Legal Opinion
Satz v. Massachusetts Bonding & Insurance
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
Decided December 18, 1925Published
1Opinion of the CourtChurchill, J.
The single question presented by the appeal is whether warranties on a policy of burglary insurance may be avoided by proof that the insurer knew the actual facts when the policy was written and that the facts Were such that the *200warranties could not be true. It was held below that such knowledge on the part of the insurer is immaterial and hence that the defendant was entitled to judgment, the falsity of the warranties being admitted.
We disagree with the conclusions so reached. The contrary principle appears to be established by numerous decisions. (Van Schoick v. Niagara Fire Ins. Co., 68 N.…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Van Schoick v. . Niagara Fire Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1877
- Baumann v. . Preferred Accident Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1919
- Thebaud v. . Great Western Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1898
- Bollard v. . New York Life Insurance CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1920
- Grubiak v. John Hancock Mutual Life InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1925
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.