In the matter of the Estate of Denise McLaughlin (deceased) and André LeBreton v. Foresters Life Insurance Company, 2026 NBKB 010
Reading time: 4 minutes (approx.)
By: Sarah Richard
The deceased, Denise McLaughlin, was insured under a $100,000 life insurance policy issued by Term Life. After her death, the insurer voided the policy based on a finding that the deceased had misrepresented her weight on the application form. Term Life claimed that this misrepresentation was material to the risk assessment. The deceased’s spouse, being the beneficiary of the policy, contested this decision.
The plaintiffs claimed that voiding the policy was unlawful. They claimed the application was ambiguous and that the insurer failed to prove the insured’s weight at the time of the application. They further claimed that the insurer should have sought verification of the insured’s weight at the time.
The defendant stated that the application was clear and unambiguous. The deceased misrepresented her weight on the application which was material to the risk assessment. They claimed they were entitled to void the policy.
The two issues arising in this case are the following:
- Was the insurer entitled to deny the claim due to a misrepresentation in the health questionnaire?
- Is question C-11 (question regarding the insured’s weight) of the life insurance application form ambiguous?
The court decided that, at the time she applied for insurance, the insured weighed more than what was allowed for someone of her height. This determination was based on her medical records which demonstrated that her weight had increased over time.
The court also rejected the plaintiffs’ argument that the insurer should have double-checked the insured’s weight. The court held that insurers are permitted to rely on the answers given in an application and are not required to investigate when an applicant answers “no” to a question.
On the issue of ambiguity, the court found that the application question about weight was clear and easy to understand. It did not require any complicated math, and an average person could reasonably tell whether their weight fell within the stated range.
As a result, the court concluded that the information about the insured’s weight was material to the assessment of risk and that the false statement of the insured was grounds to void the policy. The plaintiffs’ claim was dismissed, and they were ordered to pay the defendant’s legal costs.
