agree. However, because I find that breach of an insurance contract does not create per se liability for the tort of bad faith, I must respectfully dissent from that part of the majority opinion addressing Café Arizona’s bad faith claim. ¶23 This court has long recognized that breach of an insurance contract and the tort of bad faith are separate claims that are analyzed independently. Breach of an insurance contract is neither necessary, Coventry Associates v. American States Insurance Co., 136 Wn.2d 269, 279, 961 P.2d 933 (1998), nor sufficient, Greer v. Northwestern National Insurance Co., 109 Wn.2d 191, 201-02, 205, 743 P.2d 1244 (1987), to establish the tort of bad faith. See also Transcon. Ins. Co. v. Wash. Pub. Utils. Dists.’ Util. Sys., 111 Wn.2d 452, 470, 760 P.2d 337 (1988) (<HOLDING>). ¶24 The majority ably sets forth the standard
holding that regardless of insurers good faith denial of coverage plaintiff is entitled to recover interest to put it in position it would have been in if coverage had not been denied holding that a denial of coverage based on a reasonable interpretation of the policy is not bad faith even if incorrect holding insurer not liable for bad faith when it denied insureds claim based on a good faith dispute regarding the interpretation of a rule holding that improper motive is element of bad faith holding that a bad faith claim is a tort