Legal Opinion

Mitchell v. United National Insurance

California Court of Appeal

Decided March 8, 2005No. B170364PublishedCited by 40 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

MOSK, J.

We hold that an insurer may, under Insurance Code sections 331 and 359, rescind a fire insurance policy based on an insured’s negligent or unintentional misrepresentation of a material fact in an insurance application, notwithstanding the willful misrepresentation clause included in the required standard form fire insurance policy (Ins. Code §§ 2070 and 2071). Because there was undisputed evidence that the insurer relied upon the misstatements of material facts in the insured’s application for insurance, we affirm the summary judgment.

BACKGROUND

Plaintiff and appellant James E.…

2Cases cited28 opinions

  1. Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co.California Supreme Court · 2001
  2. Waller v. Truck Insurance Exchange, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1995
  3. Engalla v. Permanente Medical Group, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1997
  4. People v. MurphyCalifornia Supreme Court · 2001
  5. Ransom v. Penn Mutual Life InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954

23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by40 opinions

  1. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Lee Investment LLCCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
  2. Hall v. Time Warner, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2007
  3. Nieto v. Blue Shield of California Life & Health InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010
  4. Powell v. KleinmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
  5. United Guaranty Mortgage Indemnity Co. v. Countrywide Financial Corp.District Court, C.D. California · 2009

35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API