FACTS: Bruce and Sallie (the Majeskes) lived in a farmhouse in Michigan. They, however, did not own the farmhouse. The owners were Sallie’s parents, who placed the property in a revocable trust. Despite not owning the property, the Majeskes had lived in the farmhouse for 30 years. The understanding was that the Majeskes would pay the property taxes and obtain insurance on the farmhouse in exchange for living there. Sallie believed that after her parents passed, she would inherit the property. In December 2021, a fire damaged the farmhouse. The Majeskes notified Allstate and submitted a claim. When Allstate discovered that the Majeskes did not own the property, it rescinded the policy based on fraud in the application. Allstate claimed that had it known the Majeskes didn't own the property it wouldn't have issued the policy, Allstate returned the premium payments and declared the policy void. The Majeskes filed a lawsuit against Allstate, alleging among other actions, breach of contract. Allstate moved for summary judgment, but the court found a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the Majeskes misrepresented their status as homeowners. Both parties moved for partial summary judgment on the issue of insurable interest. Allstate argued that the breach of contract action should fail because the Majeskes lacked an insurable interest. And without an insurable interest, the policy was void. The Majeskes argued that even though they didn't own the farmhouse, they suffered a direct financial loss when the farmhouse was damaged in the fire.

Must the Majeskes have an ownership interest in the farmhouse at the time of the fire to establish an insurable interest under the Allstate policy?

Click here to read more and for the answer