From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Igert v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.

Supreme Court of Nevada
Apr 16, 1975
91 Nev. 240 (Nev. 1975)

Summary

enforcing an agreement that released "all claims under the policy because of bodily injuries known and unknown"

Summary of this case from Magpiong v. Superdry Retail LLC

Opinion

No. 7666

April 16, 1975

Appeal from Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Keith C. Hayes, Judge.

John Marshall, of Las Vegas, for Appellant.

Rose, Norwood Edwards, Ltd., and Niels L. Pearson, of Las Vegas, for Respondent.


OPINION


Ernestine Igert, while driving an automobile, collided with an automobile driven by an uninsured motorist and sustained bodily injuries for which she incurred medical and hospital expenses in the amount of $1,154.10. Subsequently, and with the approval of her counsel, she negotiated a settlement with her own insurance company, State Farm, for the sum of $3,000 and executed a release "in full settlement and final discharge of all claims under the policy because of bodily injuries known and unknown. . . ."

The district court deemed the release to preclude her present action to recover medical and hospital expenses. We agree, since her complaint does not allege fraud, duress, mistake or any other basis for avoiding the release. Sibson v. Farmers Insurance Group, 88 Nev. 417, 498 P.2d 1331 (1972); Las Vegas Ins. Adjusters v. Page, 88 Nev. 16, 492 P.2d 616 (1972).

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Igert v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.

Supreme Court of Nevada
Apr 16, 1975
91 Nev. 240 (Nev. 1975)

enforcing an agreement that released "all claims under the policy because of bodily injuries known and unknown"

Summary of this case from Magpiong v. Superdry Retail LLC
Case details for

Igert v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.

Case Details

Full title:ERNESTINE IGERT, APPELLANT, v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE CO.…

Court:Supreme Court of Nevada

Date published: Apr 16, 1975

Citations

91 Nev. 240 (Nev. 1975)
533 P.2d 1365

Citing Cases

Russ v. General Motors Corp.

Because Sachs was expressly named in the release, interpretation of the "all other persons, firms, or…

Razaghi v. Razaghi Dev. Co.

Defendants argue that a release can only be avoided based on “fraud, duress, mistake or any other basis for…