Courts always struggle when they are asked to deny insurance coverage. The reason for the struggle is simple. Carriers argue that they should not have to insure a loss where the insured provided misleading facts in the application. However, the insureds point out that insurance carriers have accepted their premiums and the insureds have operated under the impression that the coverage sought had been provided.Misrepresentations or fraud in the application can be the basis for avoiding … [Read more...]
Archives for 2008
Avoiding Insurance Coverage Based On Misrepresentation Or Fraud In The Application
December 29, 2008 by
Dude, Where’s My Car?
December 9, 2008 by
Bailment in NevadaLas Vegas, Nevada has a greater proportionate share of valet services than any other large city in the county and probably the world. Where else can you have a company park your car for free with the only expectation in return is a buck or two when your car is returned in the same condition that it left your hands. What happens though, when the valet can’t find your car? Or if it comes back with damage that was not there when you handed over your keys? These are classic … [Read more...]
Special Policies Get No Special Treatment
November 19, 2008 by
Even Out of the Ordinary Auto Policies Must Provide Minimum UM / UIM LimitsIn the case of Continental Insurance v. Murphy, 120 Nev. 506, 96 P.3d 747 (2004), the Nevada Supreme Court said that it will enforce basic mandatory minimum limits of $15,000 per person, $30,000 per accident for uninsured / underinsured motorist coverage, as required by NRS 690B.020 and NRS 687B.145(2), even where the claim involved an out of the ordinary policy that was written especially to cover a “classic … [Read more...]
Insurance Carriers May Have Ten Extra Days To Respond
October 30, 2008 by
Although they are few and far between, there are a few perks given to insurance companies that are made Defendants in suits brought against them in Nevada.You may know that when an insurance company is licensed to do business in Nevada, that carrier must designate the Division of Insurance as its agent for service of process. If a summons and complaint is filed naming an insurance company and if that complaint is served upon the Nevada Division of Insurance, the insurance carrier has 30 … [Read more...]
MUST / CAN / SHOULD THIS CASE BE REMOVED TO FEDERAL COURT?
August 22, 2008 by
In my experience, most Nevada plaintiffs’ attorneys would prefer litigating their client’s cases in the Nevada state court. Each probably has his or her own reason to prefer state court over federal. However, defendants may realize significant advantages by getting a case out of state court. The process of getting a case out of state court and into the proper federal court is called “removal”. I don’t recall a plaintiff’s attorney ever consulting his defense … [Read more...]
