Summary 2009 WY 120

Summary of Decision issued September 29, 2009

Summaries are prepared by Law Librarians and are not official statements of the Wyoming Supreme Court.

Case Name: Cellers v. Adami

Citation: 2009 WY 120

Docket Number: S-08-0110; S-08-0111

Appeal from the District Court of Johnson County, the Honorable John G. Fenn, Judge.

Representing Nora Cellers: Greg L. Goddard of Goddard, Wages & Vogel, Buffalo, Wyoming.

Representing Adami: Benjamin S. Kirven and Dennis M. Kirven of Kirven & Kirven, PC, Buffalo, Wyoming.

Facts/Discussion: This review of a summary judgment involves the interpretation of a marital settlement agreement. The primary issue was whether in that agreement the former wife relinquished her right as the named beneficiary to the proceeds of an investment account maintained by her former husband, now deceased.

Adami relied on Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. Bushnell arguing that the Court should apply it to the Cellers’ marital settlement agreement and hold that Nora Cellers relinquished her expectancy interest as the beneficiary by signing that agreement which contained language that set over to Stewart Cellers the investment account as his sole and separate property. Nora Cellers relied upon Costello v. Costello and stated that Costello appeared to have softened Bushnell’s implied renunciation rule in favor of a specific disclaimer rule. The Court noted in Wadsworth that the failure to distinguish properly between present property rights in insurance policies and the expectancies of beneficiaries has created confusion in interpreting property settlement agreements incorporated in divorce decrees and made difficult the court’s task of determining to whom insurance proceeds should be paid. There the court adopted a rule that to the extent no community property rights are invaded, the named beneficiary will generally be entitled to the proceeds. The Court commented on decisions from other states and noted that one of the rules that has been adopted was that the language must be an explicit waiver or relinquishment of the beneficiary’s interest. The Court agreed with those courts that hold the language in the property settlement agreement or divorce decree must reveal a specific and explicit waiver or relinquishment of the named beneficiary’s expectancy interest.

Conclusion: The Court held that under the unambiguous language of the marital settlement agreement, the former wife did not relinquish her right as the named beneficiary to the investment account proceeds; consequently, it reversed and remanded on that issue with directions that the district court enter judgment in favor of the former wife because further proceedings would serve no useful purpose.

Reversed and remanded.

J. Golden delivered the decision.

Link: http://tinyurl.com/ycgkrz2 .

[SPECIAL NOTE: This opinion uses the "Universal Citation." It was given an "official" citation when it was issued. You should use this citation whenever you cite the opinion, with a P.3d parallel citation. Please note when you look at the opinion that all of the paragraphs are numbered. When you pinpoint cite to a quote, you should cite to this paragraph number rather than to any page number. If you need assistance in putting together a citation using the Universal Citation form, please contact the Wyoming State Law Library.]