Bullock v. Life Ins. Co. of Miss.
| Docket Number: | 2001-CA-01913-SCT | |
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 05-06-2004 Opinion Author: Waller, P.J. Holding: AFFIRMED |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Insurance - Rescission of application - Material misrepresentations Judge(s) Concurring: Smith, C.J., Cobb, P.J., Carlson and Dickinson, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Diaz, Graves and Randolph, JJ. Dissenting Author : Easley, J. Procedural History: Summary Judgment Nature of the Case: CIVIL - INSURANCE |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 11-08-2001 Appealed from: MADISON COUNTY CHANCERY COURT Judge: William Joseph Lutz Disposition: Granted summary judgment to Appellee. Case Number: 99-782 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | SARAH BULLOCK |
JOHN W. CHRISTOPHER |
||
| Appellee: | LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF MISSISSIPPI | KENNA L. MANSFIELD, JR. |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Insurance - Rescission of application - Material misrepresentations |
| Summary of the Facts: | Life Insurance Company of Mississippi filed a complaint in the Madison County Chancery Court for rescission, monetary damages and injunctive relief against Sarah Bullock, claiming that, in connection with a promissory note by Bullock to Trustmark National Bank, Bullock applied for credit life and disability insurance with an intent to defraud by submitting false disability claims and collecting benefits thereon. Bullock filed a motion for change of venue alleging that she was an adult resident citizen of Simpson County, that the branch bank where she obtained the loan and purchased the CL&D insurance was in Simpson County, and that the cause of action accrued in Simpson County. The chancery court denied the motion for change of venue. Life Insurance filed a motion for summary judgment which the court granted. Bullock appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Bullock argues that summary judgment was improper because triable issues of fact existed and the chancellor improperly made credibility determinations in granting summary judgment. To rescind an application for insurance, an insurer must show that the application contains answers which are false, incomplete, or misleading and that such answers are material to the acceptance of the risk or to the hazard to be assumed. The documentary evidence in this case, when coupled with Bullock's averments at her deposition, overwhelmingly proves that Bullock made material misrepresentations to Life and that Life is entitled to rescission of the contract. The documents she filed with the three insurance companies completely contradict themselves. There are three dates on which she claims to have become totally disabled. The cause for her total disability differs among the applications. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
