Lanouette v. Laplante

• Decision Date: 11 March 1892
• Citation: Lanouette v. Laplante, 67 N. H. 118, 36 A. 981 (N.H. 1892)
• Parties: LANOUETTE v. LAPLANTE.
• Court: New Hampshire Supreme Court

36 A. 981

67 N.H. 118

LANOUETTE

v. LAPLANTE.

Supreme Court of New Hampshire. Hillsborough.

March 11, 1892.

Case reserved from Hillsborough county.

Bill by Joseph E. A. Lanouette against Louis M. Laplante for an accounting. Case reserved on facts found by the court. Case discharged.

The plaintiff is a creditor of the estate of Delina Lawrence, who died November 30 1883. In the summer of 1883 the defendant and Mrs. Lawrence were in the office of the plaintiff, who was an officer of the Granite State Mutual Aid Association. In the course of a conversation about insurance, Mrs. Lawrence said she would take out a policy if the defendant would let her have the money. He replied: "All right. Be insured if you like, and I'll let you have the money." The defendant was a Catholic priest, and Mrs. Lawrence had been one of his parishioners. He was not related to her in any way. A policy was thereupon issued by the association upon the life of Mrs. Lawrence for $4,000, payable to the defendant, one-fourth for the benefit of her daughter, and three-fourths for the benefit of the defendant. He paid the premiums and assessments until her death. Suit was brought by the defendant against the association upon the policy, which was compromised by the payment to the defendant of the sum of $1,300. Of this sum he paid the daughter $375, and retained the balance for his own benefit.

O. S. Cormier, J. H. Riedell, and Sulloway & Topliff, for plaintiff.

J. H. Andrews, for defendant.

PER CURIAM.¹ "When a policy of insurance is effected by any person on his own life or the life of another, expressed to be for the benefit of a third person, * * * the party for whose benefit such policy is so expressed to be made shall be entitled to the sum so insured, against the claims of the creditors or representatives of the party effecting the same." Gen. Laws, c. 175, § 2. The facts as reported in the case show that the insurance was effected by Mrs. Lawrence on her own life for the benefit of the defendant, upon an unbounded and well-grounded faith that the defendant would make an equitable disposition of the proceeds. It is also consistent with the findings of the case that the defendant may have been present with Mrs. Lawrence when the policy was issued. If not, he was immediately informed of it, and adopted her act in procuring the insurance and making him the principal beneficiary in the policy. The transaction in a legal aspect does not differ from what it would have been if...