Vigil v. Zubrod (In Re Vigil) , 74 F. App'x 19 ( 2003 )

F I L E D
United States Court of Appeals
Tenth Circuit
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
AUG 26 2003
FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
PATRICK FISHER
Clerk
In re:
MICHAEL ANTHONY VIGIL;
TINA ILENE VIGIL, also known as
Tina Ilene Christy,
Debtors.
No. 02-8093
MICHAEL ANTHONY VIGIL; (BAP No. WY-02-003)
TINA ILENE VIGIL, (BAP)
Appellants,
v.
TRACY LYNNE ZUBROD, Trustee,
Appellee.
In re:
CARRIE ANN MICHAELS,
also known as Carrie Ann
Michaels-Burkard,
Debtor.
CARRIE ANN MICHAELS, No. 02-8094
(BAP No. WY-02-002)
Appellant, (BAP)
v.
TRACY LYNNE ZUBROD, Trustee,
Appellee.
ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
Before TACHA , Chief Judge, BRORBY , Senior Circuit Judge, and HARTZ ,
Circuit Judge.
After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined
unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of
these appeals. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The cases are
therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
This appeal presents a purely legal question: whether under Wyoming’s
exemption statute, Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 26-15-129, a debtor in a Chapter 7
bankruptcy proceeding can exempt the cash value of a life insurance policy from
the bankruptcy estate. We answer that question in the affirmative, thus reversing
the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel.
In two separate cases, debtors Michael Anthony Vigil, Tina Ilene Vigil,
and Carrie Ann Michaels (collectively “debtors”) attempted to exempt from their
*
This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the
doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court
generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order
and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.
-2-
bankruptcy estates the cash surrender value of certain life insurance policies
owned by them and insuring their lives. The objections of the trustee to the
claims of exemption were sustained by the bankruptcy court. Debtors appealed to
the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel (BAP), which consolidated the two cases and
affirmed the bankruptcy court. This appeal followed. Our jurisdiction arises
under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d).
“On appeal from BAP decisions, we independently review the bankruptcy
court’s decision. We review the bankruptcy court’s legal determinations de novo,
and its factual findings under the clearly erroneous standard.” Lampe v.
Williamson (In re Lampe) , 331 F.3d 750, 753 (10th Cir. 2003) (quotation and
citations omitted).
Debtor Michael Vigil purchased two policies from The New York Life
Insurance Company, both listing Tina Vigil, his wife and co-debtor, as the
beneficiary. A third policy held by Tina Vigil lists Michael Vigil as the
beneficiary. Debtor Carrie Ann Michaels purchased a whole life policy from
The Prudential Insurance Company of America naming a non-debtor as the
beneficiary. There is no dispute as to ownership, beneficiaries, or values of the
whole life policies at issue.
Under § 522 of the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978, a debtor is entitled to
exempt certain property from the bankruptcy estate unless the state of his
-3-
domicile has elected to “opt out” of the federal scheme and provide its own
exemptions. Johnston v. Barney , 842 F.2d 1221, 1221 (10th Cir. 1988).
Wyoming has opted out of the federal exemptions. See Wyo. Stat. Ann.
§ 1-20-109. The issue in this appeal is thus controlled by Wyoming’s exemption
statute, which provides in pertinent part:
(a) If a policy of insurance is executed by any person on his own life
or on another life, in favor of a person other than himself, . . . the
lawful beneficiary or assignee thereof, other than the insured or the
person executing insurance or executors or administrators of the
insured or the person executing the insurance , are [sic] entitled to its
proceeds, including death benefits, cash surrender and loan values,
premiums waived and dividends, whether used in reduction of
premiums or otherwise, excepting only where the debtor, subsequent
to issuance of the policy, has actually elected to receive the
dividends in cash, against the creditors and representatives of the
insured and of the person executing the policy, and are not liable to
be applied by any legal or equitable process to pay any debt or
liability of the insured individual or his beneficiary or of any other
person having a right under the policy , whether or not:
(i) The right to change the beneficiary is reserved or permitted . . . .
Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 26-15-129 (emphasis added). 1
In the bankruptcy court and before the BAP, debtors argued that this statute
authorized them to exempt the cash surrender value of their policies from their
bankruptcy estates. Both courts disagreed, finding that the language of the statute
unambiguously precluded such an exemption. In so doing, both courts concluded
1
The italicized portion of the statute quoted above was added by amendment
in 2001.
-4-
that the phrase “other than the insured or the person executing insurance or
executors or administrators of the insured or the person executing the insurance”
defined a class of persons ineligible for the exemption. We disagree.
Because there is no authoritative Wyoming law construing the reach of this
statute, we must endeavor to predict how the Wyoming Supreme Court would
interpret the question before us. See Johnson v. Riddle , 305 F.3d 1107, 1118
(10th Cir. 2002). 2
We agree with the BAP that this statute is unambiguous and
thus, under Wyoming law, must be construed according to its plain meaning. See
Abeyta v. State , 42 P.3d 1009, 1011 (Wyo. 2002). We must give “effect to each
word, clause, and sentence so that no part will be inoperative or superfluous.”
Id. at 1012. Mindful that Wyoming courts construe exemption statutes liberally
“so as to effect their beneficent purposes,” see Pellish Bros. v. Cooper , 38 P.2d
607, 609 (Wyo. 1934), we have sought out cases interpreting statutes similar
to that of Wyoming’s in order to determine the reach of Wyo. Stat. Ann.
§ 26-15-129.
As early as 1928 in In re Messinger , 29 F.2d 158 (2d Cir. 1928), the
Second Circuit, construing a New York statute nearly identical to the Wyoming
2
The trustee cites unpublished opinions from the bankruptcy court in
Wyoming and from the Wyoming federal district court in support of her position.
Because these opinions are not from this court, however, they do not bind us on
appeal.
-5-
statute, 3 held that a debtor could exempt the cash surrender value of a life
insurance policy from the bankruptcy estate as long as the debtor did not exercise
his power to name himself as the beneficiary. Id. at 160. The court observed that
“[t]he statute does not exempt the bankrupt if he exercises his reserved power to
change the beneficiary for his personal advantage, and, indeed, precludes an
exemption in such case by saying that ‘the beneficiary . . . other than the insured’
shall be entitled to the proceeds and avails.” Id. Thus, the Second Circuit
understood the language at issue here not to preclude the exemption outright as
the bankruptcy court and the BAP held, but to preclude it only if the debtor names
himself as the beneficiary.
We cited Messinger with approval in McConnico v. Privett (In re Privett) ,
435 F.2d 261, 263 (10th Cir. 1970). Privett involved the construction of the
Oklahoma exemption statute, which at the time provided:
3
In 1928, § 55a of the New York Insurance Law, as quoted in Messinger,
provided:
If a policy of insurance, whether heretofore or hereafter issued, is
effected by any person on his own life or on another life, in favor of
a person other than himself, . . . the lawful beneficiary or assignee
thereof, other than the insured or the person so effecting such
insurance, or his executors or administrators, shall be entitled to its
proceeds and avails against the creditors and representatives of the
insured and of the person effecting the same, whether or not the right
to change the beneficiary is reserved or permitted . . . .
Messinger , 29 F.2d at 159 (emphasis added).
-6-
When a policy of life insurance is effected by any person on
his own life or on another life in favor of some person other than
himself having an insurable interest therein, or made payable by
assignment, change of beneficiary or other means to a third person,
the lawful beneficiary thereof or such third person, other than the
person effecting the insurance or his legal representatives , shall be
entitled to its proceeds against the creditors and representatives of
the person effecting the same.
Id. at 262 (quoting Okla. Stat. tit. 36, § 3631(A) (1989)) (emphasis added). While
not quite as similar to the Wyoming statute as the New York statute construed in
Messinger , the language of the Oklahoma statute is sufficiently close to the
Wyoming statute to make our holding in Privett relevant to this analysis.
Privett held that the Oklahoma statute allowed a debtor/insured to claim an
exemption for the cash surrender value of a life insurance policy, thus rejecting
the argument made here by the trustee. After acknowledging that the Oklahoma
statute was intended to “insulate the beneficiary from the creditors of the
insured,” id. at 263, this court endorsed the Messinger approach and allowed the
exemption, with the proviso that “if the bankrupt shall at any time exercise his
power to change the beneficiary for his personal advantage, the cash surrender
value shall constitute unadministered assets of the bankrupt estate.” Id. at 264.
It is undisputed here that the debtors are not the beneficiaries of the policies
they own.
Privett was followed more recently in In re Ridgway , 108 B.R. 294, 298
(Bankr. N.D. Okla. 1989), where the court concluded that, under the Oklahoma
-7-
statute, the cash surrender value of a life insurance policy was exempt, albeit with
the same caveat declared in Privett.
In view of the foregoing, we conclude that Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 26-15-129allows a Chapter 7 debtor to exclude the cash surrender value of a life insurance
policy from the bankruptcy estate unless and until the debtor changes the
beneficiary for his personal advantage.
Our resolution of this matter makes it unnecessary to address whether the
BAP correctly concluded that a beneficiary of a life insurance policy cannot claim
an exemption under Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 26-15-129 in the cash surrender value of
a life insurance policy owned by a debtor.
The orders of the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel and the Bankruptcy Court are
REVERSED and these cases are REMANDED to the Bankruptcy Court for further
proceedings not inconsistent with this order and judgment.
Entered for the Court
Wade Brorby
Senior Circuit Judge
-8-