Metropolitan Life Insurance Company v. Shirley Bush v. Phyllis Bremer, Shirley Guthrie, and Victoria Van Heiden

98 C.J. C.A.R. 5024 (10th Cir. 1998) · United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · August 31, 1998 · No. No. 97-1172

Summary

Shirley Bush appealed a summary judgment ruling concerning competing beneficiary designations for a Federal Employees Group Life Insurance Act policy issued to Patricia Moore. The Tenth Circuit held that the Denver Flight Service Station where Moore worked could qualify as her "employing office," despite the regional office receiving the later designation only after Moore's death. The court affirmed distribution of the policy proceeds equally among Bush, Phyllis Bremer, Shirley Guthrie, and Victoria Van Heiden.

Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Writing for the Court
Robert H. Henry; Wade Brorby Anderson; David M. Ebel
Jurisdiction
Federal
Decision date
August 31, 1998
Docket number
No. 97-1172
Procedural posture
Shirley Bush appealed from an order granting the appellees' motion for summary judgment in an interpleader action concerning entitlement to federal employee group life-insurance proceeds.
Standard of review
The court reviewed the grant of summary judgment under the same standard as the district court under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 and reviewed legal questions de novo. Summary judgment is proper when there is no genuine issue of material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
Precedential value
Published precedential opinion of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Parties
Shirley Bush v. Phyllis Bremer, Shirley Guthrie, Victoria Van Heiden
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

life insurance litigationfederal employment lawstatutory interpretationstandard of reviewappellate procedure

Practice areas

Life insuranceFederal employee benefitsStatutory interpretationAppellate procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the Denver Flight Service Station where Moore worked was her employing office under 5 U.S.C. § 8705 and 5 C.F.R. § 870.104.
  2. Whether Moore's June 20, 1995 designation of beneficiary form was effective even though the FAA regional office in Renton received it after Moore's death.
  3. Whether summary judgment was properly entered for the equal beneficiaries.

Holdings

  1. The Denver Flight Service Station where Moore worked could be considered her employing office under 5 U.S.C. § 8705 and 5 C.F.R. § 870.104.
  2. The June 20, 1995 designation was valid because Moore delivered the signed and witnessed form to the responsible official at the office where she worked before her death.
  3. Summary judgment for Bremer, Guthrie, and Van Heiden was proper, and the four beneficiaries were each entitled to twenty-five percent of the policy proceeds.

Key quotations

[A] designation, change, or cancellation of beneficiary ... not so executed and filed has no force or effect. (¶ 13)
This statutory purpose," it added, "is hardly fostered by a requirement that administrative processing to a central office must win a race with death. (¶ 29)

Factual background

Patricia Moore, an FAA employee with no immediate family, initially designated Shirley Bush as the sole beneficiary of her Metropolitan Life federal employee group life-insurance policy. Eighteen days later, Moore executed a witnessed form naming Bush, Phyllis Bremer, Shirley Guthrie, and Victoria Van Heiden as equal beneficiaries. Moore delivered the second form to Teala Sparks, the administrative officer at the Denver Flight Service Station where Moore worked, but Moore died before the FAA regional office in Renton, Washington received the form. The dispute concerned whether receipt by the Denver station constituted receipt by Moore's employing office under FEGLIA.

Procedural history

Metropolitan Life filed an interpleader action and deposited the $52,000 policy proceeds with the district court, which then dismissed Metropolitan Life from the case. The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment. The district court held that a designation naming Bush, Bremer, Guthrie, and Van Heiden as equal beneficiaries was valid and awarded each appellee and Bush twenty-five percent of the proceeds. The Tenth Circuit affirmed.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…

More from Tenth Circuit