(concurring specially).
[¶ 18.] I fully concur in the Court’s opinion. I write only to emphasize that this Court’s opinions in Westphal, 87 S.D. 404, 209 N.W.2d 555; Union, 454 N.W.2d 736; and Phen, 2003 SD 133, ¶¶ 28-41, 672 N.W.2d 52, 59-62 (Zinter, J., concurring in result), only considered whether certain UM policy limitations were prohibited by SDCL 58-11-9, the statute mandating UM coverage. However, policy limitations are concededly not at issue in this case. Therefore, the language of my concurring opinion in Phen should not be used to suggest that SDCL 58-11-9 precludes stacking when an insurer does not rely upon a policy limitation.