In 1989, the Reinkemeyers insured their home with Safeco. Between 1989 and 1993, they submitted three homeowner’s insurance claims, none of which were their fault. In 1994, Safeco told the Reikemeyers that it would not renew their policy. The Reinkemeyers sued alleging that Safeco had violated the provisions of NRS 687B.310 - .420. In particular, they pointed to NRS 687B.385 which currently provides: NRS 687B.385 Cancellation, nonrenewal or increase in premium due to claims for which … [Read more...]
Improper Cancellation or Non-Renewal Can Be A Breach Of Contract And An Unfair Insurance Claims Settlement Practice
July 8, 2015 by
Oral Arguments Re: Nevada Independent Counsel Leave Many Questions Unanswered
June 15, 2015 by
On May 5, 2015, the parties made their final arguments to the Nevada Supreme Court on the issues of independent counsel in Nevada. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Hansen, Nevada Supreme Court Case No. 64484. Neither attorney strayed far from his script. The justices asked only a few questions leaving us to guess at what the final decision may be. State Farm’s attorney acknowledged that since insurance panel counsel represents both the insured and the insurance company that conflicts can … [Read more...]
Not Everyone Agrees That Nevada Will Follow Majority Rule Dismissing Negligent Entrustment / Supervision / Training Where Motor Carrier Admits Course And Scope
June 7, 2015 by
In an earlier post HERE, the Nevada Trucking Law Blog called attention to decisions coming out of the U.S. District Court for Nevada supporting the proposition that claims of negligent entrustment / training / supervision should be dismissed if the motor carrier admits its driver was in the course and scope of employment. See Adele v. Dunn, 2013 WL 1314944, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44602 (D. Nev. 2013) and Cuadras-Barraza v. Stringer, Case No. 2:13-cv-01627-GMN-VCF (D. Nev. Nov. 15, 2013). Another … [Read more...]
Collateral Source Is Still Good Law Despite Tri-County Equipment Decision
May 6, 2015 by
Following the California case of Howell v. Hamilton Meats & Provisions, Inc., 52 Cal. 4th 541, 257 P.3d 81, 128 CalRptr. 3d 658 (2011), the Nevada Law Blogs began wondering if Nevada would follow California’s lead and prohibit Plaintiff’s attorneys from introducing evidence of any medical bills that had been partially or totally forgiven by Plaintiff’s medical provider. Then came the Nevada case of Tri–County Equip. & Leasing, LLC v. Klinke, 128 Nev. Adv. Op. 33, 286 P.3d 593 (2012). We … [Read more...]
Does Nevada Follow The Made-Whole Doctrine In The Context of Auto Coverage?
April 30, 2015 by
A local insurance adjuster asks whether the “made-whole” doctrine applies in Nevada in the auto subrogation context. This is one more great question the that is addressed by the Nevada Law Blogs. However, as you will see, the answer is tremendously confusing. In 2005, the Nevada Supreme Court enthusiastically embraced the concept of the made-whole doctrine. The case of Canfora v. Coast Hotels & Casinos, Inc., 121 Nev. 771, 121 P.3d 599 (2005) was a fight as to how much the Plaintiff’s … [Read more...]
