Miller v. American Home Assurance Company

• Decision Date: 16 March 1967
• Docket Number: Civ. A. No. 2277.
• Citation: 265 F. Supp. 112
• Court: U.S. District Court — Southern District of West Virginia
• Parties: Della MILLER, Guardian for Phyllis Miller, now Phyllis Miller Turner, and Della Miller, Administratrix of the Estate of Richard C. Turner, Deceased, and Goldie Turner, Plaintiffs, v. AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY, a corporation, Defendant.

265 F. Supp. 112

Della MILLER, Guardian for Phyllis Miller, now Phyllis Miller Turner, and Della Miller, Administratrix of the Estate of Richard C. Turner, Deceased, and Goldie Turner, Plaintiffs, v. AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY, a corporation, Defendant.

Civ. A. No. 2277.

United States District Court S. D. West Virginia, Huntington Division.

March 16, 1967.

R. A. Woodall, Hamlin, W. Va., and George S. Sharp Kay, Casto & Chaney, Charleston, W. Va., for plaintiff Della Miller, Guardian and Administratrix.

W. Dale Greene, Preiser, Greene & Hunt, Charleston, W. Va., and Clarence E. Hall, Madison, W. Va., for plaintiff Goldie Turner.

W. F. Wunschel, Steptoe & Johnson, Charleston, W. Va., for defendant.

CHRISTIE, District Judge:

This action involves the proceeds of an accident insurance policy and was tried to the Court without a jury. The action was originally instituted in the Circuit Court of Lincoln County, West Virginia and was removed therefrom to this court on the grounds of diversity of citizenship and requisite amount upon the petition of defendant American Home Assurance Company.

The plaintiff in this action, Della Miller, guardian for Phyllis Miller Turner and also administratrix of the estate of Richard C. Turner, seeks to recover the proceeds of a group accident insurance policy issued by defendant to Richard C. Turner's employer and under which he was an insured at the time of his death. After the removal of the cause to this court, Mrs. Goldie Turner, mother of Richard C. Turner, deceased, sought and was granted leave to become a party plaintiff in the action.

The defendant insurer admits its liability for the proceeds of the policy and has offered no defense or contest to the claim of either party. It stands ready to distribute the proceeds to the contestant prevailing in this action. Thus, the only issue is which of the parties is entitled to the $30,000.00 in insurance proceeds.

FINDINGS OF FACT

On or about January 4, 1966, Richard C. Turner signed an application for group accident insurance under Master Policy No. 9901094 issued by defendant to The Creasy Co., his then employer. The application was filled out at the home of Richard Turner's parents by a sister, and it designated his mother, Mrs. Goldie Mary Turner, as beneficiary. In it no right is expressly reserved to change the beneficiary. It is not clear whether Richard Turner signed the application before or after the sister completed filling it out. In either event, the evidence is undisputed that she performed this task at his direction. He thereafter submitted the application to his employer and in due course received Certificate of Insurance No. 1144E from defendant. This document does not contain the name of a designated beneficiary and the application is not attached to or made a part of the policy by either the express wording of the application or the certificate. The deceased kept this certificate along with certain other papers and insurance policies in the glove box of his automobile.

On or about July 2, 1966, the deceased married Phyllis Louise Miller and on August 26, 1966, he was killed in a motorcycle accident. The policy was in effect at the time and as a result of the manner in which he met his death $30,000.00 became due and owing under its terms.

The certificate of insurance contained the following provisions:

"BENEFICIARY DESIGNATION AND CHANGE: The beneficiary or beneficiaries of an Insured Person shall be that person or those persons designated by the Insured Person and filed with the Company.

"Any Insured Person who has not made an irrevocable designation of beneficiary may designate a new beneficiary at any time, without the consent of the beneficiary by filing with the Company a written request for such change, but such change shall become effective only upon receipt of such request at the General Office of the Company. When such request is received by the Company, whether the Insured Person be then living or not, the change of beneficiary shall relate back to and take effect as of the date of execution of the written request, but without prejudice to the Company on account of any payment theretofore made by it."

There is no evidence that Richard C. Turner attempted to effectuate a change of beneficiary in compliance with these provisions; but rather it is asserted that a change of beneficiary took place under the doctrine that when an insured does all that can reasonably be expected under the circumstances to bring about such a change, his purpose will be treated as accomplished.

Evidence was introduced in support of this position to the effect that on a number of occasions the deceased made statements to different individuals, including his wife, that if anything happened to him she would be well taken care of. Some of these statements were apparently made prior to the marriage, though after the policy in question had been taken out. It also appears that Richard Turner was to have entered the army shortly after the date of his death, and he had pointed out the certificate to his wife and advised her that should anything happen to him she "would be well taken care of." However, there was no actual delivery of the certificate to her nor did he tell her that she was the beneficiary. She obtained possession of the certificate after the accident. The deceased had two other insurance policies: One, taken out fifteen days before his death, designated his wife as beneficiary; the other was payable to his estate. Shortly after the accident the parties, in an attempt to ascertain the beneficiary of the policy in question, contacted the deceased's employer.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

The majority of cases support the view that a change in beneficiary can be effected without a strict or complete...