165 So. 240 | Ala. | 1935
Lead Opinion
The bill is for interpleader.
Appellant's motion to dismiss the petition and demurrers were overruled. These rulings are the insistences of error.
The bill alleges that the policy of insurance in question was originally payable to the wife of the insured, and after the death of that beneficiary was changed to appellant; that Flossie M. Moore has given defendant appellee notice that she is claiming the proceeds of the policy; that the naming of appellant as beneficiary was procured by fraud; that she, by agreement with assured (he being unable), paid the premiums on the policy and claims an interest in and lien on the moneys paid by complainant into the registry of the court; that is to say, the bill makes a case of a bona fide claim of right and ownership to and in the moneys paid into court in discharge of assurer's liability on the policy, and prays a right distribution of that fund to the rightful owner. The law of such a case is well stated in Commonwealth Ins. Co. of New York v. Terry et al.,
There was no error to reverse in the rulings of the trial court.
Affirmed.
BOULDIN, BROWN, and KNIGHT, JJ., concur.
Addendum
This is a statutory action in the nature of a bill of interpleader. Such action was authorized or introduced by section 10390 of the Code of 1923, and extends the office of such action beyond that of interpleader in equity existing prior to the statute, in that it opens the door of a court of equity to a claimant of the money or fund, as well as to the person having its possession, who has no claim thereto. Phillips v. Sipsey Coal Mining Co.,
The application for rehearing is denied.
BOULDIN, BROWN, and KNIGHT, JJ., concur. *442
