|Oklahoma Supreme Court Holds That Insurers May Prohibit Policy Stacking|
|Description||The Oklahoma high court held that a provision in an auto insurance policy that prohibits an insured from stacking one auto policy on another to increase liability coverage from the same company, is valid and consistent with the law in most jurisdictions.|
|Key Words||Liability Coverage; Policy Stacking|
|C A S E S U M M A R Y|
|Facts||While driving her Geo, Jodi Gordon was in a car accident in which her son, Joshua, was injured. The car was insured by Farmers Insurance. Jodi and her husband, Michael, also had an insurance policy on a Volkswagen they owned. Michael, on behalf of Joshua, sued Jodi for the injuries suffered by Joshua. The issue before the Oklahoma high court was whether the insurance policies on the two vehicles could be stacked, so the Gordons could potentially collect the maximum liability coverage from both the Geo and the Volkswagen insurance policies. Also at issue is whether the insurance company could have a policy provision that prohibits policy stacking by members of the insured's household..|
Inter-policy stacking of liability coverages on the car involved in the accident and the car not involved was prohibited by a clause limiting liability to the maximum limits provided by the policy on the car in the accident, regardless of the number of vehicles insured, insured persons, claims, policies, or vehicles owned. The anti-stacking clause is valid. This is consistent with other courts that have considered this issue.
|Citation||Gordon v. Gordon, 41 P.3d 391 (Sup. Ct., Okla., 2002)|
Back to Insurance Listings
©1997-2002 SW Legal Studies in Business. All Rights Reserved.