Reinsurance Law Blog

Reinsurance Law Blog

Tag Archives: Oklahoma

Homeowners policy did not cover privacy, negligence claims where there was no physical injury to person or property — 10th Circuit, Oklahoma law

Posted in Contractual Liability, Duty to Defend
In State Farm Fire v. Dawson, Dawson was sued for negligence and privacy violations after receiving inappropriate photos of an under aged student. Dawson wanted State Farm to pay his defense and any judgment.  But State Farm claimed there was no physical injury to tangible property and no bodily injury such that the policy did… Continue Reading

No bad faith for delay in appraisal where there were coverage issues — 10th Cir Oklahoma

Posted in Insurance Bad Faith
This is the second case involving Hayes Family Trust v. State Farm Fire & Casualty.  The first case, involving the appraisal process, is discussed here.  In this case, the policyholder claimed that State Farm acted in bad faith when it delayed the appraisal process because of coverage issues and when it failed to adequately investigate… Continue Reading

Bad faith claim for failure to pay workers compensation benefits may proceed — Oklahoma

Posted in Insurance Bad Faith, New Case
In Meeks v. Guarantee Insurance Co., 2017 OK 17,  the employee sued the insurer for bad faith refusal to timely comply with several orders of the Workers’ Compensation Court awarding employee temporary total disability benefits after insurer–without good cause–withheld employee’s benefits on twenty-six separate occasions. The insurer moved for dismissal, asserting employee failed to obtain… Continue Reading

Employee injured in stairwell after clocking out still entitled to workers compensation — Oklahoma

Posted in Workers Compensation
In Brown v. Claims Management Resources Inc., claimant was injured when he fell down the stairs at work, after he had clocked out. The claim had been denied on the grounds the injury was not within the course and scope of employment, and was not a compensable injury. The Oklahoma Supreme Court reversed. Because the… Continue Reading

Questions of reasonableness are for jury, not summary judgment — UM bad faith — Oklahoma law

Posted in Insurance Bad Faith
In Falcone v. Liberty Mutual, Falcone made an uninsured motorist claim (UM claim) for injuries arising out of an auto accident with an uninsured driver.  Falcone was a passenger in her mother’s car, and Liberty was the UM insurer.  Falcone was taken by ambulance to the OU Medical Center Emergency Room, and was then transferred… Continue Reading

Insurers split over other insurance provisions; limits for pro rata calculation — 10th Circuit Oklahoma

Posted in Contractual Liability
In Philadelphia Indemnity v. Lexington Insurance, both companies insured a school building which was damaged by fire.  The issue was which insurance company had to pay, and how much. The trial court ruled that Philadelphia had to pay 54% of the loss, while Lexington had to pay 46%.  Both insurance companies appealed and the Tenth… Continue Reading

Pharmacy owes decedent duty in prescription overdose wrongful death action

Posted in Contractual Liability, immunity, New Case
Carista v. Valuck was a wrongful death arising action from Plaintiff’s prescription overdose. Defendant was Plaintiff’s pharmacy. Defendant sought summary judgment alleging it owed Plaintiff no duty. Judgment for Plaintiff was proper because the Learned Intermediary Doctrine creates a duty whereby a pharmacist must advise patients of facially unreasonable prescriptions and known drug contradictions. Thus,… Continue Reading

Oklahoma Supreme Court finds Opt out portion of Workers Compensation law unconstitutional

Posted in New Case
In Vasquez v. Dillards, the Workers Compensation Commission found the opt out provisions of the state workers compensation laws unconstitutional. Under Oklahoma’s newly created workers’ compensation system, employers may  provide coverage for workplace injuries under the traditional no-fault workers’ compensation system, which grants employers immunity from civil liability.  Alternatively, Employers may also “opt out” of… Continue Reading

Auto dealers don’t have to ensure buyer has auto insurance before issuing temporary tag — Oklahoma

Posted in New Case
In Blakley v. M&N Dealerships, 2016 OK CIV APP 41, Blakley was injured in an auto accident by Meyers, who bought the car involved in the accident from the defendant dealership and employees.  Plaintiff alleged that Defendants placed a temporary license tag on the vehicle sold to Myers knowing the insurance on the vehicle did… Continue Reading

Partially subrogated insurers are not “parties” to class action, thus, have no liability for fees (Oklahoma)

Posted in New Case
In Avens v. Cotton Electric Coop., Inc., 2016 OK CIV APP 39, the plaintiffs’ class were claimants who claimed damages as a result of a fire allegedly started by Cotton Electric.  Insurers had paid part of the losses and had brought their own subrogation claims before the class action suit was filed.  The subrogation claims… Continue Reading

Cancellation notice is not cancellation — 10th Circuit, Oklahoma (unpublished)

Posted in Contractual Liability, New Case
In Self v. Travelers, the Self’s insured their son’s truck on May 5 for 6 months.  On June 25, the insurance company sent the Selfs a notice of cancellation, which said the policy was being cancelled because the Selfs did not respond to the insurance company’s request for an interview to verify the policy information. … Continue Reading

Oklahoma Supreme Court Declares Workers Compensation Act Unconstitutional — in part

Posted in New Case
In Maxwell v. Sprint, 2016 OK 41, (not yet released for publication, thus, subject to change) the Oklahoma Supreme Court found parts of Oklahoma’s new workers compensation laws unconstitutional.  First, the court ruled that scheduled members (such as limbs, toes, eyes) do not have to be evaluated per the latest AMA Guides.  Furthermore, loss to… Continue Reading

Excess Insurer Had No Duty to Initiate Settlement Negotiations with Third-Party Claimant 10th Circuit , Oklahoma

Posted in Insurance Bad Faith, New Case, Uncategorized
Under Oklahoma law, a primary insurer owes its insured a duty to initiate settlement negotiations with a third-party claimant if the insured’s liability to the claimant is clear and the insured likely will be held liable for more than its insurance will cover. Here the insured, SRM, Inc., seeks to extend this obligation to its… Continue Reading

CGL policy did not cover injuries at birthday party where endorsement not purchased– 10th Circuit, Oklahoma

Posted in Contractual Liability, Duty to Defend, New Case
In Nationwide v. Prater, Prater was severely injured at a birthday party. The birthday party was held at Kingdom Fitness and Fun, a gymnastics/cheerleading business. The application had requested information on birthday parties at the facility for Ancillary Activities and Birthday or Social Party coverage. No information was provided. The district court, on cross-motions for… Continue Reading

$20M bad faith verdict overturned because of bad jury instructions -Oklahoma

Posted in Contractual Liability, Insurance Bad Faith, New Case
In Aduddell Lincoln Plaza Hotel v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s, 2015 OK CIV APP 34; a judgment of nearly $20 million (for actual damages, bad faith damages, punitive damages, and interest) was reversed because of bad jury instructions. Lloyds offered to pay $50,000 on a $600,000 claim, after deducting for old damage and depreciation. Jury… Continue Reading

Governmental Tort Claims Act, Uninsured Motorist Coverage and Set Off — Okla law

Posted in Contractual Liability, immunity, New Case, Vehicle
In Mariani v. State ex rel. Oklahoma State University, 2015 OK 1, the issue was whether the governmental tortfeasor was entitled to a set off for the uninsured motorist coverage paid by the injured party’s insurer. Under the Governmental Tort Claims Act (GTCA), the state’s liability is limited to a certain dollar amount– in this… Continue Reading

Oklahoma law limited damages for uninsured motorists is unconstitutional

Posted in New Case, Vehicle
As part of tort reform, Oklahoma passed a law that precluded uninsured motorists from recovering damages for pain and suffering and other non-economic damages.  The Oklahoma Supreme Court struck down this law as a special law in Montgomery v. Potter.  The court states: Section 7-116 creates an impermissible special class by restricting damages in civil… Continue Reading