Sweat v. Piscataquis Mut. Ins. Co.
| Decision Date | 12 February 1887 |
| Citation | 8 A. 457,79 Me. 109 |
| Parties | SWEAT. v. PISCATAQUIS MUT. INS. CO. |
| Court | Maine Supreme Court |
On exceptions by defendant from supreme judicial court, Piscataquis county. Assumpsit on a policy of fire insurance for $450.
Crosby & Crosby, for plaintiff.
Henry Hudson and C. A. Everett, for defendant.
Whether an erroneous description or misrepresentation of title in an application for insurance is or is not material is a question of fact for the jury, and not a question of law for the court. In this case the plaintiff in her application for insurance stated that the property was unincumbered, when in fact there was a mortgage upon it. The presiding judge instructed the jury that this misrepresentation was not material. This was error. The materiality of the misrepresentation should have been submitted to the jury. Rev. St. c. 49, § 20; Bellatty v. Insurance Co., 61 Me. 414.
Exceptions sustained. New trial granted.
1 Reported by Leslie C. Cornish, Esq., of the Augusta bar.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Atherton v. British Am. Assur. Co.
...the risk." In a suit upon the policy the question of enhanced risk is properly one for the jury, rather than the court. Sweat v. Insurance Co., 79 Me. 109, 8 Atl. 457; Gilman v. Insurance Co., 81 Me. 488, 496, 17 Atl. 544; Bellatty v. Insurance Co., 61 Me. 414; Rice v. Tower, 1 Gray, 426, 4......
- White v. Blake