Texas Codes
Tex. Ins. Code § 1103.055 (2026)
Designation Of Beneficiary Of Policy; Transfer Or Assignment Of Policy Or Interest
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
TX-LEGstatutes.capitol.texas.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Sec. 1103.055. DESIGNATION OF BENEFICIARY OF POLICY; TRANSFER OR ASSIGNMENT OF POLICY OR INTEREST. An individual of legal age who is insured under a life insurance policy may in writing:
(1) in a manner and to the extent permitted by the policy, designate any individual, partnership, association, corporation, or other legal entity as a beneficiary of the policy; and
(2) in a manner and to the extent not prohibited by the policy, transfer or assign to any entity described by Subdivision (1):
(A) the policy; or
(B) an interest, benefit, right, or title in the policy.
Added by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 1419, Sec. 2, eff. June 1, 2003.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5
cases, 2006–2016 · leading case: State Farm Life Ins. Co. v. Martinez, 216 S.W.3d 799 (Tex. 2007).
State Farm Life Ins. Co. v. Martinez, 216 S.W.3d 799 (Tex. 2007). “Laws 400 (current version at TEX. INS. CODE § 1103.055); Volunteer State Life Ins.”
Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. v. Durante, 443 S.W.3d 499 (Tex. App. 2014). “On “substantial compliance” with the requirements stated in the policy for beneficiary changes, the insurer must hon- or the request and effect the change.”
Banco Popular, North Am. v. Cynthia Kanning, 638 F. App'x 328 (5th Cir. 2016). “Although a review of Texas precedent does not provide a singular definition of what constitutes an anti-assignment clause, Texas courts’ treatment of various clauses is instructive.”
Meadows v. Hartford Life Ins., 429 F. Supp. 2d 853 (S.D. Tex. 2006). “However, as Defendants argue, Defendants’ provision of services to Camelot under the COLI policy did not prevent Plaintiff from deciding to "insure his life and then deciding to assign a life insurance policy to Camelot for consideration.”
the Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. & Pruco Life Ins. Co./Irasema Sagarnaga Durante v. Irasema Sagarnaga Durante/The Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. & Pruco Life Ins. Co. (Tex. App. 2014). “On “substantial compliance” with the requirements stated in the policy for beneficiary changes, the insurer must honor the request and effect the change.”
— Tex. Ins. Code § 1103.055(2) — 1 case
Banco Popular, North Am. v. Cynthia Kanning, 638 F. App'x 328 (5th Cir. 2016). “Although a review of Texas precedent does not provide a singular definition of what constitutes an anti-assignment clause, Texas courts’ treatment of various clauses is instructive.”
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.