context: As we have stated, in order to be a "meaningful offer" of UIM coverage, an offer must "intelligibly advise the insured of the nature of' UIM coverage.
citation_a.signal: see
citation_a.identifier: 545 S.E.2d 848, 848
citation_a.parenthetical: concluding that "no [meaningful] offer was made" when UIM form was presented to and signed by spouse' of named insured who was not authorized to reject UIM coverage
citation_a.sentence: Wannamaker, 354 S.E.2d at 556; see Estate of Hancock, 545 S.E.2d at 848 (concluding that “no [meaningful] offer was made” when UIM form was presented to and signed by spouse' of named insured who was not authorized to reject UIM coverage); see also McDonald v. S.C. Farm Bureau Ins. Co., 336 S.C. 120, 518 S.E.2d 624, 626 (S.C.Ct.App.1999) (noting “legislature’s intent that all named insured be offered UIM coverage”).
citation_b.signal: see also
citation_b.identifier: 518 S.E.2d 624, 626
citation_b.parenthetical: noting "legislature's intent that all named insured be offered UIM coverage"
citation_b.sentence: Wannamaker, 354 S.E.2d at 556; see Estate of Hancock, 545 S.E.2d at 848 (concluding that “no [meaningful] offer was made” when UIM form was presented to and signed by spouse' of named insured who was not authorized to reject UIM coverage); see also McDonald v. S.C. Farm Bureau Ins. Co., 336 S.C. 120, 518 S.E.2d 624, 626 (S.C.Ct.App.1999) (noting “legislature’s intent that all named insured be offered UIM coverage”).