Van Woert v. Modern Woodmen of America
North Dakota Supreme Court
From a judgment of tbe District Court of Renville County, Leigh-ion, J., plaintiffs appeal. The defendant, being engaged in the insurance business in this state as an insurance company, is subject to the general insurance laws of the state, and is not exempt. Rev. Codes 1905, §§ 5893, 5934; Comp.
Read the full summary
From a judgment of tbe District Court of Renville County, Leigh-ion, J., plaintiffs appeal. The defendant, being engaged in the insurance business in this state as an insurance company, is subject to the general insurance laws of the state, and is not exempt. Rev. Codes 1905, §§ 5893, 5934; Comp. Laws, 1913, 6501. Under such statute it has been held that, if the application contains untrue statements, the burden of proof is upon the defendant to show that they were made in bad faith, fraudulently, and with the intention to deceive the insurance company. Soules v. Brotherhood of American…
1Opinion of the CourtOhRistiaNsoN, J.
This is an action upon a benefit certificate or policy of fraternal life insurance in the sum of $3,000,-issued to the plaintiff’s husband, Tiles J. Van Woert, for the plaintiff’s benefit. The application for such insurance was made on May 8, 1909, and the benefit certificate or policy issued on May 31, 1909, and delivered to the insured on June 12, 1909. The insurance contract consists of the beneficiary certificate together with the application therefor. The application for insurance contains thirty-five questions, together with the answers of the insured thereto. The insured, Jiles J. Van…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Cobb v. Covenant Mutual Benefit Ass'nMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1891
- McDermott v. Modern Woodmen of AmericaMissouri Court of Appeals · 1903
- Hoover v. Royal Neighbors of AmericaSupreme Court of Kansas · 1902
- Umsted ex rel. Umsted v. Colgate Farmers Elevator Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1909
- Finch v. Modern Woodmen of AmericaMichigan Supreme Court · 1897
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Mutual Life Ins. v. DibrellTennessee Supreme Court · 1916
- General Fire Extinguisher Co. v. Northwestern Auto Supply Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1922
- Fifty Associates Co. v. QuigleyMontana Supreme Court · 1919
- Stoltze Land Co. v. WestbergMontana Supreme Court · 1922
- Lawien v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1941
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.