Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1943 )


Menu:
  •                  TEICATTORNEY               GENERAL
    OF-TEXAS
    AUSTXN II.TEXAS
    GERAID C, MANN
    ATrOxauSY GIENEHAI.
    Honorable 0. P. Lockhart.
    Chairman, Board of Insurance Commissioners
    Austin, Texas
    Dear Sir:                     Opinion No. O-5559
    Re: Would the use of the farm prdpotied
    by a statewlc% mutual astiessmeiit
    life.;health and accident'conipang,
    operating under the provisions of
    Articles 485gf and”5068-1, Vernon's~
    Annotated Civil Statutes, be in
    violation of the laws reltiting-to
    insurable interest? And another
    question.
    Your letter of August 20, 1943, requesting the
    bpinion of this department on the questtons stated therein, is
    as follows:
    "A statewide nutual'assessment life, health
    and accident company, operating under the provL-
    slons of Articles 4859f ana 5068-1, R.C,S., ha3
    submitted for the approval of this Department a
    proposed new family group policy form which con-
    tains the following wording:
    "ALL BENEFITS SHALL BE PAID AT THE DIRECTION
    OF TRE PRINCIPAL INSURED
    TO                                AT
    OR anv other funeral home. funeral director. OP
    undertaker to the extent of their interesfs'derlved
    by the furnishing of funeral merchandise and/or
    services in the burial of the insured. Any amount
    over and above that due and owing to the fun'ermel
    home, funeral director, or undertaker shall be paid
    to the principal insured.'
    "The benefits are payable in cash and will,
    in most cases be an amount in excess of $150.00.
    The so-called principal insured is, Fn fact, the
    beneficiary of the policy, as head of the family
    to be insured. If the original principal insured
    dies then another member of the family becomes the
    principal insured.
    Honorable 0. P. LOckhart, page 2          Q-5559
    "The company proposes to sell the policy
    may .or may not
    through duly licensed agents who .,.          8.
    be in some'wag identified also witn tne particu-
    lar undertaker whose name is to be inserted in
    the blank space of the provision quoted.
    "Your opinion is respectfully requested as
    follows:
    "(1) 'Would the.use of this form in the manner
    contemplated be in violation of the laws relating
    to insurable interest?
    "(2) Would the effect of the policy be such t~hat
    the statewide company would be unlawfully Invading
    the field reserve&to   burial associations, under
    .Sectlon 23 of Article 5068-11"
    The insurance company desiring to use the form or
    clause which is quoted in your letter is a statewide nnrtual
    assessment life, health and accident company, operating under
    the provisions of Articles 4859f and 5068-1, Vernon's Anno-
    tated Civil Statutes.
    Apparently the policy in which the proposed clause
    is to be inserted belonga to a class sometimes denominated in-
    dustrial insurance.
    "The purpose of this character of insurance
    seems to have for its object, not the creation of
    a fund to provide for the future support and main-
    tenance of the family or near relatives of the ln-
    sured having an insurable interest in his life, or
    to augment his estate, as oralnary life insurance
    does; but to provide a reasonable fund with which
    the insured may procure in his last sickness, which
    in many cases may be lingering in character, need-
    'ingaid and assistance by way of nursing and medical
    attention, etc. and to secure a respectable and
    decent burial." (Metrolpolitan Life Insurance Com-
    pany vs. Nelson, 
    186 S.W. 520
    .) (Court of Appeals
    of Kentucky)
    An insurance policy containing a clause similar to the
    one under consideration was approved by the Commission ofAppeals
    of Texas In the case of Scott vs. American National Insurance
    Company 
    276 S.W. 643
    .
    The quoted clause under consldeyatioiiIs what is corn-
    monlg known as facility of payment clause , that is, the benefits
    Honorable 0. P. Lockhart, page 3        Q-5559
    are paid directly to the party entitled to receive the same by
    virtue of having been designated both by the insurer and the in-
    sured as the party to receive said benefits by'vlrtue of having
    furnished certain services or undertaking certain obllgatlons of
    the prlnclpal Insured.
    With reference to the term "facility of payment clauses"
    it is stated in Texas Jurisprudence Vol. 24, page 779:
    ,.,
    "Often inserted In lnaustrlal policies are
    so-called 'facility of payment' clauses whereby
    the insurer reserves the right to pay the Pnsur-
    ante to any person selected by it as equitably en-
    titled thereto. sunder such a clause which permits
    the Insurer to pay either to the beneficiary named
    in the policy or to any other-person appearing 'to
    be equitably entitled~thereto, payment may be made
    to another than the named beneficiary, providedhe
    Is equitably entitled thereto, as, for Instance,
    where he has pald the burial expenses.." (Also see
    Couch on Insurance Vol. 2, Section 311a; Scott vs.
    American National Insurance 
    Company, supra
    ; Ameri-
    can Citizen Labor & Protective Ins. bf Texas vs.
    Wesley, 
    9 S.W. 500
    ; and Border Insurance Company
    VS. Monk, 103 s.w. (26) 825)
    We are familiar with the general rule that requires
    the beneficiary to have an insurable interest in the insured In
    ordinary life Insurance policies. (See Texas Jurisprudence Vol.
    24, page 769 and the authorities cited therein)   We a0 not
    believe"that it is necessary to pass upon the questlon whether
    or'not an insurable interest rmst exist forkit Is our opinion
    that such insurable interest does exist because under the'pollcy
    under consideration the principal insured Is the beneficiary.
    The question of insurability is not Involved insofar as the
    undertaker of the funeral home Is concerned.
    In view of the foregoing authorities it Is our opinion
    that your first question should be answered in the negative, and
    Is so answered.
    Your second question Is answered in the negative also.
    In connection with the answer to your second question It is to
    be noted that section 3 of Article 5068-1, Vernon's Annotated
    Civil Statutes merely provides that assoclatlons,'persons or
    corporations doing the business of providing burial or funeral
    benefits, where benefits are payable partly or wholly In merchan-
    dise or services not in excess of $150.00 and declared to be
    burial companies nust organize under the provisions of Chapter
    274, Acts of the 41st Legislature. Under the policy under con-
    Honorable 0. P. Lockhart, page 4        Q -5559
    sideration the insurance company proposes to pay the entire
    benefits in cash and in most instances the benefits will eirceed
    the sum of $150.00. The Insurance company does not propose to
    engage in the business of provialng burial or funeral benefits
    in any manner. The insurance company does not pay anythlng in
    merchandise'or services. The insurance company merely prdposes
    to pay In cash to the funeral home or undertaker Forcertain
    benefits rendered by the funeral home or undertaker at the di-
    rection of the principal Insured.
    Yours very truly
    ATTOFUiEYGENERAL OFTEXAS
    s/Ardell Williams
    Ardell~Wllliams
    Assistant
    AW:ff:wc
    APPROVED SEP 8, 1943
    s/Gerald C. Mann
    ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
    Approved Opinion Committee By s/%iB Chairman
    

Document Info

Docket Number: O-5559

Judges: Gerald Mann

Filed Date: 7/2/1943

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/18/2017