Empire General Life Insurance Co. v. Silverman, 135 Wis. 2d 143

Summary

The Wisconsin Supreme Court held that an insured's instructions to his attorney to change the beneficiary of a life insurance policy constituted an act unequivocally indicating an intent to remove the existing beneficiary under Wis. Stat. § 632.48(1)(b). However, the insured's reference to benefiting his "family" was too vague to designate a substitute beneficiary. Because the policy provided that proceeds would be paid to the policy owner if the interests of all designated beneficiaries terminated, the court held that Doucas Oldsmobile-Renault, Inc., the policy owner, was entitled to the proceeds.

Holdings

1. Under Wis. Stat. § 632.48(1)(b), any act that unequivocally indicates an intention to change the beneficiary is sufficient to effect the change; the statute does not require a writing. Paul's repeated instructions to his attorney to take the steps necessary to ensure that his family benefited from the proceeds sufficiently indicated his unequivocal intent to remove Silverman as beneficiary.
2. Paul's designation of 'my family' was too vague to identify a specific substitute beneficiary and therefore could not itself be recognized as the beneficiary designation.
3. Because Silverman was removed by operation of law and no specific substitute beneficiary was designated, the policy's default beneficiary provision required payment to Doucas Oldsmobile-Renault, Inc., the policy owner at Paul's death.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Paul Doucas's oral instructions to his attorney constituted an act that unequivocally indicated an intention to change the beneficiary under Wis. Stat. § 632.48(1)(b).
2. Whether Paul's designation of his family as the intended substitute beneficiary was sufficiently specific to identify a beneficiary.
3. If Silverman was removed as beneficiary but no specific substitute beneficiary was designated, who was entitled to the policy proceeds under the policy's beneficiary provisions.

Disposition

affirmed