Messier v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., No. 87-392

• Docket Nº: No. 87-392
• Citation: 154 Vt. 406, 578 A.2d 98
• Case Date: June 01, 1990
• Court: United States State Supreme Court of Vermont

Page 98

578 A.2d 98 154 Vt. 406 James MESSIER and Sylvia Messier
v.
METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE CO. and Cheryl Coutts. No. 87-392. Supreme Court of Vermont. June 1, 1990.

[154 Vt. 407] Valsangiacomo, Detora, McQuesten, Rose and Grearson, Barre, for plaintiffs-appellees.

A. Gregory Rainville of Northern Trial Associates and Michael Rose (on the brief), St. Albans, for defendant-appellant Cheryl Coutts.

[154 Vt. 406] Before ALLEN, C.J., and PECK, GIBSON, DOOLEY and MORSE, JJ.

[154 Vt. 407] DOOLEY, Justice.

Plaintiffs James and Sylvia Messier sued the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and Cheryl Coutts to establish their rights

Page 99

as beneficiaries under a life insurance policy in the name of their deceased son, Michael. Cheryl Coutts (defendant), who had been engaged to be married to the insured, claimed that he made her the beneficiary before his death. The insurance company brought counter- and cross-claims in interpleader to request that the court decide between the competing claimants to the policy proceeds. Relying on a stipulation of facts that was not signed by defendant, the superior court granted plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment. Defendant appeals, and we reverse and remand for trial.

Michael Messier (insured) died on November 19, 1985, from injuries sustained while working for Wyeth Nutritionals, Inc. in Georgia, Vermont. Wyeth supplied its employees group life insurance through Metropolitan Life Insurance Company. The policy provided that an employee could designate a beneficiary by filing a written notice with the employer, who kept records of beneficiary designations. The employee could change his beneficiary[154 Vt. 408] at any time, also by filing a written notice. On March 1, 1984, the insured designated his parents, the plaintiffs, as his beneficiaries.

In August, 1984, defendant and the insured began to live together and planned to be married on November 30, 1985. An affidavit from a Wyeth personnel assistant indicates that, two weeks before his death on November 19, 1985, the insured requested information about naming defendant as his beneficiary. He was given the necessary cards to fill out, but there is no direct evidence that he returned the cards to the personnel section. A search of his personnel records did not turn up the cards.

The insured told at least two persons that he had changed the beneficiary on his life insurance policy. Other employees witnessed him filling out the change of beneficiary forms. The change of beneficiary forms could not be found among the insured's possessions after his death.

The court denied plaintiffs' first motion for summary judgment, which was filed before discovery was completed. When discovery was substantially complete, plaintiffs again moved for summary judgment. The court asked the parties to submit a stipulation of facts on which the motion could be decided. Plaintiffs' counsel submitted a draft stipulation to defendant and to the court, but defendant never signed it.

The court subsequently granted summary judgment, stating that the parties had stipulated to the facts and concluding that defendant had not shown that the insured substantially complied with the insurer's requirements for changing the beneficiary. The court also concluded that defendant had failed to establish any equitable claim to the proceeds. The present appeal followed.

The trial court stated that the summary judgment motion had been heard and decided on the stipulation of the parties. This statement was incorrect since the defendant never agreed to the stipulation as drafted by...