In re Towey's Estate
| Citation | 22 Wn.2d 212,155 P.2d 273 |
| Decision Date | 22 January 1945 |
| Docket Number | 29323. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Washington |
| Parties | In re TOWEY'S ESTATE. v. SEATTLE-FIRST NAT. BANK. TOWEY |
Proceeding in the matter of the estate of John Thomas Towey, deceased upon the adverse claims of Agnes E. Towey and Seattle-First National Bank, executor of the estate of John Thomas Towey deceased, to the proceeds of certain life insurance policies. From a judgment awarding the proceeds of the policies to Agnes E. Towey, the executor appeals.
Judgment reversed and cause remanded with directions.
Appeal from Superior Court, King County; James T. Lawler, judge.
Koenigsberg & Sanford, of Seattle, for appellant.
Wettrick, Flood & O'Brien and Robert A. Devers, all of Seattle, for respondent.
John Thomas Towey procured from the Minnesota Life Insurance Company four policies of insurance on his own life, of each of which policies the insured's wife, Agnes E. Towey, was named beneficiary. Each policy, the date of issuance and face amount of which are as follows, reserved to the insured the right to change the beneficiary by filing with the insurer a written request therefor, such change to become effective when indorsed upon the policy by the insurer:
The funds used for payment of all of the premiums on all of the policies were those of the marital community composed of John Thomas Towey and Agnes E. Towey. December 22, 1942, without consent or knowledge of his wife, the insured, pursuant to change of beneficiary clause in the insurance contracts, caused to be effected a change in the beneficiary on each policy to 'the executors or administrators of the estate of the insured.'
By his will executed November 11, 1942, Towey gave to his wife one dollar and named Seattle-First National Bank executor and trustee of his entire estate with direction to pay a stated sum monthly for educational purposes to the minor son of John Thomas Towey and Agnes E. Towey until the son arrived at the age of twenty-five years when the residue of the estate was to be paid to the son. In the event of the son's death prior to the age of twenty-five years any residual funds in the trust estate were bequeathed to the decedent's brother.
The insured died January 17, 1943, and after his will was admitted to probate the executor and the surviving spouse made adverse claims to the proceeds of the four policies. From the facts recited the court concluded that the attempted change of beneficiary of each of the policies was ineffective and that Agnes E. Towey was entitled to the proceeds of the four policies of insurance. Judgment was entered awarding the proceeds of the four policies to Mrs. Towey. The executor appealed.
Counsel for respondent contend, citing Occidental Life Insurance Company v. Powers, 192 Wash. 475, 74 P.2d 27, 114 A.L.R. 531, as determinative of the question presented in the case at bar, that when the premiums on a life insurance policy originally payable to the wife, insuring the husband's life, are paid with funds of the marital community, the insured may not, unless his wife consents thereto, designate a person other than his wife as the new beneficiary although the insurance contract in express terms gives to the insured the right to change the beneficiary without notice to or consent by the original beneficiary.
With the exception of property owned by the spouses prior to marriage and that acquired subsequently by gift, bequest, devise or inheritance and the rents, issues and profits thereof, all property acquired after marriage in any manner whatsoever by either spouse, or both, is community property. Rem.Rev.Stat. §§ 6890-6892. All community property, both real and personal, is owned by both spouses equally. Bortle v. Osborne, 155 Wash. 585, 285 P. 425. While the husband is a statutory agent for the community, there is an absolute equality of ownership and rights in all community property, there being no distinction whatever so far as concerns the equal property interests of husband and wife. Schramm v. Steele, 97 Wash. 309, 166 P. 634.
The statute, Rem.Rev.Stat. § 6892, clothes the husband with authority to manage and control community personal property with a like power of disposition as he has of his separate personal property, except he shall not devise by will more than one-half of the community property.
Upon the death of either spouse one-half of the community property remaining after payment of debts of the community shall be subject to testamentary disposition of the deceased spouse. Rem.Rev.Stat. § 1342.
In Occidental Life Insurance Company v. Powers, supra [192 Wash. 475, 74 P.2d 31], we held that 'insurance or the proceeds of insurance are not mere expectancies or choses in action, but are property,' and if the insurance premiums are paid with assets of the community they constitute community property. That is, the wife has a vested property right in all of the community property equal to that of her husband and neither spouse may, without consent of the other, make gifts of the community property even to his or her own relatives. The husband may not, as statutory agent or manager of the marital community, change the beneficiary of the insurance policy from his spouse to another person and thereby make a gift of community property to any one against the consent of his wife.
King v. Prudential Life Insurance Company, 13 Wash.2d 414, 125 P.2d 282, is indistinguishable from Occidental Life Insurance Company v. Powers, supra. In each case the husband, without the consent of his wife, attempted to make a change of beneficiary of a life insurance policy, the premiums on which were paid out of community funds. In each case we held that the husband's statutory, Rem.Rev.Stat. § 6892, authority to sell and dispose of community personal property did not authorize him to give it away without his wife's consent. We did not hold that the husband's vested property right in the insurance was not equal to that of his wife and that he could not by testamentary disposition give away his portion of the community property.
The change of beneficiary from his wife to the executors or administrators of his estate did not divest respondent wife of her equal interest with her husband in the community property. The husband did nothing more than exercise his statutory power of management, not of disposition, of community personal property, and he was not giving it away without his wife's consent.
If a husband desired to make a testamentary disposition of his one-half of the community property, consisting of the proceeds of insurance policies, he could only do so by making the proceeds of those policies payable to his estate or to his personal representatives, such as executors or administrators. German-American State Bank v Godman, 83 Wash. 231, 145 P. 221. Where the insurance is payable to the estate of the insured or to his personal...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Anderson v. Idaho Mut. Ben. Ass'n
...attempted gift. Dixon Lbr. Co. v. Peacock, 217 Cal., 415, 19 P.2d 233; Jones v. Davis, 15 Wash.2d 567, 131 P.2d 433; In re Towey's Estate, 22 Wash.2d 212, 155 P.2d 273; Wilson v. Wilson, 35 Wash.2d 364, 212 P.2d 1022; Aaron v. Aaron, Tex.Civ.App., 173 S.W.2d Our conclusion is that the chang......
-
deElche v. Jacobsen, 46715-3
...6 Wash.App. 464, 494 P.2d 238 (1972), a property right in the community property equal to that of the other spouse. In re Estate of Towey, 22 Wash.2d 212, 155 P.2d 273 (1945). It is on the basis that community property is thus "owned" by the spouses that the majority concludes that there is......
-
United States v. Overman
...giving each spouse an equal, present, and vested right in the marital community with full rights of enjoyment. (In re Towey's Estate (1945) 22 Wash.2d 212, 155 P.2d 273; Marston v. Rue (1916) 92 Wash. 129, 159 P. 111.) The interest of each in the community is protected from certain acts of ......
-
LaHue v. Keystone Inv. Co., 1020--I
...beneficial interest in those shares. In re Estate of Patton, 6 Wash.App. 464, 494 P.2d 238 (1972); In re Estate of Towey, 22 Wash.2d 212, 155 P.2d 273 (1945); Poe v. Seaborn, 282 U.S. 101, 51 S.Ct. 58, 75 L.Ed. 239 If the stockholder requirement contained in CR 23.1, following F.R.C.P. 23.1......
-
§3.2 Particular Assets
...theory in all life insurance cases. A policy purchased wholly with community funds is community property. In re Toweys Estate, 22 Wn.2d 212, 155 P.2d 273 (1945); Occidental Life Ins. Co. v. Powers, 192 Wash. 475, 74 P.2d 27 (1937). The courts have applied this analysis to various types of l......
-
§4.18 Nonprobate Assets
...the consent of the noninsured spouse. Occidental Life Ins. Co. v. Powers, 192 Wash. 475, 74 P.2d 27 (1937). In In re Toweys Estate, 22 Wn.2d 212, 155 P.2d 273 (1945), the court modified the prevailing rule and allowed a beneficiary change from the wife of the insured to the estate of the in......
-
Table of Cases
...4.7 Tower, In reMarriage of, 55 Wn.App. 697, 780 P.2d 863 (1989), review denied, 114 Wn.2d 1002 (1990): 5.6(5) Toweys Estate,In re, 22 Wn.2d 212, 155 P.2d 273 (1945): 3.2(4)(a), 4.13, 4.18(3) Trierweiler, Inre Estate of, 5 Wn.App. 17, 486 P.2d 314, review denied, 79 Wn.2d 1007(1971): 3.4(1)......
-
§4.13 Decedent's Estate Administration
...of a life insurance policy predecease the insured, the proceeds will then become subject to administration. See In re Toweys Estate, 22 Wn.2d 212, 155 P.2d 273 (1945). The decedents interest in a community life insurance policy on the life of a survivor is also subject to administration. Se......