Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Richards

• Decision Date: 17 February 1903
• Citation: 72 S.W. 487,99 Mo.App. 88
• Parties: MUTUAL LIFE INS. CO., Plaintiff, v. LILLIE RICHARDS, Respondent; JESSE REYNOLDS, Appellant
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

72 S.W. 487

99 Mo.App. 88

MUTUAL LIFE INS. CO., Plaintiff, v. LILLIE RICHARDS, Respondent;

JESSE REYNOLDS, Appellant

Court of Appeals of Missouri, St. Louis

February 17, 1903

Appeal from Butler Circuit Court.--Hon. J. L. Fort, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Judgment affirmed.

L. R Thomason for appellant.

(1) We are of the opinion that it is well settled as the law of this State that a policy of insurance may be assigned, although the assignee has no pecuniary interest in the life of the assured, and where the assignment is executed by both the assured and beneficiary for a valid consideration, absolute and unconditional, the assignee is entitled to the whole of the proceeds of said policy. Such is the holding of McFarland, Admr. v. Creath, 35 Mo.App. 122; St John v. American Mut. Ins. Co., 13 N.Y. 31; Valton v. Life Ins. Co., 26 N.Y. 32; Olmstead v. Keys, 85 N.Y. 593. (2) These rulings are in keeping with the highest courts of other states, as instanced in the following reports: Ashly v. Ashly, 3 Sim. 149; Life Ins Co., v. Allen, 138 Mass. 24; Eckel v. Renner, 41 Ohio 232; Martin v. Stubbings, 126 Ill. 387; Fitzpatrick v. Life Ins. Co., 56 Conn. 116; Clark v. Allen, 11 R. I. 439; Rittler v. Smith, 70 Md. 261; Murphy v. Reed, 64 Miss. 614.

William N. Barron for respondent.

An insurance policy payable to one who has no insurable interest in the life of the assured, is a speculation. A speculation by one party on the life of another is against public policy and void. A premium insurance policy, made, either originally or subsequently by assignment, payable to one who has no insurable interest in the life of the assured, but who has a pecuniary interest in such life, will be upheld only to the extent of the advancements made by the assignee, which the policy was intended to secure, and any subsequent advancement made on the faith of the policy. Whitmore v. Sup. Lodge, 100 Mo. 36; Heusner v. Life Ins. Co., 47 Mo.App. 336; The Masonic Ben. Assn. v. Bunch, 109 Mo. 560; Ins. Co. v. Rosenheim, 56 Mo.App. 27.

GOODE, J. Bland, P. J., and Reyburn, J., concur.

OPINION

GOODE, J.

--Both Lillie Richards, the respondent, and Jesse Reynolds, the appellant, demanded the proceeds of a certain insurance policy issued by the Mutual Life Insurance Company, May 27, 1899, on the life of Stephen F. Richards, whereby said company promised to pay Lillie Richards the sum of two thousand dollars at the death of said Stephen on receipt of satisfactory proof of his death. The insured died December 3, 1901, while the policy was in force and satisfactory proof having been made, the insurance company filed a bill of interpleader in the circuit court of Butler county, paid the money into court and prayed that appellant and respondent be required to interplead for the fund and the company be discharged from further liability. An order to that effect was entered by the circuit court pursuant to which the appellant and respondent filed pleadings stating their respective claims of right to the insurance money.

Respondent's answer states that for many years she was the wife of Stephen F. Richards, and was still his wife when he died; that the policy of insurance was taken out for her benefit and she was named as beneficiary therein; that Jesse Reynolds is not related by blood or marriage to the deceased, nor ever had any insurable interest in the latter's life. Her answer further states that on June 16, 1899, Reynolds advanced to the deceased the sum of $ 164.50, to secure payment of which said policy of insurance was assigned to Reynolds; that afterwards and during the life of the policy, to-wit, November 17, 1900, Reynolds advanced the further sum of $ 175.78 to secure the payment of which the policy was again assigned to Reynolds, whose aggregate advances, with interest, amounted to $ 359.19, that being the total interest he had in the proceeds of the policy which, the respondent averred, she was willing to have paid to him, praying that judgment be entered in Reynolds' favor for said sum and in her favor for the balance of the fund.

Reynolds' answer admits he was not related by blood or marriage to Richards and had no insurable interest in the latter's life by virtue of any relationship; also that Lillie Richards was the wife and is now the widow of said Richards, deceased. The answer denies that Reynolds advanced money for the purpose of paying premiums of said policy, but avers that he paid the premiums of said policy from time to time after the policy was assigned to him; that the payments were made for his benefit alone; that the assignment of the policy to him by the deceased and Lillie Richards was an unconditional and absolute assignment for a valuable consideration, and after it was made Lillie Richards had no interest whatever in the policy but that he (Reynolds) became and was the sole and exclusive owner thereof, not holding the same in trust for the benefit of said Lillie.

The evidence shows that when the policy was issued to Richards the insured had no money with which to pay the first premium and that one Lederer asked Reynolds to advance the premium and take the policy up for Richards. Reynolds agreed to do so provided the policy was assigned to him absolutely. Afterwards Reynolds paid the first premium and an assignment was executed by Richards and his wife, Richards saying he was satisfied if he died that Reynolds would do right by his wife. The policy was delivered to Reynolds who seems to have always kept it. Richards failed to pay the second premium, and Reynolds having discovered that fact wrote the company about it three or four months after the policy had lapsed for non-payment. The company notified him they had cancelled the policy. Reynolds then went to St. Louis and got the insurance reinstated, he paying the second premium and all the expense of reinstatement. At that time he took the second assignment from Richards and his wife. Reynolds says he told Mrs. Richards, when she said she ought to get something out of the policy, that he would relinquish his interest in it if any one would refund his money. He swears that in addition to the second premium he surrendered a note for thirteen dollars with interest due for...