On the other hand, statements which can not be understood as influencing the conduct of the adversary party can not be deemed material.1-Thus a false statement as to the motive of the buyer2 or seller;3 a false statement as to the purpose for which the personal property in question was to be used;4 a false statement as to the lowest price which the seller will accept;5 as to the information with reference to the conduct of an estate possessed by a creditor;6 that one who is purchasing for future delivery and payment is worth a million dollars if, in fact, he is able to pay for the goods;7 a false representation by a retiring member of a firm of insurance agents that he has no copy of the expiration list of "policies, the contract of dissolution allowing him to keep his good will and solicit renewals;8 a statement as to the amount of a debt where the parties agree on a certain sum therefor, "without regard to any question as to what is the real claim";9 a false statement as to the time of paying prior accounts;10 a bank statement which inflates resources and liabilities equally, or which deducts interest or re-discounts from undivided profits, instead of stating each separately in full;11 a statement by a patentee that not a reference had been found against him, the fact being that references had been made but were not then standing;12 a misstatement as to the legal title to realty when the owner of the legal title authorizes the sale and is ready to perform;13 that certain land is not "river land" where the title to such land has been cleared and it is as valuable as other land;14 a representation macte to a purchaser of a wharf who required twelve feet of water that it was seventeen feet, the depth being somewhat less but the city having guaranteed at least sixteen feet;15 a statement by the vendee that the land which he was seeking to buy "would not sprout peas," when in fact the vendee was seeking to buy it because of the mineral deposits underneath it;16 a statement that vendor had an opportunity to lease to another at a certain rental;17 that a contract had already been made, when in fact it was not made for a considerable time thereafter;18 stating that a corporation was not liable on a note as guarantor, if the maker thereof was solvent;19 a misstatement in an insurance contract concerning an ailment thought to be local and temporary, and not necessarily affecting the risk,20 as to slight ailments not affecting the general health,21 or as to weekly earnings if not affecting the amount of recovery for the actual injury; although it would have affected the amount in case of some kinds of injury,22 have all been held not to be fraud, even if knowingly false, as immaterial.

63 Miller v. Commercial Union Assurance Co., 69 Wash. 529, 125 Ac. 782.

64 Provident Savings Life Assurance Society v. Whayne (Ky.), 93 S. W. 1049; Fishblate v. Fidelity & Casualty Co., 140 N. Car. 589, 53 S. E. 354.

65 Thomas v. Hacker (Cal.), 178 Ac. 855.

66 See Sec. 288, 291, 295 to 298 and 305.

1 United States. Crump v. Schneider, 246 Fed. 225, 158 C. C. A. 385.

California. Colton v. Stanford, 82 Cal. 351, 16 Am. St. Rep. 137, 23 Ac. 16.

Delaware. Monad Engineering Co. v. Stewart, 25 Del. 35, 78 Atl. 598.

Illinois. Hansford v. Willetts, 43 111. App. 436.

Iowa. Lantz v. Ryman, 102 la. 348, 71 N. W. 212.

Maryland. Byrd v. Rautman, 85 Md. 414, 36 Atl. 1099.

Pennsylvania. Brown v. Dobson, 198 Pa. St. 487, 48 Atl. 415.

2 Byrd v. Rautman, 85 Md. 414, 36 Atl. 1099.

3 Marriner v. Denniaon, 78 Cal. 202, 20 Ac. 386.

4 Monad Engineering Co. v. Stewart, 25 Del. 35, 78 Atl. 598.

5 Pocahontas Guano Co", v. Collins-Plass Co., 118 Va. 659, 88 S. E. 66.

6 Jones v. Bradley, 8 Colo. App. 178, 45 Ac. 229 (made to the executrix by the creditor).

7 Baker v. Lehman, 186 Ala. 493, 65 So. 321.

8 Lantz v. Ryman, 102 la. 348, 71 N. W. 212.

9 Brown v. Dobson, 198 Pa. St. 487, 48 Atl. 415.

10 Monad Engineering Co. v. Stewart, 25 Del. 35, 78 Atl. 598.

11 Gerner v. Yates, 61 Neb. 100, 84 N. W. 596.

12 Arnold v. Hosiery Co., 148 N. Y. 392, 42 N. E. 980.

13 Crump v. Schneider, 246 Fed. 225, 158 C. C. A. 385; Wolf v. Lawrence, 276 111. 11, 114 N. E. 567.

14 Armstrong v. Breen, 101 la. 9, 69 N. W. 1125.

15 Ranstead v. Allen, 85 Md. 482, 37 Atl. 15.

16 Storthz v. Arnold, 74 Ark. 68, 84 S. W. 1036.

17 Robert v. Finberg, 85 Conn. 557, 84 Atl. 366 (other fraud was shown to exist, however).

18 Farwell v. Colonial Trust Co., 147 Fed. 480, 78 C. C. A. 22.

19 Jakway v. Proudfit, 76 Neb. 62, 109 N. W. 388 [affirming Jakway v. Proudfit, 76 Neb. 62, 106 N.' W. 1039].

20 Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. Millar, 113 Md. 686, 78 Atl. 483 (as failure to mention a consultation with a physician with reference to an inflammation of the middle ear).

21 United States Health & Accident Insurance Co. v. Bennett's Adm'r (Ky.), 105 S. W. 43S.