Caplin v. Penn Mutual Life Insurance

Headnote

Insurance—assignment of policies — application by assignee for loan — necessity of consent of beneficiaries named in policy — specific performance.

Caplin v. Penn Mut. Life Ins. Co., 182 App. Div. 269 , affirmed.

Appeal from a judgment entered July 8, 1918, upon an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, reversing a judgment in favor of defendant, appellant, entered upon a dismissal of the complaint by the court on trial at Special Term and directing judgment in favor of plaintiff. The action was to compel specific performance of provisions of two policies of life insurance providing for loans by the company upon security of said policies. Plaintiff held the policies by assignment from the insured. The latter had, at the time of taking out the policies, designated the beneficiaries and had not reserved the right to change them. Plaintiff contended that he, as assignee of the insured, was entitled to borrow from the insurance company the full loan value of the policies for his own benefit. The insurance company contended that an assignment of the

policy, as security, by the plaintiff alone could not affect the rights of the beneficiaries and unless all the persons interested in the policy joined in the assignment the company was not obligated to make the loan.