MRS. MYRTLE S. HAMMACK (WATSON), APPELLANT,
v.
DOLLY ANN HAMMACK, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the evidence was sufficient to establish a change of beneficiary for the National Service Life Insurance policy.
A divorced wife was the named beneficiary of a deceased soldier's National Service Life Insurance policy. The soldier's sister claimed she was the int…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse National Service Life Insurance Policy cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The government’s interpleader suit produced this controversy between a sister and a divorced wife of a deceased soldier over the proceeds of his policy issued under the provisions of the National Service Life Insurance Act. The trial court entered judgment in favor of the sister. The former wife was the beneficiary of record. The sister claimed that she became the beneficiary under a change made by her brother after his marital separation; even though the instrument evidencing the change, never actually reached the office of the Veterans Administration. The only question presented here is whether the evidence is sufficient to establish such change.
The requirements for effecting a change of beneficiary in a policy of this type are not as strict as the more formal ones where conventional life insurance is involved. Proof of an intention to make such change to a certain person and of an affirmative act exercising the right of change meets the requirements. Mitchell v. United States, 5 Cir., 165 F. 2d 758, 2 A.L.R.2d 484 (1948); McKewen v. McKewen, 5 Cir., 165 F. 2d 761 (1948); Gann v. Meek, 5 Cir., 165 F. 2d 857 (1948); Hawkins v. Hawkins, 5 Cir., 271 F. 2d 870 (1959); Aguilar v. United States, 9 Cir., 226 F. 2d 414 (1955), cert. den. 351 U.S. 955, 76 S.Ct. 852, 100 L.Ed. 1478; United States v. Williams, D.C.W.Va., 145 F.Supp. 308, affirmed, 4 Cir., 243 F. 2d 573 (1957).
A careful examination of the record has led us to the conclusion that the evidence supports the findings of fact, conclusions of law and judgment of the trial court.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
The Prudential Ins. Co. OF Am. v. Aleene T. King, 453 F.2d 925 (8th Cir. 1971)
-
Baker v. United States & Caroline S. Gardenhire, 386 F.2d 356 (5th Cir. 1967)
Authorities Cited
- Mitchell v. United States, 165 F.2d 758 (5th Cir. 1948)
- McKEWEN v. McKEWEN, 165 F.2d 761 (5th Cir. 1948)
- Gann v. Meek, 165 F.2d 857 (5th Cir. 1948)
- Imajean Hawkins v. Hawkins, 271 F.2d 870 (5th Cir. 1959)
- Parsons v. Indiana, 351 U.S. 955 (U.S. 1956)
- Alvarez v. New York, 351 U.S. 955 (U.S. 1956)
- Candelario A. Aguilar v. United States & Frances G. Aguilar, 226 F.2d 414 (9th Cir. 1955)
- Nettie Williams v. United States, 243 F.2d 573 (4th Cir. 1957)