UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

CHRISTINA A. REYNOLDS,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

No. 98-1389

UNITED OF OMAHA LIFE INSURANCE

COMPANY,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria.

Claude M. Hilton, Chief District Judge.

(CA-97-1050-A)

Argued: October 28, 1998

Decided: December 7, 1998

Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and

BOYLE, Chief United States District Judge for the

Eastern District of North Carolina, sitting by designation.

_________________________________________________________________

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

ARGUED: J. Charles Curran, KIDWELL, KENT & CURRAN, Fairfax, Virginia, for Appellant. Robert William Hesselbacher, Jr.,

SEMMES, BOWEN & SEMMES, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. ON BRIEF: Harold Kent Kidwell, KIDWELL, KENT & CURRAN, Fairfax, Virginia, for Appellant.

_________________________________________________________________
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See

Local Rule 36(c).

_________________________________________________________________

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Christina A. Reynolds (Reynolds) appeals the district court's grant

of United of Omaha Life Insurance Company's motion for summary

judgment. The underlying claim was Reynolds' suit seeking benefits

under four life insurance policies issued by United of Omaha Life

Insurance Company (United) to her late father, James H. Powell.

United refused to pay benefits on these policies on the grounds that

Powell had deceived United when applying for the policies.

In May of 1995, Powell met with a United agent and applied for

a life insurance policy. In his application, Powell answered "no" to

questions asking whether he had received medical care for or had seizures, convulsions, paralysis, stroke, mental disorder, emotional disorder, or brain disease in the past five years. He also answered "no"

to a question asking if he had been examined or received medical care

for any other mental or physical disorder or bodily injury in the past

five years. Powell also stated that he had not had or received medical

care for any respiratory disorder in the ten years prior to applying for

life insurance.

United also conducted a telephone interview with Powell, which

produced a report that was largely consistent with Powell's application. United requested various medical records in May, and again in

August, of 1995. The information received in the medical records was

generally consistent with Powell's application. However, on August

24, 1995, United received a report which indicated that Powell had

told his doctor that "he was involved as a guard in the assassination

of President Kennedy in France(?)," and records indicated that Powell

had a history of hypertension and pneumonia. Meanwhile, Powell had

applied for a second life insurance policy from United, which was

issued on September 4, 1995, after an August 26, 1995 paramedical

inspection of Powell produced statements from Powell consistent with

his earlier applications.

 2
On October 1, 1995, Powell applied for two additional life insurance policies from United. Based upon these applications, which were

virtually identical to Powell's earlier applications, United issued these

policies later in October 1995.

Powell died of respiratory arrest caused by multiple myeloma and

chronic obstructive lung disease on May 26, 1996. Reynolds made

demand for benefits under United's four insurance policies on Powell's life on July 10, 1996. On December 30, 1996, United informed

Reynolds that a claim investigation had revealed that Powell had been

treated for significant and long-standing mental health problems,

which were not disclosed on the insurance applications or revealed by

United's investigations. United went on to state that the four policies

in question would not have been issued to Powell had United been

aware of Powell's conditions and treatment at the time of application.

United declared the policies void from the date of inception, denied

Reynolds' claim, and issued a check refunding the premiums paid on

the policies.

Reynolds concedes that Powell, in spite of his statements made to

United, had a long history of serious mental illness (diagnosed as

either schizophrenia or bipolar disorder), and had been hospitalized

numerous times in the five years before applying for life insurance

from United, and as recently as July 1995. Reynolds also acknowledges that the answers to some health questions on Powell's applications for life insurance were untrue as a matter of fact.

However, Reynolds argues that United should not have relied on

Powell's false statements to United. According to Reynolds, the

inconsistencies in the information United received should have put it

on notice of Powell's untrue statements. Reynolds points out that

Powell named a different treating physician on August 26, 1995 than

he had in earlier applications. Reynolds also points to the scrawled

statement in one of the Doctor's reports that United received stating

that Powell said he had been involved as a guard in"President Kennedy's assassination in France(?)" The district court found that United

had no general duty to go beyond the face of Powell's statements to

determine that they were accurate. In making this finding, the district

court relied upon well established Virginia law. See Parkerson v. Federal Home Life Ins. Co., 797 F.Supp. 1308, 1315 (E.D. Va. 1992).

 3
Reynolds also argues that United was in possession of information

contradictory to that in Powell's applications, took no action, and thus

was estopped from relying on Powell's representations. Furthermore,

Reynolds states, as United had begun its own independent investigation, United was bound by what it should have discovered had it completed the investigation.

However, the district court found that the few discrepancies

between Powell's medical records and his applications and statements

were not sufficient to put United on notice. Certainly, United was

under no duty to investigate, as "it would be a strained result indeed

that would place the burden not on the applicant to reveal the truth,

but on the insurer to discover it." Rutherford v. John Hancock Life

Ins. Co., 562 F.2d 290, 294 (4th Cir. 1977).

Upon review of the briefs and the record, and after consideration

of oral arguments, we conclude that the district court was correct in

granting United's motion for summary judgment. Accordingly, we

affirm the judgment of the district court for the reasons stated in its

memorandum opinion. See Reynolds v. United of Omaha Life Ins.

Co., CA No. 97-1050-A (E.D.Va. February 9, 1998).

AFFIRMED

 4