Shada v. Farmers Ins. Exch., 840 N.W.2d 856

Shada filed contract claim against Farmers for underinsured motorist benefits related to a 1996 accident with Hinze.
Shada settled with Hinze’s insurer on December 28, 2001 with Farmers’ consent.
Shada admitted she never made a formal demand for UM/UIM benefits before filing suit on January 4, 2011.
District court held the 5-year contract statute began upon settlement, barring the claim.
Court acknowledged Snyder v. EMCASCO Ins. Co. as controlling but adopted a contrary rule in the reconsideration order.
This appeal challenges when the limitations period commenced and whether the Snyder rule applies.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
When does the UM/UIM accrual occur under Nebraska law?	Shada—accrual at insurer’s breach per Snyder.	Farmers—accrual at underlying settlement or denial date.	Accrual occurs at insurer’s breach; Snyder controls.
Does Snyder foreclose the district court’s minority-accrual rule?	Snyder is binding; contract accrual.	District court properly adopted minority view in reconsideration.	Yes, Snyder governs; district court erred.
Is the 5-year contract statute applicable given timely underlying claim?	Contract statute governs since underlying claim was timely.	Statute runs from breach or denial; timing post-settlement matters.	Statutory accrual under Snyder; not time-barred.

Snyder v. EMCASCO Ins. Co., 259 Neb. 621 (2000) (accrual on insurer's breach; contract-based limitations apply)
Schrader v. Farmers Mut. Ins. Co., 259 Neb. 87 (2000) (UM/UIM is a contract; majority accrual principles)
Dworak v. Farmers Ins. Exch., 269 Neb. 386 (2005) (UM/UIM indemnity contract context)