Downing v. Downing

Ninth Circuit

Downing v. Downing

175 F.2d 40, 1949 U.S. App. LEXIS 2334

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedMay 26, 1949

DocketNo. 12000

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 175 F.2d 40 (Downing v. Downing) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Downing v. Downing, 175 F.2d 40, 1949 U.S. App. LEXIS 2334 (9th Cir. 1949).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is a suit by the widow of an insured serviceman to recover on a National Service Life Insurance policy originally designating the insured’s mother as beneficiary. The complaint alleged that the veteran had subsequent to his marriage changed the beneficiary of the policy from the mother to the wife. The court found that a document evidencing the change had been executed by. the insured but was inadvertently lost while in possession of the United States Army. Judgment was accordingly given in favor of the plaintiff.

The case on its facts is closely similar to Kendig v. Kendig, 9 Cir., 170 F.2d 750, in which we held it to have been error to direct a non-suit. The judgment is affirmed on the authority of the Kendig case.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

This is a suit by the widow of an insured serviceman to recover on a National Service Life Insurance policy originally designating the insured’s mother as beneficiary. The complaint alleged that the veteran had subsequent to his marriage changed the beneficiary of the policy from the mother to the wife. The court found that a document evidencing the change had been executed by. the insured but was inadvertently lost while in possession of the United States Army. Judgment was accordingly given in favor of the plaintiff.

The case on its facts is closely similar to Kendig v. Kendig, 9 Cir., 170 F.2d 750, in which we held it to have been error to direct a non-suit. The judgment is affirmed on the authority of the Kendig case.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

175 F.2d 40, 1949 U.S. App. LEXIS 2334, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/downing-v-downing-ca9-1949.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack