From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mikeska v. United States

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit
Nov 22, 1948
171 F.2d 153 (D.C. Cir. 1948)

Opinion

No. 9708.

Argued October 8, 1948.

Decided November 22, 1948.

Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the District of Columbia (now the United States District Court for the District of Columbia).

Action between Lena Mikeska and the United States of America and Joe Mikeska involving change of beneficiary of a life policy. From an adverse judgment, Lena Mikeska appeals.

Affirmed.

Mr. Warren E. Miller, of Washington, D.C., with whom Mr. David S. Allshouse, of Washington, D.C., was on the brief, for appellant.

Mr. John W. Pehle, of Washington, D.C., with whom Mr. Lawrence S. Lesser of Washington D.C., was on the brief, for appellee Joe M. Mikeska.

Messrs. D. Vance Swann, Atty., Dept. of Justice, George Morris Fay, U.S. Atty. and Sidney S. Sachs and Thomas E. Walsh, Asst. U.S. Attys., all of Washington, D.C., entered appearances for appellee, United States of America.

Before EDGERTON, CLARK and WILBUR K. MILLER, Circuit Judges.


The case must be affirmed. The only questions involved are the intention of the insured soldier and whether or not he took such steps to effectuate his intention to change the beneficiary of his policy (if he had any such intention) as reasonably might be expected under the circumstances. We find nothing in the record to cause us to disturb the decision of judge Letts based upon his findings of fact and conclusions of law, which we therefore adopt.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Mikeska v. United States

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit
Nov 22, 1948
171 F.2d 153 (D.C. Cir. 1948)
Case details for

Mikeska v. United States

Case Details

Full title:MIKESKA v. UNITED STATES et al

Court:United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit

Date published: Nov 22, 1948

Citations

171 F.2d 153 (D.C. Cir. 1948)

Citing Cases

Joseph v. United States

Under the circumstances the court will treat that as done which ought to have been done and give effect to…

Cohn v. Cohn

We have examined the cases cited by appellee Cohn but find none contrary to the view we here express. Mikeska…