FI L ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTHCI RCUI T FEB 23, 2011 J OHN L EY CL ERK [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE U

NITED STATE S COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 0- 10 90 7 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D.C. Dock etNo. 3 :0 7- cv -0 01 11 -J TC HARTFORD LIFE AND ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Plai nt iff , vers us DEAN D. CAIN, JR ., ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll Defen dant -Ap pe ll ee, EVERETT J. CAIN, et . al., Defen da nt s, MARY J EAN CAIN, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defen da nt -Ap pe ll an t.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co urt forth e North ern Dis tri ctof Ge or gi a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ (Feb ru ary 23 , 20 11 )Befo re CARNES, M ARCUS an d F AY, Circ ui t J ud ge s.

PER CURI AM: Mary Jea n C ai n (M ary) app eal s p ro se t he di st ric t co urt’s g ran t o f su m m ary jud gm en t i n fa vo r of

DeanCai n, J r. (Dean ) in a di ve rs it y -b as edin te rp le ad er ac ti on fil edby H art fo rdLife a ndAcci de ntIns ur an ce Co m pa ny. Mary

co nt en ds th atsh e is th e so le be ne fic ia ry

of l ife in su ran ce p ro ceed s o f he r fo rm er s po us e, DeanCai n, Sr. (Dece de nt ). I. Mary an d t he Deced en t wer e m arri edon Apri l 1 , 19 74 . Tog ethe r th ey ha d fo urch il dr en , firs t Dean, t he n B ran do n, t he n B en jim an , th enDani el
. Subs eque nt ly, ho wev er, Ma ry an d t he Deced en t wer e d iv or ced , with t he “ Fi na l Ju dg em en t an d Dec ree” en te redby a Georg iasupe rio r co urt o n M arch 22 , 19 99
. Mary was a ward edcu st od y

of the ir c hi ld ren an d c hi ldsupp ort. The ch il d s up po rt in cl ud edth e requi rem en ts th atth e Dece de ntpa y Mary $1 ,00 0 p er m on th pe r ch il d, th e Dece de ntm ai nt ai n h eal th in su ran ce thr ou gh hi s emplo y er fo r th e b en efi t o f th ei r m in orch il dr en , th e Dece de ntan d M ary sp li t the co st s o f th ei r m in or ch il dr en ’s m ed ic al bi ll s n otco ve redby ins ur an ce, an d tha t “ [th e Dece de nt ] sh al l al so m ai nt ai n l ife in su ran ce thr ou gh hi s emplo y er an d s ha ll de si gn at e Ma ry J. Ca in
as be ne fic ia ry

forso lo ng as h e is li ab le forch il d s up po rt.” Con si st en t wi thth e 2ag reem en t, the Deced en t h ada li fe i ns ur an ce p ol ic y th atna m edMary as the be ne fic ia ry . Mary was n otco nt en t wi th wait in g fo r th e Dece de ntto di e n atur al ly so t ha t sh e co ul d o bt ai n h is li fe i ns ur an ce p ro ceed s. In 20 00 , sh e, al on g wi th two of h er so ns —Br an do n a ndBen

jim an—an d h er b oyfrien d d eci de d t o k il l the Deced en t. 1 The ir s ch em e, whi ch was e xp la in edby a sta te tri al co urt i n t he ap pe al of M ary’ s bo y fri en d, was as f

ol lo ws: Ove r a fo ur -m on th pe rio d, [t he bo y fri en d], Mary JeanCai n, an d h er so ns , Bran do n a nd[Ben

jim an ] Cai n, co ns pi redto m ur de r Dean Cai n, Sr., th e ex -h us bandof M ary Je anan d fa th er o f Brand on an d [Ben jim an ]. The p lo t t o m

ur de r Mr. Ca in ori gi na te d wi th Mary Jean , th e m ot iv e b ei ng to co ll ecta $4 60 ,00 0 l ife in su ran ce p ol ic y up on th e vi ct im ’s dea th . Vario us att em pt s t o m ur de r th e v ic ti m

pro ve d
un su cces sf

ul . The co ns pi rat or s fi rs t at te m pt edto bo il to ba cco do wn to it s p oi so no us form

an d p la ce i t i n t he vi ct im ’s tea . Becaus e th e te a was un dr in kabl e, th is att em ptfai le d. Nex t, the co ns pi rat or s pu rch as eda gu n wi th th e in te ntto sh oo t o utth e v ic ti m ’s ti res an d

Dea n submitt ed a “ statement of mate rial fa cts” to the district cour t. Mary did not 1 respond to this filing. The ref ore w e ac cept De an’s “ statement of mate rial fa cts.” See N.D. Ga
. Civ. R. 56.1(B)(2) (a) (2). 3cau se a fat al wreck ; h owe ve r, th is att em ptals o fa il ed . The g ro up th en de ci de d t o p us h t he vi ct im ou t o f hi s fi sh in g b oa t, kno win g t ha t h e co ul d n otswi m . Thi s ef

fo rt wa s ab an do ne d a fte r te n d ay s b ecau se to o
m an y pe op le were p res en t. Fi na ll y , th e co ns pi rat or s d eci de d t o
m ur de r th e v ic ti m

in hi s h om e an d l at er dum p h is bo dy in t he riv er. Infurth eran ce o f th e co ns pi racy, an al um in um ba se ba ll ba t, m as k a nd gl ov es were p ur ch as ed . Agai n, t hi s p la n wen t awry . After B ran do n brut al ly beathi s fa th er wi th th e b at , he l eftth e h ou se an d a nn ou nc ed to [Ben jim an ] th atth e v ic ti m

was d ead . Upo n t he ir r eturn t o d is po se of th e b ody , th ey

fou ndth e el de r Cai n s ti ll bre athi ng . The two m en dr ag ge d t he vi ct im

ou ts id e whe re h e was lef t l y in g i n apa rk in g l ot be cau se th ey

were u nabl e to ge t h im

in to th e truc k. Th e n ex t d ay , th e vi ct im ’s vi rtu al ly nak edan d b le ed in g b od y was d is co ve red . Altho ug h Mr. Ca in su rv iv ed , he s uf fers fro m ser io us , perm an en t, an d d is ab li ng in juri es . Ten ne ss ee v . Rob ertLee Fo x, 2 00 3 WL 21 33 92 52 (Ten n. Cr im . App . June 10 , 20 03 ) (u np ub li sh ed ). Mary, fo r he r ro le in th e cri m e, was ch arg edwith a tt em pt ed 2

Robert L ee F ox , and the sc heme se t forth in that case , are part of the rec ord bec ause that 2 case was repeate dly

ref ere nced in De an’s undisputed “ statement of mate rial fa cts.”

4fir stde gr ee m ur de r an d c on sp ira cy

to co m m itfir stde gr ee m

ur de r. On Fe br

ua ry 12 , 20 02 , Mary ple d g ui lt y to th e co ns pi racy to c omm itfir stde gr ee m ur de r an d
was sen te nc edto twen ty y ears in pri so n. Fo ll owi ng th e at te m

pt edm ur de r, bu t b efo re Ma ry ’s gu il ty ple a, th e Supe rio r Co urt o f Hen ry

Co un ty “ va cat edon a pe rm an en t b as is ” th e “ Ch il d s up po rt award edto [Mary ] fro m

[th e Dece de nt ]. ” Andbe cau se Dani el was s ti ll a m in or , th e co urt awa rd edch il d s up po rt, i n the am ou ntof $ 1,0 00 pe r m on th , to hi s o ld er br ot he r Dean , who pre su m ab ly hadcu st od y of Da ni el an d was cari ng forhi m . On Ap ril 7, 2 00 2, af

te r Mary ’s chi ldsupp ort was va cat edan d s he pl ead ed gu il ty to co ns pi racy to c omm itfir stde gr ee m ur de r, th e Dece de ntrem ov edMary as th e b en efi ci ary of

hi s l ife in su ran ce p ol ic y . The Dece de ntm ad e Dean , hi s s on who
was als o t he reci pi en t o f th e ch il d s up po rt p aym en ts , th e so le be ne fic ia ry of h is li fe in su ran ce p ol ic y . The t erm s o f th e p ol ic y pe rm it te d s uc h ach an ge . Alm os t fi ve y ears lat er, o n M arch 22 , 20 07 , th e Dece de ntdi ed
. Mary , fro m

pri so n, co nt en ds th atsh e is en ti tl edto th e li fe i ns ur an ce pr oc eed s. Sh e arg ue s tha t the Deced en t co ul d n otrep la ce h er as th e b en efi ci ary be cau se th e d iv or ce d ecre e st at edth athe “ sh al l d es ig na te Mary J. Cai n a s be ne fic ia ry

forso lo ng as h e is li ab le forch il d s up po rt.” She arg ue s t ha t ev en th ou gh he r ch il d s up po rt a wardwas v acat edaft er s he co ns pi redto m ur de r th e 5Deced en t, h e was no t ab le to rem ov e h er as th e b en efi ci ary be cau se he was s ti ll

li ab le to pa y

ch il d s up po rt t o Dean. Dean di sa gr ees . He arg ue s t ha t the Deced en t
was pe rm it te d t o m ak e h im th e b en efi ci ary aft er Ma ry ’s chi ldsupp ort was va cat ed
. Bo th Mary andDeanfil edm ot io ns forsu m m ary jud gm en t. The di st ric t co urt gr an te d Dea n’s m ot io n andde ni edMary’ s m ot io n. Ma ry ap pe al ed
. II.

“ W e rev ie w a di st ric t co urt’s g ran t o f su m m ary jud gm en t d e n ov o.” Sko p v . Ci ty of Atl an ta , GA, 485 F.3d11 30 , 11 36 (11 th Cir . 20 07 ). “ Su m m ary jud gm en t is ap pr op ria te wher e th ere i s n o g enui ne is su e as to an y m at eri al factan d t he
m ov in g p arty

is en ti tl edto a jud gm en t as a m at te r of law.” Id . (qu ot at io n a nd al te rat io n o m it te d) . “ Inm ak in g t hi s d et erm in at io n, we v ie w th e ev id en ce an d a ll factua l i nf

eren ces th eref

ro m in th e li gh t m os t fa vo rab le to th e n on -m ov in g p arty , an d re so lv e al l re as on ab le do ub ts ab ou t the fact s i n fa vo r of th e n on -m ov an t.” Id
. (quo ta ti onom it te d) . Add it io na ll y , “ [w]e con st ru e p ro se p le ad in gs li be ral ly.” H&R Bl oc k Eas te rnEnt erp ris es , Inc . v. Mo rri s, 6 06 F.3d12 85 , 12 88 n.1 (11 th Ci r. 20 10 ). Geo rg ialaw al lo ws a c hi ldsupp ort awa rdto in cl ud e th e requi rem en t tha t a pa ren t o bt ai n andm ai nt ai n l ife in su ran ce. See O.C.G.A. § 19 -6 -3 4( a); Ess er v . Ess er, 2 77 S.E. 2d62 7, 6 28 (Ga. 20 03 ). Mary’ s ch il d s up po rt a wardin cl ud ed
6su ch a pr ov is io n, wh ic h s ta te d t ha t “ DeanD. Cain , Sr. sh al l al so m ai nt ai n l ife

in su ran ce thr ou gh hi s emplo y er an d s ha ll de si gn at e Ma ry J. Ca in as b en efi ci ary fo r so lo ng as h e is li ab le forch il d s up po rt.” Howev er, aft er Ma ry co ns pi redto ki ll th e Dece de ntth e supe rio r co urt “ va cat edon a pe rm an en t b as is ” th e awardof c hi ld
supp ort t o h er. The pro vi si on of t he ch il d s up po rt o rd er re qu iri ng th e Dece de ntto de si gn at e Ma ry

as t he be ne fic ia ry

was a ls o v acat ed ; i t wo ul d m ak e n o s en se to
en su re co nt in ue d p aym en ts of c hi ldsupp ort p aym en ts with ali fe i ns ur an ce p ol ic y pa y ab le to a wom anwho no lo ng er h adan y rol e in th os e p aym en ts . The refo re the re i s n o i ss ue of m at eri al factbe cau se th e Dece de ntwas pe rm it te d t o c ha ng e th e b en efi ci ary on hi s l ife in su ran ce p ol ic y fro m Mary to Dean , andth e Dece de ntdi d s o. Se e West v . Pol la rd , 43 S.E.2d50 9, 5 11 (Ga. 19 47 ). AFFIRMED.

7