After Hal Goldblatt was struck by a car in a crosswalk and suffered a traumatic brain injury, his family took out loans to pay for his care while Progressive Insurance stalled their claim for months - because the request arrived on a plain form letter instead of attorney letterhead. A Clark County jury awarded $101 million: $1 million compensatory, $100 million punitive. Progressive had rejected a $1.9 million settlement offer without making a single counteroffer.

Progressive's $1.9M Offer. The Jury Said $101 Million.

104 viewsPosted 22 days agoUpdated 5 minutes ago

Progressive Insurance reported $62 billion in revenue the year Hal Goldblatt lay in an ICU with a traumatic brain injury, his family borrowing money to cover the care the insurer was supposed to help fund. The jury that heard what happened next gave that number some context.

Struck in a Crosswalk

In 2022, Hal Goldblatt was crossing a street in Las Vegas when he was struck by a vehicle driven by Lamonte Cunningham. The impact left Goldblatt with major fractures throughout his body and a traumatic brain injury, requiring an extensive stay in intensive care and a lengthy recovery that demanded round-the-clock at-home assistance. His wife Shawn was a co-plaintiff throughout the proceedings.

The Letterhead That Changed Everything

The Goldblatts submitted their claim to Progressive - the at-fault driver's insurer - using a standard form letter rather than correspondence on attorney letterhead. According to plaintiff attorney Kimball Jones of Bighorn Law, that distinction determined which pile the claim landed in. Progressive allegedly processed claims submitted without legal representation more slowly, and the family's mounting medical bills went unanswered for months while, as Jones put it, Progressive made money "slow-rolling" the funds through market investments.

The Goldblatts eventually requested a $1.9 million settlement. Progressive rejected the offer and, despite Jones asking "on several occasions," never made a single counteroffer.

What the Jury Decided

The August 2024 trial in Clark County, Nevada ran in two phases. A jury first found driver Cunningham liable for roughly $7 million in damages. Then, in the bad-faith phase targeting Progressive directly, the same jury awarded $1 million in compensatory damages and $100 million in punitive damages - a total of $101 million.

Progressive's defence was that it had followed industry-standard practices for a complex claim. The jury disagreed at a ratio of 53 to 1 over the company's own settlement floor.

Why $100 Million

Punitive damages in bad-faith cases exist for a specific purpose: to punish conduct so egregious that a compensatory award alone would not deter it. With Progressive reporting $62 billion in annual revenue, the jury settled on a number they believed would actually sting. The Goldblatt verdict was named one of CVN's top ten most impressive plaintiff verdicts of 2024 and ranks among the largest bad-faith insurance awards in Nevada history.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is insurance bad faith?
Insurance bad faith occurs when an insurer unreasonably delays, denies, or underpays a valid claim without proper justification. Policyholders and third-party claimants can sue, and juries can award punitive damages on top of the original claim value when the insurer's conduct is found to be egregious.
What happened in the Goldblatt v. Progressive case?
Hal Goldblatt was struck by a Progressive-insured driver in Las Vegas in 2022, suffering a traumatic brain injury. His family took out loans for his care while Progressive delayed their claim for months because it was submitted on a plain form letter rather than attorney letterhead. In August 2024, a Clark County jury awarded $101 million - $1 million compensatory and $100 million punitive.
Why did the jury award $100 million in punitive damages against Progressive?
Punitive damages are designed to punish and deter particularly harmful conduct. The jury found Progressive acted in bad faith by slow-rolling the Goldblatts' claim without justification and rejecting their $1.9 million settlement demand without ever making a counteroffer. Progressive reported $62 billion in annual revenue, which factored into the jury's calculation of a meaningful deterrent.
What was Progressive's defence in the Goldblatt case?
Progressive argued it had followed industry-standard practices for handling a complex insurance claim. The jury rejected that position and awarded $101 million - 53 times the $1.9 million settlement the Goldblatts had originally requested.
How does the Goldblatt verdict compare to other insurance bad-faith cases?
The $101 million Goldblatt verdict was named one of CVN's top ten most impressive plaintiff verdicts of 2024 and ranks among the largest bad-faith insurance verdicts in Nevada history. A comparable Nevada case resulted in a $200 million verdict against a health insurer, later upheld by the state Supreme Court.

Verified Fact

Two independent sources confirm core facts: CVN blog (primary, detailed) and Vegas Legal Magazine (attorney quotes, $62B revenue detail, letterhead processing system). Verdict confirmed: $1M compensatory + $100M punitive = $101M total. Trial: Clark County Nevada, Aug 1-9 2024. Driver: Lamonte Cunningham. Attorney: Kimball Jones, Bighorn Law. Progressive rejected $1.9M offer with no counteroffer - confirmed both sources. Age of 75 NOT confirmed in any primary source - dropped per instructions. Orthodox Jewish detail confirmed by search results but not in primary sources - not used.

Courtroom View Network

Related Topics

Enjoyed this? Get a fun fact daily.

One fascinating fact, every morning. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.

More from People & Mind