New England Mutual Life Insurance v. Swain
Court of Appeals of Maryland
Appeal from the Superior Court of Baltimore City (Wickes, J.) The first exception is as to the legitimacy of testimony showing the rate of commission, the appellant paid to agents. It was admitted, evidently on the theory that the larger the commission the greater the desire to sell, and the greater the desire to sell, the greater the inducement to commit fraud. Therefore, the more likely that the agent did commit fraud, and that the plaintiff’s testimony thereon is true.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Superior Court of Baltimore City (Wickes, J.) The first exception is as to the legitimacy of testimony showing the rate of commission, the appellant paid to agents. It was admitted, evidently on the theory that the larger the commission the greater the desire to sell, and the greater the desire to sell, the greater the inducement to commit fraud. Therefore, the more likely that the agent did commit fraud, and that the plaintiff’s testimony thereon is true. It could have been admitted on no other theory, and the proposition stated in this way shows its fallacy. As an abstract…
1Opinion of the CourtBoyd, J.
Oh June 1st, 1903, Isaac O. Swain sued the Insurance Company for an alleged fraud of its agent, by means of divers false and fraudulent representations, whereby he was induced to take out a policy of insurance on his life for an annual premium of $429. The declaration contains' three counts, in the first of which it is alleged that the plaintiff paid the premium with a promissory note, dated August 2nd, 1897, payable to the order of the defendant six months after date; that on September 5th, he received the policy and duiing the month of August the agent fraudulently and wrongfully demanded…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Rosenthal v. WalkerSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Faust v. HosfordSupreme Court of Iowa · 1903
- Tome v. Parkersburg Branch RailroadCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1873
- Wear v. SkinnerCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1877
- Barndt v. FrederickWisconsin Supreme Court · 1890
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Frederick Road Ltd. Partnership v. SturmCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2000
- O'HARA v. KovensCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1986
- Geisz v. Greater Baltimore Medical CenterCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1988
- James v. WeisheitCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1977
- Globe Indemnity Co. v. Victill Corp.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1969
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.