Unit 3: Case Study Directions Review the information about the mailbox rule. Und
ID: 462803 • Letter: U
Question
Unit 3: Case Study
Directions
Review the information about the mailbox rule. Under the mailbox rule, an authorized acceptance is effective when properly dispatched even if it is never received.
Answer question # 7 from your text on p. 379. Review The United States Life Insurance Company in the City of New York V. Wilson on page 368-370. What was the issue? Was this case decided correctly? Why or why not?
Course: Business Law 1 (MG260DLBU1A2016 Business Law I): Book: Business Law: The Ethical, Global, and E-Commerce Environment 16th edition
PLEASE ANSWER ON A JUNIOR COLLEGE LEVEL AND PLEASE CITE YOUR SOURCES
Explanation / Answer
AMAIA was not a party to the Policy. Only U.S. Life and Dr. Griffith were parties to the Policy; and only U.S. Life promised, under the terms of the Policy, to pay death benefits upon proof of Dr. Griffith's death at a time when the Policy was in force. As evident, AMAIA was the third party administrator for U.S. Life. In that role, it was acting as the agent of U.S. Life, a disclosed principal.
Illinois law is clear that an agent acting on behalf of a disclosed principle is not liable for the contractual obligations of the principal unless there is an express agreement to the contrary
In this case, we can conclude that, had the circuit court correctly determined, as a matter of law, that Ms. Wilson was not entitled to judgment against AMAIA as AMAIA had no contractual obligation under the Policy, it would have been an abuse of discretion for the court not to have granted summary judgment in favor of AMAIA. There was no genuine dispute of material fact relating AMAIA's role and actions in this case, and the question whether AMAIA could be liable for breaching the Policy was squarely presented in the cross-motions for summary judgment.
Related Questions
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.