Antistacking Provisions (Insurance) - Definition
If you still have questions or prefer to get help directly from an agent, please submit a request.
We’ll get back to you as soon as possible.
- Accounting, Taxation, and Reporting
Law, Transactions, & Risk Management
Government, Legal System, Administrative Law, & Constitutional Law Legal Disputes - Civil & Criminal Law Agency Law HR, Employment, Labor, & Discrimination Business Entities, Corporate Governance & Ownership Business Transactions, Antitrust, & Securities Law Real Estate, Personal, & Intellectual Property Commercial Law: Contract, Payments, Security Interests, & Bankruptcy Consumer Protection Insurance & Risk Management Immigration Law Environmental Protection Law Inheritance, Estates, and Trusts
- Marketing, Advertising, Sales & PR
- Business Management & Operations
- Economics, Finance, & Analytics
- Professionalism & Career Development
Back To: INSURANCE & RISK MANAGEMENT
Anti-Stacking Provisions Definition
An Anti-Stacking Provision is used in insurance policy to prevent multiple applications of deductibles or limits to a single loss or insured event. Insurance companies use stacking provisions or anti-stacking provisions for policies that last for a long period of time and are exposed to many insured risks. Anti-stacking provisions prohibit more than one limit or deductible to the applied to a single insured event. Usually, insurance policies that cover exposures that last for a long period of time often entail coverage under multiple policies which the anti-stacking provisions help to prevent.
A Little More on What are Anti-Stacking Provisions
In a simple language, anti-slack provisions prevent an insured from collecting damages from many insurance companies on a single insured event. The insured party is only allowed to have a single limit or deductible from a single occurrence. If an insured party makes multiple claims or collects multiple damages from a single insured event results in much liabilities for insurance companies. In abid to limit their liabilities, insurance companies often use the anti-stacking provisions. In auto insurance policies, anti-stacking provisions are commonly used, due to different classes of insured persons under the auto insurance policies, using the anti-stacking provision is important in the auto insurance industry. Depending on the language of a policy and its provisions, stacking can be permissible in some insurance policies. In certain cases, the court in a state can also determine whether stacking is allowed or not, especially when the parties involved are pitched on different sides when it comes to interpretation of whether stacking is allowed or not. Policyholders are often required to understand their policies as to whether stack is allowed or otherwise.
Reference for Anti-Stacking Provisions
Academics research on Anti-Stacking Provisions
Why Arkansas Should Overturn Its Anti-Stacking Precedent: A Look at Aggregating Uninsured and Underinsured Motorist Coverage, Chamberlin, N., & Holt, J. S. (1998). Why Arkansas Should Overturn Its Anti-Stacking Precedent: A Look at Aggregating Uninsured and Underinsured Motorist Coverage.UALR L. Rev.,21, 413. The Essential Facilities Doctrine in the Sunlight: Stacking Patented Genetic Traits in Agriculture, Purcell Jr, J. M. (2011). The Essential Facilities Doctrine in the Sunlight: Stacking Patented Genetic Traits in Agriculture.. John's L. Rev.,85, 1251. Automobile Insurance-Uninsured Motorists-Public Policy Demands thatAnti-Stacking ProvisionsBe Held Void as Against Public Policy, Craig, P. (1997). Automobile Insurance-Uninsured Motorists-Public Policy Demands that Anti-Stacking Provisions Be Held Void as Against Public Policy.Miss. LJ,67, 585. State Farm v. Lindsey: What Limits on Arizona's Anti-Stacking Statute, Guldner, J. B. (1995). State Farm v. Lindsey: What Limits on Arizona's Anti-Stacking Statute.Ariz. St. LJ,27, 265. State Farm v. Lindsey: What Limits on Arizona's Anti-Stacking Statute, Guldner, J. B. (1995). State Farm v. Lindsey: What Limits on Arizona's Anti-Stacking Statute.Ariz. St. LJ,27, 265.