McCarty v. New York Life Insurance
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by the defendant from the order of the district court for Waseca county, Buckham, J., denying its motion for a new trial. If a person is defrauded and intends to rescind his contract, he should do so immediately. Oakey v. Cook, 41 N. J. Eq. 350; Brown v. Mutual, 32 N. J. Eq. 809; Jennings v. Broughton, 5 De Gex, M. & G. 125. What is a reasonable time, when the facts are not disputed, is a question of law for the court.
Read the full summary
Appeal by the defendant from the order of the district court for Waseca county, Buckham, J., denying its motion for a new trial. If a person is defrauded and intends to rescind his contract, he should do so immediately. Oakey v. Cook, 41 N. J. Eq. 350; Brown v. Mutual, 32 N. J. Eq. 809; Jennings v. Broughton, 5 De Gex, M. & G. 125. What is a reasonable time, when the facts are not disputed, is a question of law for the court. Learning v. Wise, 23 P. F. Smith (Pa.) 173. See Barton v. Simmons, 14 Ind. 49; American v. Neiberger, 74 Mo. 167; Rolling Mill v. Indianapolis, St. Louis, Fort S. & W.…
1Opinion of the CourtMitchell, J.
The evidence either conclusively established or reasonably tended to prove the following facts: One Wood was the agent of the defendant to solicit and take applications for life insurance, and, if accepted by the defendant, to deliver the policies therefor and collect the premiums. Wood solicited the plaintiff to take a policy, stating to him the character and terms of the policy which he was “selling.” Plaintiff agreed to take a policy for $5,000, of the kind and terms described by Wood. • Thereupon Wood filled out an “application,” and presented it to plaintiff for his signature; falsely…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- New York Life Insurance v. FletcherSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Hammond v. . PennockNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
- Martin v. HillSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1889
- Conlan v. RoemerSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1889
- Downer v. SmithSupreme Court of Vermont · 1859
3Cited by19 opinions
- Bostwick v. Mutual Life Insurance Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1903
- Spiess v. BrandtSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1950
- Clark v. WellsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1914
- Evans v. Central Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Kansas · 1912
- Summers v. AlexanderSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1911
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.