Estelle v. Cunningham

I concur in the opinion of this court. I write specially, however, to encourage a reexamination by our Supreme Court of those cases, including Owens v. Coleman,520 So.2d 514, 516 (Ala. 1987), and Barnett v. Boyd,224 Ala. 309, 140 So. 375 (1932), which hold that "[a] beneficiary cannot attack a change of beneficiary designation on the ground of undue influence alone, because he has an interest which is a mere expectancy, which cannot become vested until the death of the insured." Owens, 520 So.2d at 516.

A majority of the states that have considered the issue have allowed a prior-designated…