Blog Archives

Oklahoma Supreme Court Rejects “Loss of Use” Argument, Nixes COVID-19 Business Interruption Suit

Posted on September 19, 2022 by Karl A. Schulz

There is a clear nationwide trend of federal courts disposing of COVID-19 business interruption suits.[1] Insureds are not clearing their initial burden to establish direct physical loss or damage to property, or they are running afoul of virus and contamination exclusions. Relatively few state supreme courts, however, have weighed in to resolve the issue, thereby providing guidance to their own lower courts and federal courts that must follow state law.[2] Insurers and insureds alike have been watching to see which way the Oklahoma Supreme Court would hold. In Cherokee Nation v. Lexington Ins. Co., 2022 OK 71, the Court joined the national mainstream and ruled against the insured. About The Author

Tagged with: Cherokee, covid, damage, Insurance, interruption, Oklahoma, physical, policy, use
Posted in Uncategorized

Oklahoma Holds Question of Whether Fracking Causes Earthquakes is for the Courts to Decide.

Posted on July 2, 2015 by Dick Bennett

The issue of whether hydraulic fracturing or “fracking” causes earthquakes has first-party insurance implications because policies typically exclude damage from tremors attributable to man-made causes as opposed to purely unnatural ones. We’ve discussed the issue in two recent posts after Insurance Commissioners in Oklahoma and Pennsylvania publicly warned carriers against denying earthquake claims on the basis that they were attributable to oil and gas drilling. The jury is still out on the issue, but scientific evidence linking fracking to the tremors is accumulating rapidly. At the present time, Oklahoma is at the “sharp end of the spear” with respect to this issue because the state experienced fully 567 quakes of Magnitude 3.0 or greater in 2014. That is the more…

Tagged with: Fracking, Hydraulic Fracturing, Oklahoma
Posted in Causation, Earthquake, Homeowners Coverage, Regulation

Oklahoma Court Holds the Policyholder Can Also Be the Vandal

Posted on May 22, 2015 by Dick Bennett

Earlier this week an Oklahoma federal court addressed a mortgagee’s claim for vandalism loss – a topic we also discussed in Wednesday’s post. In American Modern Home Ins. Co. v. Tulsa Fed. Credit Union, 2015 WL 2372549, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 64491 (E.D.Okla., May 18, 2015), the court rejected an insurer’s argument that because the vandalism was done by the insured, it could not constitute the covered peril of “vandalism” in a situation in which the policy neglected to define that term. The insured owned a house and secured a homeowners policy that also extended coverage to his mortgagee. The mortgage company instituted foreclosure proceedings and the policyholder vacated the dwelling, but only after removing fixtures and damaging property to…

Tagged with: Mortgage Clause, Oklahoma
Posted in Ambiguity, Homeowners Coverage, Loss Payees, Mortgagees, Theft or Dishonesty, Vandalism

Oklahoma Insurance Commissioner: Don’t Deny Earthquake Claims as Man-Made by Linking Them to Fracking

Posted on April 2, 2015 by Dick Bennett

The jury is still out on whether hydraulic fracturing or “fracking” causes earthquakes, but carriers whose policies afford coverage for quakes have recently been denying such claims, asserting that they are excluded because they are attributable to a man-made cause – oil and gas production – rather than to a purely natural one. Early last month, Oklahoma Insurance Commissioner John Doak cautioned against that, issuing a Bulletin warning earthquake insurers that his office would be forced “to take appropriate action to enforce the law” if they continued to deny quake claims on the basis of what he called “unsettled science.” Oklahoma has experienced a remarkable rise in earthquake activity in recent years. According to the Oklahoma Geological Survey, the state…

Tagged with: Fracking, Hydraulic Fracturing, Oklahoma
Posted in Causation, Earthquake, Earthquake Insurance, Regulation

Oklahoma Supreme Court Reconciles Sewer Backup Exclusion With Accidental Discharge Coverage Grant

Posted on October 29, 2014 by Dick Bennett

In May, we reported that a New York court had found that a policy containing both an exclusion for water that backs up through sewers and drains and a coverage grant for accidental discharge or overflow from a plumbing system was neither internally inconsistent nor ambiguous in nature. The post can be found here. On June 17th, Oklahoma’s highest court agreed, albeit without citing the New York case, and it held that the two provisions were fully reconcilable and enforceable. The case in question is Porter v. Oklahoma Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co., 330 P.3rd 511, 2014 Okla. LEXIS 72 (Okla., June 17, 2014). Justin and Brandy Porter owned a home that was damaged when raw sewage entered the premises…

Tagged with: Accidental Discharge, Oklahoma, Sewer Backup
Posted in Ambiguity, Flood, Seepage or Leakage, Water