Doub v. Weathersby-Breeland Insurance Agency

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that the insured had “abandon[ed] all care” when his insurance policy had been in effect for eighteen months and he had never read the policy, the court held the insurance agent was not liable for an alleged misrepresentation that the policy “covered everything”
• where there is nothing in the exclusion that is ambiguous or difficult to understand, it is effective notwithstanding insured's claim he would not have understood it if he had read it
• \One entering into a contract should read it and avail himself of every reasonable opportunity to understand its contents and meaning.\
• “[0]ne cannot complain of fraud in the misrepresentation of the contents of a written instrument in his possession when the truth could have been ascertained by his reading the instrument.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).