ÿWPCà  dAiù ˜iéXôæ9Nö=Í«ºì™`cኹOSÅ/I\!ô¬f’M dˆqò2öÌïS äù[brEA&¨j7ªe=ý~¯¶õŸQÑ ¾ÂÇïñ #;‡ëßŠËÆЭMHl|f£í!AQ>ˆÎ9Ea`Ñh–„̾­Ž7.ßfc²pN•‰è£j!ѽögŒ0ÏckUŠéwv-¹~…ö¹Û²©iYUŸÆV¢Ów;²J¤ÕÐ;#À‹;%ϲxÖ!Û]%reÒ¯Wy»Æ›3h ûåQ1¨´UÎUW»ÚËî@´Ê©îü¢|Jº‡, Ρ!º¶C¦æq™#ÀÏH–¥µÖMÛEž 8¥¡aá7¤t³ŒÐK7˜³»§À²%¦Œ Ù$¥6@ÄqØ[üúìç»X^ &-…Œ“&){QŽþ ˜5íwiÑß%–kW­R:?×ÈÌ/_X£ýľ'ÃE"b^Kíò0Ž +¹ëw·õ«$ nY[¤ οAä¤2ìctÂ$ÅN¢þG+ÝDÕ ß€„‘ù€ž7¿b̶˴ÒúŸ%«»º5”ú ÂÞÔü»²0¯ÂìLØÇË‹¾ë°¸Ó…úç¸â™z›9i’ˆ)# >UNI %— 0(w@Å4(UN0)~U:§)áU: AQD Æ• 0D[ 0DŸ 0Dã ã D/' BV Bs D3 ˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLhÎ(ÈhH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡ E[[PVÓ€$'n~<$3|x''Ör Z ‹6Times New Roman Regular Ý ƒ!¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€ XLwXXXÔÔ€ “"X XLwÔÓ  ÓÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€ XLwX “"ÔÐ  ÐÌò òDecember€29,€1998Ð šš ÐÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€ ôœ¤ôX XLwÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular Ý ƒ!¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€ XLwXXXÔÔ€ “"X XLwÔÓ  ÓÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€ XLwX “"ÔÐ  ÐÌò òDecember€28,€1998Ð šš ÐÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€ ôœ¤ôX XLwÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular !"#%Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó'''÷ÿ dxd düÿP Pd&&&&'ÿÿdxdÝ ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýññ›ññÓ  ÓÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7€ÜâXXdðdÈ7Ñò òÔ‡ X:RXXXÔñ$ñññßr€ (<,(j 8` `€€@Eȱ` ttx$°ð Õrßñññ$ññ'ññ$ñßr€ (<,(j 8` `€€@Eȱ` ttx$°ð Õrßñ$ññ'ññ'ññ'ññ'ñññ›ñññ'ññ'ññ'ññ'ñ›ñ'ññ'ñ›ñ'ñà@ ìàIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEó óˆÐ ° Ðò òñ'ñœßt€ (>.*jx^/` `€€@E&Ë` ttx$^œN  tß›ñ'ñà@kk%ìàAT€JACKSONˆÐ œì Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ð ˆØ ÐÌóóÌERNEST€L.€ATKINS,€€€€à  à€€€€à h à€€€à À à)à  àÐ L œ Ðó óà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àò ò)ó óÐ 8 ˆ Ðà  àPlaintiff/Appellant,€€€€€€€ò òà h àà À à)à  àó óShelby€Circuit€No.€79423„4€T.D.€Ð $ t Ðò òà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)ó óà  àà p àÐ  d Ðò òv.à  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)à  à€Ð  P  Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)à  àÐ ì <  ÐSECURITY€CONNECTICUT€à h à€à À à)à  àó óAppeal€No.€02A01„9710„CV„00257ò òÐ Ø(  ÐLIFE€INSURANCE€CO.,à  àà h àà À à)Ð È  Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)Ìà  àó óDefendant/Appellee.ò òà  àà h àà À à)Ð  ð  ЀÌÌà@  ìàó óAPPEAL€FROM€THE€CIRCUIT€COURT€OF€SHELBY€COUNTY€€€ˆÐ h¸ Ðà@óóìàAT€MEMPHIS,€TENNESSEE€€ˆÌÌÌà@” ” ìàTHE€HONORABLE€JAMES€E.€SWEARENGEN€,€JUDGEˆÌòòÌÌÌFor€the€Plaintiff/Appellantóó:òòà  àà h àà À àFor€the€Defendant/Appelleeóó:òòÐ È ÐóóÌEdwin€C.€Lenow€€€€€à ¸ àà  àà h àà À àS.€Russell€Headrick€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ð  ð ÐMemphis,€Tennessee€€€à  àà h à€€€€€€€€€€€€Jennifer€ZiegenhornÐ ŒÜ Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àMemphis,€Tennessee€€€€€€€€€€€€Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÌÌÌò òÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àAFFIRMEDÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àó óHOLLY€KIRBY€LILLARD,€J.Ð Ø&("% ÐÌÌÌCONCURS:ÌòòÌóóDAVID€R.€FARMER,€J.Ð `,°'+ ÐÌÌHEWITT€P.€TOMLIN,€JR.,€SR.J.ÌÔ#†XÜâXX X:RÀ#ÔÐ  0`+/ ÐØØÓÓÑ7€ÜâXXdðXXdð7Ñà@55'ìàò òOPINIONó óˆÐ ° Ðà  àThis€case€involves€a€claim€for€breach€of€a€life€insurance€contract.€€The€proceeds€of€the€lifeÏinsurance€policy€were€distributed€while€the€beneficiary€was€in€prison,€and€in€the€lawsuit€theÏbeneficiary€claimed€he€did€not€receive€them.€€The€trial€court€granted€summary€judgment€to€theÏdefendant€insurance€company.€€We€affirm.€€Ìà  àOn€approximately€November€11,€1985,€Ernest€L.€Atkins€(Father)€purchased€a€$15,000€termÏlife€insurance€policy€from€Security„Connecticut€Life€Insurance€Co.€(Security).€€Father€named€hisÏson,€Ernest€L.€Atkins,€(ð ðAtkinsðð)€as€a€contingent€beneficiary€under€the€policy.€€The€policy€indicatedÏthat€Father€lived€at€1569€Shadowlawn,€Memphis,€Tennessee€38106.€€Ìà  àOn€October€11,€1991,€Father€died.€€Security€received€two€claim€documents€after€FatherððsÏdeath.€€One€document€was€a€notice€of€social€security€number€(Notice),€dated€December€20,€1991€andÏexecuted€by€ð ðErnest€L.€Atkins,€1569€Shadowlawn€Boulevard.ðð€A€Claimantððs€affidavit€was€alsoÏsubmitted.€€This€document€was€likewise€executed€by€ð ðErnest€L.€Atkins,€1569€ShadowlawnÏBoulevard,ðð€and€notarized€and€dated€January€24,€1992.€€Securityððs€claims€department€noticedÏnothing€unusual€about€these€two€documents.€€Ìà  àAfter€receiving€the€claim€documents,€Security€notified€the€claimant,€ð ðErnest€L.€Atkins,€1569ÏShadowlawn€Boulevard,ðð€by€letter€that€his€claim€for€life€insurance€benefits€had€been€approved.€ÏSecurity€then€placed€the€policy€proceeds€and€interest,€$13,627.59,€€in€a€personal€security€account€atÏState€Street€Bank€and€Trust€Company€in€Boston,€Massachusetts.€€Two€checks€were€executed€on€theÏaccount€in€the€following€amounts:Ìà8  à1.à ` à$9,000.00€to€Debra€Atkins€dated€February€19,€1992,€and€Ð0*€%(Ð Ð  Ðà8  à2.à ` à$4,627.59€to€Debra€Atkins€dated€February€20,€1992.Ð,`'*Ð Ð  Ðà  àAt€the€time€of€his€Fatherððs€death€in€1991,€Atkins€was€incarcerated€in€the€Shelby€CountyÏCorrectional€Center.€€After€his€release€in€1994,€Atkins€applied€for€food€stamps€and€was€rejectedÏbecause€the€office€records€reflected€that€he€had€received€$13,627.59€in€income€in€1992.€€The€foodÏstamp€office€gave€Atkins€the€name€of€the€insurance€company€and€the€policy€number€from€the€IRSÏform€filed€by€Security.€€Ìà  àAtkins€then€contacted€Security€in€November€1994,€asserting€that€he€did€not€receive€theÏinsurance€policy€proceeds.€€Atkins€also€told€Security€that€he€was€incarcerated€at€the€time€of€hisÐ 09€48 Ðfatherððs€death.€€In€his€affidavit€Atkins€stated€he€had€no€contact€with€Security€during€this€time.€€AtkinsÏmaintained€that€he€did€not€authorize€anyone€to€receive€the€proceeds,€and€that€he€did€not€execute€theÏclaim€documents€used€to€recover€the€policy€proceeds.€€Security€refused€to€pay€the€policy€proceedsÏto€Atkins.€€Atkins€then€filed€this€lawsuit.€€Ìà  àSecurity€filed€a€motion€for€summary€judgment,€submitting€in€support€of€the€motion€anÏaffidavit€from€the€supervisor€of€the€claims€department€at€Security„Connecticut,€Lois€Mountzoures.ÏMountzouresðð€affidavit€recounts€the€steps€taken€by€Security€in€delivering€the€proceeds€to€theÏbeneficiary.€€Mountzoures€avers€that,€at€the€time€benefits€were€paid,€the€claim€documents€receivedÏappeared€to€have€been€properly€executed.€€She€asserts€that€Security€was€not€put€on€notice€of€theÏalleged€fraud€until€after€Atkins€contacted€Security€in€November€1994€and€April€1995.€€In€response,ÏAtkins€maintained€that€there€were€genuine€issues€of€material€fact,€since€he€as€the€proper€beneficiaryÏdid€not€receive€the€proceeds€of€the€policy.€€€€Ìà  àThe€trial€court€granted€Securityððs€motion€for€summary€judgment,€without€elaborating€on€itsÏreasoning.€€From€this€order,€Atkins€now€appeals.€€Ìà  àOn€appeal,€Atkins€claimed€that€summary€judgment€was€not€appropriate€in€this€case,€becauseÏthere€were€disputed€factual€issues€in€this€case,€and€Securityððs€payment€to€an€imposter€did€notÏextinguish€the€debt€owed€to€him.€Ìœññà  àWe€review€this€case€òòò òde€novoó óóó,€with€a€presumption€of€correctness€of€the€trial€courtððs€findingsÐ $à" Ðof€fact.€€€Tenn.›€R.›€App.›€P.›€13(d).›€ññ›œññ€ññññà  àññSummary›€judgment€is€appropriate€where€there€is€no€genuine€issue€of€material€fact€and€theÏmoving€party€is€entitled€to€judgment€as€a€matter€of€law.€€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€Rule€56.03;€òòò òByrd€v.€Halló óóó,Ð p&À!$ Ð847€S.W.2d€208,€214€(Tenn.€1993).€€ð ð[T]he€issues€that€lie€at€the€heart€of€evaluating€a€summaryÏjudgment€motion€are:€€(1)€whether€a€factual€dispute€exists;€€(2)€whether€the€disputed€fact€is€materialÏto€the€outcome€of€the€case;€€and€(3)€whether€the€disputed€fact€creates€a€genuine€issue€for€trial.ððòòò ò€Byrdó óóó,Ð ,`'* Ð847€S.W.2d€at€214.€€Even€where€disputed€facts€exist,€summary€judgment€is€appropriate€so€long€asÏthose€facts€do€not€materially€bear€on€the€legal€elements€of€the€claim€or€defenses.€ò òòòWalker€v.€FirstÐ Ð/ +. ÐState€Bankóóó ó,€849€S.W.2d€337,€340€(Tenn.€App.€1992).Ð °1-0 Ðà  àIn€this€case,€Atkins€asserts€that€he€was€the€proper€beneficiary€of€the€life€insurance€policy,€andÏthat€he€did€not€receive€the€proceeds.€€Security€responds€by€asserting€that€there€was€nothing€in€theÏœclaim›€documents€that€would€have€indicated€to€Security€that€the€documents€were€forged€or€were€œññÐ  P7 26 Ðññotherwise›€improper.€€The€record€contains€no€evidence€from€Atkins€of€anything€in€the€œclaim›Ïdocuments€that€might€have€put€Security€on€notice€that€the€documents€were€forged€or€irregular.ÏAtkinsðð€response€to€Securityððs€summary€judgment€motion€is€to€reassert€that€the€proceeds€must€haveÏbeen€paid€to€an€imposter€because€he€did€not€execute€the€œclaim›€documents€and€did€not€receive€theÏproceeds.€€Thus,€the€issue€in€this€case€is€whether€an€insurance€companyððs€payment€of€proceeds€toÏsomeone€other€than€the€named€beneficiary,€without€evidence€of€impropriety€in€the€œclaim›€documentsÏthat€would€have€placed€the€insurer€on€notice,€is€sufficient€to€support€the€beneficiaryððs€claim€againstÏthe€insurer€for€breach€of€contract.Ìà  àWe€found€no€published€Tennessee€decisions€on€this€issue.€However,€courts€in€other€statesÏthat€have€considered€this€issue€have€adopted€the€principle€that€ð ðan€insurer€is€discharged€from€allÏsubsequent€liability€when€it€makes€good€faith€payments€to€a€purported€beneficiary€without€noticeÏof€any€competing€claims.ðð€ò òòòCrosby€v.€Crosbyóóó ó,€986€F.2d€79,€83€(4th€Cir.€1993);€ò òòòsee€also€Rogers€v.Ð P  ÐUnionmutual€Stock€Life€Ins.€Co.ó óóó,€782€F.2d€1214€(4th€Cir.€1986);òòò ò€Weed€v.€Equitable€LifeÐ 0€ ÐAssurance€Soc.ó óóó,€288€F.2d€463€(5th€Cir.€1961);€ò òòòHarper€v.€Prudential€Ins.€Co.€of€Americaóóó ó,€662€P.2dÐ ` Ð1264,€1273€(Kan.€1983).€€A€payment€of€proceeds€to€a€beneficiary€in€good€faith€ð ðwithout€knowledgeÏof€facts€vitiating€the€claim€will€prevent€a€second€recovery€by€another€claimant.ðð€€òòò òWeedó óóó,€288€F.2d€atÐ Ð  Ð464.€€An€insurer€is€required€to€investigate€a€claim€when€the€company€is€aware€of€suspiciousÏcircumstances.€€ò òòòSee€In€re€Estate€of€Thompsonóóó ó,€426€N.E.2d€1€(Ill.€App.€1981).Ð $à" Ðà  àIn€òòò òEstate€of€Thompsonó óóó,€the€insurance€company€paid€life€insurance€proceeds€to€the€namedÐ p&À!$ Ðbeneficiary€who€later€confessed€that€she€had€been€involved€in€the€insuredððs€murder,€thus€precludingÏher€from€receiving€any€of€the€proceeds.€€ò òòòIn€re€Estate€of€Thompsonó óóó,€426€N.E.2d€at€2.€€The€insuredððsÐ 0*€%( Ðestate€argued€that€the€insurance€company€acted€in€bad€faith€because€the€insurance€company€allegedlyÏacted€with€notice€of€facts€that€would€defeat€the€beneficiaryððs€claim€and€acted€without€sufficientÏinvestigation.€€òòò òId.ó óóó€€In€affirming€the€trial€courtððs€granting€summary€judgment€in€favor€of€the€insuranceÐ Ð/ +. Ðcompany,€the€court€described€the€standard€for€a€good€faith€and€sufficient€œinvestigationññòòññññò òññññ›ñññññ ñ€ñ ñññññ:ññññò òññññòòñññññ ñó óò òñ ñññññó óññññññóóòòññññññò òññ›€Ð °1-0 ÐÒ°ÒÒ°ÒÓÓóóó óWe€agree€that€the€obligation€of€good€faithò òòò€óóó ómight€require€reasonably€prudent€pre„Ð 3à.2 Ðpayment€investigation€when€an€insurer€is€aware€of€suspicious€circumstancesÏconcerning€a€beneficiary€and€the€death€of€an€insured.€€However,€we€conclude€that€thisÏcomponent€of€the€obligation€of€good€faith€is€not€violated€unless€[a]€reasonablyÏprudent€investigation€would€have€uncovered€facts€which€would€have€defeated€theÏbeneficiaryððs€claim.ÌÌÒ°ÒÒ°ÒÓÓòòò òId.€óóó óat€3.Ð  :p59 Ðà  àIn€this€case,€the€record€contains€no€evidence€suggesting€that€Security€had€reason€to€suspectÏthat€the€claim€documents€were€forgeries.€€The€documents€were€properly€signed€and€notarized,€andÏthe€social€security€numbers€and€addresses€were€correct€on€the€forms.€€Therefore,€there€is€no€evidenceÏof€suspicious€circumstances€that€would€have€triggered€a€duty€by€Security€to€investigate€further.€ÏThus,€the€good€faith€payment€to€ð ðErnest€L.€Atkinsðð€discharged€Securityððs€liability€to€Atkins,€and€theÏtrial€courtððs€grant€of€summary€judgment€to€Security€was€appropriate.€€Ìà  àThe€decision€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.€€Costs€are€assessed€against€the€Appellant,€forÏwhich€execution€may€issue,€if€necessary.€€€€€ÌÌÓÓÔ‡ XzZXXXÜŸÔà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ð à Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àò òóóHOLLY€KIRBY€LILLARD,€J.Ð |Ì Ðó óà  àò òÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÐ h ÐDAVID€R.€FARMER,€J.ó óÐ T ÐÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ð È Ðóóò òHEWITT€P.€TOMLIN,€JR.,€SR.J.ó óÔ#†XÜŸXX XzZ21#Ô