Oklahoma Supreme Court strikes down named driver exclusion
In Mulford v. Neal, the Oklahoma Supreme Court in a per curiam decision decided that a named driver exclusion violated Oklahoma's public policy. As a result, the court found that there was coverage for an accident where a driver who was specifically excluded under the policy was driving. Previously, the court had upheld a named driver exclusion where the excluded driver had a bad driving record. Here, the excluded driver was a child of the insured. The court believed that the insurance company routinely excluded minors from coverage, but it is not clear whether the record supports that conclusion. The court also found coverage under the mother's policy which had a similar exclusion. It is unclear why this would be necessary since the court has previously held that freedom of contract principles apply to any coverage over the minimum amount required by law. In any event, the use of any exclusions in an automobile liability policy in Oklahoma is now suspect, and it seems likely that insurers will be on the hook for any accidents involving family members.
