Company: SUND
Filing Date: 2025-06-30
Form Type: 10-K
Source: 0001641172-25-017143
Chunk: 23

Company: Sundance Strategies, Inc.
Filing Date: 2025-06-30
Form: 10-K
Item: Item 1
Chunk 23
---
 procure an insurance
policy, it is possible that a court might find that the real party in interest is the premium finance company, which by itself would
not have an insurable interest sufficient to support the insurance policy. As a result, the insurance policy may be void or subject to
attack, which could diminish the value of the policy. States have varying precedent on this subject. California, New York and Florida
have case law that is very favorable to the policy owner (see Lincoln v. Jack Teren and Jonathan S. Berck, as trustee of the
Jack Teren Insurance Trust (Superior Court of the State of California, San Diego), Alice Kramer v. Lockwood Pension Services,
Inc., et al., (United States District Court – Southern District of New York)). These courts have held life insurance policies
to be enforceable even where the policies were clearly purchased with an intent to sell the policies in the future. Florida has case
law that is also favorable (see PrucoLife Insurance Company v. Wells Fargo (Florida Supreme Court, which held that a policy
may not be contested after the expiration of the policy’s contestability period). Delaware has laws which benefit the insurance
carrier and others that are more favorable to the policy owner (see PHL Variable Insurance Co. vs. Price Dawe, (Supreme
Court of Delaware) and Principal Life Insurance Company v. Lawrence Rucker 2007 Insurance Trust (District Court of Delaware)).
These courts have invalidated policies where the original policy owners financed the policies and did not intend to purchase the policies
with their own money and further intended to ultimately sell the policies in the life settlement markets. However, the Rucker case did
provide that premium financing could qualify as an insured procuring a policy and satisfy requirements related to insurable interest.
There is also legislation in most states regulating premium financing that must be complied with for policies originated after the legislation
was enacted.

Also,
in every state that has addressed the question other than New York and Michigan, the expiration of an insurance policy’s contestability
period may not cut off the insurer’s ability to raise the insurable interest issue as a defense to the payment of the policy proceeds.

One
or more states could adopt legislation that would require a holder of an insurance policy to have an insurable interest in the insured
at the time a policy is purchased and at the time of death of the insured. Neither us nor the Holders will have an insurable interest
in the insureds polices acquired by or