(a) The beneficiary of any life insurance policy, being a person other than the insured, whether named as beneficiary in the original policy or subsequently named as beneficiary in accordance with the terms of the policy, shall be entitled to the proceeds of the policy as against the representatives or creditors of the insured, unless the policy was procured or the designation of a beneficiary was made with intent, express or implied, to defraud creditors.
(b) If any such policy was procured or any such designation made with the intent, express or implied, to defraud creditors, the proceeds thereof shall become a part of the estate of the insured, and the executor or administrator of the estate shall collect the insurance and use the proceeds thereof so far as it is required for the expenses of administration and the payment of debts and pay over the balance, if any, to the beneficiary of the policy. If any premiums paid on the insurance policy were paid with the intent, express or implied, to defraud creditors, the amount of the premiums so paid, with interest thereon, shall become a part of the estate and shall be dealt with as above provided.
(c) The company issuing the policy shall be discharged of all liability thereunder by payment of the proceeds in accordance with the terms of the policy unless, before such payment, the company has received written notice, from a creditor, executor or administrator of the insured, that the policy was procured or premiums were paid thereon with intent to defraud creditors. That notice may be disregarded by the company unless proper legal proceedings to enforce the claim are begun within three months from the giving of the notice.
(d) This section shall apply to any policy of insurance issued before July 1, 1933, but not to policies which matured by the death of the insured before July 1, 1933.
(1949 Rev., S. 6150; P.A. 90-243, S. 65.)
History: P.A. 90-243 divided the section into Subsecs. and made technical changes for statutory consistency; Sec. 38-161 transferred to Sec. 38a-453 in 1991.
Annotations to former section 38-161:
Where husband assigned insurance on his life as security for bank loan, joinder by wife in assignment did not defeat her right as beneficiary to excess of proceeds above debt to bank. 120 C. 306.
Cited. 39 CS 470.
Annotation to present section:
Cited. 229 C. 459.
Notes of Decisions
Bigley v. Pac. Stand. Life Ins., 642 A.2d 4 (Conn. 1994).
· cites it 9× “ations and asserted four special defenses, namely that: (1) the action should be stayed in light of an order of the Superior Court for the state of California enjoining all actions against the defendant; 4 (2) the defendant had been discharged from liability by virtue of its…”
O'Neil, Jr. v. Roncari, No. 20-02001 (Bankr. D. Conn. June 24, 2020).
· cites it 57× “Thereafter, so as to properly frame the issues before the Court, the Trustee filed an Amended Motion to Amend Complaint, wherein he seeks a declaratory judgment that the Defendants are not entitled to exempt the cash surrender value of the Policy under Conn. Gen. Stat. §…”
David Roncari, No. 19-21009 (Bankr. D. Conn. June 24, 2020).
· cites it 57× “Thereafter, so as to properly frame the issues before the Court, the Trustee filed an Amended Motion to Amend Complaint, wherein he seeks a declaratory judgment that the Defendants are not entitled to exempt the cash surrender value of the Policy under Conn. Gen. Stat. §…”
Hubert Wiggs, No. 18-21473 (Bankr. D. Conn. Nov. 13, 2019).
· cites it 30× “The Trustee raises two objections: (1) the claimed exemption is improper because Conn. Gen. Stat. §§ 38a-453 and 38a-454 operate to protect the Policy’s beneficiary and not the insured; and, (2) the amended exemption is prejudicial to the administration of the bankruptcy estate.”
United States Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Ahmed, No. 3:15-cv-00675 (D. Conn. Dec. 2, 2022).
“(Liquidation Order at 21.) Thus, Defendant is both the insured and the beneficiary of the policy, and the policy is available to satisfy the judgment.”
Conn. Gen. Stat. § 38a-453(a): 2 cases
O'Neil, Jr. v. Roncari, No. 20-02001 (Bankr. D. Conn. June 24, 2020).
“Thereafter, so as to properly frame the issues before the Court, the Trustee filed an Amended Motion to Amend Complaint, wherein he seeks a declaratory judgment that the Defendants are not entitled to exempt the cash surrender value of the Policy under Conn. Gen. Stat. §…”
David Roncari, No. 19-21009 (Bankr. D. Conn. June 24, 2020).
“Thereafter, so as to properly frame the issues before the Court, the Trustee filed an Amended Motion to Amend Complaint, wherein he seeks a declaratory judgment that the Defendants are not entitled to exempt the cash surrender value of the Policy under Conn. Gen. Stat. §…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.