Wrather v. Stacy

• Decision Date: 13 October 1904
• Citation: 82 S.W. 420
• Parties: WRATHER et al. v. STACY.
• Court: Kentucky Court of Appeals

82 S.W. 420

WRATHER et al. v. STACY.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

October 13, 1904

Appeal from Circuit Court, Hickman County.

"Not to be officially reported."

Action by Pearl D. Stacy against J. D. Wrather and another. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendants appeal. Reversed.

Bullock & Smith, for appellants.

Bennett Robbins & Thomas and R. B. Flatt, for appellee.

PAYNTER J.

In June, 1901, John M. Stacy obtained a policy on his life for $1,000, payable at his death to his wife, Pearl D. Stacy. There was a provision in the policy, which authorized the insured to change the beneficiaries therein. On June 16 1902, the insured made J. R. Skinner and J. D. Wrather beneficiaries in the policy, instead of his wife. They at the time were creditors of the insured, and it was contemplated that the amount of his liability to them would be increased. And as an additional consideration they were to pay the premiums which might become due on the policy. Besides, they were to pay James Marshall Stacy, father of the insured, $500 of the amount which they might receive at the death of the insured. At the time the change in the beneficiaries took place, the insured was a consumptive, with the prospect of a short life, and he died in January, 1903. The insured and his father were without a home, and they conceived the idea of acquiring one. They purchased a house and lot in Oakton, Ky of J. R. Wrather for $350, and as additional security for the purchase-money note the $500 part of the policy going to James Marshall Stacy was pledged to its payment. The property was conveyed to the father, which he sold in the son's lifetime. After the death of the insured, Skinner and Wrather collected the money on the policy. They claim that there was due them something over $500. They paid the note which had been executed for the purchase money of the house and lot. This action was instituted by the widow, Pearl D. Stacy against the beneficiaries named in the policy and J. R. Wrather to recover the amount collected on it. The case was tried before a jury, and the verdict and judgment was for the full amount. The defendant relied upon the state of facts which we have stated above as a defense to the action.

The insured had the right, under the terms of the policy, to change the beneficiary. He could do it with or without reason, because the beneficiary first named did not have a vested interest therein. Wirgman v. Miller, 98 Ky 620, 33 S.W. 937. He had the right to substitute creditors as beneficiaries for their protection, as they would have an insurable interest in his life. Baldwin v. Haydon, 70 S.W. 300, 24 Ky. Law Rep. 900. His father also had an insurable right therein by reason of...