Farmers issued two separate auto policies to the Torres family. Both policies included uninsured coverage. The Torres daughter was injured when a moped on which she was a passenger crashed. There was no coverage on the moped so Mr. Torres turned to her parent’s auto policy for UM coverage. The company admitted coverage and paid one of the two UM coverages. However, it argued that it owed no duty to stack the policies because of the anti-stacking provision in an Endorsement. The trial … [Read more...]
Insurance Company Must Stack Multiple UM Coverages If The Anti-Stacking Language Is Not Clear.
March 21, 2019 by
Avoid UM / UIM Stacking By Meeting These Three Requirements
February 19, 2015 by
Nevada law authorizes auto insurance companies to avoid stacking their uninsured / underinsured motorist coverage. But before a court will enforce a policy’s anti-stacking provision the company must meet three requirements. See Neumann v. Standard Fire Ins. Co. of Hartford, Conn., 699 P.2d 101, 103 (Nev. 1985). The three requirements are: (1) Clarity; (2) Prominence; and, (3) The insured cannot have paid full premiums on each of the separate risks covered by the … [Read more...]
LexisNexis Names Nevada Insurance Law As A Top Insurance Law Blog For 2011
November 21, 2011 by
The Advisory Board of the LexisNexis Insurance Law Community has selected Mills & Associates' Nevada Insurance Law as one of the nation’s Top Insurance Law Blogs for 2011. The Advisory Board described what it saw in the winning blogs. The Top Blogs contain some of the best writing out there on insurance law. They contain a wealth of information for the insurance law community with timely news items, practical information, expert analysis, practice tips, frequent postings, and helpful … [Read more...]
Got Questions?
August 3, 2010 by
These posts on the Mills & Associates Nevada Insurance Law blog are published to provide useful insights on Nevada insurance law to our clients and other subscribers. Many times the topics are suggested by recent case law, or issues raised by litigation. As part of our ongoing effort to provide both timely and helpful information, we invite all our readers to submit issues which they would like to see addressed in future blog posts. Likewise, please submit questions concerning prior … [Read more...]
Stacking
May 22, 2006 by
In Nevada, a valid anti-stacking provision must satisfy three prerequisites under N.R.S. 687B.145(1) . "First, the limiting provision must be expressed in clear language. Second, the provision must be prominently displayed in the policy, binder or endorsement. Finally, the insured must not have purchased separate coverage on the same risk, nor paid a premium calculated for full reimbursement under that coverage." Accordingly, a limiting provision is void if it fails to comply with any of these … [Read more...]
