You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Cartwright v. MacCabees Mutual Life Insurance

Citations: 247 N.W.2d 298; 398 Mich. 238; 1976 Mich. LEXIS 181Docket: 58004, (Calendar No. 4)

Court: Michigan Supreme Court; December 7, 1976; Michigan; State Supreme Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

The case involves a dispute over life insurance proceeds following the death of an applicant who had provided false information on his insurance application. The plaintiff sought to recover $20,000 from the insurer, Maccabees Mutual Life Insurance Company, citing an advance premium payment and a conditional receipt. Initially, the trial court ruled in favor of the defendant, but the Court of Appeals reversed, citing errors related to the physician-patient privilege and unreasonable delays in processing the application. The Supreme Court of Michigan reviewed the case, focusing on the materiality of misrepresentations and the invocation of privilege. The court determined that the false statements regarding the applicant's medical history were material, justifying the insurer's denial of coverage. The insurer's delay in processing was found reasonable, attributed to the attending physician's slow response to information requests. The court reversed the Court of Appeals' decision and reinstated the trial court's judgment in favor of the insurer, Maccabees, due to the material misrepresentations and procedural propriety in handling the application. The decision highlights the importance of accurate disclosures and the legal nuances of privilege waivers in insurance law.

Legal Issues Addressed

Material Misrepresentation in Insurance Applications

Application: The court evaluated the materiality of misrepresentations on an insurance application, determining that false statements regarding medical history materially influenced the insurer's risk assessment.

Reasoning: A misrepresentation in an insurance application must be material to void a policy. The insurer provided strong evidence of significant inaccuracies in the Cartwright application.

Termination of Parental Rights under Civil Code Section 232

Application: The case addresses the application of the physician-patient privilege in the context of insurance disputes, particularly concerning false representations made in an insurance application.

Reasoning: The Supreme Court of Michigan granted leave to appeal, focusing on the potential invocation of the physician-patient privilege in light of the insurer's proof of false representations in the application.

Unreasonable Delay in Insurance Application Processing

Application: The case examines whether an insurance application delay constituted unreasonable conduct by the insurer, ultimately finding the delay was justified due to the attending physician's lack of timely response.

Reasoning: The record showed the delay was due solely to the attending physician's avoidance of requests for medical information, leading to the conclusion that the defendant did not act with unreasonable delay.

Waiver of Physician-Patient Privilege

Application: The court considered whether the signed waiver on the insurance application constituted a waiver of the physician-patient privilege, impacting the admissibility of medical reports during trial.

Reasoning: The Court of Appeals found reversible error in admitting Dr. Appleman’s report over claims of privilege, asserting that Mr. Cartwright's authorization for the physician to share information did not waive his right to invoke privilege during the trial.