Legal Opinion · Dissent

MEEKS v. GUARANTEE INSURANCE COMPANY

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided February 28, 2017No. 113,752Published

1DissentWinchester, J.

¶ 1 The administrative law judge used the appropriate statutory power to assure the insurer/employer paid what the WCC ordered. Without question the insurer/employer is required to pay that amount. As in this ease, the judge assessed a penalty and the amount ordered was paid, including the penalty. I would reinforce the principle that the judge has the contempt power to insure compliance with the judge’s orders. I depart from the majority in expanding “bad faith” to workers’ compensation proceedings.

¶2 I continue to hold my view as expressed in the dissent attached to Sizemore v. Continental…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Upton v. State Ex Rel. Department of CorrectionsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2000
  2. Sizemore v. Continental Cas. Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 2006
  3. Kuykendall v. Gulfstream Aerospace TechnologiesSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2002
  4. Deanda v. AIU InsuranceSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2004
  5. Caffey v. Soloray, Travelers Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 2002

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API