United States v. Tighe, Civ. A. No. 3019.
| Decision Date | 18 May 1964 |
| Docket Number | Civ. A. No. 3019. |
| Citation | 229 F. Supp. 680 |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of Mississippi |
| Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Mrs. Hallie Stirling TIGHE et al., Defendants. |
Robert E. Hauberg, U. S. Atty., Jackson, Miss., for plaintiff.
Alfred N. Crisler of Crisler, Crisler & Bowling, W. E. Gore, Jr., B. Stirling Tighe of Tighe & Tighe, Jackson, Miss., for defendants.
The United States of America on August 23, 1960 filed a complaint in interpleader against Mrs. Hallie Stirling Tighe, Mrs. Nola Chiles and Mrs. Bettie Roecker, claimants to the proceeds of a National Service Life Insurance Policy on the life of Samuel Carter Stirling, deceased. The action was brought by the plaintiff under the provisions of the World War Veterans Act of 1924 and the National Service Life Insurance Act of 1940 against the defendants above named, alleging that each of the defendants asserted a claim to the proceeds of a policy of insurance granted by the National Service Life Insurance Company to Samuel C. Stirling now deceased. Samuel C. Stirling, more frequently referred to in the pleadings and testimony was known as Carter Stirling, but entered the service under the name of Samuel C. Stirling. On April 1, 1942 he was granted a policy of insurance in the sum of $10,000 and on April 1, 1950 the insured was granted a renewal of the insurance, being the policy now in dispute. Samuel C. Stirling hereinafter will be referred to as Carter. He was the son of J. B. Stirling, referred to frequently as General. He formerly had been Attorney General of the State of Mississippi and was named as the original beneficiary in the insurance policy. General Stirling died on April 19, 1950 and on May 1, 1950 the insured, Carter Stirling, executed a change of beneficiary in favor of Mrs. Nola Chiles. She was not related to him, but was a friend and Carter Stirling had dated her off and on for several years. Carter Stirling had previously been married on March 12, 1930 to Charla Vesta Culpepper and to this marriage was born one child, now Mrs. Bettie Hallie Stirling Roecker. About the year 1932 Mrs. Carter Stirling deserted Carter Stirling in Jackson, Mississippi and went to Honolulu and while there divorced Carter Stirling in 1936. The decree of divorce awarded the custody of the child, who was then some five or six years old. The decree of divorce did not award any alimony or any support or maintenance for the child.
The child, Mrs. Roecker, was never at any time named the beneficiary in the policy of insurance and prior to the trial of this lawsuit she had never seen her father but one time after she and her mother went to Honolulu. She returned to Mississippi when she was about sixteen years of age and spent a few hours with her father while in Jackson visiting some relatives. While there her father, Carter Stirling, took her to dinner at the home of Carter's sister, Mrs. Hallie Stirling Tighe. Up until the time of the divorce Carter Stirling kept in contact with his wife by correspondence from time to time and sent some presents and some money to the child. After the divorce Mrs. Stirling remarried and again was divorced from that husband and again was married to her present husband, with whom she is now living in California. Bettie Hallie Stirling married, becoming Mrs. Roecker, has lived in California since that time and has two children.
The three defendants named in the interpleader suit each filed an answer asserting a claim to the proceeds of this policy. Mrs. Hallie Stirling Tighe asserted a claim by virtue of the decree of the Chancery Court of Hinds County, Mississippi directing the guardian of Carter Stirling, N.C.M., Sebastian Moore, to change the beneficiary from Mrs. Nola Chiles to Mrs. Hallie Stirling Tighe.
On February 11, 1956 Carter Stirling was adjudged non compos mentis and William Sebastian Moore was appointed guardian, qualified as such and acted as guardian until after the death of the said Carter Stirling. Carter Stirling died January 3, 1959. On May 28, 1956 William Sebastian Moore, the guardian of Carter Stirling, filed a petition with the Chancery Court of Hinds County, which had jurisdiction of the guardianship matter end of the guardian and of the ward, requesting authority to designate and change the beneficiary in the policy to Mrs. Hallie Stirling Tighe. The Veterans Administration was notified of the filing of the petition and filed its answer on June 1, 1956, neither admitting nor denying the right of the Court to authorize the guardian to change the beneficiary, but apprised the Court that Carter Stirling had a child, Bettie Hallie Stirling Roecker, living in California. On June 25, 1956 the guardian filed a supplemental petition setting out the fact of the said Carter Stirling having a child and praying for authority to designate Mrs. Tighe as beneficiary. On June 27, 1956 the Veterans Administration filed an answer to the supplemental petition, submitting the matter to the Court. On May 21, 1958 the guardian filed with the Chancery Court a petition requesting authority to institute proceedings to designate Mrs. Hallie Stirling Tighe as beneficiary of the estate of the ward, Carter Stirling. Pursuant to the petition of the guardian, the Chancery Court of Hinds County, Mississippi, entered a final decree on December 19, 1958, allowing the guardian to change the beneficiary on the NSLI policy from Mrs. Nola Chiles to Mrs Hallie Stirling Tighe, sister of the insured, finding that such change would be to the best interest of the ward. The guardian pursuant thereto executed such change and delivered the same to the Veterans Administration.
On January 3, 1959 the insured died, at a time when Mrs. Hallie Stirling Tighe had been designated as beneficiary on the NSLI policy by the guardian and with the approval, by order, of the Chancery Court of Hinds County.
Mrs. Hallie Stirling Tighe claims the proceeds of the NSLI policy in question by virtue of the change of beneficiary in her favor authorized by the final decree of the Chancery Court of Hinds County and subsequently executed by the guardian of the insured.
Mrs. Nola Chiles claims such proceeds by virtue of her designation by the insured as beneficiary on May 1, 1950, subsequent to the death on April 19, 1950 of J. B. Stirling, the originally named beneficiary, and avers, contrary to the final decree of the Chancery Court dated December 19, 1958, that the insured was competent on and before May 1, 1950.
Mrs. Bettie Roecker claims such proceeds in her name and in the name of the insured's estate, charging that the insured was incompetent on May 1, 1950, after the death of J. B. Stirling, and, therefore, could not legally effect a designation of beneficiary of Mrs. Nola Chiles; hence the proceeds of the policy inured to the estate.
Claimants, Mrs. Chiles and Mrs. Roecker, have in further averments as to their claims charged that the decree of December 19, 1958 was procured by fraud and hence is voidable upon the collateral attack which they made upon such decree at the trial of this cause, but as a fact failed to prove any fraud.
The initial issue for consideration by the Court is whether the Chancery Court had jurisdiction and authority to enter its final decree authorizing a change of beneficiary on the NSLI policy in dispute. In regard to the consideration of this issue, it is significant that no offer of proof of fraud as against claimant, Mrs. Chiles, was made at the trial of this case, all of the charges of such fraud being levied in support of the claim of Mrs. Roecker; hence the issue of whether the Chancery Court of Hinds County had jurisdiction and authority to enter its decree in December, 1958 is dispositive of the respective claims of claimant, Mrs. Tighe, and claimant, Mrs. Chiles, and that issue may be properly decided purely as a matter of law. It is a matter of record that claimant, Mrs. Chiles, in an attempt to avoid a decision against her upon this issue, amended her pleadings so as to charge the same fraud as was averred by claimant, Mrs. Roecker; however, such issue again becomes simply a matter of law when it is viewed that such assertion in behalf of claimant, Mrs. Chiles, was without any substance whatever. Moreover, claimant, Mrs. Tighe, contends that the argument as laid in her behalf that the Chancery Court had full jurisdiction and authority to make the change of beneficiary on the NSLI policy in dispute, without notice to either of the other claimants, is dispositive of the entire case against both claimant Mrs. Roecker as well as claimant, Mrs. Chiles, when it is further viewed that the assertions of fraud which they make are upon collateral attack of the decree of the Chancery Court in the trial of this case in the United States District Court, and as a matter of law the said decree of the Chancery Court is not subject to the collateral attack made by said claimants.
General authority for change of beneficiary on National Service Life Insurance policies is found both in the National Service Life Insurance Act and the Veterans Administration Regulations applicable to such policies, as follows:
National Service Life Insurance Act, Title 38 U.S.C.A. § 717(a):
"The insured shall have the right to designate the beneficiary or beneficiaries of insurance maturing on or after August 1, 1946, and shall, subject to regulations, at all times have the right to change the beneficiary or beneficiaries of such insurance without the consent of such beneficiary or beneficiaries."
Veterans Administration Regulation 3447 (8.47), admitted in evidence in the request for admissions of claimant, Mrs. Tighe, says:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Roecker v. United States
...no fraud in the procurement of the redesignation. Accordingly, he awarded the proceeds of the policy to Mrs. Tighe. United States v. Tighe, S.D.Miss.1964, 229 F. Supp. 680. We affirm in part and in part vacate the judgment of the district court and remand for further I. The record contains ......
-
Taylor v. Gardner
...or the regulations as promulgated?" Id. 107 F.Supp. at 293. The reasoning and result of Murray was followed in United States v. Tighe, 229 F.Supp. 680 (S.D.Miss.1964). The Fifth Circuit affirming in part, Roecker v. United States, 379 F.2d 400 (5th Cir. 1967) (rehearing denied en banc), "* ......
-
Maccabees Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Morton
...have held that a guardian, with court approval, may change the beneficiary of a life insurance policy. See, e.g., United States v. Tighe, 229 F.Supp. 680, 686 (S.D.Miss.1964); Murray v. United States, 107 F.Supp. 290, 294 (E.D.Mich.1950), aff'd, 188 F.2d 362 (6th Cir.) (per curiam), cert. d......
-
Salvato v. Volunteer State Life Ins. Co.
...if the guardian is duly authorized to make such a change of beneficiary by a court of competent jurisdiction. United States v. Tighe, 229 F.Supp. 680 (U.S.D.C., Miss., 1964); Parry v. Parry, 316 Mass. 692, 56 N.E.2d 875 (1944); In re Degnan, 122 N.J.Eq. 470, 194 A. 789 (1937); Zuber v. Zube......