From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Daino v. Atlantic Refining Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
May 23, 1960
399 Pa. 606 (Pa. 1960)

Summary

adopting Restatement (First) of Contracts § 151

Summary of this case from Welding Eng'rs Ltd. v. NFM/Welding Eng'rs, Inc.

Opinion

April 25, 1960.

May 23, 1960.

Insurance — Life insurance — Group insurance — Employe's certificate — Nonassignability — Delivery of certificate to beneficiary — Subsequent change of beneficiary.

In this action of assumpsit to determine who should receive the proceeds of a group life insurance certificate, in which it appeared that the group policy provided ". . . for delivery to each Employee insured hereunder, an individual certificate which shall state the insurance to which such Employee is entitled under this Policy and to whom benefits are payable . . .", and that any employe could change the beneficiary without the beneficiary's consent but "Such change shall take effect upon endorsement thereof by the Employer on such certificate and unless the certificate is so endorsed, the change shall not take effect", and further provided "The Employee's certificate is nonassignable and the insurance and benefits are nonassignable prior to loss"; and it further appeared that the appellant was designated as beneficiary in the employe's certificate which was delivered to her and kept by her; that subsequently a duplicate certificate of insurance was issued to the employe and the appellee was the last beneficiary named by him, it was Held that (1) in view of the nonassignability provision of the group policy, delivery of the original insurance certificate to appellant did not constitute a gift, (2) the provision in the group policy for the return of the certificate as a requirement for a change of beneficiary was for the benefit of the insurer and had been waived by it, and (3) the appellee was entitled to the insurance proceeds.

Before JONES, C. J., BELL, MUSMANNO, JONES, COHEN and EAGEN, JJ.

Appeal, No. 152, Jan. T., 1960, from judgment of Court of Common Pleas No. 4 of Philadelphia County, June T., 1958, No. 2484, in case of Rose F. Daino et al. v. Atlantic Refining Company et al. Judgment affirmed; reargument refused June 14, 1960.

Same case in court below: 20 Pa. D. C.2d 470.

Assumpsit.

Judgment entered on the pleadings for $8,250 in favor of interpleaded claimant against defendants; and judgment entered for defendants in claim of original claimant, opinion by ALEXANDER, J. Plaintiff (original claimant) appealed.

Raymond J. Porreca, for appellant.

Gordon W. Gerber, with him Owen B. Rhoads, and Barnes, Dechert, Price, Myers Rhoads, for defendants, appellees.

Frank Carano, with him Milton H. Kunken, and Carano Kunken, for interpleaded claimant-appellee.


The judgment is affirmed on the opinion of Judge ALEXANDER, reported in 20 Pa. D. C.2d 470.


Summaries of

Daino v. Atlantic Refining Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
May 23, 1960
399 Pa. 606 (Pa. 1960)

adopting Restatement (First) of Contracts § 151

Summary of this case from Welding Eng'rs Ltd. v. NFM/Welding Eng'rs, Inc.
Case details for

Daino v. Atlantic Refining Co.

Case Details

Full title:Daino, Appellant, v. Atlantic Refining Company

Court:Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Date published: May 23, 1960

Citations

399 Pa. 606 (Pa. 1960)
161 A.2d 42

Citing Cases

Welding Eng'rs Ltd. v. NFM/Welding Eng'rs, Inc.

"Generally, all rights are assignable unless forbidden by statute, the contract creating the right, or by…

Prudential Insurance Company of America v. Alkhafaji

In addition to these federal court cases, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania also has consistently held that…