Legal Opinion · Dissent

Grayson v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance

Nevada Supreme Court

Decided March 19, 1999No. 29832Published

1Dissent

Maupin, J.,

with whom, Young, J., agrees, dissenting:

Under our scheme for the recovery of UIM benefits, the insured has a right to bring a direct action against the carrier after a collision with an uninsured motorist, regardless of whether a judgment has been obtained against the tortfeasor. See Lee v. Allstate Ins. Co., 648 F. Supp. 1295 (D. Nev. 1986). Implicit in this is the right to bring the direct action at any time after the cause of action against the actual tortfeasor accrues. Accrual occurs, consistent with the ruling in Lee, when a person insured under the policy becomes “legally…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Blutreich v. Liberty Mutual InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1991
  2. Lee v. Allstate InsuranceDistrict Court, D. Nevada · 1986

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API