Sheppard v. Crowley
| Decision Date | 12 June 1911 |
| Citation | 61 Fla. 735,55 So. 841 |
| Parties | SHEPPARD v. CROWLEY. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Columbia County; B. H. Palmer, Judge.
Bill of interpleader by the Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States against Cleavey P. Sheppard and Kate V Crowley. Decree for defendant Crowley, and Sheppard appeals. Affirmed.
Syllabus by the Court
Where under the terms of a life insurance policy, a change of the beneficiary is to take effect upon the indorsement of the same on the contract by the life assurance society, such change may not take effect at any other time than that agreed upon without the consent of the society.
Where a change in the beneficiary of a life policy may not take effect without the consent of the life assurance society, to be evidenced by an indorsement thereof on the contract of insurance by the society at its home office, the act required to be done by the society is not a mere ministerial one.
Where a change in the beneficiary of a life policy was pending and unfinished when the assured died, and upon his death the amount of the insurance was payable to his estate, upon the happening of his death his estate, to be represented by his administrator, immediately became vested with the policy.
The conclusions of a chancellor upon mere questions of fact will not be reversed, where it does not clearly appear that he erred therein.
COUNSEL R. T. Boozer, Guy Gillen, and J. B. Hodges, for appellant.
G. O Palmer, for appellee.
On the 21st day of December, 1908, the Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States, a corporation, filed a bill of interpleader against Cleavey P. Sheppard and Kate V. Crowley, as administratrix of the estate of Jerry F Crowley, deceased, and in her own right.
That part of the bill bearing upon the question before us alleges: That on the 22d day of November, 1901, the said life assurance society wrote a certain policy of life insurance on the life of Jerry F. Crowley, the intestate, and son of the defendant Kate V. Crowley, and brother-in-law of the defendant Cleavey P. Sheppard, for the sum of $1,000. That one of the privileges and conditions of the said policy is as follows: 'Change of Beneficiary--This contract is issued with the express understanding that the purchaser may from time to time during its continuance change the beneficiary or beneficiaries by filing with the society a written request duly acknowledged, accompanied by this contract, such change to take effect upon the indorsement of the same on this contract by the society, provided it has not been assigned and notice of such assignment recorded on the books of the society.'
The bill further alleges: That the said Jerry F. Crowley during his lifetime, on or about the 9th day of October, 1908, executed his request to the said life assurance society. That the beneficiary of said policy should be changed from Lonnie L. Crowley to Cleavey P. Sheppard, which said request was received by the said society on or about the 12th day of October, 1908, and the said change of beneficiary was indorsed upon the policy on the 15th day of October, 1908. That the said Jerry F. Crowley died intestate and without issue on or about the 15th day of October, 1908. That satisfactory proof of his death has been made and furnished the society by Cleavey P. Sheppard, who claimed to be the then beneficiary of the said policy and demanded a settlement thereunder by payment to her of the proceeds of said policy. That thereupon the said assurance society issued its check for the amount of $1,300 in her favor, which check was delivered to the said Cleavey P. Sheppard, but has not been paid, and payment thereof has been stopped, for the reason hereinafter stated.
That on or about the 17th day of November, 1908, the defendant Kate V. Crowley made known her claim that at the time of the death of the said Jerry F. Crowley she was the owner of the said policy and all benefits thereunder, because at the time of his death the change of the beneficiary of the said policy to Cleavey P. Sheppard had not taken effect by the indorsement upon the said policy of the said substitution by the said assurance society, as provided by the conditions of said policy, and the said Kate V. Crowley claims the said sum of $1,300 is due and payable to her, either as the administratrix of the estate of the said Jerry F. Crowley or in her own right.
That the said Cleavey P. Sheppard has commenced an action at law against the said assurance society to recover the said sum of $1,300; and the said Kate V. Crowley has procured letters of administration on the estate of the said Jerry F. Crowley, deceased, and employed lawyers to prosecute her claim for the said $1,300.
That the said assurance society has always been willing to pay the amount of such insurance money to such person or persons as should be lawfully entitled to receive the same and to whom it could pay the same in safety, and offers to bring the same into court, as the court shall decree. That the said society does not collude with either of the said defendants touching the matters in controversy in this cause, nor is the said society in any manner identified with the defendants, or either of them, and this bill of interpleader is not exhibited at the request of either of them.
The bill prays that the said defendants may...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lamar Life Ins. Co. v. Moody
...etc. Asso., 81 Neb. 327; Metropolitan L. Ins. Co. v. Clanton, 76 N. J. E. 4; Sullivan v. Maroney, 76 N.Y. Eq. 104; Sheppard v. Crowley, 61 Fla. 735, 55 So. 841. public policy of this state, as expressed in her statutes and declared by her courts, is opposed to the position assumed by counse......
-
Clarkston v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
... ... 189, 75 N.E. 925; Begley v ... Miller, 137 Ill.App. 278; French v. Assurance ... Society, 205 Mass. 424, 91 N.E. 577; Shephard v ... Crowley, 61 Fla. 735 ... James ... J. O'Donohoe for respondent ... (1) The ... defendant failed to introduce ... ...
-
Warren v. Aetna Life Insurance Company of Hartford
... ... Co., 161 P. 148, 150; Sullivan v. Maroney, 76 ... N.J.Eq. 104, 110; Washington L. Ins. Co. v. Berwald, ... 97 Tex. 111, 116; Sheppard v. Crowley, 61 Fla. 735, ... 740; Filley v. Ill. L. Ins. Co., 93 Kan. 193, 197; ... Lloyd v. Royal N. M. L. I. Co., 245 F. 162, 165, ... 168; ... ...
-
U.S. Life Ins. Co. in the City of N.Y. v. Logus Mfg. Corp.
...a change of beneficiary, and all that remains to be done is some ministerial duty on the part of the [insurer].” Sheppard v. Crowley, 61 Fla. 735, 55 So. 841, 842 (1911). A ministerial duty is one that requires no discretion on the part of the insurance company, such as a duty to endorse th......