(1) (a) (I) Except as described in subsection (1)(a)(II) of this section, an automobile liability or motor vehicle liability policy insuring against loss resulting from liability imposed by law for bodily injury or death suffered by any person arising out of the ownership, maintenance, or use of a motor vehicle, which policy is delivered or issued for delivery in this state with respect to any motor vehicle licensed for highway use in this state, must provide coverage or supplemental coverage, in limits for bodily injury or death set forth in section 42-7-103 (2), under provisions approved by the commissioner, for the protection of persons insured under the policy who are legally entitled to recover damages from owners or operators of uninsured motor vehicles because of bodily injury, sickness, or disease, including death, resulting from a motor vehicle accident.
(II) Subsection (1)(a)(I) of this section does not apply if the named insured rejects the coverage described in subsection (1)(a)(I) of this section in writing; except that, if the named insured is a transportation network company, as defined in section 40-10.1-602 (3), securing coverage for a transportation network company driver, as defined in section 40-10.1-602 (4), to protect against damages caused by uninsured motorists, as described in section 40-10.1-604 (2.5), the named insured may not reject the coverage for periods when the transportation network company driver is engaged in a prearranged ride, as defined in section 40-10.1-602 (2).
(b) This subsection (1) shall not apply to motor vehicle rental agreements or motor vehicle rental companies.
(c) The coverage described in paragraph (a) of this subsection (1) shall be in addition to any legal liability coverage and shall cover the difference, if any, between the amount of the limits of any legal liability coverage and the amount of the damages sustained, excluding exemplary damages, up to the maximum amount of the coverage obtained pursuant to this section. A single policy or endorsement for uninsured or underinsured motor vehicle coverage issued for a single premium covering multiple vehicles may be limited to applying once per accident. The amount of the coverage available pursuant to this section shall not be reduced by a setoff from any other coverage, including, but not limited to, legal liability insurance, medical payments coverage, health insurance, or other uninsured or underinsured motor vehicle insurance.
(2) Before the policy is issued or renewed, the insurer shall offer the named insured the right to obtain uninsured motorist coverage in an amount equal to the insured's bodily injury liability limits, but in no event shall the insurer be required to offer limits higher than the insured's bodily injury liability limits.
(3) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (2) of this section, after selection of limits by the insured or the exercise of the option not to purchase the coverages described in this section, no insurer nor any affiliated insurer shall be required to notify any policyholder in any renewal or replacement policy, as to the availability of such coverage or optional limits. However, the insured may, subject to the limitations expressed in this section, make a written request for additional coverage or coverage more extensive than that provided on a prior policy.
(4) Uninsured motorist coverage shall include coverage for damage for bodily injury or death that an insured is legally entitled to collect from the owner or driver of an underinsured motor vehicle. An underinsured motor vehicle is a land motor vehicle, the ownership, maintenance, or use of which is insured or bonded for bodily injury or death at the time of the accident.
(5) (Deleted by amendment, L. 2007, p. 1921, § 2, effective January 1, 2008.)
(6) An alleged tortfeasor shall be deemed to be uninsured solely for the purpose of allowing the insured party to receive payment under uninsured motorist coverage, regardless of whether the alleged tortfeasor was actually insured, if:
(a) The alleged tortfeasor cannot be located for service of process after a reasonable attempt to serve the alleged tortfeasor; and
(b) (I) Service of process on the insurance carrier as authorized by section 42-7-414 (3), C.R.S., is determined by a court to be insufficient or ineffective after reasonable effort has failed; or
(II) (A) The report of a law enforcement agency investigating the motor vehicle accident fails to disclose the insurance company covering the alleged tortfeasor's motor vehicle; and
(B) The alleged tortfeasor's insurance coverage when the incident occurred is not actually known by the person attempting to serve process.
(7) Nothing in subsection (6) of this section voids the alleged tortfeasor's policy if the alleged tortfeasor was actually insured.
Source: L. 79: Entire section added, p. 377, § 11, effective July 1. L. 83: Entire section R&RE, p. 454, § 1, effective November 5. L. 92: (2) amended, p. 1759, § 4, effective June 5. L. 95: (1) amended, p. 143, § 4, effective April 7. L. 2007: (1)(c) added and (2), (4), and (5) amended, p. 1921, §§ 1, 2, effective January 1, 2008. L. 2010: (6) and (7) added, (HB 10-1164), ch. 196, p. 845, § 1, effective January 1, 2011. L. 2022: (1)(a) amended, (HB 22-1089), ch. 169, p. 1037, § 2, effective August 10.
Notes of Decisions
Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co. v. McMichael, 906 P.2d 92 (Colo. 1995).
· cites it 181× “The court of appeals held that the public policy of section 10-4-609, 4A C.R.S. (1994), required insurers to provide UM/UIM coverage to a class of individuals as broad as the class provided with liability coverage under the terms of the automobile insurance policy.”
Passamano v. Travelers Indem. Co., 882 P.2d 1312 (Colo. 1994).
· cites it 206× “In this case, we must give full effect to the language of the General Assembly requiring all insurers to offer uninsured motorist coverage, as set forth in section 10-4-609, as well as the definitional provisions of section 10-4-601(2).”
Allstate Ins. Co. v. Parfrey, 830 P.2d 905 (Colo. 1992).
· cites it 86× “Although we do not totally agree with the court of appeals’ construction of section 10-4-609 with respect to an insurer’s statutory duty to offer higher UM/UIM coverage, we do agree with the court of appeals’ holding that the statute creates a private cause of action for the…”
State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Johnson, 396 P.3d 651 (Colo. 2017).
· cites it 30× “First, does the UM/UIM statute, section 10-4-609, C.R.S. (2016), require each named insured to reject such coverage, or is one named insured’s rejection binding on all? And second, did the legislature, by enacting section 10-4-609, abrogate the common law agency principles of…”
Calderon v. Am. Fam. Mut. Ins. Co., 2016 CO 72 (Colo. 2016).
· cites it 95× “UM/UIM Coverage ¶27 The majority concludes that section 10-4-609, which governs the UM/UIM coverage that Calderon purchased from American Family, prohibits the $5,000 setoff.”
USAA v. Parker, 200 P.3d 350 (Colo. 2009).
· cites it 58× “Parker also filed a third party complaint against USAA for UIM benefits, alleging that the litigation determining Maxwell's liability for Parker's injuries "should determine the liability of USAA for payment of underinsured benefits as required by Colorado statute C.R.S.…”
State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Brekke, 105 P.3d 177 (Colo. 2005).
· cites it 50× “As we explain in the body of the opinion, UM coverage *181 mandated by section 10-4-609, C.R.S. (2004) is diluted if an insurance company contractually prohibits a default judgment from establishing the liability of an uninsured motorist.”
Apodaca v. Allstate Ins. Co., 255 P.3d 1099 (Colo. 2011).
· cites it 65× “The Uninsured Motorist Act, section 10-4-609, C.R.S. (2010), requires insurers to offer uninsured/underinsured motorist ("UM/UIM") coverage with every "automobile lability or motor vehicle liability" policy sold in Colorado.”
Jordan v. Safeco Ins. Co. of Am., 348 P.3d 443 (Colo. Ct. App. 2013).
· cites it 56× “Under section 10-4-609, C.R.S.2012, as amended effective January 1, 2008, may an insurer providing underinsured motorist (UIM) insurance deny an insured such coverage for the difference between the limit of the tort-feasor's liability insurance coverage and the amount of a…”
Shelter Mut. Ins. Co. v. Thompson, 852 P.2d 459 (Colo. 1993).
· cites it 55× “We find, therefore, that the decision of the court of appeals is irreconcilable with the plain language of section 10-4-609, 4A C.R.S. (1979, 1983 & 1987), and existing Colorado case law.”
Am. Fam. Mut. Ins. Co. v. Ashour, 2017 COA 67 (Colo. Ct. App. 2017).
· cites it 34× “. . .” Id. at 1268. ¶ 32 The division determined that the insurance company’s interpretation of the policy to deny coverage when the tortfeasor was immune from suit under the CGIA violated public policy.”
Terranova v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 800 P.2d 58 (Colo. 1990).
· cites it 24× “The petitioners contend that the exclusion of a vehicle insured under the policy’s liability terms from uninsured motor vehicle coverage violates the legislative policies underlying section 10-4-609, 4A C.R.S. (1987). Section 10-4-609 provides in part: (1) No automobile…”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 10-4-609(1) — 50 cases
Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co. v. McMichael, 906 P.2d 92 (Colo. 1995).
“The court of appeals held that the public policy of section 10-4-609, 4A C.R.S. (1994), required insurers to provide UM/UIM coverage to a class of individuals as broad as the class provided with liability coverage under the terms of the automobile insurance policy.”
Passamano v. Travelers Indem. Co., 882 P.2d 1312 (Colo. 1994).
“In this case, we must give full effect to the language of the General Assembly requiring all insurers to offer uninsured motorist coverage, as set forth in section 10-4-609, as well as the definitional provisions of section 10-4-601(2).”
Allstate Ins. Co. v. Parfrey, 830 P.2d 905 (Colo. 1992).
“Although we do not totally agree with the court of appeals’ construction of section 10-4-609 with respect to an insurer’s statutory duty to offer higher UM/UIM coverage, we do agree with the court of appeals’ holding that the statute creates a private cause of action for the…”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 10-4-609(1)(a) — 33 cases
Apodaca v. Allstate Ins. Co., 255 P.3d 1099 (Colo. 2011).
“The Uninsured Motorist Act, section 10-4-609, C.R.S. (2010), requires insurers to offer uninsured/underinsured motorist ("UM/UIM") coverage with every "automobile lability or motor vehicle liability" policy sold in Colorado.”
State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Johnson, 396 P.3d 651 (Colo. 2017).
“First, does the UM/UIM statute, section 10-4-609, C.R.S. (2016), require each named insured to reject such coverage, or is one named insured’s rejection binding on all? And second, did the legislature, by enacting section 10-4-609, abrogate the common law agency principles of…”
Am. Fam. Mut. Ins. Co. v. Ashour, 2017 COA 67 (Colo. Ct. App. 2017).
“. . .” Id. at 1268. ¶ 32 The division determined that the insurance company’s interpretation of the policy to deny coverage when the tortfeasor was immune from suit under the CGIA violated public policy.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 10-4-609(1)(a)(I) — 3 cases
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 10-4-609(1)(b) — 4 cases
v. Scott, 2019 COA 174 (Colo. Ct. App. 2019).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 10-4-609(1)(c) — 18 cases
Calderon v. Am. Fam. Mut. Ins. Co., 2016 CO 72 (Colo. 2016).
“UM/UIM Coverage ¶27 The majority concludes that section 10-4-609, which governs the UM/UIM coverage that Calderon purchased from American Family, prohibits the $5,000 setoff.”
Jordan v. Safeco Ins. Co. of Am., 348 P.3d 443 (Colo. Ct. App. 2013).
“Under section 10-4-609, C.R.S.2012, as amended effective January 1, 2008, may an insurer providing underinsured motorist (UIM) insurance deny an insured such coverage for the difference between the limit of the tort-feasor's liability insurance coverage and the amount of a…”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 10-4-609(2) — 40 cases
Allstate Ins. Co. v. Parfrey, 830 P.2d 905 (Colo. 1992).
“Although we do not totally agree with the court of appeals’ construction of section 10-4-609 with respect to an insurer’s statutory duty to offer higher UM/UIM coverage, we do agree with the court of appeals’ holding that the statute creates a private cause of action for the…”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 10-4-609(3) — 5 cases
Allstate Ins. Co. v. Parfrey, 830 P.2d 905 (Colo. 1992).
“Although we do not totally agree with the court of appeals’ construction of section 10-4-609 with respect to an insurer’s statutory duty to offer higher UM/UIM coverage, we do agree with the court of appeals’ holding that the statute creates a private cause of action for the…”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 10-4-609(4) — 49 cases
USAA v. Parker, 200 P.3d 350 (Colo. 2009).
“Parker also filed a third party complaint against USAA for UIM benefits, alleging that the litigation determining Maxwell's liability for Parker's injuries "should determine the liability of USAA for payment of underinsured benefits as required by Colorado statute C.R.S.…”
Allstate Ins. Co. v. Parfrey, 830 P.2d 905 (Colo. 1992).
“Although we do not totally agree with the court of appeals’ construction of section 10-4-609 with respect to an insurer’s statutory duty to offer higher UM/UIM coverage, we do agree with the court of appeals’ holding that the statute creates a private cause of action for the…”
Terranova v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 800 P.2d 58 (Colo. 1990).
“The petitioners contend that the exclusion of a vehicle insured under the policy’s liability terms from uninsured motor vehicle coverage violates the legislative policies underlying section 10-4-609, 4A C.R.S. (1987). Section 10-4-609 provides in part: (1) No automobile…”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 10-4-609(4)(a) — 8 cases
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 10-4-609(4)(b) — 1 case
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 10-4-609(5) — 26 cases
Jordan v. Safeco Ins. Co. of Am., 348 P.3d 443 (Colo. Ct. App. 2013).
“Under section 10-4-609, C.R.S.2012, as amended effective January 1, 2008, may an insurer providing underinsured motorist (UIM) insurance deny an insured such coverage for the difference between the limit of the tort-feasor's liability insurance coverage and the amount of a…”
USAA v. Parker, 200 P.3d 350 (Colo. 2009).
“Parker also filed a third party complaint against USAA for UIM benefits, alleging that the litigation determining Maxwell's liability for Parker's injuries "should determine the liability of USAA for payment of underinsured benefits as required by Colorado statute C.R.S.…”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 10-4-609(5)(a) — 7 cases
Shelter Mut. Ins. Co. v. Thompson, 852 P.2d 459 (Colo. 1993).
“We find, therefore, that the decision of the court of appeals is irreconcilable with the plain language of section 10-4-609, 4A C.R.S. (1979, 1983 & 1987), and existing Colorado case law.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 10-4-609(5)(b) — 3 cases
Shelter Mut. Ins. Co. v. Thompson, 852 P.2d 459 (Colo. 1993).
“We find, therefore, that the decision of the court of appeals is irreconcilable with the plain language of section 10-4-609, 4A C.R.S. (1979, 1983 & 1987), and existing Colorado case law.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 10-4-609(6) — 2 cases
Apodaca v. Allstate Ins. Co., 255 P.3d 1099 (Colo. 2011).
“The Uninsured Motorist Act, section 10-4-609, C.R.S. (2010), requires insurers to offer uninsured/underinsured motorist ("UM/UIM") coverage with every "automobile lability or motor vehicle liability" policy sold in Colorado.”
Am. Fam. Mut. Ins. Co. v. Ashour, 2017 COA 67 (Colo. Ct. App. 2017).
“. . .” Id. at 1268. ¶ 32 The division determined that the insurance company’s interpretation of the policy to deny coverage when the tortfeasor was immune from suit under the CGIA violated public policy.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 10-4-609(a)(1) — 1 case
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 10-4-609(a)(4) — 1 case
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 10-4-609(l) — 1 case
Passamano v. Travelers Indem. Co., 882 P.2d 1312 (Colo. 1994).
“In this case, we must give full effect to the language of the General Assembly requiring all insurers to offer uninsured motorist coverage, as set forth in section 10-4-609, as well as the definitional provisions of section 10-4-601(2).”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 10-4-609(l)(a) — 12 cases
Calderon v. Am. Fam. Mut. Ins. Co., 2016 CO 72 (Colo. 2016).
“UM/UIM Coverage ¶27 The majority concludes that section 10-4-609, which governs the UM/UIM coverage that Calderon purchased from American Family, prohibits the $5,000 setoff.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 10-4-609(l)(c) — 4 cases
Calderon v. Am. Fam. Mut. Ins. Co., 2016 CO 72 (Colo. 2016).
“UM/UIM Coverage ¶27 The majority concludes that section 10-4-609, which governs the UM/UIM coverage that Calderon purchased from American Family, prohibits the $5,000 setoff.”
Jordan v. Safeco Ins. Co. of Am., 348 P.3d 443 (Colo. Ct. App. 2013).
“Under section 10-4-609, C.R.S.2012, as amended effective January 1, 2008, may an insurer providing underinsured motorist (UIM) insurance deny an insured such coverage for the difference between the limit of the tort-feasor's liability insurance coverage and the amount of a…”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 10-4-609(l)(e) — 3 cases
Jordan v. Safeco Ins. Co. of Am., 348 P.3d 443 (Colo. Ct. App. 2013).
“Under section 10-4-609, C.R.S.2012, as amended effective January 1, 2008, may an insurer providing underinsured motorist (UIM) insurance deny an insured such coverage for the difference between the limit of the tort-feasor's liability insurance coverage and the amount of a…”
Calderon v. Am. Fam. Mut. Ins. Co., 2016 CO 72 (Colo. 2016).
“UM/UIM Coverage ¶27 The majority concludes that section 10-4-609, which governs the UM/UIM coverage that Calderon purchased from American Family, prohibits the $5,000 setoff.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.