Hayes v. Automobile Insurance Exchange

On Rehearing.

Upon re-argument of this case

{Hayes v. Automobile Insurance Exchange, 126 Wash. 487, 218 Pac. 252), before the court En Banc, it is vigorously urged by the respondent that he should be allowed to submit to the jury the question of his lack of intent to deceive, for the reason that as a matter of fact, he never read his policy and therefore could have had no such intent. The answer to this argument is that, as stated in the Department's opinion, whether he read the policy or not is immaterial, for the law charges him with the duty of reading it.

Justice Holmes, of the United States…