Sorensen v. Nelson

1 Citing case

  1. In re Pepmeyer

    275 B.R. 539 (Bankr. N.D. Iowa 2002)   Cited 5 times
    Explaining UTMA's purpose "to facilitate the easy inter-vivos transfers of assets to minors"

    Id. While interpreting an insurance policy, the Iowa Supreme Court has stated that a beneficiary has no vested interest in a policy, rather a "mere expectancy", where the policy holder holds the right to change the designation of the beneficiary. Sorensen v. Nelson, 342 N.W.2d 477, 480 (Iowa 1984); see also Penn Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Mulvaney, 265 N.W. 889, 893 (Iowa 1936) (holding that when the beneficiary is "dependent upon the will and pleasure of the insured" no property interest exists to "be the subject of a gift"). Trustee asserts Debtor's creation of the annuity with Erika as beneficiary fails as a gift based on Debtor's failure to follow the requirements of Iowa's Uniform Transfer to Minors Act.