Mundy v. Lumbermanís Mut. Cas.
783 F.2d 21.
Facts: The plaintiff had an insurance policy covering burglary.† They were sent a notice that the policy was changing such that the insurance companyís liability for stolen silver would be limited to $1,000 in the future.† They didnít really look at the notice.† Later, there was a burglary and lots of silver was stolen from them.† The insurance company refused to pay out more than $1,000.† The Mundys sued, claiming that they werenít given adequate notice of the change in their policy.
Issue: Is the policy change binding on the Mundys?
Rule: An insured person is bound by the terms of a renewal policy as long as the person actually receives the policy.
Analysis: The court finds that the notice given in the policy itself was quite clear.† Holding the Mundys to its contents goes along with the common law ďduty to readĒ.
Conclusion: The judgment of the lower court is affirmed.