Equitable Life Assur. Soc. of the U.S. v. Weightman
| Decision Date | 17 October 1916 |
| Docket Number | 7787. |
| Citation | 160 P. 629,61 Okla. 106,1916 OK 879 |
| Parties | EQUITABLE LIFE ASSUR. SOC. OF THE UNITED STATES ET AL. v. WEIGHTMAN. |
| Court | Oklahoma Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court.
A beneficiary in a policy of life inurance, who murders the assured, is thereby barred from collecting the insurance money.
The insurance policy being a nonnegotiable instrument, the assignee of such a beneficiary has no better claim upon the insurance money than his assignor.
Provisions of a life insurance policy upon the lives of two persons providing for the payment of the insurance fund to the survivor of the first decedent, examined, and held, that the policy in question, so far as the insurance fund payable on such contingency is involved, is a several policy upon the life of each of the assured, and that the interest of the assured persons in such expectancy is not a joint tenancy, by reason of which one takes by the right of survivorship upon the death of the other, but that the survivor takes, if at all, under the contract.
Where no alternative beneficiary is designated in a contract of life insurance, and the designated beneficiary becomes barred from taking the benefits of the policy by reason of the fact that she has murdered the assured, in the absence of a statute which provides an alternative beneficiary, by operation of law a trust arises in favor of the estate of the assured, by virtue of which the representative of the assured is entitled to recover the insurance fund.
Held, no error in rendering judgment for intervener and overruling motion for new trial.
Additional Syllabus by Editorial Staff.
To the existence of a joint tenancy, four unities must exist in the tenants, viz.: (1) Unity of interest; (2) unity of title; (3) unity of time; and (4) unity of possession.
Commissioners' Opinion, Division No. 3. Error from District Court, Cleveland County; F. B. Swank, Judge.
Action by Ben F. Williams against the Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States, and J. T. Weightman administrator of the estate of Thomas J. Gentry, intervenes. Judgment for intervener, and plaintiff and defendant bring error. Affirmed.
Alexander & Green, of New York City, Stephen C. Treadwell, of Oklahoma City, and Locke & Locke, of Dallas, Tex., for plaintiff in error Equitable Life Assur. Soc.
Lydick & Eggerman, of Shawnee, for plaintiff in error Williams.
Kittie C. Sturdevant, of Shawnee, and Dorset Carter, of Oklahoma City, for defendant in error.
This action was filed upon January 4, 1913, in the district court of Cleveland county, by Ben F. Williams, as plaintiff, against the Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States, as defendant, for the recovery of $2,000 upon a policy of life insurance on the life of Thomas J. Gentry, deceased, the plaintiff having become the owner by assignment of the rights of the beneficiary in the policy. The defendant resisted recovery upon the ground that, as contended by it, there was no liability under the policy for the reason that the beneficiary, Alverta B. Gentry, had murdered the insured, who was her husband, and thereby forfeited her right to the insurance and terminated all liability of the insurance company. J. T. Weightman, as administrator of the estate of the insured, Thomas J. Gentry, deceased, intervened in the cause, alleging that Alverta B. Gentry, the beneficiary named in the policy, had murdered the insured, and thereby forfeited her right to the insurance, but that he, as such administrator, was entitled to the insurance. The case was tried to the court upon the pleadings and an agreed statement of facts. The lower court rendered judgment in favor of the intervener, J. T. Weightman, administrator of Thomas J. Gentry, and against the plaintiff and defendant, awarding the insurance to the administrator. Plaintiff and defendant bring the case here on appeal.
The policy in question was issued upon April 7, 1910, covering and insuring the lives of both Thomas J. Gentry and Alverta B. Gentry, husband and wife, respectively, in the sum of $2,000. The principal insuring clause of the policy reads as follows, to wit:
"In consideration of the payment in advance of sixty-nine 74/100 dollars, and of the payment annually thereafter of a like sum upon each fifteenth day of March until the death of either Thomas J. Gentry, of Oklahoma, Okl., or his wife, Alverta B. Gentry of Oklahoma, Okla. (hereinafter jointly called the insured) the Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States agrees to pay at its home office in the city of New York two thousand dollars upon receipt of due proofs of the death of either one of the insured, provided this policy is then in force and is then surrendered properly released, to the survivor of the said Thomas J. Gentry and Alverta B. Gentry, beneficiaries, with the right on the part of the insured to change the beneficiary."
The policy also contained the further clause, with reference to change of beneficiary, as follows, to wit:
And the policy contained the further clause as follows, to wit:
The policy contained other provisions usual in such instruments. There was no provision, specifically affecting liability in the event of the murder of either of the insured by the beneficiary of his or her insurance. The instrument provided for certain cash values after the payment of specified numbers of annual premiums.
It was agreed between the parties that, on or about the 6th of January, 1912, the said Alverta B. Gentry had willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously caused the death of the said Thomas J. Gentry by murdering him with malice aforethought, and had been legally convicted of murder, under a charge therefor, and sentenced to the Oklahoma State Penitentiary for the term of her natural life. It was also conceded that the premiums on the policy had been duly paid, and that the plaintiff Ben F. Williams by assignment was the owner of the rights of Alverta B. Gentry in the policy, whatever such rights may be; and it was agreed that the intervener was the duly qualified administrator of the estate of Thomas J. Gentry, and had properly intervened in the cause, and that the said Thomas J. Gentry died intestate, leaving as his sole heirs at law the said Alverta B. Gentry, his wife, and Theodore R. Gentry, the minor son of both of such insured. The insurance company made no contest upon formal grounds, and relied upon the contentions herein mentioned.
Plaintiff in error the insurance company contends: (1) That Alverta B. Gentry, the beneficiary in the policy, having murdered her husband, by that act forfeited her right to collect the insurance on his life. (2) That the plaintiff Ben F. Williams, as assignee of Alverta B. Gentry, has no better claim upon the insurance than she would have, and cannot take the money because of her crime. (3) That under the laws of Oklahoma a man and his wife may own property as joint tenants and upon the death of either that property will be owned by the survivor, not by inheritance, but by survivorship, and that the insurance policy prior to the death of Thomas J. Gentry was a chose in action owned by him and his wife as joint tenants, and on the death of Thomas J. Gentry the benefits accruing under the policy vested, if at all, in Alverta B. Gentry: (a) By the terms of the policy itself; (b) by survivorship. That Alverta B. Gentry forfeited the right to take this benefit by her crime, and the law at the time the murder was committed failed to designate who should take it in her stead. (4) That Alverta B. Gentry, being the survivor of the two lives insured, was the only person entitled by the terms of the contract to collect the insurance. That her right and that of her assignee were forfeited by her crime, and, there being no trust created by statute or contract, and there being no alternative payee according to the terms of the contract, there could be no resulting trust in favor of the estate of Thomas J. Gentry, deceased, and that it necessarily follows that the administrator, J. T. Weightman, has neither statutory nor contractual right to recover. And (5) that the court erred in rendering judgment for intervener and in overruling its motion for a new trial.
Plaintiff in error Ben F. Williams, in his brief states that he is inclined to believe, without so confessing, that the law is as contended for by defendant in error, but contends that, if this court finds that Thomas J. Gentry and Alverta B. Gentry were joint tenants as to the policy and liability thereunder, as contended by the insurance company, in that event the benefits of the policy went to Alverta B. Gentry, as the survivor of such joint tenancy, and that he, as the assignee of such survivor, should take such benefits.
Defendant in error, the administrator of Thomas J. Gentry, deceased admits that, by her act of murdering insured, the beneficiary forfeited her right and the right of her assignee to take and hold the benefits of the policy, and contends that the policy was not joint, but a several policy upon the lives of each of the insured, and...
To continue reading
Request your trial