<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Passion for Subro &#187; South Dakota</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.passionforsubro.com/category/state-law/south-dakota/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.passionforsubro.com</link>
	<description>The personal subrogation blog of Attorney Adam V. Russo.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 20:35:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Amicus Update 2011</title>
		<link>http://www.passionforsubro.com/made-whole-rule/amicus-update-2011/</link>
		<comments>http://www.passionforsubro.com/made-whole-rule/amicus-update-2011/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Jul 2011 22:55:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>cmonfils</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Made Whole Rule]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New Hampshire]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New Jersey]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Oregon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pennsylvania]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[South Dakota]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Workers' Compensation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.passionforsubro.com/?p=6815</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Subrogator       Spring/Summer 2011 By Kammy Poff, Allstate Insurance Company, Roanoake, VA and Daran Kiefer, Kreiner and Peters Co., LPA, Cleveland, OH Bills/Legislation In February of this year, the National Association of Subrogation Professionals (NASP) embarked on a trip to Pierre, South Dakota. House Bill 1184 had just passed in the South Dakota House of [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.passionforsubro.com/made-whole-rule/amicus-update-2011/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>SOUTH DAKOTA DEFEATS PROPOSED “MADE WHOLE” LEGISLATION</title>
		<link>http://www.passionforsubro.com/made-whole-rule/south-dakota-defeats-proposed-%e2%80%9cmade-whole%e2%80%9d-legislation/</link>
		<comments>http://www.passionforsubro.com/made-whole-rule/south-dakota-defeats-proposed-%e2%80%9cmade-whole%e2%80%9d-legislation/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Mar 2011 12:43:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>cmonfils</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Made Whole Rule]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[South Dakota]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.passionforsubro.com/?p=5613</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Matthiesen &#124; Wickert&#124; Lehrer, S.C March 2011 Newsletter By Melissa M. Stone For a second consecutive year, South Dakota has defeated an attempt to introduce “Made Whole” legislation into the insurance subrogation arena. The “Made Whole” Doctrine is an equitable defense to the subrogation or reimbursement rights of a subrogated insurance carrier or other party, [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.passionforsubro.com/made-whole-rule/south-dakota-defeats-proposed-%e2%80%9cmade-whole%e2%80%9d-legislation/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Amicus Committee Update</title>
		<link>http://www.passionforsubro.com/state-law/nevada/amicus-committee-update-3/</link>
		<comments>http://www.passionforsubro.com/state-law/nevada/amicus-committee-update-3/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Mar 2011 22:00:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>cmonfils</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Nevada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New Hampshire]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[South Dakota]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.passionforsubro.com/?p=5444</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[www.subrogation.org South Dakota House Bill 1184 If you have been following the progress of House Bill 1184, we would like to report that the bill has finally been defeated in the South Dakota Senate.  The full Senate voted 11-24 not to bring the bill to the floor for a debate.  This is the second consecutive [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.passionforsubro.com/state-law/nevada/amicus-committee-update-3/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Amicus Committee Update</title>
		<link>http://www.passionforsubro.com/state-law/connecticut/amicus-committee-update-2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.passionforsubro.com/state-law/connecticut/amicus-committee-update-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Mar 2011 18:47:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>cmonfils</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Connecticut]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Illinois]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Iowa]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Oklahoma]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[South Dakota]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Workers' Compensation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.passionforsubro.com/?p=5435</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[www.subrogation.org NASP testifies in South Dakota: Committee Rejects HB 1184 South Dakota’s House Bill 1184 was voted down in the Senate Judiciary Committee on February 24, 2011 by a 4-3 vote.  Daran Kiefer, NASP’s Vice President, and Kammy Poff, NASP’s Amicus Chair, testified in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee last Thursday on behalf of [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.passionforsubro.com/state-law/connecticut/amicus-committee-update-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NASP Amicus Committee Update</title>
		<link>http://www.passionforsubro.com/state-law/south-dakota/nasp-amicus-committee-update/</link>
		<comments>http://www.passionforsubro.com/state-law/south-dakota/nasp-amicus-committee-update/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Feb 2011 18:48:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>cmonfils</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[South Dakota]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.passionforsubro.com/?p=5193</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[www.subrogation.org South Dakota House Bill 1184 The South Dakota Legislature has once again introduced an anti-subrogation bill. The language in this year’s bill is almost identical to the language we saw in 2010. The bill states: No insurer under this chapter is entitled to participate in any recovery from any tortfeasor on account of bodily [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.passionforsubro.com/state-law/south-dakota/nasp-amicus-committee-update/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>SD S 169/ Passed and Moves to the House/ Affects All Subrogation Rights</title>
		<link>http://www.passionforsubro.com/subrogation/sd-s-169-passed-and-moves-to-the-house-affects-all-subrogation-rights/</link>
		<comments>http://www.passionforsubro.com/subrogation/sd-s-169-passed-and-moves-to-the-house-affects-all-subrogation-rights/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Mar 2010 15:15:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Adam V. Russo</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[South Dakota]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Subrogation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.passionforsubro.com/?p=2224</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The South Dakota bill would prohibit a subrogated insurer from participating in any recovery for “bodily injury” or “property damage” unless or until the injured party is “made whole”. S.D. Senate bill 169 failed to pass the Senate on February 22, 2010. However, the Senate reconsidered the bill on February 23rd, 2010 which resulted in [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.passionforsubro.com/subrogation/sd-s-169-passed-and-moves-to-the-house-affects-all-subrogation-rights/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>South Dakota Senate Bill 169 Seeks to Codify “Made Whole” in All Insurance Policies</title>
		<link>http://www.passionforsubro.com/made-whole-rule/south-dakota-senate-bill-169-seeks-to-codify-%e2%80%9cmade-whole%e2%80%9d-in-all-insurance-policies/</link>
		<comments>http://www.passionforsubro.com/made-whole-rule/south-dakota-senate-bill-169-seeks-to-codify-%e2%80%9cmade-whole%e2%80%9d-in-all-insurance-policies/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2010 21:00:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Adam V. Russo</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Made Whole Rule]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[South Dakota]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.passionforsubro.com/?p=2091</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[South Dakota Senate seeks to graft “made whole” into each and every subrogation provision which insurers seek to enforce in the state. The legislature in South Dakota is attempting to amend Title 58-11 of the Insurance Code by adding the following new section: No insurer under this chapter is entitled to participate in any recovery [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.passionforsubro.com/made-whole-rule/south-dakota-senate-bill-169-seeks-to-codify-%e2%80%9cmade-whole%e2%80%9d-in-all-insurance-policies/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>South Dakota</title>
		<link>http://www.passionforsubro.com/state-law/south-dakota/south-dakota/</link>
		<comments>http://www.passionforsubro.com/state-law/south-dakota/south-dakota/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 22:07:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Adam V. Russo</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[South Dakota]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Workers' Compensation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.passionforsubro.com/?p=1711</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[South Dakota’s Senate Bill 26 clarifies that a ruling by an employer that a bill or injury is not work related creates a presumption that the bill or injury is “non-work” related for purposes of any other insurance. An exclusion in an auto, health or disability policy for work related injuries would not apply. If [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.passionforsubro.com/state-law/south-dakota/south-dakota/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

