MARIA HELENA GONZALEZ, APPELLANT,
v.
AMERICAN HERITAGE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court affirmed summary judgment for the insurer, holding that the decedent was bound by the insurance application he signed and that the insurer was entitled to rescind the policy based on misrepresentations, and that the insurer properly credited the premium refund to the loan account through its agent.
The decedent was bound by the contents of the insurance application he signed, and the insurer was entitled to rescind the policy under the circumstances.
[1] An insured is bound by the contents of an insurance application he signs, and an insurer may rescind a policy based on material misrepresentations in the application.
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMaria Helena Gonzalez appealed a summary judgment in favor of American Heritage Life Insurance Company regarding a life insurance policy purchased thr…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Insurance Agent Authority cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We conclude that the decedent was bound by the contents of the insurance application he signed, see Allied Van Lines, Inc. v. Bratton, 351 So. 2d 344, 347-48 (Fla.1977); Florida Automobile Finance Corporation v. Reyes, 710 So. 2d 216, 217 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998), and that, under the circumstances, the appellee insurer was entitled to rescind the insurance policy. See Continental Assurance Co. v. Carroll, 485 So. 2d 406, 409 (Fla.1986); Smart v. Time Insurance Co., 419 So. 2d 686, 686-87 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982).
We also affirm with respect to the appellant widow’s claim that the appellee has not properly refunded the insurance premium of $3141.85. This life insurance policy was purchased through First Union National Bank of Florida, as agent for the appellee insurer. The record indicates that the portion of the premium which went to the appellee insurance company, together with the commission which went to First Union, in the total amount of $3141.85 was credited by First Union to the appellant’s loan account. Whether First Union was allowed under the loan documents to credit the premium refund against the loan account, as opposed to returning the entire premium to the appellant borrower, is a question not now before us, and First Union is not a party to the present appeal. Our affirmance as to the appellee insurance company is without prejudice to the appellant to pursue the point with First Union.
The summary judgment is affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Allied van Lines, Inc. v. Ila M. Bratton, 351 So. 2d 344 (Fla. 1977)
- Cont'l Assurance Co. v. Carroll, 485 So. 2d 406 (Fla. 1986)
- Smart v. Time Ins. Co., 419 So. 2d 686 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)
- Fla. Auto. Fin. Corp. v. Reyes, 710 So. 2d 216 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)