Our Georgia interpleader lawyers handle all life insurance interpleader cases and beneficiary disputes.
A life insurance interpleader case is a legal action that occurs when there are conflicting claims to the proceeds of a life insurance policy. The insurance company files an interpleader complaint with the court and deposits the policy proceeds with the court, asking the court to decide who is entitled to receive the money. The insurance company then names all the potential beneficiaries as defendants in the suit and is usually discharged from further liability.
Georgia has a 10-day free look period for life insurance policies, which means that the policyholder can cancel the policy within 10 days of receiving it and get a full refund of any premiums paid. This is shorter than the typical 14-day free look period in Florida.
Georgia requires life insurance companies to pay interest on the death benefit from the date of death, not from the date they receive the proof of death. This can increase the amount of money that the beneficiaries receive, especially if there is a delay in processing the claim.
Georgia has a stranger-owned life insurance (STOLI) law that prohibits anyone from taking out a life insurance policy on someone else’s life without their consent or insurable interest4. This is intended to prevent fraud and abuse by third parties who may profit from the death of an insured person.
Georgia has a divorce revocation law that automatically revokes any designation of a former spouse as a beneficiary of a life insurance policy upon divorce, unless the policyholder expressly states otherwise4. This is meant to protect the policyholder’s assets from going to the wrong person in case they forget to update their beneficiary information after divorce. However, this law does not apply to employer-provided life insurance policies, which are governed by federal law.
A life insurance interpleader in Georgia is a legal action that an insurance company may take when there are conflicting or competing claims to the death benefit of a life insurance policy. The insurance company may file an interpleader lawsuit in a court of law and ask the court to decide who is entitled to receive the policy proceeds. The insurance company may also deposit the policy proceeds with the court and name all the potential claimants as defendants in the lawsuit. This way, the insurance company can avoid paying the wrong person or being sued by multiple parties for the same policy.
Protective Life Insurance interpleader Georgia:This case involved a dispute between the beneficiaries of a life insurance policy issued by Protective Life to William Krueger, who died on October 10, 2022. The policy named Ashely Krueger, his daughter, as the primary beneficiary and Susan Ann Ambo and Christine Elizabeth Kingsley, his sisters, as the contingent beneficiaries. However, Ashely Krueger claimed that her father had intended to change the beneficiary designation to her only before his death, but was prevented by Protective Life’s negligence and breach of contract. Protective Life filed an interpleader action to deposit the policy proceeds of $307,000 with the court and seek a determination of the rightful beneficiaries. The case is still pending as of September 26, 2023.
Prudential Life interpleader Georgia: This case involved a dispute between the widow and the parents of a veteran who was accidentally killed in a car crash over his Veterans’ Group Life Insurance (VGLI) policy. The policy named Roxanne West, the widow, as the primary beneficiary and Robert and Sandra West, the parents, as the contingent beneficiaries. However, the parents claimed that their son had intended to change the beneficiary designation to them before his death, but was prevented by Prudential’s negligence and breach of contract. Prudential filed an interpleader action to deposit the policy proceeds of $307,000 with the court and seek a determination of the rightful beneficiaries. The court granted Prudential’s motion for final judgment order in interpleader on February 26, 2021 and dismissed it from the case with prejudice. The court also granted Roxanne West’s motion for summary judgment on March 31, 2021 and awarded her the policy proceeds plus interest.
Metropolitan Life interpleader Georgia: This case involved a dispute between the beneficiaries of a life insurance policy issued by Metropolitan Life to Robert Jones, who died on July 15, 2018. The policy named Robert Jones Jr., his son, as the sole primary beneficiary until June 2018, when Jones allegedly changed the beneficiary designation to Lisa Jones, his ex-wife. However, Robert Jones Jr. contested the validity of the change and claimed that his father’s signature was forged or coerced by Lisa Jones. Metropolitan Life filed an interpleader action to deposit the policy proceeds of $50,000 with the court and seek a determination of the rightful beneficiaries. The court granted Metropolitan Life’s motion for final judgment order in interpleader on November 13, 2018 and dismissed it from the case with prejudice.
A Georgia Interpleader Case Background:
Mr. Anderson, a successful business owner, held a substantial life insurance policy with Life Insurance Company such as The Hartford Life, Penn Mutual Life or Transamerica Life. Unfortunately, he passed away unexpectedly. The life insurance policy listed two potential beneficiaries: his sister, Lisa, and his business partner, Alex.
Beneficiary Dispute:
Both Lisa and Alex claimed to be the rightful beneficiary of the life insurance proceeds. Lisa argued that Mr. Anderson had verbally expressed his intention to make her the sole beneficiary, while Alex insisted that they had a written agreement that entitled him to the proceeds as a key person in the business.
Interpleader Claim Initiation:
In light of the conflicting claims, Life Insurance Company decided to file a life insurance interpleader claim in the appropriate court. They deposited the policy proceeds with the court and submitted the necessary documentation, naming Lisa and Alex as defendants in the interpleader action.
Court Proceedings:
The court would then summon Lisa and Alex to present their cases. Lisa would have the opportunity to provide any evidence supporting her claim, such as witness statements or any documentation suggesting Mr. Anderson’s verbal intent. On the other hand, Alex would present the written agreement and argue that it supersedes any verbal communication.
Resolution:
The court, in its role as a neutral party, would evaluate the evidence presented by both parties. The goal is to determine the rightful beneficiary of the life insurance proceeds. If the court cannot definitively decide, the funds deposited by Life Insurance Company would be distributed equitably or as determined by the court.
Conclusion:
Life insurance interpleader claims are essential in cases of beneficiary disputes, ensuring a fair and impartial resolution while protecting the insurance company from potential legal repercussions. This hypothetical scenario illustrates the complexity and importance of such interpleader claims in navigating beneficiary conflicts.