Court Opinion

ID: 9849500
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 04:41:08.850442+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:18:49.412649
License: Public Domain

HATHAWAY, Judge
(dissenting).
In Greber there could be no finding of knowledge imputed to the insurance company because of the misinformation con-cededly furnished by the applicant. Here, the jury found a full disclosure to the defendant’s agent. That knowledge is in law the knowledge of the insurer, principal, whether or not communicated to it by its agent. Commercial Credit Co. v. Eisen-hour, 28 Ariz. 112, 236 P. 126 (1925).
Having candidly disclosed the information required by the insurer, the applicant should not be required to re-examine the application to determine which information the insurance agent found pertinent. Protection of the insurer from its agent’s errors and omissions at the price of disaster to an applicant, sanctifies and fosters over-reaching and is fundamentally unfair.
The methods employed in processing applications lie substantially within the control of the insurer. See authorities pointed out as contrary authorities in the majority opinion. The insurer should not be shielded from its own wrong. I believe the verdict should be reinstated and judgment entered thereon.