In Mississippi Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Co. v. Peteet, 359 So.3d 181, (2023), the Court held that before an insured can seek UM benefits from his or her automobile insurer, the insured must establish that the insurer gave consent to the settlement under the terms of the policy. The Mississippi Supreme Court found in favor of the insurer when it concluded that the execution of a settlement agreement with the tortfeasor without the consent of the insurer unlawfully cut off the insurer’s right of subrogation without its consent and, therefore, the insurer had no duty to pay the claimant’s UM claim.
A Respected Expert Witness And Authority On Insurance Law In The U.S.
INSURER CONSENT REQUIRED TO ACCESS UM COVERAGE BENEFITS
On Behalf of Steven Plitt, Expert Insurance Consultant & Witness | Jan 30, 2025 | Firm News