Does Nevada Allow UM/UIM Stacking? What NRS 687B.145 Says

By the FigureMyTax Editorial Team · How we calculate

Nevada neither bans nor guarantees stacking. A policy may cap recovery at the higher of the applicable limits, prorated, but only in clear and prominent language, and the clause is void if you paid a premium calculated for full reimbursement under separate coverage.

The limiting clause

Section 687B.145(1) lets any policy providing UM or UIM, or other casualty insurance, say that if you have coverage under more than one policy or provision, any recovery or benefits may equal but not exceed the higher of the applicable limits and must be prorated in the proportion that their limits bear to the aggregate.

The conditions

The clause must be in clear language and prominently displayed in the policy, binder or endorsement. It is void if the named insured purchased separate coverage on the same risk and paid a premium calculated for full reimbursement under that coverage.

Required offers

Insurers must offer UM and UIM in an amount equal to the bodily injury limits sold, on a form approved by the Commissioner, and the coverage must let you recover up to your own limits the damages from the other driver that exceed that driver's limits (subsection 2). UM must be provided unless a named insured rejects it in writing on the insurer's form (NRS 690B.020).

What it leaves open

The statute does not define what a premium "calculated for full reimbursement" is or how a court decides, and we did not read Nevada decisions applying it. Ask an attorney before assuming your limits add up or do not.

How to use this

Compare the results in the Nevada UM/UIM stacking calculator, start with the plain-English stacked versus single-limit explainer, and read how Nevada UM and UIM work.

This is general information, not legal advice, and the state comparisons above are illustrative, not an exhaustive survey. Confirm how Nevada's rules apply to your specific case with a licensed Nevada attorney.