Ogletree v. Hutchinson

• Decision Date: 13 August 1906
• Citation: 126 Ga. 454,55 S.E. 179
• Parties: OGLETREE . v. HUTCHINSON.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

55 S.E. 179

126 Ga. 454

OGLETREE .

v.HUTCHINSON.

Supreme Court of Georgia.

Aug. 13, 1906.

1. Insurance—Application—Beneficiary.

When an application for a policy of life insurance designates a named person as the beneficiary of the policy, and a policy is issued which does not contain the name of any beneficiary, the person named in the application is to be treated as the beneficiary of the contract. Aliter, if the application name one person and the policy name another, and the policy be accepted by the insured.

2. Same—Stipulations — Validity—Persons Entitled to Proceeds of Policy.

A stipulation in a policy of life insurance that payment of the amount of the policy to any relative of the insured belonging to a designated class will discharge the company from liability is valid, but such a stipulation does not have the effect to make the person actually receiving the money thereunder the beneficiary of the policy. It is merely an appointment, by the parties to the confract, of a person who may collect the amount due under the policy for the benefit of the person ultimately entitled thereto. (Syllabus by the Court.)

Error from Superior Court, Fulton County; J. T. Pendleton, Judge.

Action by Edna F. Hutchinson against the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and J. P. Ogletree. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant Ogletree brings error. Affirmed.

Mrs. Edna F. Ogletree, now Hutchinson, brought suit against the Metroplitan Life Insurance Company and J. P. Ogletree, and alleged: About five years ago Q. P. Ogletree made an application and had issued to him a policy of insurance upon his life in the sum of $500 by the Metropolitan Insurance Company. He died August 29, 1904. Petitioner was his wife, and was the beneficiary of the policy. The policy, copy of which is attached to the petition, names no beneficiary. The application for the policy, which is attached to the petition, names toe petitioner as the beneficiary. The policy is in the hands of J. P. Ogletree, father of the deceased, and he is proceeding to collect the amount due thereunder. Petitioner prays for an injunction restraining him from collecting the amount of insurance, and also for a receiver to collect the same and hold it pending the determination of the controversy. The defendant demurred on the that the petitioner had no cause of actionand was not a party to the contract of insurance. This demurrer was overruled, and the defendant excepted.

W. H. Terrell, for plaintiff in error.

Payne, Jones & Jones, for defendant in error.

COBB, P. J. (after stating the foregoing facts). While the case was; pending, the insurance company paid the amount of the policy into court and was dismissed from the case. The only question now to be determined is, who is entitled to this fund which resulted from the contract made by the insured with the company? In the application appears the following: "14. Name, etc., of beneficiary, subject to provisions of policy applied for as to payment. Name: Mrs. Edna F. Ogletree. Relationship: Wife. 15. Is name of beneficiary to be entered in policy? —" The policy stipulated to pay the amount thereof as an endowment to the insured when he shall have passed the age of 79 years, and, "if the insured shall die prior to the date of the maturity of the endowment, to pay, upon receipt of proofs of death of insured, made in the manner and to the extent and upon the blanks required herein, and upon the surrender of this policy and all receipt books the amount stipulated in said schedule. * * * In case of such prior death of the insured the company may pay the amount due under this policy to...