Evening star., 1949-11-07
New Beneficiary
Ruled Valid on
NoticetoAgency
Retirement Change
Held Legal Before
csc Receives 1t


Claims today ruled that change
of beneficiary of retirement funds
under Civil Service. Commission
regulations is. valid even though
the commission itself had not re-
ceived notice before the workers
death.
The decision held that notice
to the agency for which the man
worked was sufficient to warrant
payment to the new beneficiary.
Chief Judge Marvin Jones and
Judges Benjamin H. Littleton and
Evan Howell concurred. but
Judges Sam E. Whitaker and j.
Warren Madden dissented.
The case involved the late John
Norman Hulsart. who was en-
ployed by the General Accounting
Office from August 8. 1884. until
his death in April, 1947. Divorced
from his first wife. Mr.. Hulsart
remarked in 1910. He had two
children by the previous marriage.
Names Second Wife.
A month after the second mar
riage he designated the second
wife as beneficiary of his retire
ment fund. In 1941 he and his
wife separated.
In March, 1947, he indicated his
intention to retire by writing to
his office and asked for necessary
papers to change the beneficiary
to his estate.
In April. 1e47, the GAO per-
sonnel division complied with the
request and advised him that
when the papers were filled out,
they should be returned to the
GAO personnel division.
In the papers. Mr.. Hulsart re-
voked the previous designation OF
beneficiary. The. notice was re-
ceived by the GAO retirement unit
April IL.
Mr.. Hulsart died April IA.
The Civil Service Commission
refused to recognize the change
of beneficiary on the ground that
it had not received the notice be-
fore his death.
Son Seeks Payment.
Upon the mans death, son
by the first marriage, j. Joseph
Hulsart, as administrator of the
estate, sought payment of the re-
tirement money-about $1,000.
In it's findings the Court OF
Claims stated that ever since the
use of Form 280671, which Mr..
Hulsart used. was started in 1884
it has been the practice OF GAO
employees to transmit such forms
to the GAO for Transmission TO
the Civil Service Commission.
The court pointed out that the
commission had knowledge OF
this practice and dealt with the
retirement unit of GAO as an Off
cia. bganch of that office"
New employees, however. are di-
rected to send the form direct to
the commission. Furthermore,
the Court said. "it has. been the
general practice Of Federal en-
ployes" to transmit this form
through the agencies by which
they are employed.
Decision Quoted.
In the Hulsart case the deci-
sion said:
Even If 1t were held that the
new designation were not COM
plete, since it was not actually
recorded before the employees
death, 1t certainly should be con-
strued sas cance1ing the original
designation, which would produce
the same net result"
Judge Jones said that under
the provisions of the laws of the
District, where such estate is
pending, the widow of the de-
ceased is entitled to a portion OF
the personal property. Disbursing
of this fund by the administrator
will, of course, be subject to the
approval of the appropriate court
to which the administrator re-
ports"
Judge Madden's dissent declared:
81 think Congress would not
have been willing that these sums
on deposit, some of which will be-
come very large, should be the
object of death-bed competition
for designations. with consequent
disputes as to which one got his
designation signed last"
He termed the Civil Service
Commissions regulation mot
only not illegal, but wise"