Can a Beneficiary Accused of Manslaughter Receive Life Insurance Proceeds?
The sudden and tragic death of a loved one is devastating enough—but when the surviving spouse is also the person accused of causing that death, the legal and emotional fallout can be overwhelming. That’s the difficult intersection where criminal law and life insurance litigation meet. A real-life case involving a man named Patrick—charged with manslaughter after the death of his wife—illustrates just how complex these disputes can become. At the center of the case: a $150,000 life insurance policy and a legal battle over whether Patrick, as the named beneficiary, could receive the proceeds despite his criminal charge.
After Patrick’s wife died from injuries sustained during a domestic argument—falling down a staircase following blunt-force trauma—he was charged with manslaughter. He later entered a no-contest plea, avoiding a trial but not denying involvement. Despite the criminal case, Patrick remained the sole beneficiary on his wife’s life insurance policy with North American Company for Life and Health Insurance. After her death, both Patrick and the wife’s estate submitted competing claims. With no clear resolution, the insurer filed an interpleader action in U.S. District Court, asking the court to determine who should receive the funds.
The Slayer Statute and Life Insurance: When Crime Meets Contract
At the heart of the dispute was the Slayer Statute, a legal doctrine recognized in every U.S. state. The principle is simple: no one should be allowed to financially benefit from their own wrongful act. In the context of life insurance, this means that a person who “feloniously and intentionally” kills the insured is disqualified from receiving policy proceeds. This public policy aims to discourage financial motives behind homicide and prevent unjust enrichment.
In Patrick’s case, the estate argued that he was barred under the Slayer Statute because he caused his wife's death. However, Patrick countered that his no-contest plea to manslaughter was not equivalent to a conviction for intentional murder. By definition, manslaughter is a killing that occurs without malice or premeditation. The question became: Does a manslaughter conviction automatically trigger the Slayer Statute?
The answer is not always clear-cut. While intentional killings fall squarely within the statute’s scope, courts often grapple with whether lesser offenses like involuntary manslaughter or criminally negligent homicide meet the “felonious and intentional” threshold. Some courts require evidence of actual intent to kill, while others consider the totality of the circumstances.
Settlement Over Judgment: When Legal Gray Areas Lead to Compromise
Rather than risk an uncertain court ruling, the parties in Patrick’s case reached a settlement. The proceeds—$150,000 in total—were divided evenly, with Patrick receiving $75,000 and the other half going to his late wife’s estate. This type of resolution is common in cases where criminal charges create uncertainty about whether a beneficiary is legally entitled to receive payment. It avoids the need for a full trial and allows both parties to recover at least part of the funds while leaving legal questions unresolved.
Importantly, this case was settled without creating a binding precedent. That means similar disputes will still depend heavily on the facts, the specific criminal charges involved, and the laws of the state where the claim is being litigated.
Why Insurance Companies Freeze Claims in Suspicious Deaths
When an insurer learns that the named beneficiary may have played a role in the policyholder’s death, they will almost always pause the claim. These delays are not necessarily acts of bad faith. Insurers are legally required to withhold payment when there’s a possibility the beneficiary is disqualified under the Slayer Statute. Often, they file a lawsuit called an interpleader—as in Patrick’s case—asking the court to decide who should receive the money. This protects the insurer from liability and ensures the rightful party is paid.
During this time, families may be left in financial limbo. Burial expenses, living costs, and ongoing debts continue to mount, but the life insurance proceeds remain inaccessible until the matter is resolved. That’s why it’s crucial for both sides—whether it’s the accused beneficiary or the decedent’s estate—to seek experienced legal counsel as early as possible.
The Importance of Legal Representation in Slayer Statute Disputes
Cases involving allegations of wrongdoing by a life insurance beneficiary are among the most complex types of claims. They involve both criminal law and civil insurance litigation, often requiring coordination between criminal defense attorneys, probate lawyers, and life insurance specialists. Legal representation is critical for several reasons:
Understanding the scope of the Slayer Statute: Every state has its own variation, and the definition of “intentional” can vary.
Managing interpleader actions: These federal or state court lawsuits must be properly answered and defended to prevent default judgments.
Protecting inheritance rights: The estate of the deceased may assert its right to the proceeds, especially if the primary beneficiary is disqualified.
Negotiating settlements: Many of these cases resolve through negotiated compromises, but only with effective legal advocacy.
Without a qualified attorney, beneficiaries risk losing access to policy funds—even in cases where criminal charges don’t result in conviction. Likewise, estates may lose out if they fail to contest a disqualified beneficiary’s claim. The legal complexity, emotional weight, and financial consequences all demand professional legal guidance.
Frequently Asked Questions About Life Insurance and the Slayer Statute
What is the Slayer Statute in life insurance?
The Slayer Statute is a legal rule that prevents individuals from profiting from a wrongful death they caused. If someone “feloniously and intentionally” kills the insured, they are barred from receiving life insurance benefits. The statute applies in every U.S. state but may be interpreted differently depending on local laws and court rulings.
Does a manslaughter conviction automatically bar someone from receiving life insurance?
Not necessarily. Manslaughter generally refers to an unlawful killing without intent or premeditation. Whether a manslaughter plea triggers the Slayer Statute depends on the specific facts of the case and how the statute defines “intentional.” Courts often assess whether the conviction meets the statutory threshold.
Can a beneficiary receive part of the policy if accused in the death?
In some cases, yes. If the beneficiary is not convicted of an intentional killing, or if the legal standard is unclear, courts or parties may reach a settlement dividing the proceeds. This was the outcome in the Patrick case, where the funds were split between the accused spouse and the estate.
What happens to the life insurance proceeds during a criminal investigation?
Insurance companies often place the proceeds in escrow and file an interpleader lawsuit asking a court to decide who should receive the funds. Payments are delayed until the investigation concludes or a settlement is reached. This process ensures that insurers don’t violate the Slayer Statute or expose themselves to legal liability.
Is a no-contest plea the same as admitting guilt for insurance purposes?
A no-contest (nolo contendere) plea does not admit guilt but has the same legal effect as a guilty plea for sentencing purposes. However, for civil matters like life insurance disputes, the plea may be considered as part of the evidence—but it does not automatically disqualify the beneficiary.
Can the estate contest the beneficiary’s right to collect life insurance?
Yes. If the estate believes the beneficiary caused the death or should be disqualified for another reason, it can submit a competing claim and ask the court to apply the Slayer Statute. The court will consider criminal records, police reports, and other evidence before making a determination.
Do life insurance companies decide who gets the money in these cases?
No. Insurers do not have the authority to resolve legal disputes between beneficiaries. When faced with conflicting claims or potential legal disqualification, they usually deposit the funds with the court and request a ruling through an interpleader action.
What if the criminal case is still pending?
Insurers typically wait for the criminal case to conclude before releasing any funds. If charges are dropped or no conviction is entered, the beneficiary may still receive the proceeds—unless the court finds civil grounds to disqualify them.
Can a life insurance policy be paid to a contingent beneficiary if the primary is disqualified?
Yes. If the primary beneficiary is disqualified under the Slayer Statute, most policies allow the death benefit to go to the contingent beneficiary or the estate, depending on how the policy was structured.
Should I hire a lawyer if a beneficiary is accused of killing the insured?
Absolutely. These cases involve intricate legal questions and often require litigation to resolve. An experienced life insurance attorney can help protect your rights, ensure proper procedures are followed, and work toward a fair outcome—whether you're the accused beneficiary or part of the decedent’s estate.