Dadurian v. Underwriters At Lloyd’s Of London

787 F.2d 756 (1st Cir. 1986)


Dadurian (P) alleged that he purchased twelve pieces of jewelry from 1977-1980 for investment purposes. P claimed he paid $233,000 and purchased all the pieces from Howe with cash. There were no sales receipts nor any kind of documentation to show the purchases. P purchased an insurance policy for the jewelry from Lloyd’s (D) in 1980. The policy was based on appraisal certificates from Howe. Just a month later, P filed a claim. P contends that armed robbers stole the jewelry. D conducted a claims examination. It was immediately discovered that P made a number of false statements according to D’s description of the events. D refused to pay on the claim. P had stated under oath that he had obtained bank loans to purchase the jewelry but the loans did not correspond to the alleged purchase amounts paid. P sued D for the claim. The issues at trial were both the ownership and whether P lied to the insurance company, which would void the insurance. The jury found that P did buy the jewelry and he did not intentionally lie to D. It gave the verdict to P. D moved for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict.