Under California Insurance Code Section 339, which of the following matters does an insured need not communicate to the insurer?

Why A is correct

Section 339 of the California Insurance Code marks the boundary of the duty to communicate: an insured is not required to disclose matters that fall within the party's own private knowledge and personal judgment. The law recognizes that some facts are inherently matters of individual opinion, taste, or self-knowledge that an applicant could not reasonably be expected to report to the insurer. By contrast, material facts that affect the risk, such as a serious illness, a hazardous occupation, or the existence of other coverage, must be disclosed because the insurer relies on them to underwrite the policy and set the premium. The exception for private judgment does not excuse the disclosure of objective facts that would change the insurer's decision to accept the risk or the price it charges.

Why the other options are wrong

• B) A fact that would change the insurer's decision to accept the risk is precisely the kind of material fact the duty to communicate exists to protect. Such a fact must be disclosed, because the insurer's underwriting decision depends on knowing it, and it plainly falls outside the narrow exception for private judgment.
• C) A material health change that occurs after the application but before the policy takes effect must generally be reported so the insurer can reassess the risk. This is not a matter of private judgment but a change in an objective fact that affects whether the policy should be issued.
• D) The existence of other life insurance coverage on the same life can affect the insurer's assessment of exposure and must generally be disclosed. Whether to disclose such objective information is not left to the applicant's personal judgment, because it bears directly on the risk.

Memory hook

Matters of private judgment stay private; material facts must be told.