Saunders v. Stevers

California Court of Appeal Oct 25, 1963 No. Civ. 21066Published

Before: Salsman

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the insured's written notice to the insurance company was sufficient to effect a change of beneficiary because the insurer interpleaded the funds, triggering a liberal application of equity to carry out the insured's clear intent.

Issues

Whether the insured's acts were sufficient to effect a change of beneficiary under California law.
Whether an order denying a motion for a new trial is appealable.

Disposition. Appeal from order dismissed; judgment affirmed.

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“We are of the opinion that Nancy’s acts were sufficient to effect such a change and that the judgment must be affirmed.”

“Where, as here, the company makes no contest but inter-pleads the contesting beneficiaries and pays the proceeds of the policy into court, a liberal rule obtains and courts of equity seek to do that which the insured intended to have done”

SALSMAN, J.

This is an appeal from a judgment and from an order denying a motion for a new trial. The judgment was in favor of Becky Jane Stevers and against Barney R. P. Saunders in an interpleader action brought by the Union Central Life Insurance Company to determine the beneficiaries entitled to the proceeds of two life insurance policies issued by the company on the life of Nancy Saunders. Since the order denying appellant’s motion for a new trial is not appealable

(Rodriguez

Barnett,

52 Cal.2d 154 [338 P.2d 907]) that portion of the appeal will be dismissed.

The case was submitted to the trial court on an agreed statement of facts. The facts were that Union Central Life Insurance Company issued two policies of insurance on the life of Nancy Bardosy, formerly Nancy Saunders. Each policy was in the amount of $5,000. At the time the policies were issued Nancy was married to Cecil Saunders, but he is not a party to this action and has in fact disclaimed any interest in the policies. Nancy first designated respondent Becky Jane Stevers, her daughter by a prior marriage, and appellant Barney Saunders, her son by her marriage to Cecil Saunders, as beneficiaries of each policy. Nancy and Cecil Saunders were divorced and Nancy thereafter married AI Bardosy. After Nancy’s marriage to Bardosy she wrote the insurance company a letter stating: “I have remarried and wish to have my policies mailed to the above address. Also, I wish to have both my policies to read Becky Jane Stevers as beneficiary—Sincerely Nancy J. Bardosy P.S. I am removing my son Barney Robert Pearson Saunders he having been well provided for by his father. ’ ’ The insurance company returned its forms for change of beneficiary to Nancy and these were at least partially executed when they

[541]

were inadvertently destroyed. On October 9, 1959, Nancy wrote to the company and again requested forms. The company replied on October 30, 1959, and enclosed a second set of forms for Nancy’s execution. On November 4, 1959 Nancy executed a new will. It contained this paragraph: ‘ "SIXTH: I give and bequeath to my son BARNEY ROBERT PEARSON SAUNDERS the sum of one dollar ($1.00) only feeling and knowing that he can and will be well provided for by his natural father. ’ ’

Saunders v. Stevers

AI Brief

SALSMAN, J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief