Source: https://ads1.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=B282008&s=CA&d=120683
Timestamp: 2019-04-23 08:04:25+00:00

Document:
with cancer in September 2012 and became disabled as a result.
For the reasons given below, we reverse the judgment.
was terminated and could not be reinstated.
occurrence of Carada’s total disability, as defined in the Rider.
to work and totally disabled as of August 2012.
letter to Carada on June 19, 2013.
illness and disability and asked if the policy could be reinstated.
not be reinstated. The agent relayed this information to Carada.
Carada died on September 23, 2013.
In November 2013, the Lats sued Farmers and its agent.
grace period following a delinquency in premium payments.
interpretation of the terms of the insurance policy.” (Morris v.
Farmers to declare a policy lapse were therefore waived.
by California’s notice prejudice rule.
We agree with the Lats.
actual prejudice from the delay.2 (Campbell v. Allstate Ins. Co.
notice requirement serves to protect insurers from prejudice, . . .
‘a technical escape-hatch.’ ” (Carrington Estate Planning v.
had promised Carada it would waive.
and the policy’s terms may be enforced. (See Doe v. Life Ins.
on other grounds sub nom. UNUM Life Ins. Co. of America v.
Farmers does not meaningfully distinguish these cases.
case, none of which are legally relevant.
Rider: to have the deductions charged to her account waived.
while she was disabled and the policy would not have lapsed.
had declared it to have lapsed.
Farmers’ reliance on Slater v. Lawyers’ Mutual Ins. Co.
company a complaint against him for legal malpractice. (Id.
Farmers relies upon. (See, e.g., Pacific Employers Ins. Co. v.
Slater, effectively rewrite the contract between the parties.

References: v.

 v. 
 v.

 v. 
 v.

 v. 
 v.