Materiality Of Misrepresentation

305 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Murray Gladstone v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co.
  536 F.2d 1403· 2d Cir.· 1976-05-17 ·cited 8×
  The grant of summary judgment was inappropriate because there are disputed issues of material fact regarding the interpretation of the insurance proposal's instructions and the truthfulness of the applicant's answers.
• Sec. Mut. Cas. Co. v. Affiliated FM Ins. Co.
  471 F.2d 238· 8th Cir.· 1972-12-29 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a material misrepresentation in an insurance contract avoids the policy if it increases the risk of loss, regardless of intent to deceive, and that sufficient evidence supported the jury's finding of increased risk.
• Mercantile Tr. Co. v. NEW York Underwriters Ins. Co.
  376 F.2d 502· 7th Cir.· 1967-05-04 ·cited 8×
  The court held that while the insured's fraud regarding contents vitiated the claim for contents, it did not bar recovery by the innocent trustee for the dwelling, as the policy was divisible as to claimants under Illinois law.
• Kwong v. Occidental Life Ins. Co. of Cal.
  273 F.2d 691· 5th Cir.· 1959-12-30 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court's findings of fact were not clearly erroneous and that the law was correctly applied, affirming the judgment for the insurer.
• Sulentich v. The Interlake S.S. Co.
  257 F.2d 316· 7th Cir.· 1958-06-24 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the jury instruction regarding the affirmative defense of misrepresentation was a correct statement of the law and properly given, and that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate prejudicial error on appeal.
• Stopper v. The Manhattan Life Ins. Co. OF NEW York
  241 F.2d 465· 3d Cir.· 1957-01-31 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the insured's misrepresentations regarding recent medical treatment and other insurance applications were so clearly fraudulent that the trial court should have directed a verdict for the insurer.
• Nelson v. United States
  227 F.2d 21· D.C. Cir.· 1955-07-28 ·cited 8×
  The dissenting judge argues that the evidence did not support a conviction for false pretense because the defendant provided ample security for the purchase, negating intent to defraud and actual fraud.
• Pan-American Life Ins. Co. v. Fowler
  174 F.2d 199· 5th Cir.· 1949-04-25 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the jury could reasonably find the insured's representations were not false or fraudulent, and thus the insurer could not cancel the policies.
• Edwards v. United States
  140 F.2d 526· 6th Cir.· 1944-02-07 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the question of the insured's fraud in procuring the policy was a question of fact for the jury, not a matter of law for the court.
• Hesham Moustafa and Hala Ahmed v. Omega Ins. Co.
  201 So. 3d 710· Fla. 4th DCA· 2016-09-07 ·cited 7×
  Homeowners appealed an insurer's rescission of their homeowner's policy based on material misrepresentations in the application. The court affirmed rescission, holding that the applicant's failure to disclose prior claims and water damage was material as a matter of law and would
• Mora v. Tower Hill Prime Ins. Co.
  155 So. 3d 1224· Fla. 2d DCA· 2015-01-23 ·cited 7×
  The Moras appealed summary judgment rescinding their homeowners insurance policy based on alleged misrepresentations about prior cracking damage. The Florida appellate court reversed, finding that Tower Hill Insurance failed to meet its burden of proof to establish either that th
• Northfield Ins. v. Barlow
  983 F. Supp. 1376· N.D. Fla.· 1997-09-30 ·cited 7×
  The court held that material misrepresentations made by the insureds on their insurance application voided the policy ab initio under the doctrine of uberrima fidei, entitling the insurer to summary judgment.
• Woods v. Indep. Fire Ins. Co.
  749 F.2d 1493· 11th Cir.· 1985-01-08 ·cited 7×
  The majority erred by granting summary judgment, as factual issues regarding fraudulent misrepresentation and insurable interest should have been decided by a jury.
• Iten Leasing Co. v. Burroughs Corp.
  684 F.2d 573· 8th Cir.· 1982-07-28 ·cited 7×
  The court affirmed the district court's judgment, holding that misrepresentations regarding specific devices were not material to the overall accounting system and that the buyer's revocation of acceptance was untimely.
• Wilmington Tr. Co. v. The Mfrs. Life Ins. Co.
  624 F.2d 707· 5th Cir.· 1980-08-22 ·cited 7×
  Summary judgment was improperly granted on the issue of materiality because the beneficiaries' ability to impeach the insurer's sole witness raised a genuine dispute of material fact.
• Cent. Mut. Ins. Co. v. Cropper
  296 So. 2d 69· Fla. 2d DCA· 1974-06-19 ·cited 7×
  The court affirmed a summary judgment for the insured's administratrix, holding that the insurer failed to prove that the insured's misrepresentations about his heart condition were fraudulent or material to the acceptance of the risk or the hazard assumed.
• Bishop v. The Franklin Life Ins. Co.
  412 F.2d 949· 5th Cir.· 1969-05-29 ·cited 7×
  The court should affirm the directed verdict because the materiality of misrepresentations and reliance were established facts, not disputed questions for a jury.
• Pistas v. NEW England Mut. Life Ins. Co.
  843 F.2d 1038· 7th Cir.· 1988-04-08 ·cited 6×
  This case concerns whether severance pay received by a spouse before dissolution is a marital asset subject to equitable distribution, and whether the trial court abused its discretion in failing to make such a distribution.
• Marshall Durbin Food Corp. v. The Equitable Life Assurance Soc'y OF THE United States
  834 F.2d 949· 11th Cir.· 1987-12-23 ·cited 6×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence for a reasonable jury to find for the plaintiff on claims of breach of contract and fraud, and that the trial court did not err in submitting these claims to the jury.
• Barrington Press, Inc. v. Morey
  752 F.2d 307· 7th Cir.· 1985-01-10 ·cited 6×
  The court held that while a misrepresentation occurred, it was not material, and therefore the buyers could not avoid the contract or claim fraud.
• United States v. Reynaldo De Jesus Ramos
  725 F.2d 1322· 11th Cir.· 1984-02-27 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the defendant could be convicted and sentenced under both 18 U.S.C.A. § 1001 and 18 U.S.C.A. § 1542 because each statute requires proof of a fact that the other does not, satisfying the Blockburger test.
• Elfriede Mayer v. OIL Field Sys. Corp.
  721 F.2d 59· 2d Cir.· 1983-10-31 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the plaintiff had standing to sue under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5, and that the amended complaint sufficiently alleged a fraudulent scheme.
• United States v. Evers
  552 F.2d 1119· 5th Cir.· 1977-05-26 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict, the search warrant was supported by probable cause, and the government did not engage in misconduct regarding the entrapment defense.
• Crosby v. The Gen. Tire & Rubber Co.
  543 F.2d 1128· 5th Cir.· 1976-12-13 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a Mississippi statute voiding indemnity agreements for a party's own negligence barred General Tire's claims against Vulcan and its insurer, even under theories of express contract, implied indemnity, or quasi-contractual indemnity.
• Vernon v. AETNA Ins. Co.
  301 F.2d 86· 5th Cir.· 1962-03-30 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a provision in an insurance policy voiding coverage for any false swearing, even if made after the denial of liability and commencement of action, is invalid as contrary to the public policy of Texas.
• United States v. Satiris Galahad Fassoulis
  293 F.2d 243· 2d Cir.· 1961-07-19 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to prove the defendant devised a scheme to defraud and caused an interstate wire communication for the purpose of executing that scheme, and that the defendant's speedy trial rights were not violated.
• Prudential Ins. Co. OF Am. v. Gourley
  267 F.2d 156· 5th Cir.· 1959-05-22 ·cited 6×
  The dissenting judge believes the misrepresented facts increased the risk of loss as a matter of law, contrary to the majority's view that it was a jury question.
• Green v. Life & Health OF Am.
  692 So. 2d 220· Fla. 4th DCA· 1997-04-09 ·cited 5×
  Allen Green, as representative of Harold Green's estate, appealed the trial court's grant of summary judgment to Life & Health Insurance Company, which rescinded Green's home health care policy based on material misrepresentation in his application. The Fourth District affirmed t
• Austin v. Servac Shipping Line
  794 F.2d 941· 5th Cir.· 1986-07-02 ·cited 5×
  The court held that while the insurance policy was not voided by misrepresentation or unseaworthiness, the insurer was only liable for two deductibles, not one, and treble damages were not recoverable under Texas or Florida law for unfair claims practices.
• Disciplinary Bd. of the Supreme Court v. Feingold (In re Feingold)
  S.D. Fla.· 2012-05-17 ·cited 4×
• Mercury Ins. Co. OF Fla. v. Markham
  36 So. 3d 730· Fla. 1st DCA· 2010-04-20 ·cited 4×
  Mercury Insurance appealed a trial court's grant of partial summary judgment against it for wrongfully refusing to defend an insurance claim based on alleged material misrepresentation. The court reversed, finding that the insurance application question asking whether a vehicle w
• First Nat'l Bank Holding Co. v. Fid. & Deposit Co.
  885 F. Supp. 1533· N.D. Fla.· 1995-03-15 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the insurance policy was void ab initio due to material misrepresentations in the application and that the claim was barred by the policy's dishonesty exclusion.
• FRY v. J.E. Jones Constr. Co.
  567 So. 2d 901· Fla. 5th DCA· 1990-08-23 ·cited 4×
  The Frys purchased a lot in a residential subdivision after being told by a sales agent that it was a waterfront lot with lake access, but discovered after signing that the lot was 100 feet from the lake with a conservation tract between them and the water. The court reversed the
• Bradley v. Veterans Admin.
  900 F.2d 233· Fed. Cir.· 1990-03-30 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the evidence did not support an inference that the petitioner intended to defraud the government, as any misrepresentation was not material to the benefit received.
• Evans v. United Life & Accident Ins. Co.
  871 F.2d 466· 4th Cir.· 1989-03-23 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the insurance application was improperly admitted because it was not attached to the policy by the issue date, thus the insurer has no defense against a claim for the full policy amount.
• Scottie N. Singer v. Nationwide Mut. Fire Ins. Co.
  512 So. 2d 1125· Fla. 4th DCA· 1987-09-23 ·cited 4×
  Singer applied for homeowners insurance with Nationwide but made material misrepresentations on the application regarding prior insurance policies and theft claims. Nationwide denied coverage based on these misrepresentations, and the trial court granted summary judgment in Natio
• Bennie Vitale v. The AETNA Cas. & Sur. Co.
  814 F.2d 1242· 8th Cir.· 1987-03-16 ·cited 4×
  The court held that jury instructions allowing imputation of an agent's fraudulent proof of loss to the principals were proper under Missouri law, and that sufficient evidence supported the jury's findings.
• United States v. Juozas Kungys
  793 F.2d 516· 3d Cir.· 1986-06-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the defendant's misrepresentations regarding his identity and wartime activities were material, warranting revocation of his citizenship.
• United States v. Anzalone
  783 F.2d 10· 1st Cir.· 1986-02-05 ·cited 4×
  The court held that evidence of prior fraudulent insurance claims, even from entities not named in the indictment, was admissible to prove the scheme and the substantiality of the misrepresentations, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting such evidence
• Colonial Lincoln-Mercury, Inc. v. Musgrave
  749 F.2d 1092· 4th Cir.· 1984-12-03 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the grant of judgment n.o.v. for the sellers on the purchasers' fraud claims, finding insufficient evidence of material misrepresentation, fraudulent intent, or reasonable reliance. The court vacated and remanded for a jury trial on certain factual issues regar
• Robert v. Wendel
  435 So. 2d 284· Fla. 5th DCA· 1983-06-23 ·cited 4×
  A misrepresentation made after an insurance policy's application, which is corrected before a Proof of Loss is filed and is not material to the insurer's risk, does not void the entire policy.
• United States v. Palciauskas
  559 F. Supp. 1294· M.D. Fla.· 1983-03-23 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the defendant's citizenship must be revoked because it was illegally procured and obtained by concealment of material facts and willful misrepresentation, specifically his wartime role as Mayor of Kaunas.
• Life Ins. Co. OF N. Am. v. Capps
  660 F.2d 392· 9th Cir.· 1981-10-26 ·cited 4×
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Snokist Growers, Inc.
  532 F.2d 1239· 9th Cir.· 1976-03-15 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board should have ordered a new election due to material misrepresentations by the union regarding pension coverage in a very close election.
• Royal Indem. Co. v. Kaiser Aluminum & Chem. Corp.
  516 F.2d 1067· 9th Cir.· 1975-04-29 ·cited 4×
  The court held that Royal's reliance on Kaiser's alleged misrepresentations was not justifiable, and the misrepresentations were not material, thus affirming the dismissal of the fraud and reformation claims. The court also affirmed the denial of additional premium claims and the
• Aaronson v. Susi
  296 So. 2d 508· Fla. 3d DCA· 1974-06-18 ·cited 4×
  Condominium purchasers sued sellers for damages under Florida law based on false and misleading promotional representations regarding a common recreational area. The court reversed a dismissal, holding that the loss of a substantial common area through conversion into an addition
• Spencer Cos., Inc. v. Armonk Indus., Inc.
  489 F.2d 704· 1st Cir.· 1973-12-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the denial of a temporary restraining order, under the circumstances, was appealable as a denial of a preliminary injunction, but affirmed the denial of injunctive relief.
• Miele v. Boston Ins. Co.
  288 F.2d 178· 8th Cir.· 1961-03-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the evidence supported the trial court's findings that the insured participated in arson and procured insurance policies through fraudulent misrepresentation and concealment, rendering the policies void.
• Maria de la Luz Viruette Torres v. HOY
  269 F.2d 289· 9th Cir.· 1959-07-01 ·cited 4×
  The court held that misrepresentations made on an immigration visa application are material, even if the visa might have been issued with truthful answers, and that substantial evidence supported the deportation order.
• Billington v. The Prudential Ins. Co. OF Am.
  254 F.2d 428· 7th Cir.· 1958-04-09 ·cited 4×
  The court held that false material representations in an insurance application, even if made innocently, will avoid the policy under Indiana law, and the insured is bound by the statements unless they are read and corrected.