Hagins v. Fuller

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Hagins v. Fuller

225 S.E.2d 485, 138 Ga. App. 23, 1976 Ga. App. LEXIS 2039

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMarch 8, 1976

Docket51788

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 225 S.E.2d 485 (Hagins v. Fuller) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hagins v. Fuller, 225 S.E.2d 485, 138 Ga. App. 23, 1976 Ga. App. LEXIS 2039 (Ga. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

Bell, Chief Judge.

Appellee administrator’s motion for summary judgment was granted in this suit to determine entitlement to the proceeds of a life insurance policy. There is no dispute as to the facts. In 1963, appellant purchased a life policy on her husband in which she was designated as the primary beneficiary. The policy by endorsement specifically designated appellant as the owner with the right to control the policy and to exercise every right and privilege provided in favor of an "insured,” which included the right to change the beneficiary. In 1966, to enable her husband to obtain a bank loan, appellant caused the insurance company to change the beneficiary to "the Executors, Administrators, or Assigns of the Insured.” Thereafter, the loan was repaid and appellant took no action to again change the beneficiary. Appellant’s husband died in June 1974. Held:

*24 Submitted February 2, 1976 Decided March 8, 1976. Westmoreland, Hall, McGee & Warner, J. M. Crawford, for appellant. Sidney Haskins, W. Seaborn Jones, for appellees.

The right to change the beneficiary is one of contract, and it can be accomplished only in the manner specified in the policy. Roberts v. Northwestern Nat. Life Ins. Co., 143 Ga. 780, 782 (85 SE 1043). As there was no attempt or effort by the appellant to change the beneficiary prior to the death of the deceased, the estate of appellant’s husband became vested with title to the proceeds of the policy on his death. Loyd v. Loyd, 203 Ga. 775 (48 SE2d 365).

Judgment affirmed.

Clark and Stolz, JJ., concur.

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

Bell, Chief Judge.

Appellee administrator’s motion for summary judgment was granted in this suit to determine entitlement to the proceeds of a life insurance policy. There is no dispute as to the facts. In 1963, appellant purchased a life policy on her husband in which she was designated as the primary beneficiary. The policy by endorsement specifically designated appellant as the owner with the right to control the policy and to exercise every right and privilege provided in favor of an "insured,” which included the right to change the beneficiary. In 1966, to enable her husband to obtain a bank loan, appellant caused the insurance company to change the beneficiary to "the Executors, Administrators, or Assigns of the Insured.” Thereafter, the loan was repaid and appellant took no action to again change the beneficiary. Appellant’s husband died in June 1974. Held:

*24 Submitted February 2, 1976 Decided March 8, 1976. Westmoreland, Hall, McGee & Warner, J. M. Crawford, for appellant. Sidney Haskins, W. Seaborn Jones, for appellees.

The right to change the beneficiary is one of contract, and it can be accomplished only in the manner specified in the policy. Roberts v. Northwestern Nat. Life Ins. Co., 143 Ga. 780, 782 (85 SE 1043). As there was no attempt or effort by the appellant to change the beneficiary prior to the death of the deceased, the estate of appellant’s husband became vested with title to the proceeds of the policy on his death. Loyd v. Loyd, 203 Ga. 775 (48 SE2d 365).

Judgment affirmed.

Clark and Stolz, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

225 S.E.2d 485, 138 Ga. App. 23, 1976 Ga. App. LEXIS 2039, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hagins-v-fuller-gactapp-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack