Court Rules In Life Insurance Dispute Of PA Mistress Killed By Lover's Wife

[Northeast Agent]

Court Rules In Life Insurance Dispute Of PA Mistress Killed By Lover's Wife

The ex-husband of a Pennsylvania woman killed by her lover's wife in a murder-suicide must relinquish the proceeds he received from her individual life insurance policies -- but can keep the proceeds from her group plan, a Delaware judge has ruled.

The murder-suicide occurred days after taking a new job as an assistant vice president at Villanova University, all while she was going through a divorce with Chapman.

 

[walthamny]

This explains the thinking behind judges order and I agree with it.

Judge rules in fatal love triangle life insurance dispute

 

[Fire]

Interesting case . Again the life beneficiary is iron glad as the proceeds were paid off . I understand the intent of the law.Many people forget to change or never get around to removing the divorced party from their life policy or will . I never knew this . Im pretty sure this wouldn’t apply if the ex husband owned the policy . State law would not overturn ownership laws.My friends ex wife kep a policy she owned on him . He could not get it cancelled and was told he’d have to go to court . He was told no judge would overturn the life ownership clause .

 

[walthamny]

Interesting case . Again the life beneficiary is iron glad as the proceeds were paid off . I understand the intent of the law.Many people forget to change or never get around to removing the divorced party from their life policy or will . I never knew this . Im pretty sure this wouldn’t apply if the ex husband owned the policy . State law would not overturn ownership laws.My friends ex wife kep a policy she owned on him . He could not get it cancelled and was told he’d have to go to court . He was told no judge would overturn the life ownership clause .

I used to think like you but the Supreme court ruled that if there is a state law that deals with post divorce issues like beneficiaries, that will over take any life insurance ownership designations. Now this only applies if there is a law, not all state regulate post divorce beneficiaries and also does not apply in the case of Erisa pensions which is dealt with under the Federal law.

Here is the decision.

US Supreme Court decides 8-1 to Uphold Revocation-On-Divorce Provision

 

[Allen Trent]

Im pretty sure this wouldn’t apply if the ex husband owned the policy . State law would not overturn ownership laws.My friends ex wife kep a policy she owned on him . He could not get it cancelled and was told he’d have to go to court . He was told no judge would overturn the life ownership clause .

In many states, that is not true. Many states divorce laws void all ownership & beneficiary rights. So, unless the divorce decree states otherwise, it ends. Even for term riders, etc even if the owner continued to pay premiums or incur costs for years. I was involved in a case where the divorce was 25 yrs prior. The carrier couldn't even pay the contingent bene on the term rider because the state regs consider post divorce situations like this to have no valid bene & the proceeds went to probate & were taken by creditors instead of going to the children that were contingent bene.

Key is for divorce to address it & not take cheap default divorce way out, plus update bene & ownership post divorce. Sadly, customer service from agents in life industry is not the greatest after the sale is made & commission made. Part of that is because many agents don't make it in life only long term

 

[Fire]

Wow interesting . It’s funny I’ve never heard of this and i’ve seen plenty of cases were the ex wife collected . So your saying if my wife owned the policy and I got divorced.I’m in revocation on divorce state I can get her ownership overturned ? Where do I find the states that allow that ? It makes sense as most of the time insurance interest not there . If it’s not addressed in divorce decree can the insurer deny claim based on this state law and no insurance interest ?

 

[Tahoe Ray]

My friends ex wife kep a policy she owned on him . He could not get it cancelled and was told he’d have to go to court . He was told no judge would overturn the life ownership clause .

That's likely because it's part of the divorce decree. "Forgetting" to change your beneficiary and having a state intercede based on their laws is a whole different ballgame.

 

[scagnt83]

This is a very interesting case on multiple levels. But is this not a slippery slope in lots of ways as well?

1. Unless she wrote it down or told someone... there is no way to know the deceased ex-wife's intent for the policies. Some divorces, even with infidelity, are not hostile and financial ties are not always totally unwound.

2. This could bring up a huge potential issue for Contract Law in general. I wouldnt be surprised to see this go to SCOTUS.

The ruling was not about life insurance, it was about which state laws govern a legal contract.

Life Insurance aside, so many legal contracts are written and based on laws of the "Situs" state, meaning the state they originated in. Im talking literally any legally binding contract.

So now, all a person has to do to avoid state based legal clauses, is move to a different state. How is that a good thing?

Now legal contracts will be forced to include a clause for every state variation of laws? Definitely a SCOTUS issue.

 

[Wandasi]

What a tragic story to hear, and what a situation! Despite that, life insurances are great, but they are also complex, mainly if you have acquired a significant policy, such as multi-million dollar life insurance. In these circumstances, it is clear why this was the outcome. I like when the procedures are transparent and accessible for everyone to understand. That's why this was a determinant point for me when choosing the insurance company. I took a 5 million term life insurance cost. In my case, this was the appropriate one.

 

[Edwardfin]

Welp this is a good email to your customers to remind them to do that beneficiary reviews.-lol!!!