Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. Sterling
| Decision Date | 08 February 1962 |
| Citation | 15 A.D.2d 334,224 N.Y.S.2d 146 |
| Parties | AETNA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. Elizabeth STERLING, Daphne Sterling, Defendants-Appellants, and Rebecca Greenberg, Defendant-Respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Daniel J. Madigan, New York City, of counsel (Burton B. Turkus, New York City, attorney) for defendants-appellants.
Leonard R. Glass, New York City, of counsel (Harold Greenberg, New York City, with him on the brief; Glass & Greenapple, New York City, attorneys) for defendant-respondent.
Before BREITEL, J. P., and RABIN, McNALLY, STEVENS and STEUER, JJ.
Deceased was the holder of a certificate in the sum of $5,000 of a group insurance policy, as an employee of Shearson, Hammill & Company. Her daughters, the defendants Sterling, were the beneficiaries. Upon leaving her position, deceased was notified by the insurer that her participation in the group policy would expire May 1, 1960, but that she had the option to replace the participation with an individual life policy in the sum of $2,000. She made an application for such a policy, paid the first premium and named her mother, the defendant Greenberg, as beneficiary of this new policy. She died on April 25, 1960, while the certificate was still in effect. The daughters and the mother of deceased made claim to the proceeds. The insurer has paid the proceeds, some $5,216, into court, and the claimants both moved for summary judgment.
It is true that, where no issue exists between the insurer and the claimed beneficiary, the terms or conditions of the policy in regard to change of beneficiary need not be complied with (Considine v. Considine, 255 App.Div. 876, 7 N.Y.S.2d 834). This does not mean that in any situation where the insurer declines to choose between rival claimants and pays the proceeds into court the court should make a disposition based on which of them the court finds that the deceased would have preferred to receive the proceeds. There must be an act or acts designed for the purpose of making the change, though they may fall short of accomplishing it. Mere intent is not enough (Fink v. Fink, 171 N.Y. 616, 64 N.E. 506). Here, the deceased made no effort to change the beneficiary of the certificate. What she did was to name a different beneficiary for a different policy, which would replace the certificate. In the light of her acts, speculation on her general intent is neither profitable nor permissible. The order in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Sun Life & Health Ins. Co. v. Colavito
...must demonstrate Matthew's specific intent to change the beneficiaries of his Sun Life policy. See Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. Sterling, 15 A.D.2d 334, 224 N.Y.S.2d 146, 147 (1962) (“Speculation on [the insured's] general intent is neither profitable nor permissible.”); cf. McCarthy, 681 N.Y.S.2......
-
Prudential Ins. Co. of America v. Kamrath
...for the purpose of making the change.'" McCarthy, 681 N.Y.S.2d 790, 704 N.E.2d at 560 (quoting Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. Sterling, 15 A.D.2d 334, 224 N.Y.S.2d 146, 147 (N.Y.App.Div.) (per curiam), aff'd, 11 N.Y.2d 959, 229 N.Y.S.2d 9, 183 N.E.2d 325 (1962) (mem.)). Therefore, if the insured "h......
-
McCarthy v. Aetna Life Insurance Company
...Kane v. Union Mutual Life Insurance Co., 84 A.D.2d 148, 445 N.Y.S.2d 549, appeal dismissed 57 N.Y.2d 956; Aetna Life Insurance Co. v. Sterling, 15 A.D.2d 334, 224 N.Y.S.2d 146, affd. 11 N.Y.2d 959, 229 N.Y.S.2d 9, 183 N.E.2d 325; Considine v. Considine, 255 App.Div. 876, 7 N.Y.S.2d 834) an ......
-
Union Cent. Life Ins. Co. v. Berger
...or acts designed for purpose of making the change, though they may fall short of accomplishing it.'" Id. (quoting Aetna Life Ins. Co. v Sterling, 15 A.D.2d 334, 335 (1st Dep't), aff'd, 11 N.Y.2d 959 (1962)). The "paramount factor in resolving the controversy is the intent of the insured." I......