A driver runs a red light on Sahara, your car is totaled, and you spend two nights in the hospital. Then the adjuster calls with the bad news. The at-fault driver carried the Nevada minimum, 25,000 dollars for one person’s bodily injury, and your hospital bill by itself is several times that. The driver has no assets worth chasing. That is where the conversation turns to your own policy, and to a word most people have heard without ever being told what it means. Stacking.
Stacking is the idea that you can add together more than one layer of uninsured or underinsured motorist coverage to reach a higher total. Sometimes you can. Often the policy says you cannot. Nevada has a specific statute on the subject, and the statute contains an exception that beats the policy language in a meaningful set of cases.
Here is how uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage actually works in Nevada, when stacking is available, and what to look for on your own declarations page before you accept an insurer’s first answer.
What Uninsured and Underinsured Coverage Are Doing
Uninsured motorist coverage, usually written UM, pays when the at-fault driver has no liability insurance at all. It also typically covers a hit and run where the other vehicle is never identified. Underinsured motorist coverage, written UIM, pays when the at-fault driver has insurance but not enough to cover what you lost.
Nevada requires liability limits of at least 25,000 dollars for bodily injury or death of one person in any one accident, 50,000 dollars where two or more people are hurt, and 20,000 dollars for property damage. Those are the floors the DMV enforces for registration. A great many Nevada drivers carry exactly those numbers, which is why UM and UIM coverage is the difference between a real recovery and a token one in a serious crash.
Two things follow from that. First, the coverage that matters most in a catastrophic Nevada crash is often coverage the injured person bought for themselves. Second, the claim gets made against your own insurer, which means the company that has been sending you renewal notices for a decade is now the party writing the check and the party evaluating your injuries. That relationship changes fast.
Nevada Makes the Insurer Offer It and Makes Rejection Formal
NRS 690B.020 requires that uninsured motorist coverage be included in a Nevada motor vehicle liability policy unless the named insured rejects it in writing, on a form furnished by the insurer that describes the coverage being rejected. The minimum amount is tied to the state minimum liability limits for bodily injury, and the coverage may be written up to the amount of bodily injury coverage the policyholder actually purchased.
NRS 687B.145 adds a parallel duty. Insurers transacting motor vehicle insurance in Nevada must offer, on a form approved by the Commissioner of Insurance, uninsured and underinsured vehicle coverage in an amount equal to the limits of bodily injury coverage sold to the insured under a passenger car policy. The same statute requires insurers to offer medical expense coverage of at least 1,000 dollars for expenses arising from a crash.
The written rejection requirement is not a formality. When a carrier claims a policyholder declined UM or UIM coverage, the first question is whether a compliant written rejection exists in the underwriting file, signed by a named insured, on the insurer’s own form describing what was being given up. Files go missing. Agents skip steps. Verbal declinations happen. That paperwork is worth demanding early, and it is worth demanding in writing.
The Anti-Stacking Clause and the Exception Inside It
NRS 687B.145 is the anti-stacking statute, and it is more interesting than its reputation. Subsection 1 permits a casualty policy to provide that if an insured has coverage available under more than one policy or provision of coverage, the recovery or benefits may equal but not exceed the higher of the applicable limits of the respective coverages, with the recovery prorated between the applicable coverages in proportion to their limits.
That is the anti-stacking authorization. If your policy contains that clause, the insurer’s position will be that three vehicles with 100,000 dollars of UM coverage each does not equal 300,000 dollars of available coverage, only 100,000 dollars.
The statute then imposes two conditions the insurer has to satisfy. Any provision that limits benefits under the section must be in clear language and must be prominently displayed in the policy, binder or endorsement. And any such limiting provision is void if the named insured has purchased separate coverage on the same risk and has paid a premium calculated for full reimbursement under that coverage.
That second condition is the fight. If you were charged a separate premium, per vehicle, for uninsured motorist coverage, and that premium was calculated as though each vehicle carried full coverage, then you paid for coverage the insurer now says you cannot use. The statute addresses that outcome directly. Whether the exception applies in your case is a question about the rating structure of your specific policy, not a question that can be answered from the declarations page alone.
How to Read Your Own Declarations Page
Pull the declarations page and look for four things.
- Whether uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage appears at all, and at what limits, expressed as a per person and per accident pair.
- Whether a separate UM or UIM premium is charged for each listed vehicle, or a single premium is charged for the policy as a whole.
- Whether an anti-stacking or limit of liability endorsement is listed by form number.
- Whether medical payments coverage was purchased, and in what amount.
Then get the full policy, not the summary. The declarations page tells you the numbers. The policy form tells you who counts as an insured, what counts as an uninsured motor vehicle, what notice the insurer requires, and whether the insurer must consent before you settle with the at-fault driver. Insurers will send the declarations page readily and the certified full policy slowly. Ask for the certified copy in writing.
Nevada Underinsured Coverage Sits on Top, It Does Not Subtract
This is the point that surprises people who moved here from another state, and it is worth getting exactly right.
In some states, underinsured coverage is a difference in limits benefit. If the at-fault driver has 25,000 dollars and you have 100,000 dollars of UIM, you get 75,000 dollars of UIM, because the tortfeasor’s payment is subtracted from your limit. Nevada does not work that way.
NRS 687B.145 defines the damages recoverable under underinsured vehicle coverage as the amount for which the underinsured motorist is alleged to be liable to the claimant in excess of the limits of bodily injury coverage set by the underinsured motorist’s policy. Nevada underinsured coverage is excess coverage. It sits on top of what the at-fault driver’s carrier pays rather than being reduced by it.
The same statute adds a second protection. An insurer that pays an injured person on account of underinsured vehicle coverage is not entitled to subrogation against the underinsured motorist who is liable for those damages. Your carrier cannot pay you and then chase the other driver for reimbursement of the underinsured portion.
Which Policies You Should Be Hunting For
Stacking questions are usually framed as one policy against another, but the real work is identifying every policy that might respond in the first place. In a serious Nevada crash the list is longer than most people expect.
- Your own auto policy, including every vehicle listed on it.
- A policy in the household of a resident relative, since many policy forms define an insured to include family members residing in the same household.
- The policy on the vehicle you were occupying, if it was not yours.
- An employer’s commercial auto policy, if you were in a company vehicle or on a work errand.
- A personal umbrella or excess policy, which sometimes but not always includes UM or UIM.
NRS 687B.145 carves out several categories from the mandatory offer. Insurers are not required to offer uninsured or underinsured coverage in connection with general commercial liability policies, excess policies, umbrella policies, or other policies that do not provide primary motor vehicle insurance. That does not mean an umbrella never carries the coverage. It means you cannot assume it does, and you have to read the form to find out.
How an Insurer Can Lose the Stacking Argument
An anti-stacking clause is not self-executing. To rely on it, the carrier has to have written it in clear language, displayed it prominently in the policy, binder or endorsement, and avoided the separate premium problem described above. Buried language, a clause that contradicts another section of the same policy, or a limitation that never made it into the delivered policy at all can all undercut the position.
There is a second front. Nevada regulates how insurers handle claims. NRS 686A.310 lists unfair practices in settling claims, including misrepresenting pertinent facts or policy provisions relating to coverage at issue, failing to affirm or deny coverage within a reasonable time after proof of loss has been submitted, failing to provide a prompt and reasonable explanation of the basis for a denial, and compelling insureds to file suit to recover amounts due by offering substantially less than what is ultimately recovered. The statute makes an insurer liable to its insured for damages sustained as a result of those acts.
An insurer that asserts an anti-stacking clause it cannot produce, or that refuses to explain the basis for its coverage position, has a problem beyond the underlying claim. Documenting the exchange in writing from the beginning is what preserves that leverage.
Deadlines, Consent to Settle, and the Mistakes That Kill Claims
Three timing issues do the most damage.
The first is the bodily injury deadline. Under NRS 11.190, an action to recover damages for injuries to a person caused by the wrongful act or neglect of another must be brought within two years. That governs the claim against the driver who hit you. A UM or UIM claim against your own carrier is a claim on a written contract, and NRS 11.190 gives six years for an action upon a contract, obligation or liability founded on a written instrument. Those are different clocks, and treating them as one clock is a common and expensive error.
The second is consent to settle. Most policy forms require the insured to notify the UIM carrier and obtain consent before accepting a settlement from the at-fault driver’s insurer, so the UIM carrier can decide whether to preserve its position. Signing a release with the liability carrier without that step can jeopardize the underinsured claim. Do not sign anything until the UIM carrier has been notified in writing and has responded.
The third is the comparative fault reduction. NRS 41.141 provides that a plaintiff’s comparative negligence does not bar recovery if it was not greater than the negligence of the parties against whom recovery is sought, with the award reduced by the plaintiff’s share. Your own insurer evaluating a UM claim will apply that same analysis against you, because it stands in the shoes of the uninsured driver for purposes of deciding what it owes.
For a closer look at how these claims get valued once coverage is established, see our discussion of underinsured motorist claim values in Nevada. The broader mechanics of liability and damages are covered in our Nevada car accident practice and by our Las Vegas car accident attorneys. Riders face the same coverage problem in sharper form, since minimum limits rarely cover a motorcycle crash, and families dealing with a fatality should understand how UM and UIM interact with a wrongful death claim. The Nevada DMV publishes the current state liability insurance requirements if you want the minimums from the source.
Getting a Read on Your Own Coverage
If an at-fault driver’s limits will not cover what happened to you, the next step is a careful read of every policy that might respond, including the anti-stacking language and the premium structure behind it. The Bourassa Law Group offers a free consultation to review your declarations page and policy forms, identify additional coverage that may be available, and handle the notice and consent steps that protect an underinsured claim. There is no cost for that review.
This article is general information about Nevada law and insurance practice and is not legal advice. Policy language varies, and the answer for your claim depends on the specific forms and endorsements in your policy.
1-800-870-8910