Does the traditional doctrine of wberrimae fidei continue to apply in its strict form (as held by the First Circuit in the decision below and also by the Third, Ninth, and Eleventh Circuits), or is the doctrine limited to cases in which the insurer relied on a mistake or omission when issuing the policy (as held by the Second and Eighth Circuits), or is the traditional doctrine no longer part of federal maritime law (as held by the Fifth Circuit), or should the doctrine be modified to limit an insurer's ability to avoid the policy (which would restore uniformity with the law in England)?

Does the traditional doctrine of uberrimae fidei continue to apply in its strict form, or is the doctrine limited to cases in which the insurer relied on a mistake or omission when issuing the policy, or is the traditional doctrine no longer part of federal maritime law, or should the doctrine be modified to limit an insurer's ability to avoid the policy?