Home >> Statutes >> Back

Click to open printable format in new window.Printable Format
 | Next

40-284. Uninsured motorist coverage and underinsured motorist coverage; rejection; antistacking provision; exclusions or limitations of coverage; subrogation rights of underinsured motorist coverage insurer. (a) No automobile liability insurance policy covering liability arising out of the ownership, maintenance, or use of any motor vehicle shall be delivered or issued for delivery in this state with respect to any motor vehicle registered or principally garaged in this state, unless the policy contains or has endorsed thereon, a provision with coverage limits equal to the limits of liability coverage for bodily injury or death in such automobile liability insurance policy sold to the named insured for payment of part or all sums which the insured or the insured's legal representative shall be legally entitled to recover as damages from the uninsured owner or operator of a motor vehicle because of bodily injury, sickness or disease, including death, resulting therefrom, sustained by the insured, caused by accident and arising out of ownership, maintenance or use of such motor vehicle, or providing for such payment irrespective of legal liability of the insured or any other person or organization. No insurer shall be required to offer, provide or make available coverage conforming to this section in connection with any excess policy, umbrella policy or any other policy which does not provide primary motor vehicle insurance for liabilities arising out of the ownership, maintenance, operation or use of a specifically insured motor vehicle.

(b) Any uninsured motorist coverage shall include an underinsured motorist provision which enables the insured or the insured's legal representative to recover from the insurer the amount of damages for bodily injury or death to which the insured is legally entitled from the owner or operator of another motor vehicle with coverage limits equal to the limits of liability provided by such uninsured motorist coverage to the extent such coverage exceeds the limits of the bodily injury coverage carried by the owner or operator of the other motor vehicle.

(c) The insured named in the policy shall have the right to reject, in writing, the uninsured motorist coverage required by subsections (a) and (b) which is in excess of the limits for bodily injury or death set forth in K.S.A. 40-3107, and amendments thereto. A rejection by an insured named in the policy of the uninsured motorist coverage shall be a rejection on behalf of all parties insured by the policy. Unless the insured named in the policy requests such coverage in writing, such coverage need not be provided in any subsequent policy issued by the same insurer for motor vehicles owned by the named insured, including, but not limited to, supplemental, renewal, reinstated, transferred or substitute policies where the named insured had rejected the coverage in connection with a policy previously issued to the insured by the same insurer.

(d) Coverage under the policy shall be limited to the extent that the total limits available cannot exceed the highest limits of any single applicable policy, regardless of the number of policies involved, persons covered, claims made, vehicles or premiums shown on the policy or premiums paid or vehicles involved in an accident.

(e) Any insurer may provide for the exclusion or limitation of coverage:

(1) When the insured is occupying or struck by an uninsured automobile or trailer owned or provided for the insured's regular use;

(2) when the uninsured automobile is owned by a self-insurer or any governmental entity;

(3) when there is no evidence of physical contact with the uninsured motor vehicle and when there is no reliable competent evidence to prove the facts of the accident from a disinterested witness not making claim under the policy;

(4) to the extent that workers' compensation benefits apply;

(5) when suit is filed against the uninsured motorist without notice to the insurance carrier; and

(6) to the extent that personal injury protection benefits apply.

(f) An underinsured motorist coverage insurer shall have subrogation rights under the provisions of K.S.A. 40-287, and amendments thereto. If a tentative agreement to settle for liability limits has been reached with an underinsured tortfeasor, written notice must be given by certified mail to the underinsured motorist coverage insurer by its insured. Such written notice shall include written documentation of pecuniary losses incurred, including copies of all medical bills and written authorization or a court order to obtain reports from all employers and medical providers. Within 60 days of receipt of this written notice, the underinsured motorist coverage insurer may substitute its payment to the insured for the tentative settlement amount. The underinsured motorist coverage insurer is then subrogated to the insured's right of recovery to the extent of such payment and any settlement under the underinsured motorist coverage. If the underinsured motorist coverage insurer fails to pay the insured the amount of the tentative tort settlement within 60 days, the underinsured motorist coverage insurer has no right of subrogation for any amount paid under the underinsured motorist coverage.

History: L. 1968, ch. 273, § 1; L. 1981, ch. 191, § 1; L. 1984, ch. 167, § 1; L. 1986, ch. 173, § 1; L. 1988, ch. 152, § 1; July 1.

Law Review and Bar Journal References:

"Uninsured Motorist Coverage," Alan I. Widiss, 40 J.B.A.K. 199, 200, 231 (1971).

"Uninsured Motorist Coverage," Alan I. Widiss, 41 J.B.A.K. 19, 79, 80 (1972).

Cited in comment on uninsured motorist coverage concerning the effect of settlement with an insured joint tortfeasor on the amount of recovery, M. Kim Moore, 12 W.L.J. 253, 256 (1973).

"Comparative Negligence Update—A Discussion of Selected Issues," Donald W. Vasos, 44 J.B.A.K. 13, 17 (1975).

Cited in note on recovery under uninsured motorist insurance where no physical contact occurred with hit-run vehicle, Ellen S. Holmes, 23 K.L.R. 335 (1975).

Discussed in note concerning the Kansas uninsured motorist statute, 16 W.L.J. 764 (1977).

"Uninsured Motorist: Interspousal Immunity Not a Bar to Coverage," Michael Callen, 2 J.K.T.L.A. No. 7, 20 (1979).

"Stacking Personal Injury Protection Benefits: Can You? Should You?" Jay Thomas, 3 J.K.T.L.A. No. 6, 20 (1980).

"Survey of Kansas Law: Insurance Law," 29 K.L.R. 531, 536, 537, 539 (1981).

"No-Fault Automobile Insurance: An Analysis of the Kansas Automobile Injury Reparations Act," Linda L. Pfalzgraf, 20 W.L.J. 375, 378, 402 (1981).

"Torts—Interspousal Immunity in Kansas: A Vestige of a Bygone Era—Guffy v. Guffy," Catherine Hauber, 30 K.L.R. 611, 612 (1982).

"Recent Developments in Kansas Insurance Law: A Survey, Some Analysis, and Some Suggestions," Robert H. Jerry II, 32 K.L.R. 287, 329, 331, 332, 343, 344, 345, 346 (1984).

"Recent Developments in Uninsured Motorist Insurance and Umbrella Policies," Vol. IX, No. 4, J.K.T.L.A. 20 (1985).

"New Developments in Kansas Insurance Law," Robert H. Jerry, II, 37 K.L.R. 841, 877 (1989).

"Kansas Automobile Insurance: Current Issues and Problems," John J. Knoll, 29 W.L.J. 600, 608 (1990).

"Pitfalls on the Road to Salvation: The Kansas Saving Statute," Steven C. Day, 59 J.K.B.A. No. 8, 19, 22 (1990).

"Money Left on the Table," Gerald W. Scott, J.K.T.L.A. Vol. XV, No. 2, 9 (1991).

"Uninsured/Underinsured Motorist Insurance: A Sleeping Giant," Gerald W. Scott, 63 J.K.B.A. No. 4, 28, 29, 30, 31 (1994).

"UM/UIM Coverage Under School Bus Policy of Children Not on Bus," Tim Short, J.K.T.L.A. Vol. 24, No. 6, 8 (2001).

"The Clash Between Workers' Compensation Benefits and Underinsured Motorists Benefits Under Kansas Law," Brooke A. Bennett, 51 K.L.R. 155 (2002).

"Conflict of Laws in Kansas: A Guide to Navigating the Dismal Swamp," Terri Savely Bezek, 71 J.K.B.A. No. 8, 21 (2002).

"Settlements and Verdicts," Robin Maxon, Editor, J.K.T.L.A. Vol. 27, No. 2, 19 (2003).

"Settlements and Verdicts," Robin Maxon, Editor, J.K.T.L.A. Vol. 27, No. 3, 24 (2004).

"Liquidated Damages—When is the Claimant Entitled to Prejudgment Interest?" Mary E. Christopher, Michelle M. Watson, 73 J.K.B.A. No. 5, 14 (2004).


1. Mentioned as being effective after execution of insurance contract under consideration. Sturdy v. Allied Mutual Ins. Co., 203 K. 783, 785, 457 P.2d 34.

2. Mentioned; insurance carrier which has issued uninsured motorist policy may intervene in action brought by its insured against an uninsured motorist. Rawlins v. Stanley, 207 K. 564, 567, 486 P.2d 840.

3. Uninsured motorist coverage hereunder does not impose absolute liability on insurer. Bachman v. American Mutual Insurance Company of Boston, 338 F.Supp. 1372, 1373, 1374, 1375.

4. Term "legally entitled to recover as damages" construed; establishment of fault, extent of damage. Winner v. Ratzlaff, 211 K. 59, 62, 64, 505 P.2d 606.

5. Discussed; insurance policy provisions limiting, conditioning and diluting uninsured motorist coverage held void. Clayton v. Alliance Mutual Casualty Co., 212 K. 640, 646, 648, 650, 651, 512 P.2d 507. Rehearing denied: 213 K. 84, 515 P.2d 1115.

6. Where policy provision more restrictive than statute requiring coverage, statute will prevail. Clayton v. Alliance Mutual Casualty Co., 213 K. 84, 515 P.2d 1115.

7. Policy clause excluding coverage of insured person occupying named insured's insured automobile injured by named insured's uninsured automobile is void hereunder. Forrester v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co., 213 K. 442, 443, 444, 445, 449, 450, 517 P.2d 173.

8. Contents noted in discussing history of no-fault insurance act (40-3101 et seq.). Manzanares v. Bell, 214 K. 589, 605, 522 P.2d 1291.

9. Insurers issued coverage under statute prior to its effective date; accident covered. Van Hoozer v. Farmers Insurance Exchange, 219 K. 595, 598, 599, 600, 601, 602, 603, 606, 607, 610, 549 P.2d 1354.

10. Provisions of policy purporting to limit insurer's liability to one policy void. Van Hoozer v. Farmers Insurance Exchange, 219 K. 595, 598, 599, 600, 601, 602, 603, 606, 607, 610, 549 P.2d 1354.

11. Provisions purporting to reduce amounts payable under policy by amounts of workmen's compensation benefits void. Van Hoozer v. Farmers Insurance Exchange, 219 K. 595, 598, 599, 600, 601, 602, 603, 606, 607, 610, 549 P.2d 1354.

12. Uninsured motorist authorized to "stack" coverages up to but not more than full amount of damages sustained. Welch v. Hartford Casualty Ins. Co., 221 K. 344, 345, 346, 347, 348, 349, 350, 559 P.2d 362.

13. Section cited; award in excess of uninsured motorist coverage; trial court erred. Hammerman v. Southwestern Ins. Group, 1 K.A.2d 445, 447, 571 P.2d 1.

14. Section construed; physical contact requirement in hit and run clauses in the uninsured motorist provisions of automobile insurance is void. Simpson v. Farmers Ins. Co., 225 K. 508, 510, 511, 512, 515, 516, 592 P.2d 445.

15. Provision excluding government-owned vehicle from definition of uninsured motor vehicle held void as attempt to reduce coverage required hereunder. Hillhouse v. Farmers Ins. Co., 226 K. 68, 69, 595 P.2d 1102.

16. Passenger of unauthorized user of a vehicle, who is not within policy definition of "insured," is not within mandated coverage. Farmers Ins. Co. v. Schiller, 226 K. 155, 162, 597 P.2d 238.

17. Exclusionary clause in uninsured motorist policy not in conflict with coverage mandated hereunder. Benson v. Farmers Ins. Co., 227 K. 833, 836, 837, 610 P.2d 605.

18. Nothing hereunder grants any type of authorized exclusion prohibiting "stacking." McNemee v. Farmers Insurance Group, 228 K. 211, 212, 215, 612 P.2d 645.

19. Where two vehicles are insured in a single policy with separate premiums, injured insured may stack the two uninsured motorist coverages. Davis v. Hughes, 229 K. 91, 92, 95, 100, 622 P.2d 641.

20. Any insurance policy provision which attempts to dilute, condition or limit minimum coverage requirements of the K.A.I.R.A. is void and invalid; policies may allow or exclude coverage above statutory limits. DeWitt v. Young, 229 K. 474, 478, 625 P.2d 478.

21. Policy provisions which purport to condition, limit or dilute unqualified uninsured motorist coverage mandated by statute are void and unenforceable. Barnett v. Crosby, 5 K.A.2d 98, 99, 612 P.2d 1250.

22. Statute does not address stacking, nor does it require equal treatment of all classes of insureds. Burke v. AID Ins. Co., 487 F.Supp. 831, 835.

23. Kansas uninsured motorist benefits apply only to Kansas registered or principally garaged vehicles. Wilds v. Mid-Century Ins. Co., 231 K. 124, 125, 126, 127, 642 P.2d 567 (1982).

24. Uninsured motorist may recover under another's policy if uninsured motorist is an "insured" under that policy. Merritt v. Farmers Ins. Co., 7 K.A.2d 705, 709, 711, 647 P.2d 1355 (1982).

25. Interspousal immunity prevents recovery of damages against uninsured spouse. Patrons Mutual Ins. Ass'n v. Norwood, 231 K. 709, 711, 712, 713, 714, 716, 647 P.2d 1335 (1982).

26. Venue in Kansas on additional uninsured motorist coverage because change of address notification meant policy delivered or issued for delivery in Kansas. Safeco Ins. Co. of America v. Miller, 591 F.Supp. 590, 596 (1984).

27. Where accident occurred prior to underinsured motorist provisions, original statute will not be judicially expanded. Kansas Farm Bureau Ins. Co. v. Miller, 236 K. 811, 819, 820, 696 P.2d 961 (1985).

28. Cited; appeal of summary judgment for only one defendant where required certificate (60-254(b)) not issued examined. Miller v. Safeco Ins. Co. of America, 11 K.A.2d 91, 712 P.2d 1282 (1986).

29. Class of insureds in uninsured coverage cannot be more restrictive than class covered by liability provisions of 40-3107. Girrens v. Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co., 238 K. 670, 674, 715 P.2d 389 (1986).

30. Procedure for underinsured motorist claims distinguished from uninsured; underinsured carrier bound by any judgment. Haas v. Freeman, 236 K. 677, 678, 683, 693 P.2d 1199 (1985).

31. Cited; "automobile" as used herein held to include motorcycles. Klamm v. Carter, 11 K.A.2d 574, 580, 730 P.2d 1099 (1986).

32. Statute does not contemplate situation where "uninsured owner or operator" is the owner of an automobile liability insurance policy. Hilyard v. Estate of Clearwater, 240 K. 362, 369, 729 P.2d 1195 (1986).

33. Statutory exclusion herein relative to uninsured motorist coverage (e)(3) does not deny any rights under U.S. or Kansas constitutions. Clements v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co., 243 K. 124, 125, 753 P.2d 1274 (1988).

34. Relationship of uninsured motorist coverage of plaintiff against defendant whose insurance carrier insolvent (40-2901 et seq.) determined. Hetzel v. Clarkin, 244 K. 698, 701, 772 P.2d 800 (1989).

35. Vehicle not uninsured when driver has minimum required coverage; underinsured coverage not applicable where coverage does not exceed that of offending driver. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Cummings, 13 K.A.2d 630, 637, 638, 778 P.2d 370 (1989).

36. Personal liability umbrella policy is excess uninsured motorist coverage to underlying primary policy. Bartee v. R.T.C. Transportation, Inc., 245 K. 499, 515, 781 P.2d 1084 (1989).

37. Underinsured provision in policies excluding injury coverage while occupying any owned vehicle not covered "under this policy" held unenforceable. Farmers Ins. Co. v. Gilbert, 14 K.A.2d 395, 791 P.2d 742 (1990); affirmed as modified, 247 K. 589, 792 P.2d 742 (1990).

38. Action by insured against own insurer for underinsured motorist benefits as not requiring naming underinsured tortfeasor determined. Gifford v. Farm Bur. Mut. Ins. Co., 14 K.A.2d 740, 741, 799 P.2d 105 (1990).

39. Named insured must reject in writing higher uninsured/underinsured coverage; employee of named insured has standing to challenge sufficiency of rejection. Larson v. Bath, 15 K.A.2d 42, 46, 801 P.2d 1331 (1990).

40. Injured passenger has liability and uninsured motorist coverage available from negligent insured driver in accident with negligent uninsured driver, policy provisions notwithstanding, Stewart v. Capps, 14 K.A.2d 356, 359, 789 P.2d 563 (1990); Affirmed, 247 K. 549, 802 P.2d 1226 (1990).

41. Exclusive remedy of workers compensation act did not convert coemployee's vehicle into "uninsured motor vehicle" due to liability coverage. Chance v. Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co., Inc., 756 F.Supp. 1440, 1443 (1991).

42. Policy provision reducing underinsured motorist coverage by amount paid by party potentially liable held void and unenforceable. Allied Mut. Ins. Co. v. Gordon, 248 K. 715, 733, 811 P.2d 1112 (1991).

43. Insured precluded from joining own underinsured carrier in action against underinsured tortfeasor; procedure to be followed outlined. Ramsey v. Chism, 249 K. 299, 302, 303, 817 P.2d 198 (1991).

44. Insurer electing not to intervene after notice is bound by judgment based on confession of judgment. Guillan v. Watts, 249 K. 606, 608, 609, 611, 822 P.2d 582 (1991).

45. Contractual provisions for setoff regarding attorney fees when PIP benefits involved examined. Bardwell v. Kester, 15 K.A.2d 679, 681, 815 P.2d 120 (1991).

46. An insured may recover underinsured motorist benefits which are not duplicative of PIP benefits. Rich v. Farm Mutual Bur. Mut. Ins. Co., 250 K. 209, 210, 211, 212, 213, 214, 216, 824 P.2d 955 (1992).

47. Exclusion of named insured's family members from uninsured motorist coverage authorized by statute when they are occupying or struck by an uninsured automobile or trailer owned or provided for their regular use. Ball v. Midwestern Ins. Co., 250 K. 738, 740, 829 P.2d 897 (1992).

48. Noted in holding that uninsured motorist coverage and PIP benefits not applicable to occupants shot after minor collision. Hamidian v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 251 K. 254, 256, 833 P.2d 1007 (1992).

49. Noted where statutory credit for workers compensation benefits (40-3110) held applicable to maximum PIP benefits payable under policy terms. House v. American Fam. Mut. Ins. Co., 251 K. 419, 426, 837 P.2d 391 (1992).

50. Insured not required to obtain judgment before receiving underinsured motorist benefits; attempts to limit unlisted coverage unenforceable. Brown v. USAA Cas. Ins. Co., 17 K.A.2d 547, 549, 840 P.2d 1203 (1992).

51. Liability of insurer providing uninsured motorist coverage for judgment obtained by insured against uninsured motorist examined. Pickens v. Allstate Ins. Co., 17 K.A.2d 670, 673, 843 P.2d 273 (1992).

52. Uninsured motorist coverage is limited to maximum of one policy; stacking of underinsured motorist coverage is prohibited. Walker v. State Farm Mut. Auto Ins. Co., 973 F.2d 634, 637, 638 (1992).

53. An insured may recover underinsured motorist benefits which are not duplicative of workers' compensation benefits. Kilner v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 252 K. 675, 676, 677, 678, 679, 680, 681, 682, 683, 684, 685, 686, 688, 847 P.2d 1292 (1993).

54. Whether law of Kansas, where insureds resided and policy issued or state law where auto accident occurred applied examined. Lienemann v. King, 832 F.Supp. 257, 260 (1993).

55. Driver of vehicle without personal liability insurance is not uninsured if driving insured vehicle. Grimmett v. Burke, 21 K.A.2d 638, 653, 905 P.2d 156 (1995).

56. Insurance code (40-101 et seq.) allows a named insured to give legal agent the right to reject uninsured motorist and PIP coverage. Ridgway v. Shelter Ins. Co., 22 K.A.2d 218, 221, 225, 913 P.2d 1231 (1996).

57. Prohibition against stacking of underinsured motorist insurance will not be read into contract lacking provision. Eidemiller v. State Farm Mut. Auto Ins. Co., 22 K.A.2d 278, 279, 915 P.2d 161 (1996).

58. Although not listed as an exclusion to mandatory coverage, limitation of uninsured motorist coverage to U.S.A. and Canada not void. Degollado v. Gallegos, 260 K. 169, 171, 917 P.2d 823 (1996).

59. Failure to include anti-stacking provision in policy does not constitute a waiver of statutory prohibition against stacking. Eidemiller v. State Farm Mut. Auto Ins. Co., 261 K. 711, 720, 933 P.2d 748 (1997).

60. Insurance carrier forfeited subrogation right by failing to properly substitute payment for settlement with underinsured motorist. Davis v. Prudential property and Cas. Ins. Co., 961 F.Supp. 1496, 1500 (1997).

61. Settlement and release of underinsured tortfeasor without notice to insurer forfeited insured's right of recovery under policy's underinsured motorist provisions. Dalke v. Allstate Ins. Co., 23 K.A.2d 742, 935 P.2d 1067 (1997).

62. Award of attorney fees to insured proper where insurer refused to pay claim without just cause. Davis v. Prudential Property and Cas. Ins. Co., 985 F.Supp. 1251, 1254 (1997).

63. Insurers may exclude or limit uninsured or underinsured motorist coverage benefits which duplicate workers compensation benefits. Fisher v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 264 K. 111, 114, 117, 955 P.2d 622 (1998).

64. Underinsured motorist carrier not required to join insured's tort action for liability and damages where underinsurance remains unresolved issue. Mitchell v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 265 K. 556, 961 P.2d 1235 (1998).

65. Insured may purchase uninsured/underinsured auto coverage in any amount from the statutory minimum up to liability limits of policy. McTaggart v. Liberty Mut. Ins., 267 K. 641, 651, 983 P.2d 853 (1999).

66. Either per person or per occurrence may apply in determining limits on underinsured policy. Jones v. Automobile Club Inter-Insurance Exchange, 26 K.A.2d 206, 209, 981 P.2d 767 (1999).

67. Letter from insurer confirming rejection of coverage allowed insurer to limit coverage to statutory minimum. Bishop v. Empire Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 47 F.Supp.2d 1300, 1303 (1999).

68. Section to be liberally construed; Jones v. Automobile Club, 26 K.A.2d. 206, supersedes State Farm v. Cummings, 13 K.A.2d. 630, in situations involving closely linked injured persons. Cashman v. Cherry, 270 K. 295, 13 P.3d 1265 (2000).

69. When multiple tortfeasors are involved, individual policies are to be compared separately with underinsured motorist coverage. Stafford v. State Farm Mut. Automobile Ins. Co., 27 K.A.2d 224, 1 P.3d 924 (2000).

70. Insured gave proper notice of tentative settlement to underinsured motorist insurer; upon failure to respond in 60 days, insurer cannot deny underinsured motorists benefits because insured executed settlement agreement with tortfeasor and tortfeasor's insurance company. Anderson v. Employers Mutual Casualty Ins. Co., 27 K.A.2d 623, 6 P.3d 918 (2000).

71. No requirement that supplemental payment provisions of policy be imputed to uninsured/underinsured coverage. Mitchell v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 271 K. 684, 24 P.3d 711 (2001).

72. Plaintiffs cannot recover for bodily injuries under their PIP coverage where tortfeasor is insured but cannot be located for service of process. Loveless v. American Family Mut. Ins. Co, 29 K.A.2d 223, 24 P.3d 198 (2001).

73. Defendant's 44-504 subrogation lien attaches to 40-284 substitute payment to plaintiff. Loucks v. Gallagher Woodsmall, Inc., 272 K. 710, 35 P.3d 782 (2001).

74. Underinsured motorist coverage does not apply when the underinsured motorist coverage equals or does not exceed the limits of policy applicable to other motor vehicle. Halsey v. Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co., 275 K. 129, 61 P.3d 691 (2003).

75. Passenger in one car accident whose injuries were compensated by insurance company may testify on behalf of driver; policy exclusion of such is void. Cannon v. Farmers Ins. Co., 274 K. 166, 50 P.3d 48 (2002).

76. Deputy sheriff entitled to uninsured motorist coverage; vehicle titled by sheriff's department imputed to belong to county; insurance company entitled to be credited for workers compensation benefits awarded deputy. Tyler v. Employers Mut. Cas. Co., 274 K. 227, 49 P.3d 511 (2002).

77. Significant other is not a "resident relative" for purposes of receiving benefits on underinsured auto policy. Taylor v. Allstate Indemnity Co., 30 K.A.2d 595, 43 P.3d 260 (2002).

78. Underinsured motorist insurance provider liable to pay difference between insured's pro rata share in settlement with tortfeasor and insured's total damages up to limits of policy. O'Donoghue v. Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co., 275 K. 430, 66 P.3d 822 (2003).

79. Person receiving maximum recovery under uninsured provisions of policy may not recover benefits under underinsured provision of same policy or any other policy issued by same insurer. Brown v. Farmers Ins. Co., 31 K.A.2d 419, 65 P.3d 1063 (2003).

80. When both have UIM coverage, vehicle owner's policy is primary and driver's policy excess. Narron v. Cincinnati Ins. Co., 32 K.A.2d 28, 78 P.3d 1188 (2003).

81. Plaintiff driver of vehicle entitled to recover excess damages on her underinsured motorist insurance coverage after primary underinsured motorist coverage of owner of vehicle was exhausted. Narron v. Cincinnati Ins. Co., 278 K. 365, 97 P.3d 1042 (2004).

82. Insured did not breach his insurance policy regarding underinsured motorist coverage by dismissing action against tortfeasor (who had returned to Mexico). Loucks v. Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co., 33 K.A.2d 288, 101 P.3d 1271 (2004).

83. Stacking of underinsured motorist coverage from separate policies is prohibited. Barlett v. CNA, 33 K.A.2d 519, 104 P.3d 1011 (2005).

84. Self-insurers are not required to provide uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage. Farmers Ins. Co. v. Southwestern Bell Tel. Co., 279 K. 976, 113 P.3d 258 (2005).

85. Claimant's UIM coverage held not to exceed limits of bodily injury coverage of operator of other vehicle; no entitlement to UIM benefits. Tilley v. Allied Property & Cas. Ins. Co., 33 K.A.2d 923, 111 P.3d 188 (2005).

86. No specific type of waiver form needed to delete uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage from umbrella policy. McNally v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 446 F.Supp.2d 1192, 1202 (2005).

87. Umbrella policy does not become the primary auto policy simply because the insured has exhausted the limits of the primary policy. Fiorella v. Travelers Property Cas. Inc. Co., 36 K.A.2d 597, 602, 142 P.3d 321 (2006).

88. Underinsured motorcycle was provided for the insured's regular use where she rode it with her husband two or three times a month. Davis v. Allstate Insurance Co., 36 K.A.2d 717, 719, 143 P.3d 413 (2006).

89. Mentioned; summary judgment denied insurer where policy language in dispute. Long v. American Standard Ins. Co. of Wis., 483 F.Supp.2d 1099, 1101 (2007).

90. Section applied in uninsured motorist coverage claim; policy properly excluded coverage when no disinterested witness existed. Russell v. Farmers Inc. Co., 38 K.A.2d 290, 294, 295, 296, 163 P.3d 1266 (2007).

91. 40-284 and 40-256 are analyzed and applied regarding uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage. Phillips v. St. Paul Fire and Marine Ins. Co., 39 K.A.2d 758, 760, 762 to 764, 184 P.3d 280 (2008).

92. Cited; insurer subrogated to rights of injured party but failed to request reimbursement before statute of limitation expired. Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co. v. Progressive Direct Ins. Co., 40 K.A.2d 123, 125 to 127, 129, 131, 190 P.3d 989 (2008).

93. Cited; where underinsured motorist coverage exceeds limits of bodily injury coverage carried by owner of other car, UIM coverage exists. Stemple v. Zurich American Ins. Co., 584 F.Supp.2d 1304, 1307 to 1310, 1312, 1314 (2008).

94. Earlier rejection of higher limits for uninsured motorist insurance controls any subsequent policy unless insured revokes earlier rejection. Phillips v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 289 K. 521, 213 P.3d 1066 (2009).

95. No uninsured motorist benefits found for non-permissive users of insured vehicles or passengers of non-permissive users. Long v. St. Paul Fire and Marine Ins. Co., 589 F.3d 1075 (10th Cir. 2009).

96. Statutory cap in K.S.A. 75-6105 has no effect on recovery of damages for underinsured motorist coverage. Speer v. Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co., 43 K.A.2d 520, 226 P.3d 558 (2010).

97. Binding election of lower bodily injury limit of liability in compliance with statute. Ochs v. Federal Mut. Ins. Co., 43 K.A.2d 127, 221 P.3d 622 (2010).

98. Any insurer may exclude or limit the recovery of future medical expenses under UM or UIM coverage when a workers compensation claimant is allowed to apply for the reimbursement of future medical expenses. Bussman v. Safeco Ins. Co. of America, 298 K. 700, 317 P.3d 70 (2014).

99. When determining whether underinsured motorist coverage is available under the provisions of subsection (b), a court must determine that: (1) The tortfeasor's liability coverage is below the claimant's liability coverage; and (2) the claimant has damages in excess of the tortfeasor's liability coverage. E.H. ex rel. Hemenway v. Auto. Club Inter-Ins. Exch., 57 K.A.2d 109, 447 P.3d 382 (2019).

100. Any rejection of uninsured coverage in excess of the statutory minimum must be in writing and be the product of an affirmative, unequivocal act specifying the insured's rejection of excess coverage. McLean v. Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, P.A., 60 K.A.2d 283, 289, 493 P.3d 968 (2021).

 | Next

12/30/2022 Meeting Notice  Agenda
11/16/2022 Meeting Notice Agenda
9/23/2022 Meeting Notice Agenda
6/16/2022 Meeting Notice Agenda
2/23/2022 Meeting Notice Agenda
1/7/2022 Meeting Notice Agenda

LCC Policies

6/29/2022 Meeting Notice Agenda

2021 Interim Assignments
2022 Valid Section Numbers
Chapter 72 Statute Transfer List
Kansas School Equity & Enhancement Act
Gannon v. State
Information for Special Session 2021
General Information, Legal Analysis & Research
2022 Amended & Repealed Statutes
2021 Amended & Repealed Statutes
2020 Amended & repealed Statutes
2019 Amended & Repealed Statutes

Session Laws

Kansas Legislature
Administrative Services
Division of Post Audit
Research Department