New Era Life Ass'n v. Weigle

Citations

• 128 Pa. 577
• 18 A. 393
• 1889 Pa. LEXIS 819

Syllabus

<p>1. In negotiating a contract for insurance, the insurer and insured are bound to deal fairly and honestly with each other, and any concealment or misrepresentation material to the risk, on either side, is a ground of relief from the contract thus obtained.</p> <p>2. An untrue representation by the agent of a company, to a person negotiating for a policy therein, that the company is in good financial condition and has a paid-up capital of $50,000, whereby the applicant is induced to take a worthless policy in it, is a fraud rendering the contract voidable.</p> <p>3. The fact that by the terms of the policy the death claim upon it is to be restricted to the amount actually collected by mortuary assessments upon other policies, does not render such fraudulent misrepresentation as to the capital of the company immaterial. ,</p> <p>4. Nor does the fact that the stock of such company is held by persons who at the time are of sufficient financial ability to meet calls for the unpaid portion of the capital, render immaterial an untrue representation that the whole of the capital stock has aetualty been paid in.</p> <p>(a) On the trial of an action there was uncontradicted testimony that the defendant was induced to enter into the contract in suit by a misrepresentation of fact. The plaintiff did not ask that this testimony be submitted to the jury, but presented a point which virtually conceded the misrepresentation and requested the court to charge that it was immaterial.</p> <p>5. In such circumstances, the court should not be convicted of error in failing to submit to the jury the question of the credibility of the testimony respecting the alleged misrepresentation, although it would have been proper for it so to do, had there been a request for such submission upon the trial of the cause.</p>