Court Opinion

ID: 9865915
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-25 23:45:33.716502+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:08:03.382348
License: Public Domain

On the Merits.
The right of plaintiff to collect this death benefit must stand or fall on her claim as a beneficiary as fixed by the rules adopted under, which the plan operated, and the situation as it existed at the time of the employee’s death. These rules constitute the contract by which the plaintiff’s rights against the company must be determined. If the plaintiff shows that she comes within the category of beneficiaries provided for death claimants in that part of the rules, undoubtedly she has a right to recover. From these rules it is obvious that she must meet the following conditions: (1) It must appear that the deceased employee did not prior to his death request the company to exclude her from the death benefit with the written approval of the company; (2) that she is the lawful widow of the deceased; (3) that she was living with or dependent upon the deceased for support at the time of his death to the extent of at least 20 per cent, of the amount which he was receiving.
On the first point, it is to be noted that there is no allegation in the petition that the deceased had not excluded plaintiff from the death benefit with the written approval- of the company. However, if such was the case, that was a matter of defense to be set up by the company, as this fact, if such was the fact, was peculiarly within the knowledge of the company which had control of the operation of the plan and had possession of whatever written documents were necessary to make this condition applicable and effective. But the company has not set up any such plea, nor has it anywhere in the pleadings alleged that the deceased excluded his wife with its written approval, and substituted the son of the deceased, or any one else, in her place.
*240On the trial of the case, defendant offered in evidence a statement signed by the deceased with reference to his marital status and dependents for the information of the company in determining the matter of continuing the pension payments, one of these statements having been made only a month or so prior to. the death of the deceased. On objection, the statements were excluded. It is contended by the defendant that these statements signed by the deceased are admissible for two purposes : First, to show by the statement of the deceased himself that he was not living with plaintiff and was not contributing to her support; and, second, to show that the deceased had excluded plaintiff from the death benefit.
These statements were admissible to show what the deceased said in these statements as to his status and his dependents, not as conclusive proof justifying the payment to some one else, but merely to be given such weight in determining the question of dependency and marital status as the circumstances might justify. The deceased was then receiving benefits and as one of the parties to the benefit plan, his written statement was relevant in fixing the status of the parties.
Of course, if these statements contained a request to the company to exclude plaintiff from the death benefit and substitute another in her place, such a request would be relevant as a defense. But, as already stated, no such a defense is set up and from the nature of the defense made it does not appear that the company intended to show that plaintiff had been excluded by the deceased with its written approval, as the officers of the company admit that plaintiff would be entitled to the benefits if she could show that she was living with her husband or was dependent on him for support to the extent of at least 20 per cent, of his pay.
We are therefore of the opinion that the admission of the written statements of the deceased is of sufficient importance in showing his status with his wife and her. dependency to justify remanding the case for the purpose of admitting these statements in evidence with the right of plaintiff to offer such rebuttal testimony in connection with said statements as may be legal and proper.
For these reasons assigned, it is ordered that the judgment appealed from be and the same is hereby reversed and set aside, and the case is hereby remanded for the purpose therein stated, all costs to await the final termination of the case.