Riggins

United States v. Riggins

Good Law
65 F.2d 750·1933 U.S. App. LEXIS 3143
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 12, 1933No. 7098California741 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Wilbur, J.

This is an action brought upon a reinstated term war risk insurance policy for the sum of $5,000 by the guardian of a World War veteran who has become totally and permanently disabled by reason of insanity. The original policy lapsed for nonpayment of premium in 1921. The application for reinsurance was executed on June 30,1927. In connection with his application for reinstatement the applicant stated in effect that he had not had syphilis. This statement was untrue, and it was known by the veteran to be untrue. The trial court was of opinion, however, that, inasmuch as the government, as well as the applicant, knew that the statement was untrue, the government was not defrauded by the misstatement. It must be conceded that the misrepresentation would be a defense to the policy if the government were thereby deceived. In that regard it is sufficient to cite Raives v. Raives (C. C. A.) 54 F.(2d) 267 . Indeed, the proposition is not seriously disputed.

It appears that the applicant contracted syphilis while he was in the military service of the United States and was hospitalized *751 by reason thereof, and that while in the government hospital suffering with such disease he applied…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.