Broadhurst

Prudential Insurance v. Broadhurst

Good Law
157 Cal. App. 2d 375·321 P.2d 75
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 3, 1958Civ. 22703California1,485 words

Opinion

Opinion

Herndon, J.

The determinative question pre sented on this appeal is whether it must be held as a matter of law that by the terms of a property settlement agreement respondent, the divorced wife of an insured, effectively waived her right to receive, as beneficiary, the proceeds of a policy of insurance on the life of her former husband.

In this interpleader action brought by the insurance carrier, the tripartite contest over the policy proceeds was waged in the trial court by (1) respondent, the former wife of the insured, who was the named primary beneficiary, (2) appellant, the administratrix of the insured’s estate, and (3) Sherry Lee Chapman, respondent’s minor daughter, who was the named secondary beneficiary. Upon findings of fact and conclusions of law favorable to respondent, the trial court held that her right to take as beneficiary was not foreclosed by the provisions of the property settlement agreement and rendered judgment accordingly. The administratrix of the insured’s estate has appealed from the judgment and from an order denying her motion for a different judgment.

Richard Broadhurst, the deceased, was the insured under a life insurance policy issued in January, 1946. His…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.