Geoffroy v. Gilbert

William R. Clarkson, deceased, in 1868 took out a §10,000 insurance policy in the New York Life Insurance Company upon his own life, payable to his daughter Jennie Clarkson, then four years of age, or her legal representatives. The policy was paid up in ten years, but remained in his custody till his death. His daughter married the plaintiff, and died childless and intestate on the 27th day of June, 1891. The father, whose life was insured, survived his daughter nearly four years, dying on the 16th day of March, 1895. The husband now claims, as the survivor of the wife, the right to the amount of the insurance policy, which amount has been paid into court by the insurance company. The executors claim that the fund belongs to the estate. It needs some patient study to ascertain precisely what rules, as settled by our court of last resort, apply to the solution of a case like this. I am -satisfied, however, that it is settled by the decisions of the court of appeals—First, that the taking of a life insurance policy, payable to a wife or child, is not simply a gift, but confers such a vested interest that the insured has no right, -after the valid inception of the policy, to destroy their interest by surrender or diversion; second, that such vested interest, however, is of a contingent nature, and ordinarily terminates, as to the person named as beneficiary, with the death of that person, if such death occurs before the decease of the insured. Whitehead v. Insurance Co., 102 N. Y. 144 , 6 N. E. 267 ; U. S. Trust Co. v. Mutual Ben. Life Ins. Co., 115 N. Y. 152 , 21 N. E. 1025 ; Walsh v. Insurance Co., 133 N. Y. 408 , 31 N. E. 228 . Therefore, if the policy had been payable simply to Jennie Clarkson, her death prior to that of her father would have terminated her interest. But an addition is made to her name, as beneficiary, of the words, “or legal representatives.” Primarily, these words signify the executors or administrators of a deceased person. They, however, have been construed to refer to blood relations standing as heirs or next of kin, and are held to mean that class of persons where the circumstances indicate such intention. Tillman v. Davis, 95 N. Y. 17 ; Greenwood v. Holbrook, 111 N. E. 465 , 18 N. E. 711 ; Griswold v. Sawyer, 125 N. Y. 411 , 26 N. E. 464 . The last-named case arose on the construction of the term as used in a life insurance-policy. At the time of the issuing of the policy there were three persons parties to the contract then made, namely, the life insurance company, the insured, William R. Clarkson, and the beneficiary, Jennie Clarkson, a child four years of age. The contract was therefore mainly between the company and the insured, he acting for himself and as agent for his child. At that time there was no prospect of her contracting a marriage for many years to come. She

Complaint dismissed, with costs.