Fourth St. Place hired Roofing contractors to replace the roof on its building. The contractors removed the old roofing and planned to return the next week to complete the job. That is when the rain started. The roofers came back and laid out … [Continue reading]
Nevada Adopts The Doctrine Of Efficient Proximate Cause Denies Coverage Nevertheless Finding The Doctrine Inapplicable
February 7, 2012 by
Paper Experts
January 31, 2012 by
When Nevada courts decide whether an expert witness will be allowed to testify, they do not look to the rules set by the U.S. Supreme Court in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharm., Inc, 509 U.S. 579, 113 S.Ct. 2786, 125 L.Ed.2d 469 (1993). See, Dow Chem. … [Continue reading]
An Auto Policy Will Cover The Insured When Driving Someone Else’s Car Unless That Car Is Available For The Insured’s “Regular Use”. Whether The Car Is Available For The Insured’s Regular Use Is Normally A Question Of Fact. But. . .
January 6, 2012 by
. . . EVEN THE SLIGHTEST RESTRICTION TO THE LIMITATION OF USE WILL GIVE RISE TO A DUTY TO DEFEND Most auto policies provide an insured person coverage when driving another person's vehicle with that person’s permission. There is however an … [Continue reading]
An Insured Cannot Recover UM And UIM Benefits From The Same Policy
January 3, 2012 by
In the case of Hall v. Farmers Ins. Exch., 105 Nev. 19, 768 P.2d 844 (1989) the Nevada Supreme Court considered the question of whether a claimant could recover both uninsured (UM) and underinsured (UIM) benefits from the same policy. Ruby Hall was … [Continue reading]
An Activist Supreme Court Prohibits Enforcement Of Binding Arbitration Provision That Prevents Nevada Consumers From Joining Class Action Suit
December 30, 2011 by
Auto insurance is not the only industry in which Nevada law provides protections to consumers. In a previous POST, we pointed out that the legislature precluded the enforcement of compulsory arbitration provisions in auto insurance policies. Now … [Continue reading]
