Materiality Of Misrepresentation

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

• Gov't Emps. Ins. Co. v. The Right Spinal Clinic, Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-07-06
  The court held that licensed massage therapists are not entitled to PIP reimbursement under the No-Fault Law, entitling GEICO to summary judgment on its unjust enrichment claim for physical therapy services. However, disputes of fact preclude summary judgment on other claims.
• Great Lakes Ins. SE v. Lassiter
  S.D. Fla.· 2022-04-29
  Great Lakes Insurance SE sought declaratory judgment that a marine insurance policy was void because the insured, Reynolds Lassiter, violated the policy's Named Operator Warranty when an uncovered crew member helmed the vessel before it ran aground and sank. The court found that
• Metro. Life Ins. Co. v. Liebowitz
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-03-21
  The court held that the insurer MetLife proved its claim for rescission of the disability policy because the insured Dr. Liebowitz made material misrepresentations on his application with fraudulent intent, and MetLife rescinded the policy within a reasonable time.
• Metro. Life Ins. Co. v. Liebowitz
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-01-11
  The court held that Dr. Liebowitz made false and material misrepresentations on his insurance application, but a genuine issue of material fact exists regarding his intent to deceive, precluding summary judgment on that element.
• Trisura Specialty Ins. CompanyY v. Kanpai, Inc.
  S.D. Fla.· 2021-10-21
  The court held that the insurer failed to meet its burden to prove misrepresentation, materiality, and detrimental reliance, thus denying its motion for summary judgment.
• Alexander v. Heath
  M.D. Fla.· 2021-08-13
  The court held that the relator failed to state a claim under the False Claims Act for presentment of false claims, false records/statements, and reverse false claims due to insufficient particularity in pleading. However, the court granted leave to amend the retaliation claim.
• Zurich Am. Ins. Co. & Am. Guar. & Liab. Co. v. Syngenta Crop Prot., LLC
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2020-08-03
  The court held that the Tillery Letter did not constitute a "claim for damages" under the insurance policies because it lacked specificity regarding potential claimants and damages, thus it was a threat of future litigation, not a "claim made" prior to policy inception. Consequen
• Domke v. MRS Bpo, LLC
  M.D. Fla.· 2020-01-31
  The court held that the debt collection letter's language was not a false, deceptive, or misleading representation under the FDCPA, and the claim under § 1692f was based on the same conduct as the § 1692e claim.
• Diamond Miami Corp. v. United States Citizenship & Immigr. Servs.
  S.D. Fla.· 2019-10-08
  The court held that USCIS's denial of the I-140 petition based on the non-disclosure of a familial relationship was not arbitrary or capricious, but its finding of fraud or willful misrepresentation based on employment history inconsistencies was arbitrary and capricious.
• Lima Delta Co. v. State of Del.
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2016-02-19
  The Delaware Superior Court granted the Insurers' motion to dismiss the second amended complaint, finding that the Georgia action was the first-filed suit and that the parties and issues were substantially identical, warranting dismissal under the McWane doctrine. The court also
• Guenther v. Novartis Pharm. Corp.
  849 F. Supp. 2d 1085· M.D. Fla.· 2014-02-20
  The court held that a plaintiff need not prove a prescribing physician would have acted differently, only that a different warning might have altered patient behavior, and that collateral source payments must be deducted from medical expense awards.
• United States v. Sumpolec
  811 F. Supp. 2d 1349· M.D. Fla.· 2011-09-09
  The court granted the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, finding the defendant liable for violations of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the R-value Rule due to deceptive advertising practices regarding R-values and energy savings.
• Fretwell v. Kan. City Life Ins.
  643 F. Supp. 2d 1317· N.D. Fla.· 2009-07-16
  The court held that when an insured provides correct age and birth date to an insurer's agent, and the agent makes an error in recording it, the insurer cannot use policy provisions or statutes designed for misstated ages to reduce the death benefit.
• DCV Holdings, Inc.
  Del.· 2005-12-08
  The Superior Court's judgment is affirmed. The appellate court found that the evidence supported the Superior Court's findings of fact and conclusions of law regarding both the fraud and breach of contract claims. The court held that the buyer failed to prove the elements of comm
• In & for New Castle Cnty. in re Best Lock Corp. Consol. S'holder Litig.
  Del. Ch.· 2001-07-11
  The Delaware Court of Chancery denied defendants' motion to dismiss claims for breach of fiduciary duty in connection with freeze-out mergers and a challenged stock sale, finding that plaintiffs adequately alleged self-dealing and unfair dealing. The court granted defendants' mot
• In re the Search of McCorkle
  972 F. Supp. 1423· M.D. Fla.· 1997-08-01
  The court held that it had anomalous jurisdiction to hear the motion for return of seized property, but found that the Movants failed to show that the probable cause determination for the seizure warrants was erroneous or that irreparable harm would result from the government's r
• Marrone v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Ins. Co.
  655 So. 2d 146· Fla. 4th DCA· 1995-05-03
  The court held that the appeal was frivolous and assessed attorney's fees against the appellant and his counsel.
• United States v. Davis
  989 F.2d 244· 7th Cir.· 1993-03-17
  The court held that the defendant's conviction on Count I for bank fraud must be reversed because the government failed to prove the materiality of the misrepresentations made to the bank; however, convictions on other counts involving forged money orders were affirmed.
• Rhea Dawn Jones v. NEW York Life & Annuity Corp.
  985 F.2d 503· 10th Cir.· 1993-02-10
  An insured has a duty to read their insurance application before signing, and is bound by its contents, including misrepresentations made by the agent, unless specific exceptions apply. The insurer must prove statutory grounds for rescission.
• Pac. Indem. Co. v. Golden
  985 F.2d 51· 2d Cir.· 1993-01-27
  The court held that the insured's false statements about the origin and purpose of gasoline stored in his house were not, as a matter of law, material to the insurer's investigation, and therefore summary judgment for the insurer was improper.
• United States v. Falcone
  934 F.2d 1526· 11th Cir.· 1991-07-11
  The court reversed the convictions because the offense clause of 18 U.S.C. § 371 does not require the United States to be the target of the conspiracy.
• Am. Standard Ins. Co. of Wis. v. Forsythe
  915 F.2d 1212· 8th Cir.· 1990-10-05
  The court held that the American Standard insurance policy was void ab initio due to material misrepresentations, and that the uninsured motorist coverage provided by Cameron Mutual Insurance Company could be stacked, with per occurrence limits applying to the distinct claims.
• United States v. One Parcel of Real Est. at 5860 N. Bay Rd.
  101 F.R.D. 680· S.D. Fla.· 1988-08-10
• Lynch v. Anne T. Cullen
  521 So. 2d 209· Fla. 3d DCA· 1988-02-16
• Howell v. Colonial Penn Ins. Co.
  842 F.2d 821· 6th Cir.· 1987-12-08
  A misrepresentation on an insurance application that increases the risk of loss voids the policy under Tennessee law, even if innocently made and regardless of whether it contributed to the actual loss.
• United States v. Sokolov
  814 F.2d 864· 2d Cir.· 1987-03-24
  The court held that while the government failed to prove material misrepresentations for the visa application, Sokolov did make a material misrepresentation regarding his pro-Fascist writings during his naturalization application. The court reversed and remanded on one evidentiar
• Golden Rule Ins. Co. v. Welsh
  798 F.2d 1198· 8th Cir.· 1986-08-22
  The court held that the insurer failed to prove the applicant knowingly misrepresented material facts with intent to deceive, thus could not avoid liability on the policy.
• Goldberg v. Nat'l Life Ins. Co. OF Vt.
  774 F.2d 559· 2d Cir.· 1985-10-01
  The court affirmed the judgment, holding that the exclusion of rebuttal testimony was proper and that the insurer was entitled to recover benefits paid due to the insured not being under the care of a licensed physician as required by the policy.
• Barrer v. Women's Nat'l Bank
  761 F.2d 752· D.C. Cir.· 1985-05-10
  The court held that the magistrate erred in granting summary judgment because he failed to apply the correct legal test for innocent material misrepresentation and there were material issues of fact in dispute.
• Conger Life Ins. Co. v. McCAWLEY
  452 So. 2d 596· Fla. 5th DCA· 1984-05-17
  The court held that the jury's finding of no misrepresentations was not against the manifest weight of the evidence, despite admitted omissions, due to an ambiguous verdict form drafted by the defendant.
• Claudette Friez v. Nat'l OLD Line Ins. Co.
  703 F.2d 1093· 9th Cir.· 1983-04-11
  The good health clause in an insurance policy is a condition precedent and not ambiguous, requiring strict fulfillment.
• John S. Ferguson, M.D. v. Unionmutual Stock Life Ins. Co. of Am.
  673 F.2d 253· 8th Cir.· 1982-03-29
  An insured's conduct in withdrawing a claim during the contestability period and refiling after it expires can estop them from asserting the incontestability clause as a defense against the insurer's challenge based on application misrepresentations.
• Ruthie Davis v. Integon Life Ins. Corp.
  645 F.2d 494· 5th Cir.· 1981-05-21
  The court held that the insured's misrepresentations regarding his medical history were fraudulent as a matter of law, justifying the insurer's denial of the policy claim and granting of summary judgment.
• Nichols v. S. Life Ins. Co.
  584 F.2d 106· 5th Cir.· 1978-11-17
  The court held that material misrepresentations or omissions in an insurance application regarding the insured's health justify the insurer's avoidance of the policy.
• The Guardian Life Ins. Co. OF Am. v. Robitaille
  495 F.2d 890· 2d Cir.· 1974-04-04
  The dissenting judge believes the jury's verdict in favor of the insured was unconscionable and should be set aside due to material misrepresentations in the insurance application that increased the risk of loss.
• First Nat'l Bank OF Manhattan v. Modern Woodmen OF Am.
  486 F.2d 10· 10th Cir.· 1973-10-24
  The court held that the insurance policy was not voided by the insured's failure to list all hospitalizations, as the application as a whole provided sufficient information, and there was no evidence the insured knew of his heart condition.
• Woodall Indus., Inc. v. Mass. Mut. Life Ins. Co.
  483 F.2d 986· 6th Cir.· 1973-04-06
  The court held that the applicant truthfully answered the question regarding whether he had been told he had a disorder of the heart or blood vessels, as the term 'disorder' implies something more serious than a minor, temporary, or insignificant finding.
• World Ins. Co. v. Posey
  227 So. 2d 67· Fla. 4th DCA· 1969-10-10
  The court held that the insurer could not void the policy based on the insured's misrepresentation regarding a prior diagnostic examination because the misrepresentation was neither fraudulent nor material to the risk, and the insurer failed to prove reliance or that it would not
• Am. Fire & Indem. Co. v. Lancaster
  415 F.2d 1145· 8th Cir.· 1969-09-15
  An insurance company cannot avoid a policy based on an agent's knowledge of a misrepresentation if the agent had actual or apparent authority to solicit applications, and a non-fraudulent misrepresentation does not void a policy unless it is material and either warranted or incor
• Allstate Ins. Co. v. Dorr
  411 F.2d 198· 9th Cir.· 1969-05-02
  The court held that the Arizona statute requiring liability insurance policies to be absolute upon injury, regardless of fraud in procurement, is constitutional.
• Brook J. Jones and J. Fred Jones v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.
  402 F.2d 65· 5th Cir.· 1968-10-14
  The court held that the admission of underwriter testimony regarding the meaning of 'physical defects' was not prejudicial error, and that the jury was properly tasked with determining if the insured's failure to disclose epilepsy constituted fraudulent misrepresentation or conce
• Nat'l Aviation Underwriters, Inc. v. Fischer
  386 F.2d 582· 8th Cir.· 1967-11-30
  The court held that the trial court did not err in withdrawing certain defenses from the jury and in its instructions, and that substantial evidence supported the jury's verdict.
• Standard Accident Ins. Co. v. Starks
  351 F.2d 895· 6th Cir.· 1965-10-20
  A misrepresentation of sole ownership in an automobile insurance policy does not prevent recovery if it is neither material nor fraudulent, especially in a public liability context.
• Allstate Ins. Co. v. Cook
  324 F.2d 752· 6th Cir.· 1963-11-26
  A misrepresentation in an insurance application, constituting a warranty under Ohio law, renders the policy void ab initio if the misrepresented fact is material, regardless of the insured's intent or knowledge of falsity.
• Turner v. The Manhattan Life Ins. Co.
  320 F.2d 553· 9th Cir.· 1963-07-10
  The dissenting judge argues that the district court's findings of fact, supported by ample evidence, were not clearly erroneous and that the insurer should not have issued the policy based on the applicant's misrepresentations.
• Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. v. Willsey
  214 F.2d 729· 10th Cir.· 1954-08-03
  The court held that testimony regarding the insured's disclosures to the insurance agent about his health history was admissible to show lack of intent to deceive, even if it seemed to vary the written policy terms.
• Ætna Life Ins. Co. v. HUB Hosiery Mills
  170 F.2d 547· 1st Cir.· 1948-11-08
  The court held that the insured's failure to disclose a minor chill or a hospitalization for a routine check-up did not constitute a material misrepresentation or increase the risk of loss under Massachusetts law, and the evidence did not compel a finding that the insured had dia
• Owens v. Curtiss Candy Co.
  169 F.2d 179· 8th Cir.· 1948-07-20
  The court held that there was no substantial evidence of a written contract for two years of employment satisfying the statute of frauds, and the jury's verdict was supported by the evidence.
• N.Y. Life Ins. Co. v. Lowe
  119 F.2d 740· 5th Cir.· 1941-05-16