Nebraska Uninsured & Underinsured Motorist Coverage

Nebraska requires both UM and UIM on qualifying policies

Section 44-6408(1) requires uninsured-motorist and underinsured-motorist bodily-injury coverage when a qualifying liability policy is delivered, issued for delivery or renewed for a motor vehicle principally garaged in Nebraska. The protection concerns insured persons legally entitled to compensatory damages for bodily injury, sickness, disease or death from the uninsured or underinsured owner or operator. This provision is not an automatic property-damage benefit. Source: Neb. Rev. Stat. § 44-6408(1).

Minimum first-party limits are 25 / 50

For each required coverage, the minimum is $25,000 for one person’s injury or death in one accident and, subject to that per-person limit, $50,000 for two or more persons in one accident. These figures are coverage limits, not a valuation of the injuries or a promise that the full limit is payable. Obtain the declarations and all UM/UIM endorsements to establish the actual limits purchased. Source: § 44-6408(1)(a)-(b).

The higher-limit requirement is not a ceiling on what may be sold

On the named insured’s written request, the insurer must provide higher limits in accordance with its rating plan and rules, but this statutory duty does not require limits above $100,000 per person and $300,000 per accident. That is a limit on the compulsory offer, not a prohibition against greater protection. Section 44-6413(4) expressly permits higher limits or terms more favorable to the insured. Source: § 44-6408(2)-(3). Source: § 44-6413(4).

Identify the insured person and every potentially applicable policy

Obtain the policy and endorsements, record the accident and policy dates, and distinguish coverage under the occupied vehicle’s policy from household, employer or other possible coverage. These are investigative steps, not a finding that each policy applies. Separately examine limits, permitted exclusions, priority, offsets and settlement conditions. Multiple policies do not necessarily mean their limits can be added; use the stacking and priority guide.

Excess and umbrella insurers are not required by section 44-6413(2) to offer or provide coverage conforming to the Act. That does not prove that a particular umbrella policy contains no UM/UIM coverage; read the contract. Source: § 44-6413(2), (4).

Permissive occupants have a specific insured-definition protection

A policy subject to the Act cannot define an insured for UM/UIM purposes to exclude a person occupying the insured motor vehicle with the express or implied permission of an insured. Preserve the facts establishing occupancy and permission. This protection against a restrictive definition does not dispense with the other requirements for proving a covered loss, legal liability or damages. Source: § 44-6413(5).

Check the precise exclusion, not a general description of it

Section 44-6413(1) identifies exclusions concerning certain settlements or judgments without consent, specified owned vehicles, certain public or livery use, being struck by an identified owned vehicle, and expiration of the underlying claim’s limitation period. Each has its own wording. For example, the consent provision includes an adverse-effect condition and a statutory UIM exception. A statement that an exclusion exists does not establish every fact needed to apply it. More favorable policy protection must also be considered. Source: § 44-6413(1)(a)-(e), (4).

Before a liability-limits settlement, protect the UIM claim

When a tentative agreement to settle for liability limits is reached with an underinsured vehicle’s owner or operator, section 44-6412(2) requires the insured to notify the UIM insurer in writing by certified or registered mail. The notice must include written documentation of lost wages and medical bills, plus written authorization to obtain reports from all employers and medical providers. Keep the complete submission and proof of receipt; an informal phone call or ordinary email is not the method specified in this provision. Source: § 44-6412(2).

The insurer has thirty days after receipt of the notice to substitute its payment for the tentative settlement amount. If it does not make that payment within the statutory period, the statute removes its subrogation right for UIM payments. Section 44-6413(1)(a) provides the corresponding UIM exception to its consent limitation when the insured has complied and the insurer has failed to make the required protective payment. This is not automatic approval of the claim or an unconditional promise of UIM benefits. Read the settlement guide’s notice and release sequence before signing. Source: § 44-6412(2). Source: § 44-6413(1)(a).

The underlying claim has its own deadline

Section 44-6413(1)(e) addresses expiration of the applicable limitation period on the insured’s claim against the uninsured or underinsured motorist. Do not assume that notifying your insurer, negotiating, or waiting through the substitution period preserves the claim against a responsible person. Track each potentially liable party and the applicable filing or settlement steps separately. Calculate deadlines from the actual facts, policy and governing law rather than from a general insurance timeline. Source: § 44-6413(1)(e).

Do not apply the 2008 Steffen vehicle holding without checking the 2009 amendment

Steffen v. Progressive Northern Insurance Co., 276 Neb. 378, 754 N.W.2d 730 (2008), considered a farm-tractor exclusion under an earlier statutory version and also addressed a distinct limitations issue. In 2009, LB152 removed the word motor from the vehicle descriptions in section 44-6413(1)(b) and (c) and added the permissive-occupant provision in subsection (5). The current statute must therefore be read alongside the older decision; the tractor-specific result is not a sound basis for assuming the same result under later law. Nor does that amendment establish that every separate part of Steffen was displaced. Source: official Steffen opinion. Source: Laws 2009, LB152, § 1. Current § 44-6413.

Review scope: This update explains the linked statutory provisions and flags an identified historical-law change. It does not certify all later case treatment, historical policy applications, claim deadlines or insurer calculations. Those questions remain subject to further review. For a shared vehicle, also examine the separate peer-to-peer coverage framework.