Sweat v. Piscataquis Mutual Insurance

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Sweat v. Piscataquis Mutual Insurance

8 A. 457, 79 Me. 109, 1887 Me. LEXIS 26

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine·Decided February 12, 1887·Published

Opinion

Walton, J.

Whether an erroneous description or misrepresentation of title in an application for insurance is or is not material, is a question of fact for the jury and not a question of law for the court. In this case, the plaintiff, in her application for insurance, stated that the property was unincumbered, when in fact, there was a mortgage upon it. The presiding judge instructed the jury that this misrepresentation was not material. This was error. The materiality of the misrepresentation should have been submitted to the jury. R. S., c. 49, § 20; Bellatty v. Ins. Co. 61 Maine, 414.

Exceptions sustained. New trial granted.

Peters, C. J., Danforth, Emery, Foster and Haskell, JJ., concurred.

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

Walton, J.

Whether an erroneous description or misrepresentation of title in an application for insurance is or is not material, is a question of fact for the jury and not a question of law for the court. In this case, the plaintiff, in her application for insurance, stated that the property was unincumbered, when in fact, there was a mortgage upon it. The presiding judge instructed the jury that this misrepresentation was not material. This was error. The materiality of the misrepresentation should have been submitted to the jury. R. S., c. 49, § 20; Bellatty v. Ins. Co. 61 Maine, 414.

Exceptions sustained. New trial granted.

Peters, C. J., Danforth, Emery, Foster and Haskell, JJ., concurred.

Sweat v. Piscataquis Mutual Insurance, 8 A. 457, 79 Me. 109, 1887 Me. LEXIS 26 (Me. 1887).

Pincite

8 A. 457 (Sweat v. Piscataquis Mutual Insurance) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.