Court Opinion

ID: 9765721
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 04:16:04.322667+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:30:14.747243
License: Public Domain

Blandin, J.,
dissenting-. In this case the insured made a deliberate false statement of a material and essential fact to the insurer. He persisted in his falsehood for six months because as he testified, he feared the consequences if his father and the authorities of the college which he attended learned the truth. The applicable New Jersey law holds that “whatever the assured’s motivation” for his deliberate false statements is immaterial. Sutera v. Provident Ins. Co. of N. Y., 67 N. J. Super. 554, 562. *370Indisputably the policy is avoided unless the untrue statements are “promptly and seasonably corrected.” Mariani v. Bender; 85 N. J. Super. 490, 501; see also, Sutera v. Provident Ins. Co. of N. Y., supra.
The Mariani case, which is the basis of the majority opinion, held that it was an issue of fact for the jury whether a correction of an untrue statement made by an assured within a bare three weeks was “promptly and seasonably” made. I cannot believe that this decision is any authority for holding that an assured, who persisted in a deliberate false statement for six months and finally confessed to the truth under pressure, might be found to have “promptly and seasonably” corrected his untrue statement. I would therefore order judgment for the plaintiff as a matter of law.