Moyse v. Laughlin
| Decision Date | 18 January 1937 |
| Docket Number | 32482 |
| Citation | 177 Miss. 751,171 So. 784 |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
| Parties | MOYSE v. LAUGHLIN et al |
1. ARMY AND NAVY.
Unadopted illegitimate child of deceased veteran who, while in army declared in writing that child was his in order to obtain allotment for her, held not entitled to inherit share payable under veteran's war risk policy as "heir" within World War Veterans' Act construed in connection with Mississippi laws of descent and distribution, there being no conflict between federal and state laws (World War Veterans' Act 1924, secs. 3, 300, 303, as amended, 38 U.S.C. A., secs. 421, 424, 511, 514; Code Miss. 1930, secs 358, 1404).
2. MONEY RECEIVED.
Guardian of minor who received money to which he was not entitled as guardian held liable therefor as an individual.
HON. J L. WILLIAMS, Chancellor.
APPEAL from the chancery court of Washington county HON. J. L. WILLIAMS, Chancellor.
Action by William F. Laughlin, as administrator de bonis non of the estate of Wesley Cooper, deceased, and another, against M. M. Moyse, guardian of Dollie Bessie Cooper Jackson, a minor, and individually. M. M. Moyse died, and Sidney L. Moyse was appointed administrator of his estate. Decree was rendered for the plaintiff against M. M. Moyse, as guardian, but denying relief against him individually, and the administrator of the guardian appeals, and the plaintiff cross-appeals. Affirmed on direct appeal, and reversed and remanded on cross-appeal.
Affirmed on direct appeal, and reversed and remanded on cross-appeal.
Ernest Kellner and D. S. Strauss, both of Greenville, for appellant.
This court has held that descent and distribution to war risk insurance funds are controlled by the World War Veterans' Act of 1924, and amendments thereto, and the laws of descent and distribution of Mississippi, and that there is no conflict between the federal act and the laws of this state.
Williams v. Eason, 148 Miss. 446; U.S.C. A., Title 38, sections, 424, 511, 514; Sections 1402, 1404 and 1406, Code of 1930.
Counsel contended in the trial court, as they will here, that because Dollie Bessie Cooper was not made legitimate under the laws of this state, she is entitled to no part of the estate of her deceased father. To so hold would not only create a conflict between the federal act the laws of this state, but would make the laws of this state superior to the plain provisions of the federal act that, insofar as the proceeds of yearly renewable term insurance on the life of a deceased veteran are concerned, an illegitimate child, recognized in writing by the veteran, stands on the same footing as a legitimate child of the veteran.
Wm. I. McKay and Leonard E Nelson, both of Vicksburg, for appellees.
The Supreme Court of the United States definitely concluded all argument as to the proper construction of the sections of the war risk insurance act and amendments thereto by their decision in the now well known and oft quoted case of Singleton v. Cheek, 284 U.S. 493, 76 L.Ed. 419. This case is also determinative of the question or issue raised by the appellant.
Under the agreed state of facts Wesley Cooper died intestate, leaving surviving him only his lawful widow, Mimic Cooper, and an illegitimate child, Dollie Bessie Cooper. Under the laws of the state of Mississippi the lawful widow is the sole distributee of decedent's etate, and the sole heir at law of the decedent, for the reason that the illegitimate child was never made legitimate in accordance with the laws of this state, which laws are exclusively controlling.
Where commuted value of unpaid installments are paid to the estate of the insured, state law controls exclusively the question of descent and distribution of such funds.
Remaining installments due on war risk insurance policies upon the death of the beneficiary therein designated become assets of the insured's estate, and should be distributed in accordance with the laws of descent and distribution of the state of the deceased veteran's residence as of the date of the insured's death.
Hunter v. James, 144 So, 576; Singleton v. Cheek, 284 U.S. 493, 76 L.Ed. 419; Vita v. Morris, 75 S.W. 157; Seeley v. U.S. 7 F.Supp. 434.
Distribution of war risk insurance payable after death of beneficiary held controlled by the laws of descent and distribution of the state of the soldier's residence.
U. S. v. Rose, 57 S.W.2d 350; Condon v. Nallan, 30 F.2d 995; Porter v. Watson, 181 S.E. 683.
By reference to the agreed statement of facts it will be seen that the appellants are not contending that the recognition by the deceased veteran of the illegitimate child in the allotment certificate had the effect of legitimatizing the child under the laws of this state, but on the contrary they admit that she was never made legitimate in accordance with the laws of the state of Mississippi or otherwise. From the authorities above cited it will be readily seen that the federal statute, regardless of the fact that it makes an illegitimate child one of the permitted class of beneficiaries, has no bearing whatever on the case, and has no control of the descent and distribution of the funds paid to the deceased veteran's administrator.
The federal statutory provision as to class of persons permitted to be designated as beneficiaries does not affect descent and distribution.
Hunter v. James, 144 So. 577; Brown v. U.S. 65 F.2d 67; O'Quain v. U.S. 28 F.2d 350.
To construe federal statute as controlling descent and distribution would abrogate state law.
In re Ogilvie's Estate, 139 A. 826; Hunter v. James, 144 So. 576.
While we do understand that it is the purpose of the Moyse estate to pay any deficiency, such estate has not legally obligated itself so to do, therefore, the appellees and cross-appellants prefer to stand on their right to have the individual liability or non-liability of M. M. Moyse judicially determined. The individual liability of M. M. Moyse is unquestionable.
24 C. J. 742; Elmore v. Elmore, 51 L.R.A. 261; Smith v. Jeffreys, 16 So. 377; Clay v. Boyce, 62 Miss. 390.
M. M. Moyse is individually liable. It is not imaginable that Moyse is not individually liable. He received one thousand dollars to which he had no shadow of right or title in any capacity. To the demand of the true owner for Moyse to reply that he received the money as guardian but magnifies the absence of any substance to his position. So far we have found no case involving a guardian. But we have found many authorities involving executors and administrators. The analogy is entirely true.
24 C. J. 742; Elmore v. Elmore, 51 L.R.A. 261; Smith v. Jeffreys, 16 So. 377; Clayton v. Boyce, 62 Miss. 390.
It appears from the agreed facts that the guardian now has the one thousand dollars in cash and in investments thereof, in, as a part of, and mingled with, the estate of his ward. In these circumstances, he is liable both individually and also as guardian.
The principal question involved in this case is whether or not under the World War Veterans' Act, and amendments thereto , construed in connection with the laws of descent and distribution of this state, an unadopted, illegitimate child is an heir.
William F. Laughlin, as administrator de bonis non of the estate of Wesley Cooper, deceased, and Mimic Cooper, the widow of the latter, filed their bill in the chancery court of Washington county against M. M. Moyse, guardian of Dollie Bessie Cooper Jackson, a minor, and the guardian individually to recover the sum of one thousand dollars theretofore paid to the guardian by R. L. Jayne, the former administrator of the estate of the decedent, Wesley Cooper. A trial was had on bill, answers, and agreed facts. Pending the appeal, the guardian, M. M. Moyse, died, and Sidney L. Moyse was appointed administrator of his estate. A decree was rendered in favor of Laughlin, administrator of Cooper's estate against M. M. Moyse, guardian, for the one thousand dollars but denying relief against him individually. From that decree the administrator of the guardian appeals, and the administrator of Cooper, the deceased, prosecutes a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
National Surety Corporation v. Laughlin
... ... these demurrers and dismissing the bills as to the United ... States Fidelity & Guaranty Company, appeals were prosecuted ... Prior ... to the hearing, by agreement, the cause was nonsuited as to ... the guardian M. M. Moyse and his ward, Dollie Bessie Cooper, ... under a stipulation that the then status of the guardianship ... funds should be maintained, and that any recovery by either ... the complainant or cross complainant should be held intact ... until the relative rights of said cross-complainant and ... ...
-
Cooper v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.
... ... Appellant is ... legally and equitably entitled to reparative relief ... National ... Surety Corp. v. Laughlin, 172 So. 490; Weyant v ... Utah Sav. & Tr. Co., 9 A.L.R. 1119 ... The ... generally accepted rule is that a judgment or decree against ... appeals for a fuller statement of the material facts ... National Surety Corp. v. Laughlin, 178 Miss. 499, ... 172 So. 490, and Moyse v. Laughlin, 177 Miss. 751, ... 171 So. 784 ... Jayne ... was the original administrator. He was removed and Bessie C ... Hillery was ... ...