Hoyt v. Gilman
This text of 8 Mass. 336 (Hoyt v. Gilman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Whether fraud be a question for the Court or jury, yet if, upon the facts in evidence in this case, the jury had given the plaintiff his premium, we should not have hesitated to set aside the verdict. The letter, which * the plaintiff concealed, contained information very material in estimating the risk. The plaintiff must have been aware of this, if he had capacity to enter into a contract. The underwriter had a right to the information. The withholding it from him must be considered fraudulent, and the insurance was therefore void. And being avoided for such a cause, the plaintiff is not entitled to a return of his premium.
The nonsuit is confirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
8 Mass. 336, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hoyt-v-gilman-mass-1811.