Tomlinson v. Jones
| Citation | 677 S.W.2d 490 |
| Decision Date | 20 June 1984 |
| Docket Number | No. C-2631,C-2631 |
| Parties | Herschel F. TOMLINSON, Sr., Petitioner, v. Sally O. JONES, et al., Respondents. |
| Court | Supreme Court of Texas |
Latham & Moss, James B. Ragan and B. Mills Latham, Corpus Christi, for petitioner.
Meredith & Donnell, Ted B. Roberts, Corpus Christi, for respondents.
Herschel Tomlinson, Sr. brought this suit against Sally O. Jones to recover $39,700 in life insurance proceeds which Mr. Tomlinson, Sr. alleged were wrongfully paid to Ms. Jones after the death of Herschel "Tommy" Tomlinson, Jr. Tommy was the son of Herschel Tomlinson, Sr. and the husband of Sally O. Jones. After a jury trial, the trial judge granted Ms. Jones judgment notwithstanding the verdict. The court of appeals affirmed. 664 S.W.2d 123 (Tex.App.1983). The questions presented here are (1) whether there is evidence to support a jury finding that Tommy Tomlinson lacked sufficient mental capacity on January 18, 1975 to effectively change the beneficiary of his two life insurance policies from his father, Herschel Tomlinson, Sr., to his wife, Sally O. Jones, and (2) if there is, whether such jury finding matters under the facts of this case. We answer both questions affirmatively, reverse the judgments of the courts below, and render judgment for $39,700 in favor of Herschel Tomlinson, Sr.
Tommy Tomlinson and Sally Jones were married in 1962. Tommy was employed by Producers Grain Company in Amarillo, Texas and was covered by two life insurance policies issued in 1968 and 1969. The policies were provided by Producers Grain pursuant to the Producers Retirement Plan Trust, an express trust set up by Producers Grain for the benefit of its employees. Tommy named his father, Herschel Tomlinson, Sr., as beneficiary at the time the policies were originally issued, and Mr. Tomlinson, Sr. remained the beneficiary under the policies until approximately one week before Tommy's death in 1975.
Under the insurance contract between the Producers Retirement Plan Trust and the insuror, the trustees of the Trust were named the technical "owners" of Tommy's life insurance policies with the power to designate the beneficiary(s) of those policies. However, the trust agreement which created the Trust clearly gave Tommy the right to designate the beneficiary(s) of his policies; the trustees were authorized to name the beneficiary(s) only if for some reason Tommy failed to do so. Two provisions of the trust agreement make this quite clear:
Section 5.07--In the event of the death of a participant prior to normal retirement date, the Trustees shall instruct the life insurance company to pay to the beneficiary or beneficiaries designated by the employee in the policy or policies on his life or annuity, or, if none be so designated, to his estate, the death benefits provided by the terms of such policy or policies. (Emphasis added.)
Section 9.02--If any participant shall fail to instruct the Trustees to designate a beneficiary or beneficiaries, the Trustees shall designate as beneficiary or beneficiaries on his behalf, in the order named, these persons in the following classes who survive the participant: (1) spouse, (2) issue, per stirpes, (3) parents, (4) brothers and sisters, (5) nephews and nieces, and (6) estate of the participant. (Emphasis added.)
On December 15, 1974, Tommy Tomlinson was involved in an automobile accident and sustained second and third degree burns over fifty percent of his body. Because of this severe injury, he was taken immediately to the burn unit of Memorial Medical Center in Corpus Christi, Texas where he stayed until his death on January 25, 1975. On January 18, 1975, one week prior to Tommy's death, Sally Jones and two witnesses met with Tommy in the hospital, where Tommy was under 24-hour a day medical care. At that meeting, Tommy allegedly consented to the execution of a special power of attorney authorizing Sally to change the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Clewis v. State
...Evidence" Points of Error, 38 Tex.L.Rev. 361, 368 (1960). A "legally insufficient evidence" point is a question of law. Tomlinson v. Jones, 677 S.W.2d 490, 492 (Tex.1984). In Texas criminal cases, however, historically there have only been "insufficient evidence" challenges without a legal ......
-
Paxton v. City of Dall.
...786 S.W.2d 670, 671 (Tex.1990) (per curiam); Navarette v. Temple Indep. Sch. Dist., 706 S.W.2d 308, 309 (Tex.1986) ; Tomlinson v. Jones, 677 S.W.2d 490, 492 (Tex.1984) ; Williams v. Bennett, 610 S.W.2d 144, 145 (Tex.1980) ; Freeman v. Tex. Comp. Ins. Co., 603 S.W.2d 186, 191 (Tex.1980) ; Do......
-
City of Keller v. Wilson
...(Tex.1988); City of Gladewater v. Pike, 727 S.W.2d 514, 518 (Tex.1987); King v. Bauer, 688 S.W.2d 845, 846 (Tex.1985); Tomlinson v. Jones, 677 S.W.2d 490, 492 (Tex.1984); Glover v. Tex. Gen. Indem. Co., 619 S.W.2d 400, 401 (Tex.1981) (per curiam); Holley v. Adams, 544 S.W.2d 367, 370 (Tex.1......
-
Cobb v. Justice
...contest a change of beneficiaries on the basis that the insured was incompetent at the time he executed the change. Tomlinson v. Jones, 677 S.W.2d 490, 492-93 (Tex.1984); accord Martin, 11 S.W.2d at 348; Turner, 195 S.W. at We believe that the correct rule of law is that stated by the Fort ......
-
Chapter 4-4 Legal Implications of Dementia and Alzheimer's Disease
...overruled).[54] In re Estate of Vackar, 345 S.W.3d 588, 597 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2011, reh'g overruled) (citing Tomlinson v. Jones, 677 S.W.2d 490, 492-93 (Tex. 1984); Mandell & Wright v. Thomas, 441 S.W.2d 841, 845 (Tex....
-
Chapter 4-4 Legal Implications of Dementia and Alzheimer's Disease
...overruled).[44] In re Estate of Vackar, 345 S.W.3d 588, 597 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2011, reh'g overruled) (citing Tomlinson v. Jones, 677 S.W.2d 490, 492-93 [Tex. 1984]; Mandell & Wright v. Thomas, 441 S.W.2d 841, 845 [Tex....
-
Chapter 5-2 The Power of Attorney
...overruled).[30] In re Estate of Vackar, 345 S.W.3d 588, 597 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2011, reh'g overruled) (citing Tomlinson v. Jones, 677 S.W.2d 490, 492-93 [Tex. 1984]; Mandell & Wright v. Thomas, 441 S.W.2d 841, 845 [Tex....
-
Chapter 5-2 The Power of Attorney
...overruled).[30] In re Estate of Vackar, 345 S.W.3d 588, 597 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2011, reh'g overruled) (citing Tomlinson v. Jones, 677 S.W.2d 490, 492-93 (Tex. 1984); Mandell & Wright v. Thomas, 441 S.W.2d 841, 845 (Tex....