The Designation of the Beneficiary

Judging from the unusually large number of court decisions which relate to this subject, it is apparent that the beneficiary often is designated carelessly in a life-insurance policy, and that because of such carelessness the real intention of the insured might upon his death be difficult to determine and might, therefore, possibly be defeated. It is the general rule of the courts, if at all possible, so to construe the language used in designating the beneficiary as to enforce the intentions of the parties thereto. But in doing this the courts cannot set aside the language expressly used if the same is not ambiguous.

Numerous illustrations may be cited as indicating the necessity of care in describing the beneficiary. Thus, where the policy is payable to the insured's "children", the term includes those by a former wife but not his wife's children by a former husband. A policy payable "to the wife and upon her death before the insured to "their children", does not give an interest to a child by a marriage contracted by the insured after his first wife's death. Adopted children are included in the term "children" and the term "dependents" is limited strictly to those actually dependent for support upon the insured. Again the term "relatives" has been held to "include those by marriage as well as by blood, but not an illegitimate child"; while the term "heirs" refers to "those who take under the statute of descent and distribution".