Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's v. Ted Montford, AKA Theodore F. Montford

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that since both the federal admiralty rule and the California statue were the same, it was unnecessary to decide whether the result was under admiralty or California law
• holding that a marine insurer was entitled to void a policy under the duty of uberrimae fidei where the insurance applicant represented the “present market value” of a vessel when the applicant specifically asked for the purchase price
• holding that a marine insured was entitled to void a policy under the doctrine of uberrimae fidei where the insurance applicant represented the “present market value” of a vessel when the applicant specifically asked for the purchase price
• explaining that an insurance applicant's loss history is a fact material to the risk
• loss history, purchase price, and age of vessel was material as a matter of law
• “total loss on a vessel named the ‘Pamela Ann’ ” was a material fact that should have been disclosed, and so insurer could elect to void insurance policy

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).