Reasonableness of the Examination Requirement
Courts have consistently held that the requirement in an insurance policy that an insured submit to an examination under oath is reasonable. More than 80 years ago, in Hickman v. London Assurance Corp., 184 Cal. 524, 529, 195 P. 45 (1920), the California Supreme Court expressly approved the reasonableness of an examination under oath as a means of “cross-examining” other statements of the insured.
The author and publisher disclaim any liability, loss, or risk incurred as a consequence, directly or indirectly, of the use and application of any of the contents of this blog. The information provided is not a substitute for the advice of a competent insurance, legal, or other professional. The Information provided at this site should not be relied on as legal advice. Legal advice cannot be given without full consideration of all relevant information relating to an individual situation.