Calligaro v. Midland Casualty Co.

The defendant’s principal contentions are (1) that there is no evidence to support the jury’s finding that Calligaro did not misrepresent his occupation at the time he made application for insurance, and (2) that if Calligaro’s occupation at the time he made application for the insurance was in fact a bartender in a speakeasy, the policy should be avoided because the representation was material and increased the risk.

As to the defendant’s first contention, it appears without dispute that for about a year and a half prior to May 26, 1928, Calligaro had been continuously employed in his…