Mortgage guaranty policies. A. All statements and descriptions in any application for an insurance policy or in negotiations therefor, by or in behalf of the insured, shall be deemed to be representations and not warranties. Misrepresentations, omissions, concealment of facts, and incorrect statements shall not prevent a recovery under the policy unless: 1. Fraudulent; or 2. Material either to the acceptance of the risk, or to the hazard assumed by the insurer; or 3. The insurer in good faith would either not have issued the policy, or would not have issued a policy in as large an amount, or would not have provided coverage with respect to the hazard resulting in the loss, if the true facts had been made known to the insurer as required either by the application for the policy or otherwise. B. Subsection A of this section shall not be applicable to mortgage guaranty insurance, as hereinafter defined. Misrepresentations, omissions, concealment of facts and incorrect statements shall not prevent a recovery under a policy of mortgage guaranty insurance unless material and fraudulent. As used herein, the term "mortgage guaranty insurance" means a form of casualty or surety insurance insuring lenders against financial loss by reason of nonpayment of principal, interest and other sums agreed to be paid under the terms of any note, bond or other evidence of indebtedness secured by a mortgage, deed of trust or other instrument constituting a lien or charge on real estate which contains a residential building or a building designed to be occupied for industrial or commercial purposes. Laws 1957, p. 365, § 3609.
Notes of Decisions
Claborn v. Washington Nat'l Ins. Co., 910 P.2d 1046 (Okla. 1996).
· cites it 6× “All statements and descriptions in any application for an insurance policy or in negotiations therefore, by or in behalf of the insured, shall be deemed to be representations, and not warranties. Misrepresentations, omissions, concealment of facts, and incorrect statements shall…”
Scottsdale Ins. Co. v. Tolliver, 2005 OK 93 (Okla. 2005).
· cites it 3× “All statements and descriptions in any application for an insurance policy or in negotiations therefor, by or in behalf of the insured, shall be deemed to be representations and not warranties.”
Firstier Mortg. Co. v. Investors Mortg. Ins., 708 F. Supp. 1224 (W.D. Okla. 1989).
· cites it 11× “IMI defends by arguing that under Okla.Stat. tit. 36, § 3609 the policies are void because of misrepresentations, omissions, concealments of facts, and incorrect statements made by or in behalf of Firstier in the applications and negotiations for the insurance policies.”
Massachusetts Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Allen, 416 P.2d 935 (Okla. 1965).
· cites it 4× “Plaintiff Company’s contentions on appeal are that: (1) Under 36 O.S.1961, § 3609, and the uncontradicted evidence plaintiff Company was entitled to judgment as a matter of law; and (2) that in any event, Company is entitled to a new trial for refusal of the trial court to…”
Scottsdale Ins. v. Tolliver, 636 F.3d 1273 (10th Cir. 2011).
“We affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment on the Tollivers’ bad faith claim, but reversed and remanded based on the district court’s erroneous instruction on the burden on proof with respect to the element of intent to deceive under Okla. Stat. tit. 36, § 3609 ,…”
Roesler v. TIG Ins. Co., 251 F. App'x 489 (10th Cir. 2007).
· cites it 2× “36, § 3609 , which provides in part: All statements and descriptions in any application for an insurance policy or in negotiations therefor, by or in behalf of the insured, shall be deemed to be representations and not warranties.”
Scottsdale Ins. v. Tolliver, 261 F. App'x 153 (10th Cir. 2008).
· cites it 2× “Scottsdale asserted its claims under Okla. Stat. tit. 36, § 3609 . 1 The Tollivers filed counterclaims for breach of contract and bad faith.”
Harkrider v. Posey, 2000 OK 94 (Okla. 2000).
“10 III THE MISREPRESENTATION MADE BY POND IN HER INSURANCE APPLICATION DOES NOT RENDER THE POLICY IN QUESTION VOID, BUT MERELY VOIDABLE 19 Oklahoma Property argues that the provisions of 36 O.S.1991 § 3609 11 provide it with a statutory defense to Hark-rider's garnishment claim…”
Vining Ex Rel. Vining v. Enter. Fin. Grp., Inc., 148 F.3d 1206 (10th Cir. 1998).
· cites it 3× “Enterprise also raised the affirmative defense of rescission, arguing that Milford made material misrepresentations in the insurance application which justified a rescission of the Policy pursuant to Okla. Stat. tit. 36, § 3609 (1990). During trial, Vining proved the following…”
City Nat'l Bank & Trust Co. v. Jackson Nat'l Life Ins., 804 P.2d 463 (Okla. Civ. App. 1990).
“36 O.S.1981 § 3609. Thus, in order for an insurer to escape liability under this section for misrepresentation in the application process, the insurer bears the burden of proof to show not only that the statements were untrue, but also that the statements were willfully false,…”
Powell v. Time Ins., 382 S.E.2d 342 (W. Va. 1989).
“Code, 33-6-7, stated in note 2: "Our statute is essentially identical to Okla. Stat. tit. 36, § 3609 (1981), and Idaho Code § 41-1811 (1977 ed.”
Crews v. Shelter Gen. Ins., 393 F. Supp. 2d 1170 (W.D. Okla. 2005).
· cites it 2× “Those circumstances are set out in Okla. Stat. tit. 36, § 3609 , which provides in part: A.”
— Okla. Stat. tit. 36, § 3609(1) — 1 case
Firstier Mortg. Co. v. Investors Mortg. Ins., 708 F. Supp. 1224 (W.D. Okla. 1989).
“IMI defends by arguing that under Okla.Stat. tit. 36, § 3609 the policies are void because of misrepresentations, omissions, concealments of facts, and incorrect statements made by or in behalf of Firstier in the applications and negotiations for the insurance policies.”
— Okla. Stat. tit. 36, § 3609(2) — 2 cases
Massachusetts Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Allen, 416 P.2d 935 (Okla. 1965).
“Plaintiff Company’s contentions on appeal are that: (1) Under 36 O.S.1961, § 3609, and the uncontradicted evidence plaintiff Company was entitled to judgment as a matter of law; and (2) that in any event, Company is entitled to a new trial for refusal of the trial court to…”
Firstier Mortg. Co. v. Investors Mortg. Ins., 708 F. Supp. 1224 (W.D. Okla. 1989).
“IMI defends by arguing that under Okla.Stat. tit. 36, § 3609 the policies are void because of misrepresentations, omissions, concealments of facts, and incorrect statements made by or in behalf of Firstier in the applications and negotiations for the insurance policies.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.