In Mississippi, everyone has a duty to read their contracts. Indeed, even blind and illiterate persons have a duty to have someone read their contracts to them. Specifically, regarding insurance policies in Mississippi, a policyholder has an affirmative duty to read their policy. In fact, whether the policy was read or not, constructive knowledge of its contents is imputed to the policyholder. Moreover, an agent does not have an affirmative duty to read or explain the terms of an insurance policy to a Plaintiff absent a special, fiduciary relationship. Even more so, an agent’s representations regarding a policy does not itself create a duty to fully explain those terms. A plaintiff’s breach of her own duty to read her insurance policy unravels any claim of negligence against a defendant insurance agent. An insured who possesses a policy that contradicts an agent’s representations cannot rely on the agent’s representations to create coverage when none existed. If the insured read her policy, there would not have been any misrepresentations or failures to explain the policy.
Consider the matter Wilson v. Kemper Corporate Services, Inc. In this matter, the insured brought claims against the insurance company, its subsidiary, and two of its agents in the Circuit Court of Claiborne County. Against the agents specifically, Plaintiff alleged negligence and fraud. The Plaintiff’s negligence and fraud claims revolved around the allegation that one of the agents mislead the Plaintiff about the contents of her Policy. To prove fraudulent joinder, the defendants were required to demonstrate that their negligence and fraud claims made against them were meritless. The defendant agents argued, in part, that both claims failed as a matter of law because the Plaintiff had a duty to read their contract.
The Court found that Plaintiff’s negligence and fraud claims against the defendant agents failed as a matter of law because the agents did not have a special, fiduciary relationship with the Plaintiff, therefore, the agents did not have to explain the contents of the policy to the Plaintiff. Moreover, the Plaintiff should have had the Policy read to her if she could not read and understand it. As such, the Court held that the Plaintiff’s negligence and fraud claims failed as a matter of law.
The Legal Lounge Conclusion
As seen above, Mississippi state and federal courts continue to reaffirm the strict duty to read. The duty to read may be a defense to fraud and negligence claims made against insurance agents. Contact Brown Legal Group today for more insight on Mississippi’s duty to read.