Davis v. Davis
| Decision Date | 23 December 1916 |
| Citation | 190 S.W. 459,136 Tenn. 520 |
| Parties | DAVIS v. DAVIS ET UX. |
| Court | Tennessee Supreme Court |
Appeal from Chancery Court, White County; A. H. Roberts, Chancellor.
Suit by Rachael Davis against James Davis and wife. Judgment for defendants, and plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
J. H Anderson, of Sparta, for appellant.
Robinson & Fancher, of Sparta, for appellee Davis.
This is a suit by Rachael Davis, the widow of C. E. Davis, to recover $2,000, the proceeds of a benefit certificate in the Modern Woodmen of America, issued to her husband, which proceeds were paid to Lottie Davis, the mother of the insured, who was named as beneficiary in the face of the policy.
The theory of the bill is: (a) That the insured, a single man at the time the certificate was issued to him in July, 1907 intermarried with the complainant in May, 1911, and at once set about to have the beneficiary changed so as to substitute the name of complainant, his wife, for that of his mother and that he did all in his power to effect this, but failed though on account of no fault or neglect on his part. (b) That the policy was assigned and delivered to complainant thus, it is claimed, vesting in her the right to take its proceeds, regardless of any failure to change the beneficiary.
The chancellor held against complainant, and she has appealed and assigned errors raising these questions for review by this court.
It appears that, soon after the marriage of complainant with the insured, he stated that he desired to have the certificate changed to name her as beneficiary. The couple remained in White county, where the local camp of the order to which insured belonged was located, until October, 1911, at which time they removed to Atlanta, Ga., where her husband took employment as a street car conductor, and where he died in October, 1913. Between the last two dates, the insured visited his old home twice, and on the first visit he brought with him the benefit certificate for the purpose of effecting the change, but failed to do so. On the last visit, thinking it was necessary that some step or action be taken in open lodge, he took the policy to the meeting place, but found the door locked, and that no meeting was to be held. On returning to his home in Atlanta, he handed the certificate to his wife, intending at the time that she should have the benefit of it, the chancellor found, and it remained in her possession at the date of his death. She surrendered it to James Davis, the father of insured, in order that it might be realized on, under a promise from him that the proceeds would be applied to the payment of the funeral expenses and certain indebtedness of insured, and the remainder turned over to her, the complainant.
The insured made no effort to formally comply with the by-laws of the order respecting the changing of a beneficiary by surrendering the certificate and designating a new beneficiary in the surrender clause on the back of the certificate, or by the payment of the required fee. The by-laws provide that a fee shall be paid and the method of so designating a substitute beneficiary. They further provide:
The chancellor held the insured did not do all that he reasonably could have done to execute his purpose, which was formed more than two years before his death; and we think he was correct in so ruling.
Undoubtedly the rule is that when a member of a benefit...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Republic National Life Insurance Company v. Sackmann
...on the part of the insured is not enough. The claimed change of beneficiary was not effective in the following cases: Davis v. Davis, 136 Tenn. 520, 190 S.W. 459; Cronbach v. Aetna Life Ins. Co., 153 Tenn. 362, 284 S.W. 72; Holmes v. Gooch, 3 Tenn.App. 80; National Life & Acc. Ins. Co. v. B......
-
National Life & Acc. Ins. Co. v. Bryant
... ... intention to make the change will not suffice. See also ... Holmes v. Gooch & Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, 3 ... Tenn.App. 80; Davis v. Davis, 136 Tenn. 520, ... 190 S.W. 459 ... It is ... insisted for the appellant, Georgia Chadwell, that on account ... of ... ...
-
Holmes v. Interstate Life & Acc. Ins. Co.
...to make the change will not suffice. See also Holmes v. Gooch & Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, 3 Tenn.App. 80; Davis v. Davis, 136 Tenn. 520, 190 S.W. 459.' In case before us the facts are different. Floyd Martin had done everything he could have done to bring about a change of the be......
-
Mutual Savings Life Insurance Co. v. Cowan
...will be profitable. The question appears to have been first before the appellate courts of Tennessee in the case of Davis v. Davis, 1916, 136 Tenn. 520, 190 S.W. 459, which involved an insurance certificate issued by the Modern Woodmen of America. The consent of change of beneficiary was no......