Burnham v. Bankers Life & Casualty Co.

Utah Supreme Court

Burnham v. Bankers Life & Casualty Co.

484 P.2d 155, 26 Utah 2d 9, 1971 Utah LEXIS 643

CourtUtah Supreme Court

DecidedApril 28, 1971

DocketNo. 12261

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 484 P.2d 155 (Burnham v. Bankers Life & Casualty Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Utah Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Burnham v. Bankers Life & Casualty Co., 484 P.2d 155, 26 Utah 2d 9, 1971 Utah LEXIS 643 (Utah 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

ELLETT, Justice:

This is the second appeal in this matter. The facts were set out in our former opinion reported in 24 Utah 2d 277, 470 P.2d 261 (1970). In the former case the trial judge had granted a summary judgment in favor of the defendant upon the grounds that it could contest the policy because the insured had committed suicide. We there held that the period for contesting the contract on the basis of suicide had expired, and remanded the case for a trial on the merits, saying, “ * * * [Tjhat a summary judgment was inappropriate because there were disputed issues of material facts.”

The issues to be determined on trial are whether or not the decedent was guilty of fraud in knowingly and wilfully misstating or withholding facts from the insurance company for the purpose of inducing the defendant to reinstate the policy and whether or not the defendant was deceived thereby and reinstated the policy when it would not have done so had it known the true situation.

After remand of the matter, the plaintiff then moved for summary judgment. The trial court denied the motion, and we permitted an interlocutory appeal to be taken from that ruling. The ruling of the trial court was correct and is, therefore, affirmed. The case is remanded for such further proceedings as may be proper in the matter. Respondent is awarded its costs.

CALLISTER, C. J, and TUCKETT, HENRIOD and CROCKETT, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ELLETT, Justice:

This is the second appeal in this matter. The facts were set out in our former opinion reported in 24 Utah 2d 277, 470 P.2d 261 (1970). In the former case the trial judge had granted a summary judgment in favor of the defendant upon the grounds that it could contest the policy because the insured had committed suicide. We there held that the period for contesting the contract on the basis of suicide had expired, and remanded the case for a trial on the merits, saying, “ * * * [Tjhat a summary judgment was inappropriate because there were disputed issues of material facts.”

The issues to be determined on trial are whether or not the decedent was guilty of fraud in knowingly and wilfully misstating or withholding facts from the insurance company for the purpose of inducing the defendant to reinstate the policy and whether or not the defendant was deceived thereby and reinstated the policy when it would not have done so had it known the true situation.

After remand of the matter, the plaintiff then moved for summary judgment. The trial court denied the motion, and we permitted an interlocutory appeal to be taken from that ruling. The ruling of the trial court was correct and is, therefore, affirmed. The case is remanded for such further proceedings as may be proper in the matter. Respondent is awarded its costs.

CALLISTER, C. J, and TUCKETT, HENRIOD and CROCKETT, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

484 P.2d 155, 26 Utah 2d 9, 1971 Utah LEXIS 643, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/burnham-v-bankers-life-casualty-co-utah-1971.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack