Kelly v. Layton

Decision Date10 December 1962
Docket NumberNo. 17017.,17017.
Citation309 F.2d 611
PartiesHellen S. KELLY, Appellant, v. Patricia Ann LAYTON, Appellee.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit

Sylvan Agatstein, St. Louis, Mo., Shifrin, Treiman, Agatstein & Schermer, St. Louis, Mo., and Lueders & Robertson and Leo Konzen, Granite City, Ill., on the brief, for appellant.

Joseph G. Stewart, St. Louis, Mo., Dowd & Dowd and Robert G. Dowd, St. Louis, Mo., on the brief, for appellee.

Before SANBORN and BLACKMUN, Circuit Judges, and REGISTER, District Judge.

SANBORN, Circuit Judge.

Joseph N. Kelly, an employee of the Union Electric Company of St. Louis, Missouri, and the holder of two certificates of life insurance under a group policy which was issued to his employer by the General American Life Insurance Company on June 22, 1945, died on August 31, 1960. There were two claimants for his life insurance. One was Patricia Ann Layton (formerly Patricia Ann Kelly), the only child of the insured by his first wife, June Kelly, now June Kelly Wallis, whom he married on April 25, 1937, and by whom he was divorced on July 27, 1948. The daughter, Patricia Ann, born in 1938, was the sole beneficiary named in the original certificates of insurance. They were delivered to her mother, who retained possession of them from the time of their issuance in 1945 until the death of the insured.

The other claimant for the insurance in suit was Hellen S. Kelly, the second wife of the insured, whom he married May 1, 1950, and who at the time of his death was the beneficiary of his life insurance according to the records of the Insurance Company; this because, under date of November 26, 1954, he had sent to the Company an affidavit stating that his certificates of insurance had been lost or misplaced and asking that duplicate certificates be issued, and had filed a request that the beneficiary be changed to his wife, Hellen S. Kelly.

Confronted by these adverse claims, the Insurance Company filed in the District Court a Bill of Interpleader and an Amended Bill of Interpleader naming the claimants (citizens of different states) as defendants, deposited in the Registry of the court the amount of insurance called for under the certificates and the group policy, and bowed out of the controversy between the claimants.

The District Court tried the issues raised by the adverse claims asserted by the defendants in their respective answers to the Amended Bill of Interpleader. The court determined that the daughter, who was the sole beneficiary named in the original certificates, is entitled to the proceeds of the insurance, and entered judgment accordingly. Hellen S. Kelly, the widow of the insured, has appealed.

The basis for the District Court's determination that the daughter is entitled to her father's life insurance in suit is stated in its Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law as follows:

"The Court further finds that on the 27th day of July, 1948, the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis, Missouri, entered its decree of divorce upon the petition of June Kelly and against Joseph N. Kelly. In said action custody of Patricia Ann, plaintiff sic here, was granted to June Kelly and Joseph N. Kelly was ordered to pay $40.00 per month, payable at the rate of $20.00 on the first day of each month and $20.00 payable on the fifteenth day of each month, for the support of Patricia Ann. Thereafter at various times Joseph N. Kelly became in arrears in his payments of support money. Joseph N. Kelly, in order to prevent execution upon his wages and his property, entered into an agreement with June Kelly, now June Kelly Wallis, the mother of plaintiff sic, whereby in consideration of June Kelly Wallis\' agreement not to levy upon his property should he become in arrears in his payments for the support of Patricia Ann or in any way fail to fully comply with the order of the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis, Missouri, he, Joseph N. Kelly, would not at any time in the future change the beneficiary of said policies. The Court further finds in furtherance of his agreement he permitted June Kelly Wallis to retain physical possession of the certificates evidencing the insurance on his life, all for the benefit of Patricia Ann Layton.
"The Court further finds that thereafter on November 26, 1954, and during the minority of plaintiff sic and while the decree of the Circuit Court respecting support of plaintiff sic here was still in force, the deceased, in violation of his agreement with June Kelly Wallis, falsely made an affidavit reciting that the certificates evidencing the insurance had been `misplaced\' for the purpose of then effecting a change of beneficiary; that thereafter the General American Life Insurance Company issued its change of beneficiary form naming defendant, Hellen S. Kelly, beneficiary under said certificates.
"Conclusions of Law.
"Joseph N. Kelly during his lifetime entered into a valid contract upon sufficient consideration with his former wife, June Kelly Wallis, to make Patricia Ann Kelly, now Patricia Ann Layton, irrevocable beneficiary under the certificates evidencing his insurance coverage with plaintiff; that Joseph N. Kelly conferred no right upon Hellen S. Kelly, who was expressly and gratuitously named beneficiary subsequent to his entering into the contract with June Kelly Wallis. * * *"

The contentions of the appellant, briefly stated, are: (1) that the findings of the District Court are...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Co. v. Mitchell
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit
    • 22 Enero 1963
    ...Carter Carburetor Corp. v. Riley (8 Cir.), 186 F.2d 148, 150; Black v. United States of America (8 Cir.), 309 F.2d 331; and Kelly v. Layton (8 Cir.), 309 F.2d 611. A review of some of the facts pertaining to the accident and the actions taken by the respective parties herein subsequent ther......
  • Goldenhersh v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue (In re Estate of Satz)
    • United States
    • U.S. Tax Court
    • 29 Junio 1982
    ...contracted for “an adequate and full consideration in money or money's worth.”1. Equitable Assignment Petitioner, citing Kelly v. Layton, 309 F.2d 611 (8th Cir. 1962); Perry v. Perry, 484 S.W.2d 257 (1972); and Prudential Insurance Co. of America v. Gibson, 421 S.W.2d 26 (Mo. App. 1967), ar......
  • Volis v. Puritan Life Ins. Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Tenth Circuit
    • 1 Febrero 1977
    ...whether it reached a permissible conclusion in light of the evidence. Hodgson v. Okada, 472 F.2d 965 (10th Cir. 1973); Kelly v. Layton, 309 F.2d 611 (8th Cir. 1962). Appellate courts cannot try a case de novo. The resolution of conflicting evidence is within the sole province of the trial c......
  • In re Hardzog, CIV-87-1448-A
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Ohio
    • 23 Enero 1989
    ...a permissible conclusion in light of the evidence." Dowell v. United States, 553 F.2d 1233, 1235 (10th Cir.1977) (citing Kelly v. Layton, 309 F.2d 611 (8th Cir.1962)). III. FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS. A. The Cost-of-Funds Approach to Ascertaining the Value of the Rate of the Allowed Secured Clai......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT