United States v. Rhode Island Hospital Trust Co.
United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
355 F.2d 7 (1966)
- Written by Daniel Clark, JD
Facts
Charles Horton took out an insurance policy on the life of his son. The beneficiaries were originally Horton and his wife. Horton kept the policy in a safe-deposit box that only he had access to and paid all premiums on the policy. Horton, his son, and all other members of the family considered and believed that the policy was fully owned by Horton and that it could not be altered unless Horton desired it to be. The legal right to alter the beneficiary or otherwise amend the policy, however, was possessed by Horton’s son. When Horton’s wife died, Horton removed the policy from his safe-deposit box and had his son amend the policy. At his father’s behest, the son removed Horton’s wife as a beneficiary and made Horton alone the primary beneficiary, with the son’s other family members as successive beneficiaries. The legal right to make further amendments remained with the son, although all the members of the Horton family believed and intended that any practical power to make amendments was to be held solely by Horton. The son died. The executors of the son’s estate (plaintiffs) did not include the amount paid to Horton in the gross estate. The government (defendant) argued that the amount must be included. The district court ruled in favor of the executors, and the government appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Coffin, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.
