Ukrainian Law Blog
Freedom means the supremacy of human rights everywhere
(Move to ...)
Home
Ads Kit
▼
Topics
(Move to ...)
Home
Artificial Intelligence
BB: bitcoin, blockchain
Business Law
Crowdfunding
Cybersecurity
Design Blog
Doing errands in Ukraine
Employment law
EU's Apple tax case
Intellectual Property
IoT - The Internet Of Things
Jenny Holt
KNEU’s Lawyers: Alternative Legal Service Provider...
Legal business/Legal tech
Lucy Adams: essay writing
MH17
Remote Working
Startups
Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership
Vic Eugene Nicholson ♫♪♫
Rzeczpospolita Polska
Ukraine. Returning own history / Украина. Возвращение своей истории
Ukrainian Art
Алексей Арестович
Commercial representation
Running Errands in Ukraine
Free Legal Advice
About me
▼
Tuesday, March 20, 2018
Argument analysis: Legal questions, practical concerns at play in post-divorce life insurance case
When Mark Sveen died in 2011, his life insurance policy still named his ex-wife, Kaye Melin, as the beneficiary – even though the couple had divorced four years before. Nothing in the Minnesota couple’s divorce settlement (which divided up, among other things, the all-terrain-vehicle and the snowmobile) addressed the fate of Mark’s insurance policy, and there was no other evidence – other than a statement from Kaye herself – of what Mark wanted to do about the policy. Under a state law passed in 2002, which provides that a divorce automatically nullifies the designation of a former spouse as the beneficiary of a life-insurance policy, the proceeds from the policy would go to Mark’s adult children, Ashley and Antone.
No comments:
Post a Comment
‹
›
Home
View web version
No comments:
Post a Comment