Problem 1: When you read this case, did you assume that Gaon died from lung cancer or some other smoking-related cause? Does the court actually say that?
Problem 2: Can you reasonably infer from the facts here that Gaon himself filled out the form and signed it? That is, can you know with some degree of certainty that he lied to the insurance company? Would it make any difference if he merely signed a form that his secretary filled out? Why or why not?
Problem 3: What if Gaon died of causes unrelated to smoking (e.g., he was in a fatal automobile accident), and the insurance company was looking for ways to deny the claim? Does the court's opinion and language still seem reasonable (e.g., the statement "there is no doubt that Mutual was induced to issue the non-smoker, discounted-premium policy to JMR precisely as a result of the misrepresentations made by Gaon concerning his smoking history")?
Problem 4: If Gaon had accurately disclosed his smoking history, is it clear that the insurance company would have refused to make any policy at all? Why is this question important? Do you agree with the court that the question is irrelevant?