top of page
A Misstatement on Your Application for Insurance Can Cost You!

May 15, 2020: Recently the Supreme Court of Ohio decided Nationwide v. Pusser. Ms. Pusser was living with her sister at the time she (the sister) purchased an auto policy with Nationwide. One of the questions asked on the application for insurance was whether there were any other persons in the insured person’s household. The sister answered that she was the only person in her household even though Ms. Pusser was living with her at the time of the application. 

     Ms. Pusser struck and killed a pedestrian while driving her sister’s car. Nationwide refused to provide coverage for the accident, claiming that the policy was void “ab initio” or “from the beginning”—as if there had never been a policy. The trial court held for Nationwide that the policy was void. The appellate court reversed, meaning it held that Nationwide would have to provide insurance coverage, and Nationwide’s appeal was taken up by the Ohio Supreme Court. 

       In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court of Ohio held for Nationwide that the policy was void from the beginning. Put simply, it was as if there had never been insurance on the sister’s vehicle. The reason—the Court found that Ms. Pusser’s sister had noticed that a misstatement (failing to list a licensed driver living in her household) on her warranty (the application for insurance) which was specifically incorporated into and part of the policy was sufficient to allow the insurance company to void the policy from the beginning as if it never existed. You can read the entire opinion here:

     Several takeaways here: The Court did not say in its opinion that either fraud or an intent to deceive the insurance company was necessary to void the policy; only a “misstatement.” The Court found that Nationwide’s policy language sufficiently warned applicants that misstatements in the application were a breach of warranty which could lead to a void policy. And the policy was not canceled from the date the misstatement was discovered but rather was voided as if it never existed, which meant there was no insurance coverage on the date of the fatal accident. Finally, there was no discussion whether, in addition to the civil penalties for which Mr. Pusser or her sister might be found liable, either or both women would or could be subject to driver license suspensions for failing to carry liability insurance. 

Call 800/582-5577 if you need me. I have been protecting the rights of injured motorcyclists for nearly 50 years. 

This information is for general purposes only and does not constitute legal or professional advice. 
No user should act based on any of the information contained on this site without obtaining proper legal or other professional advice specific to his or her situation. It should not be relied upon for any specific purpose and no representation or warranty about its accuracy or completeness are implied.  

Copyright © 2020 Ralph C. Buss – All Rights Reserved

Top 100 Trial Lawyers logo
Registered Mediator logo
bottom of page