Cook v. Aetna Life Ins. Co.
| Decision Date | 05 October 1990 |
| Citation | 560 N.Y.S.2d 556,166 A.D.2d 895 |
| Parties | Joyce M. COOK a/k/a Joyce M. Ransom, Appellant, v. AETNA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant, Wilma Chubb Cook, Respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Hoffmann, Hubert & Hoffmann by Wilfred Hoffmann, Syracuse, for appellant.
Fischer, Hughes & Bessette by Glenn MacNeil, Malone, for respondent.
Before DENMAN, J.P., and BOOMER, PINE, BALIO and LAWTON, JJ.
The court erred in denying plaintiff's cross motion for summary judgment seeking the proceeds of a $20,000 life insurance policy issued by Aetna Life Insurance Company. Plaintiff and the insured were divorced in 1978, and the insured thereafter married defendant, who also claimed entitlement to the policy proceeds. Because Aetna paid the policy proceeds into court, the policy requirements concerning change of beneficiary were waived and the intent of the insured, based on equitable considerations, controls (see, Cable v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Amer., 89 A.D.2d 636, 453 N.Y.S.2d 86; Considine v. Considine, 255 App.Div. 876, 7 N.Y.S.2d 834). That intent must be demonstrated by proof of affirmative acts to effectuate the change (see, Hunnell v. Hunnell, 45 A.D.2d 521, 359 N.Y.S.2d 926, affd. 37 N.Y.2d 931, 379 N.Y.S.2d 841, 342 N.E.2d 602). The only proof of intent offered by defendant was the insured's alleged statement to her that he had provided for her and the children "in his insurance policy." Because defendant failed to offer any proof of an affirmative act by the insured to change his beneficiary, the court should have granted plaintiff's cross motion (see, Hunnell v. Hunnell, supra; cf., Cable v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., supra; Considine v. Considine, supra).
Order insofar as appealed from unanimously reversed on...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lincoln Life & Annuity Co. of N.Y. v. Wittmeyer
..., 92 N.Y.2d 436, 440, 681 N.Y.S.2d 790, 704 N.E.2d 557 [1998] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Cook v. Aetna Life Ins. Co. , 166 A.D.2d 895, 896, 560 N.Y.S.2d 556 [4th Dept. 1990] ; Cable v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. , 89 A.D.2d 636, 636, 453 N.Y.S.2d 86 [3d Dept. 1982] ). Assuming,......
-
McCarthy v. Aetna Life Insurance Company
...supra, at 154, 445 N.Y.S.2d 549; Aetna Life Insurance Co. v. Sterling, supra, at 335, 224 N.Y.S.2d 146; cf., Cook v. Aetna Life Insurance Co., 166 A.D.2d 895, 560 N.Y.S.2d 556). While the dissent contends that we are making a "new contract for the parties", in this case the precise point is......
-
William Penn Life Ins. Co. of N.Y. v. Coleman
...John Hancock, unlike this matter, “completion of the new form was within” the power of the insured to accomplish. Cook v. Aetna Life Ins. Co., 166 A.D.2d 895 (4th Dept.1990) is similarly inapposite, as no evidence was presented that there was any affirmative act by the insured to effect a c......
-
Lincoln Life & Annuity Co. of N.Y. v. Wittmeyer
... ... the part of the insured] to accomplish the change" ... (McCarthy v Aetna Life Ins. Co., 92 N.Y.2d 436, 440 ... [1998] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Cook v ... ...
-
Chapter Thirty
...beneficiary designation constituted “substantial compliance” with policy terms on beneficiary change); Cook v. Aetna Life Ins. Co., 166 A.D.2d 895, 896, 560 N.Y.S.2d 556 (4th Dep’t 1990) (Intent of insured is demonstrated by proof of affirmative act by insured.).[4051] . Life & Health Insur......