OK to use Declaratory Judgment to decide coverage
This case is the first one to interpret Oklahoma's amended declaratory judgment statute. Previously, Oklahoma did not permit insurers to use the declaratory judgment statute to determine rights and liabilities under an insurance policy. Since 2004, however, the statute specifically permits such determinations. The court agreed that the plain language of the statute permitted such a determination.
In addition, the court specifically found that the intentional act of hitting someone with your car is not covered, even if the insured did not intend to cause injury. This is not so obvious as you might think in Oklahoma, since there are cases that distinguish between intentional acts and intentional injuries.
EQUITY INSURANCE CO. v. GARRETT; 2008 OK CIV APP 23
In this case, summary judgment in favor of Equity was affirmed. Garrett, the insured, admitted to intentionally bumping Hull with her car. She claimed she was trying to stop a fight between Hull and her husband and did not intend to cause Hull injury. Equity filed a declaratory judgment seeking a declaration of no coverage and no duty to defend Garrett in Hull’s action against her. The court found that under Oklahoma’s declaratory judgment statute, as amended, the trial court could properly declare whether there was coverage under the policy. The Court of Civil Appeals also affirmed that there was no coverage for the intentional act of Garrett.
