ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT
On August 10, 1975, Marshall Davis allegedly suffered an $18,310.00 loss when his house was burglarized. Davis submitted a рroof of loss statement to his insurer, State Farm and Casualty Company, on October 1, 1975. State Farm rejected the claim on November 24, 1975. On August 11, 1981, Davis filed the present multi-million dollar action against State Farm for bad faith rеfusal to pay an insurance claim.
A claim alleging an insurer’s bad faith mаy be pursued under either a contract or tort theory. Thus, the plaintiff has the freedom to elect between an action in tort and onе in contract.
McDowell v. Union Mutual Life Insurance Co.,
Generally, a cause of action on a written contract is controlled by the six-year statute of limitations contained in NRS § 11.190(l)(b). Here, however, the insurance contract on which Davis predicates his contract cause of action contains a clause limiting the time for bringing action upon the contrаct to a twelve-month period. The clause reads:
No suit or action on this policy for the recovery of any claim shall be sustainаble in any court of law or equity unless all the requirements of this policy shall have been complied with, and unless commenced within 12 months next after inception of the loss.
A contractual stipulation such as this, is enforceable as long as it is reasonable. Annot.,
A contractual limitation of the period in which to bring suit is reasonable if it provides the insurer with рrompt notice of the claim, yet allows the insured sufficient time after the rejection of the claim to investigate the claim and bring the аction. Here, the twelve-month period was a reasonable balance of the competing interests of the insured and the insurer.
See Clark v. Truck Ins. Exchange,
In the alternative, Davis contends that the present action may bе maintained on a tort theory. For the action to be timely under a tort theory it would have to be covered by the six-year statute of limitations contained in § 11.190(l)(b). Davis argues that the bad faith tort claim comes within this section because it is “founded” upon the insurance contract, but it has been established that tort action for an insurer’s bad faith is not “founded upon an instrument in writing” as contemplated by § 11.-190(l)(b).
See El Ranco, Inc. v. New York Meat & Prov.,
Instead, the bad faith tort claim is controlled by the four-year statute of limitations covering actions upon a “liability not founded upon an instrument in writing.” NRS § 11.190(2)(c);
See McDowell v. Union Mutual Life Insurance Co.,
In consideration of the premises,
IT HEREBY IS ORDERED that summary judgment shall be entered in favor оf defendant and against plaintiff to the effect that this action be dismissed with prejudice.