Mutual of Omaha Insurance Company v. Echols

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that the issue of a knowing misrepresentation was a question for the jury but finding that the applicant’s “statements were not true and correct to the best of her knowledge and belief’ ’ because of admissions in her motion for judgment
• testimony of chief underwriter that policy would not have been issued if application had disclosed fainting spells was clear proof of materiality

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).