The Colorado Supreme Court issued a ruling finding a carrier, acting in accordance with its underwriting records and with the policy as issued though later reformed voluntarily by the carrier, was reasonable in denying UIM coverage to a claimant not identified as an insured on the policy; and that the carrier was not subject to a statutory claim of unreasonable delay or denial. American Family Mut. Ins. Co. v. Hansen, No. 14SC99, June 20, 2016. The Court also reaffirmed that a finding of ambiguity is a prerequisite to looking to extrinsic evidence when interpreting an insurance policy.