Branch v. United States

• Decision Date: 08 February 1949
• Docket Number: Civ. No. 3872.
• Parties: BRANCH v. UNITED STATES et al.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Western District of Oklahoma

83 F. Supp. 641

BRANCH v. UNITED STATES et al.

Civ. No. 3872.

United States District Court W. D. Oklahoma.

February 8, 1949.

Martin C. Moore, of Oklahoma City, Okl., for plaintiff.

Robert E. Shelton, U. S. Atty., of Oklahoma City, Okl., for the United States.

Howard K. Berry and Ted Foster, both of Oklahoma City, Okl., for Mary C. Pendergrass, guardian of James and Anna M. Branch, minors.

Falkenstine & Fisher, of Watonga, Okl., for Inez Branch Hamilton.

VAUGHT, Chief Judge.

On February 27, 1948, the plaintiff Ophelia Branch filed her complaint seeking to recover on an insurance policy issued February 3, 1943 by the defendant United States of America on the life of Eddie Branch, an enlisted man in the military service, (hereinafter referred to as the insured.) The beneficiaries named therein are Ophelia Branch, wife, $5,000, and John Branch, father, $5,000, with a provision that if either of the beneficiaries died the survivor should become the sole beneficiary in that event.

The plaintiff alleges that the insured died on June 14, 1944, while in the service, leaving the plaintiff as his surviving wife; that John Branch, the father, died on October 6, 1944, leaving the plaintiff as the sole beneficiary; that she had made due claim as beneficiary for the benefits provided in the policy and that her claim was denied by the Veterans' Administration on December 16, 1947; that on or about April 1, 1944, she and the insured entered into a common-law marriage agreement, which agreement, by acts set forth in the complaint, was in full force and effect at the date of the death of the insured, and by reason thereof, she is entitled to the proceeds of the policy.

The defendant United States of America filed its answer admitting paragraph 1 of the complaint and denying paragraphs 2 and 3 of the complaint except that it admitted that Eddie Branch was inducted into the military service of the United States on February 3, 1943 and died while in the service on June 14, 1944. It admitted that it issued on February 4, 1943 the policy sued upon, with the beneficiaries named therein, and that the insurance policy was in full force and effect at the date of the death of the insured. It admitted that the beneficiary John Branch died on October 6, 1944 and alleged that at the time of his death he had received three installments of insurance benefits under the policy. It alleges that no insurance benefits are payable to the plaintiff for the reason that she is not the lawful widow of the insured and is not within the permitted class of beneficiaries as provided by Section 802(g), Title 38 U.S.C.A. It admits that the plaintiff made claim as beneficiary under the policy and that her claim was denied as alleged in her complaint. It denies that the plaintiff received any sum or sums from the defendant as beneficiary under the policy; that on April 1, 1944, or any other later date, the insured entered into a common-law marriage with the plaintiff, and all other allegations of the complaint.

As a counterclaim the defendant states that the insured was legally married to Inez Bennett on April 6, 1935 and to that union were born two children, James Branch and Anna M. Branch. That on March 29, 1944 the District Court of Oklahoma County, Oklahoma, granted the insured an absolute divorce from Inez Bennett Branch, but ordered that the decree should not become absolute until after the expiration of six months from the date of the decree, and that the death of the insured occurred prior to the effective date of the decree. That Inez Branch (now Inez Branch Hamilton) has filed claims on behalf of herself as the lawful widow of the insured and on behalf of James Branch and Anna M. Branch, children of the insured. That the benefits heretofore paid to John Branch, deceased, be deducted and the balance be paid to the person, or persons, found by the court to be entitled thereto.

In order to avoid a multiplicity of suits for the insurance benefits under the policy, Inez Branch Hamilton, James Branch and Anna M. Branch, minors, and their guardian, Mary C. Pendergrass, have been made parties defendant.

...