Exclusion provisions in a policy work to limit the range of coverage by restricting certain events or losses; often serving as a basis to deny a claim. Nevada case law has long held the burden is on the insured to prove a claim falls within the scope of coverage, and the insurer bears the burden to prove the applicability of an exclusion. However, for the first time the Supreme Court for the State of Nevada was faced with the question of who bears the burden to prove an exception to a policy’s exclusion provision, essentially restoring coverage.1
Latest Post
More Posts
Forging a New Path: ATI Training Expands to Support Public Adjusters
Arizona Monsoon Season Thundering Across Grand Canyon State
Royal Pain for Royal Dane Mall
Nevada Public Adjuster Requirements and Regulations
Clearing Things Up: Interpreting Ambiguities in Arizona Policies
The Insurance Coverage Gap Worsens—Farmers Policy Changes Approved
Hot off the Press: Farmers to Pay Oklahoma Policyholders $25 Million for Earthquake Claims
Eight Essential Questions Every Policyholder Should be Asking
Rockfall Damage Not a Landslide Victory
Subscribe: Subscribe via RSS
Firm/Org