A Video Dealing With the So-Called “Innocent” Co-Insured

Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/rights-innocent-co-insured-insurance-proceeds-when-zalma-esq-cfe and see the full video at https://rumble.com/vhwbrb-the-rights-of-an-innocent-co-insured-to-insurance-proceeds-when-another-ins.html and at https://youtu.be/IEL126xAE2Y and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 3750 posts. 

When denying a claim for fraud, it is necessary to determine if there are any innocent co-insureds, and if so, whether the innocent co-insured is entitled to any indemnity.

The question whether arson by one coinsured spouse bars the innocent coinsured spouse from recovering under an insurance policy was one of first impression in Iowa [Vance v. Pekin Ins. Co., 457 N.W.2d 589 (Iowa, 1990)]. The Supreme Court noted that courts across the United States have developed three distinct theories of recovery to resolve the question. Several years ago, one writer critically examined those theories and the rationales for them. [The Problem of the Innocent Coinsured Spouse: Three Theories of Recovery, 17 Val.U.L.Rev. 849 (1983) [hereinafter Innocent Coinsured Spouse].]