Friez v. National Old Line Insurance Co.
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
703 F.2d 1093 (1983)
- Written by Sheryl McGrath, JD
Facts
In December 1977, Friez applied for life insurance from National Old Line Insurance Co. (Old Line) (defendant). The application required Friez to answer yes or no to whether he knew of any existing impairment, disease, or disorder in his health condition. Friez answered no. Also in the application was a clause that stated, “I understand and agree that there shall be no insurance in force until the policy hereby applied for is issued and delivered to me during my lifetime and good health and the first premium is paid by me in which event the insurance shall be effective as of the Date of issue stated in the policy.” Old Line issued the life-insurance policy to Friez in January 1978. At that time, Friez had undiagnosed terminal cancer. Friez died the following month. Old Line declined to pay the life-insurance proceeds on two grounds: first, that Friez’s good health was a condition precedent to life-insurance coverage and Friez’s undiagnosed cancer rendered him not in good health; and second, that Friez made a misrepresentation in the application by failing to disclose that he had received treatment for ulcers nine years ago. Old Line cancelled the policy and returned the premium payments. Friez’s life-insurance beneficiary (Beneficiary) (plaintiff) sued Old Line for the policy proceeds. The district court entered judgment in favor of Beneficiary. Old Line appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Schroeder, J.)
Dissent (Wallace, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 814,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.