Legal Opinion · Dissent

Curry v. Great Northwest Insurance

New Mexico Court of Appeals

Decided March 7, 2014No. 34,451; Docket No. 31,990Published

1DissentFry, Judge

{32} I respectfully dissent. In my view, the line of Supreme Court cases addressing the acceptable method of rejecting full UM/UIM coverage, culminating in Jordan, compels the conclusion that information regarding UM/UIM coverages and corresponding premiums must be listed in the policy — not necessarily in the rejection form — provided to the insured. Our Supreme Court in Jordan made it clear that one of the four prerequisites to valid rejection of full UM/UIM coverage is that the insurer “inform the insured about premium costs corresponding to the available levels of coverage.”…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Herrera Ex Rel. Estate of Ruiz v. Quality PontiacNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2003
  2. Jordan v. Allstate InsuranceNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2010
  3. Madrid v. Village of ChamaNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2012

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

Powered by the Exa API