  2. Frampton v. Central Indiana Gas CompanyIndiana Supreme Court · 1973
  3. Petermann v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Local 396California Court of Appeal · 1959
  4. Nees v. HocksOregon Supreme Court · 1975
  5. Monge v. Beebe Rubber Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1974

17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API