Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. v. Lane

Missouri Court of Appeals

Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. v. Lane

258 S.W.3d 67, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 661, 2008 WL 2038425

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedMay 13, 2008

DocketED 89948

StatusPublished

This text of 258 S.W.3d 67 (Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. v. Lane) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. v. Lane, 258 S.W.3d 67, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 661, 2008 WL 2038425 (Mo. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Angela Jeans (‘Wife”) appeals from a judgment in the Circuit Court of St. Louis County finding that Sylvia Young, Angel *68 Lane and Sharmae Young are the beneficiaries of Emmet Young’s (“Decedent”) $33,000 life insurance policy. In her sole point on appeal, Wife argues that the trial court erred in finding that Decedent did not intend to change his beneficiary because this finding was against the weight of the evidence. More specifically she argues that Decedent substantially complied with the terms of the policy and “had done everything possible to effect such a change.”

No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, which sets forth the facts and reasons for this order.

We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Angela Jeans (‘Wife”) appeals from a judgment in the Circuit Court of St. Louis County finding that Sylvia Young, Angel *68 Lane and Sharmae Young are the beneficiaries of Emmet Young’s (“Decedent”) $33,000 life insurance policy. In her sole point on appeal, Wife argues that the trial court erred in finding that Decedent did not intend to change his beneficiary because this finding was against the weight of the evidence. More specifically she argues that Decedent substantially complied with the terms of the policy and “had done everything possible to effect such a change.”

No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, which sets forth the facts and reasons for this order.

We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

258 S.W.3d 67, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 661, 2008 WL 2038425, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/metropolitan-life-insurance-co-v-lane-moctapp-2008.