Koenig v. Bishop

• Decision Date: 24 December 1965
• Docket Number: No. 9344,9344
• Citation: Koenig v. Bishop, 409 P.2d 102, 90 Idaho 182 (Idaho 1965)
• Parties: Edith (Acre) KOENIG, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Charlotte BISHOP, Defendant-Respondent.
• Court: Idaho Supreme Court

Page 102

409 P.2d 102

90 Idaho 182

Edith (Acre) KOENIG, Plaintiff-Appellant, v.Charlotte BISHOP, Defendant-Respondent.

No. 9344.

Supreme Court of Idaho.

Dec. 24, 1965.

C. J. Hamilton, Coeur d'Alene, for appellant.

McNaughton & Sanderson, Coeur d'Alene, for respondent.

McQUADE, Chief Justice.

In October 1953Edith Koenig, plaintiff-appellant herein, married Lyman E. Acre.Approximately a year prior to the marriage, Acre, as an employee, acquired a group life insurance policy which named himself as the insured and the defendant-respondent, a daughter, the issue of a previous marriage, as the beneficiary.From the time of the policy's inception until Acre's death in 1959, the premiums, amounting to about $4.00 a month, were paid partly by deductions from Acre's wages and partly by contributions of his employer.Shortly after Acre's death, respondent applied for and received the face amount of the policy.

This action was instituted by appellant to recover those funds.Appellant contends that because the premiums were paid with community funds, the policy and the value thereof belonged to the community of herself and Acre and that as survivor of the community, she was entitled to the same.

The trial court entered judgment against the appellant and in favor of the respondent.From that judgment the appellant appeals.

Appellant testified that she never made an objection to Acre concerning his payments of the premiums for the policy and in fact had never discussed the subject with him.

The trial court found that:

' * * * prior to the marriage of the plaintiff and said decedent, the plaintiff obtained knowledge of the existence of said life insurance coverage and of the fact that the defendant was the named beneficiary thereof, and again shortly after the marriage of said parties * * * the plaintiff was again reminded of the existence of said insurance policy and of said beneficiary designation.'

There was substantial, competent evidence in the record to support this finding.

In 1956the appellant and Acre executed a property settlement wherein they agreed 'to make a full settlement of all their property rights and obligations, past, present and future.'Thereafter the appellant commenced a divorce action against Acre.However, they became reconciled and the divorce action was dismissed.They then lived as husband and wife until Acre's death in 1959.This court has recently held, in a prior action between the appellant and the administrator of Acre's estate, that the property settlement agreement executed by the appellant and Acre survived their reconciliation and was valid and not terminated by the parties.Acre v. Koenig, 90 Idaho ----, 404 P.2d 621(1965).

Although the property settlement does not mention specifically the insurance policy in question, it contains a provision whereby:

'9.Each party hereto, in consideration of the covenants contained herein, hereby releases the other from any and all property claims, property obligations and property demands now due or which may cecome due by reason of the marital relations existing between them, except as are established by this agreement, it being the intention of the parties, both having a full understanding of their property and property rights, to make a full and final adjustment concerning their property interests and claims by this agreement.'(Emphasis added)

On the trial of this action below, the district court found:

'That by...