court: “G.S. 1935, 40-420, provides that policies must contain certain provisions, and subdivision (9) requires provision for reinstatement inter alia ‘upon evidence of insurability satisfactory to the company,’ and the policy sued on contained such provision. In making his application for reinstatement, and in furnishing evidence of insurability, Brown concealed facts which we think were material to the risk.” 146 Kan. at 305. Given K.S.A. 40-418 does not apply to reinstatement applications, we apply the common-law doctrine of fraudulent misrepresentation to determine whether Shawn misstated or omitted facts material to FBL’s risk of reinstating the Policy. See Scott v. National Reserve Life Ins. Co., 143 Kan. 678, 680, 56 P.2d 76, modified by 144 Kan. 224, 226, 58 P.2d 1131 (1936) (<HOLDING>). To establish fraudulent misrepresentation in
recognizing wrongful adoption cause of action grounded in fraud and fraudulent misrepresentation holding that in fraud and nondisclosure claims a plaintiff must show actual and justifiable reliance recognizing fraud to be a known misrepresentation or a nondisclosure holding misrepresentation claim to be preempted holding that equitable estoppel requires proof of fraud misrepresentation or affirmative deception