## Facts

- Jon Holloway bought a $100,000 life-insurance policy from Minnesota Life Insurance Company and named his sister, Joetta Hearing, as beneficiary.
- A divorce decree required Jon to maintain life insurance payable to his children until his child-support obligations ended; those obligations ended no later than 2008.
- The policy required any beneficiary change to be made by a signed, written request submitted to the insurer before the insured’s death.
- Jon died in 2013; a handwritten note dated September 18, 2012, addressed to his daughter Nikole “Nikki” Holloway, was found on or near his body.
- The note expressed affection, gave general directions about distributing or selling property, and listed the policy number and the insurance agent’s name and phone number.
- Nikki submitted the note to Minnesota Life after Jon’s death and claimed the policy proceeds; Hearing also submitted a claim.
- Minnesota Life interpleaded the proceeds, deposited the funds with the court, and was dismissed, leaving Hearing and Holloway to litigate entitlement.

## Issues

1. Whether a handwritten note to the decedent’s daughter, referencing the policy number and agent, effected a change of beneficiary under the policy’s change procedure.
2. Whether the note constituted “substantial compliance” under Nebraska law, permitting an equitable change of beneficiary despite failure to follow policy formalities.

## Decision

- The Eighth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for Hearing.
- The court held that Jon did not change the policy beneficiary from Hearing to Holloway.
- The handwritten note did not satisfy the policy’s requirement of a signed, written request submitted to the insurer before death.
- Nebraska’s substantial-compliance doctrine did not apply because Jon took no affirmative steps directed toward Minnesota Life to carry out the policy’s change procedure.

## Legal Principles

- When a life-insurance policy specifies a method for changing beneficiaries, an insured must comply with that method or meet the state’s substantial-compliance standard to obtain an equitable change.
- Under Nebraska substantial-compliance doctrine, intent alone does not change a beneficiary; the insured must do everything reasonably possible under the circumstances to effect the change, leaving at most a ministerial act.
- A private writing directed to a would-be recipient, not communicated to the insurer and not purporting to request a beneficiary change, is insufficient to show substantial compliance.

## Conclusion

Because Jon never submitted any written change request to Minnesota Life and took no steps approximating the policy’s procedure, the handwritten note could not effect a beneficiary change under the policy or Nebraska’s substantial-compliance doctrine, so the proceeds were awarded to the originally named beneficiary, Joetta Hearing.


Hearing v. Minn. Life Ins. Co., 793 F.3d 888 (8th Cir. 2015)