Logourl black
From our private database of 13,000+ case briefs...

New York Life Insurance v. Dunleavy

United States Supreme Court
241 U.S. 518 (1916)


Facts

In 1907, Boggs & Buhl (Boggs) obtained a personal judgment in Pennsylvania state court against Joseph Gould’s (Gould) (defendant) daughter, Effie Gould Dunleavy (Dunleavy) (plaintiff). At the time, Dunleavy was a Pennsylvania resident so the judgment against her was valid. In 1909, the surrender value of Gould’s life insurance policy with New York Life Insurance (NYLI) (defendant) became due for $2,479.70. Dunleavy alleged that the policy had been assigned to her in 1893. In November 1909, Boggs attempted to attach the life insurance money to its judgment against Dunleavy, summoning Gould and NYLI as garnishees. Gould answered, claiming full right to the life insurance money and that there had been no assignment to Dunleavy. NYLI answered by paying the disputed money into the court to be paid out to the correct party. NYLI also sought to interplead the parties to determine the correct recipient in one proceeding. Despite being given notice of the request for interpleader, Dunleavy, who had since moved to California, did not respond. Instead, Dunleavy brought this action in California in January 1910 to recover the insurance money. In the Pennsylvania case, the court found that there was no assignment and awarded the money to Gould. Meanwhile, in this case, the district court in California awarded the money to Dunleavy and the court of appeals affirmed. Gould appealed on the grounds that the Pennsylvania case was a bar to Dunleavy’s recovery in California because the Pennsylvania court had originally had jurisdiction over her.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Holding and Reasoning (McReynolds, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 129,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 13,000 briefs, keyed to 177 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.