Warning

Info

Warning

Info

Warning

Info

LSDefine

Simple English definitions for legal terms

immediate-notice clause

Read a random definition: fitness for a particular purpose

A quick definition of immediate-notice clause:

An immediate-notice clause is a rule in many insurance policies that requires the insured person to tell the insurance company as soon as possible after something happens that might lead to a claim. This means that the person must let the company know quickly, usually within a reasonable amount of time. The policy might use words like "prompt," "immediate," "at once," or "as soon as possible" to describe how quickly the person needs to give notice.

A more thorough explanation:

An immediate-notice clause is a provision found in many insurance policies that requires the insured to inform the insurer as soon as possible after a claim arises. This clause is also known as a prompt-notice clause.

When an insurance policy includes an immediate-notice clause, it means that the insured must notify the insurer within a reasonable time under the circumstances. The clause may use phrases such as "immediately," "at once," "forthwith," "as soon as practicable," or "as soon as possible."

For example, if a homeowner's property is damaged by a storm, the homeowner must notify their insurance company immediately. If the homeowner waits too long to report the damage, the insurer may deny the claim.

Similarly, if a driver is involved in a car accident, they must inform their auto insurance company as soon as possible. Failing to do so could result in the insurer denying coverage for the accident.

These examples illustrate how an immediate-notice clause works in practice. By requiring prompt notification of claims, insurers can investigate and process claims more efficiently, which benefits both the insurer and the insured.

immediate notice | immediate past president

Warning

Info

General

General chat about the legal profession.
main_chatroom
👍 Chat vibe: 0 👎
Help us make LSD better!
Tell us what's important to you
Dont agree dkk but out of messages so this is a talk for another day
17:34
@LawIsForPeasants: I just want you to know that: you matter, you are important, and finally, I am proud of you. :D
That is so fucking cringe and leave me alone
llama i appreciate you
17:35
@LawIsForPeasants: while charlie kirk's facts do not care about your feelings, just know that I do!
texaslawhopefully
17:36
@Dkk: Fair enough, but if you're using political philosophy to defend Trump, it's hard to reconcile him as a candidate with very relevant classic political theory, like Locke's individual rights and limited government as illustrated in the 2nd treatise, or the constitutional framework limiting executive power (e.g., Federalist 51). Trump's disregard for constitutional checks and populist rhetoric directly is in tension with our very foundational principles.
Dkk
17:36
@SplitterusClitterus: sounds good. Trying to paint a wine glass rn anyway after I just woke up.
Dkk
17:37
@texaslawhopefully: Psssh I would not use gender relations as a way to defend Trump. He does not go that route and I think literally him and everyone in their cabinet has no idea what those are. I mean, just look at how many divorces Elon and Trump have had.
texaslawhopefully
17:38
Was that not why you said you voted for him?
17:38
@KnowledgeableRitzyWasp: can I ask what “2 years retroactive withdrawals” means
17:39
elon and trump realize there are many fish in the sea, and sometimes u can't just 'make it work'
@sadpadresfan: grades changed to W for two consecutive years of classes
Dkk
17:39
Nah, I did not vote. I have never voted in my life because I have a lot of issues with it. 4 years ago my mom filled out my ballot for me because she wanted to but I do not vote.
17:40
based fellow non voter
@llama i do not need or desire external validation.
17:40
@KnowledgeableRitzyWasp: ah I see
17:41
@LawIsForPeasants: ok, sorry, I will not bother u while u 'self validate yourself in the corner' my bad.
@llama: im self validating so hard rn
17:42
@KnowledgeableRitzyWasp: thats very ithica of you, wasp.
texaslawhopefully
17:44
@KnowledgeableRitzyWasp: Out of curiosity, since you're in law school and prolly know fedsoc people, how conservative do you think you have to be to be in fedsoc? Like is a david french sort of conservative fairly common in it, or is it the maga type people mainly
i dont interact with any fedsoc people, but i dont know any maga people at cornell. but the student body overwhelmingly leans left, so i think they might not be comfortable showing that theyre conservative if that makes sense?
one time a guy kind of crashed out about masks in conlaw
but that's the most ive seen
texaslawhopefully
17:47
Yeah, that does make sense. I would like to join fedsoc, but I'm also, clearly, very opposed to Trump and where the GOP has gone.
if you join fedsoc and go for clerking and eventually become a judge. you will be pinholed into maga politics as long as maga is the predominant conservative stance
Idk if @irishdinosaur is online but congrats on UCLA!!
next you will say you want to be the first black kkk grand wizard
@SaddestPortlander: tysm!!!!
texaslawhopefully
18:00
yes congrats irishdinosaur! that's incredible
18:03
@IrishDinosaur: you inspire me and my completely misguided cope that I might ever get into UCLA
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.