Saunders' Estates, In re

• Decision Date: 07 November 1957
• Docket Number: No. 33984,33984
• Citation: 51 Wn.2d 274,317 P.2d 528
• Parties: Matter of the Combined ESTATES of Uriah G. SAUNDERS and Bertha Lee Saunders, husband and wife, both deceased. Olive AUSTIN, J. W. Saunders, Mrs. Edrie Hilgert, Mrs. Dorothy Friske, and W. B. Saunders, legal heirs of the Estate of Uriah G. Saunders, deceased, Appellants, v. Winnifred M. MAJORS, Ursula M. Griffin, and Amanda M. Majors, and The National Bank of Washington, General Administrators of the Combined Estates of Uriah G. Saunders and Bertha Lee Saunders, both deceased, and The Tax Commission of the State of Washington, Respondents.
• Court: Washington Supreme Court

Page 274

51 Wn.2d 274

317 P.2d 528

Matter of the Combined ESTATES of Uriah G. SAUNDERS and

Bertha Lee Saunders, husband and wife, both deceased.

Olive AUSTIN, J. W. Saunders, Mrs. Edrie Hilgert, Mrs.

Dorothy Friske, and W. B. Saunders, legal heirs of

the Estate of Uriah G. Saunders, deceased, Appellants, v. Winnifred M. MAJORS, Ursula M. Griffin, and Amanda M.

Majors, and The National Bank of Washington, General

Administrators of the Combined Estates of Uriah G. Saunders

and Bertha Lee Saunders, both deceased, and The Tax

Commission of the State of Washington, Respondents.

No. 33984.

Supreme Court of Washington, En Banc.

Nov. 7, 1957.

As Modified March 17, 1958.

Rehearing Denied March 17, 1958.

Harry R. Calbom, Jr., Wayne Roethler, Longview, for appellant.

Atwell, Moore & Walstead, Kelso, for respondent.

MALLERY, Justice.

Mr. and Mrs. Saunders died simultaneously in an airplane accident on August 26, 1954, in Montana. At the time of their deaths they were, and for many years had been, residents of Cowlitz county, Washington. Neither had children, but both left collateral heirs. There were a number of insurance policies upon the lives of each, which had been purchased with community funds. The beneficiary in each policy was the other spouse. No alternate beneficiaries were named in any of the policies, although some of them provided that, if the beneficiary was not living at the date of the death of the insured, the proceeds of the policy were to be payable to the executive, administrator, or assigns of the insured.

The declaratory judgment in this case decreed, in effect, that one half of the proceeds of each of the policies should go to the estate of each spouse for distribution.

There were more insurance avails under the husband's policies than under those of the wife. His collateral heirs have appealed.

Appellants contend they should take all the avails of the policies in which the husband was the insured and the wife's collateral heirs should take only the avails of the policies in which she was the insured.

Laws of 1943, chapter 113, § 4, p. 258 (RCW 11.05.040 Rem.Supp.1943, § 1370-4 [formerly RCW 11.04.210]), provides:

'Where the insured and the beneficiary in a policy of life or accident insurance have died and there is no sufficient evidence that they have died otherwise than simultaneously the proceeds of the policy shall be distributed as if the insured had survived the beneficiary.' (Italics ours.)

Compare Uniform Simultaneous Death Act, 9C U.L.A. 167, § 5 (recommending amendment in community property states).

The devolution of the proceeds of the insurance in which the husband was the insured must be distributed according to the statute, as if he had survived his wife. The survival of the husband caused both his half and her half of the community property, in the life insurance policies upon his life, to pass to his estate. His half did so because he had a vested interest in one half of the surrender value of the policies in his own right, which he could take or dispose of by will. In re Towey's Estate, 22 Wash.2d 212, 155 P.2d 273.

Her vested community half of the proceeds of the insurance on his life went first to the personal representative of her estate, and then by inheritance to him...