Bulla v. Donahue, 174 Ind.App. 123, 127, 366 N.E.2d 233, 236 (1977). Needless to say, an insurance agent or broker must be knowledgeable about the contents of a policy to “procure a policy consistent with his [client’s] needs.” Id. Given their legal status as experts, knowledgeable of the insurance policy’s contents, the Subagents could not have reasonably relied on Guffey’s misrepresentations about the front-end load. The plain terms of the Flex II show that the policy’s guaranteed cash value does not exceed the premiums paid until the seventh year of the policy’s life. R. at 1193. The Subagents are held to have known about the front-end load and, hence, cannot complain that they suffered fraud through reasonable reliance. Cf. Plymale v. Upright, 419 N.E.2d 756, 762 (Ind.Ct.App.1981) (<HOLDING>). CONCLUSION In light of our discussion above,
holding that a person cannot reasonably rely on a misrepresentation when the contents of a written instrument contradict the alleged misrepresentation holding misrepresentation claim to be preempted holding negligent misrepresentation sufficient holding as to a fraudulent misrepresentation claim under michigan law that the sixyear statute of limitations begins to run when the misrepresentation was perpetrated and not when the plaintiff discovered or should have discovered the misrepresentation holding that contractor could not show that it reasonably relied upon alleged misrepresentation