Kathryn A. Tucker, Etc. v. Vester G. Brady, Guardian Ad Litem of Doris Jean Lehman, Jacqueline Anne Lehman and James William Lehman

This case arose under the Federal Interpleader Statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1335 , by the filing of a complaint in inter-pleader by the Douglas Aircraft Company, Inc., naming as defendants the parties to this appeal. At issue is the right to death benefits in the sum of $10,651.00 payable under the Salaried Employees’ Pension Plan of the aircraft company as the result of the death of its employee John Lehman. Appellant is the divorced wife of Lehman and his designated beneficiary under the pension plan. Appellee is guardian ad litem for the minor children of Lehman by a subsequent marriage. The district court, finding that appellant at the time of divorce had waived her rights as beneficiary and that the decedent had revoked his designation of her as his beneficiary, rendered judgment in favor of appellee. Upon appeal, appellant asserts that the determination of the district court was against the evidence and was clearly erroneous.

At the outset we note that appellant’s claim is as beneficiary and not as the holder by any vested property right to the fund in question. Thus we are not concerned with the nature of the fund as community property or with the respective rights to it of the…

(dissenting).

I dissent.

While I do not say that it was stipulated that the wife Kathryn had no knowledge of the Douglas Company plan at the time of the execution of her property settlement agreement, yet it was agreed she would testify she had no knowledge. While normally I strongly advocate the right of a trial judge to disbelieve a party as a witness, here there was no demeanor of a live witness. Maybe Kathryn was an active partner in the family business and knew all about the Douglas fringe benefits. But I believe a goodly percentage of all American women still let their husbands handle without much question all facets of the man’s work-a-day employment.

We have no way to doubt the effect of what Kathryn would have testified to: That she had no knowledge of the death benefits. No contradicting facts were offered. I do not see how, under judicial notice, it can be said that “under the economic conditions then generally prevailing” Kathryn had “learned of its [the death benefit program’s] existence.” That bends the mast to the breaking point.

It is my notion, absent affirmative misrepresentation or mistake, people should be held literally to their agreements such as Kathryn…

305 F.2d 550 Kathryn A. TUCKER, etc., Appellant, v. Vester G. BRADY, Guardian ad Litem of Doris Jean Lehman, Jacqueline Anne Lehman and James William Lehman, Appellee. No. 17600. United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit. July 3, 1962. Behymer & Hoffman, and Gordon Hunt, Los Angeles, Cal., for appellant. Romer & Brown, San Francisco, Cal., and Vester G. Brady, Los Angeles, Cal., for appellee. Before CHAMBERS and MERRILL, Circuit Judges, and TAVARES, District judge. MERRILL, Circuit Judge. 1 This case arose under the Federal Interpleader Statute, 28 U.S.C. 1335, by the filing of a complaint in interpleader by the Douglas Aircraft Company, Inc., naming as defendants the parties to this appeal. At issue is the right to death benefits in the sum of $10,651.00 payable under the Salaried Employees' Pension Plan of the aircraft company as the result of the death of its employee John Lehman. Appellant is the divorced wife of Lehman and his designated beneficiary under the pension plan. Appellee is guardian ad litem for the minor children of Lehman by a subsequent marriage. The district court, finding that appellant at the time of divorce had waived her rights as beneficiary and…