When two or more uninsured motorist policies apply, a question arises as to whether those policies should pro-rate with each other, or one of the policies should be designated as primary, with the other as excess. This issue was addressed by the Kentucky Supreme Court in Countryway Insurance Co. v. United Financial Casualty Insurance Co., 2016 WL 4488306 (Ky. August 25, 2016). Noting the close conjunction between UM coverage and liability coverage, the court found that when a passenger in a vehicle was injured in a collision caused by an uninsured motorist, and the passenger’s vehicle as well as the vehicle in which the passenger was riding both had uninsured motorist coverage containing “other insurance” clauses, the policy covering the vehicle in which the passenger was riding provided primary UM coverage.
A Respected Expert Witness And Authority On Insurance Law In The U.S.
- TENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FINDS THAT INSURANCE POLICY’S APPRAISAL CLAUSE ALLOWS CAUSATION DETERMINATIONS by Jordan R. Plitt
- THE SPLIT LANDSCAPE REGARDING DEPRECIATION OF LABOR COSTS WHEN CALCULATING ACTUAL CASH VALUE by Jordan R. Plitt
- CALIFORNIA COURT OF APPEALS REFUSES TO EXPAND THE TRIGGER FOR WHEN “CUMIS” COUNSEL IS REQUIRED UNDER CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE §2860 by Jordan R. Plitt
- DOES A WATER-BACKUP EXCLUSION INCLUDE SEWAGE? by Jordan R. Plitt