MEEKS v. GUARANTEE INSURANCE COMPANY
2017 OK 17
| Okla. | 2017Background
- Tracy Meeks (employee) alleged Guarantee Insurance (insurer) repeatedly failed to pay court‑ordered temporary total disability (TTD) benefits on 26 separate dates, though payments were ultimately made or penalties paid.
- Meeks sought certification from the Workers' Compensation Court (WCC) under 85 O.S. § 42(A) and Rule 58; the WCC issued a June 26, 2014 order finding insurer failed to comply without good cause but denied certification under § 42(A) because penalties were paid before the hearing.
- Insurer moved to dismiss Meeks' district‑court bad‑faith suit, arguing certification under § 42(A) was a jurisdictional prerequisite and was not granted.
- The district court dismissed, relying on Summers/Sizemore line of cases; Meeks appealed to the Oklahoma Supreme Court.
- The Supreme Court retained the appeal to clarify Summers application to monetary awards that were paid but not timely provided as ordered.
- The high court reversed dismissal, holding the WCC order satisfied Summers' certification category for "benefits not provided as ordered," so Meeks could proceed in district court on a bad‑faith tort claim.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether district court has jurisdiction over a bad‑faith tort claim absent a § 42(A) certification when insurer paid penalties before the hearing | Meeks: WCC June 26 order explicitly found insurer failed to provide benefits as ordered and lacked good cause — that satisfies Summers' certification for "benefits not provided as ordered." | Insurer: Certification under § 42(A) (for unpaid awards) was denied; without that certification plaintiff cannot file bad‑faith suit in district court. | Held: WCC order met Summers' second certification category (benefits not provided as ordered); jurisdiction exists and dismissal was erroneous. |
| Whether § 42(A) is the exclusive route for bad‑faith claims involving monetary awards | Meeks: § 42(A) applies only to unpaid monetary amounts; separate Summers category applies where benefits were not provided as ordered even if paid later. | Insurer: § 42(A) and related remedies preclude a separate tort action absent certified unpaid award. | Held: § 42(A) governs unpaid awards; but Summers permits a bad‑faith tort for benefits not provided as ordered, so § 42(A) is not exclusive. |
| What constitutes adequate WCC certification under Summers/Rule 58 | Meeks: a WCC order identifying prior awards, stating benefits were not provided as ordered, and finding insurer failed to show good cause suffices; no "magic words" required. | Insurer: Certification must follow § 42(A) procedures and Rule 58 formalities; denial of § 42(A) certification here defeats jurisdiction. | Held: Properly framed WCC findings that insurer failed without good cause to provide ordered benefits satisfy Summers/Rule 58 for the second certification category. |
| Whether payment of arrearages or penalties before/after the WCC hearing bars bad‑faith suit | Meeks: Payment or purge does not nullify bad‑faith tort where WCC found repeated unjustified failures to provide benefits. | Insurer: Making payment and penalties (and WCC contempt/sanctions power) remedies the injury; no separate tort recovery should be allowed. | Held: Payment of arrearages/penalties does not automatically bar a bad‑faith action when WCC certifies benefits were not provided as ordered and insurer failed to show good cause. |
Key Cases Cited
- Summers v. Zurich Am. Ins. Co., 213 P.3d 565 (Okla. 2009) (articulates two Summers certification categories: unpaid awards or benefits not provided as ordered)
- Sizemore v. Continental Cas. Co., 142 P.3d 47 (Okla. 2006) (recognizes common‑law bad‑faith tort for refusal to pay workers' compensation awards)
- Goodwin v. Old Republic Ins. Co., 828 P.2d 431 (Okla. 1992) (insurer's implied duty of good faith extends to workers' compensation beneficiaries)
- Christian v. Am. Home Assurance Co., 577 P.2d 899 (Okla. 1977) (adopting insurer bad‑faith tort principles and duty to deal fairly)
- Silljer v. Mega Life & Health Ins. Co., 213 P.3d 1156 (Okla. 2009) (reaffirming Summers' certification requirements for benefits not provided as ordered)
- Martin v. Gray, 385 P.3d 64 (Okla. 2016) (bad‑faith claim is an independent tort)