The slayer rule: when a beneficiary can't collect

The slayer rule is the principle that a person who intentionally and unlawfully kills someone cannot profit from the death. For life insurance, it means a beneficiary who feloniously and intentionally kills the insured loses the right to the death benefit, and the money is paid as if that beneficiary had died first. Every state recognizes the principle, either by statute or by court decision, but the wording, the standard of proof and the details differ.

Where the rule comes from

Courts applied the idea before most statutes existed. In Riggs v. Palmer (New York, 1889), a grandson who poisoned his grandfather was barred from inheriting under the will, on the principle that no one should profit from his own wrong. The U.S. Supreme Court reached the same result for life insurance in Mutual Life Insurance Co. v. Armstrong (1886), holding that a beneficiary who murdered the insured could not recover the policy. Today statutes spell out the rule.

The model law: UPC section 2-803

The Uniform Probate Code, a model law adopted in whole or part by a number of states, covers the subject in section 2-803, titled "Effect of Homicide on Intestate Succession, Wills, Trusts, Joint Assets, Life Insurance, and Beneficiary Designations." Its main points:

• An individual who feloniously and intentionally kills the decedent forfeits benefits from the decedent's estate, including an intestate share.
• The killing revokes any revocable disposition or appointment to the killer in a governing instrument, such as a life insurance beneficiary designation, and it treats the killer as having died first.
• A joint tenant who feloniously and intentionally kills another joint tenant loses survivorship rights.
• A final judgment of conviction of felonious and intentional killing is conclusive. With no conviction, the court may decide by a preponderance of the evidence whether the killing was felonious and intentional.
• A payor such as an insurer that pays according to the policy's terms is generally protected unless it received written notice of a claim before paying.

Minnesota's version is Statutes §524.2-803, which follows this structure. The headline words, "feloniously and intentionally," do the work: the rule is aimed at deliberate killing, not at accidents or negligence.

State statutes compared

States using their own wording include:

Note the differences: Texas reaches an accomplice, and Florida's statute covers a person who "participates in procuring the death," at least as to wills and probate benefits. Other states vary on whether voluntary manslaughter counts, whether a plea of insanity or diminished capacity avoids forfeiture, and whether the rule reaches a person who assisted a suicide. Ask an attorney about your state.

Who gets the money instead

Under the model approach, the killer is treated as having died before the insured, so the proceeds follow the rest of the designation:

1. A contingent beneficiary, if one is named. In Texas, Insurance Code §1103.152 says a contingent beneficiary entitled to take, who has not himself forfeited, receives the proceeds, and if none, the insured's nearest relative.
2. Other primary beneficiaries, if the killer was one of several, who typically share the killer's portion as the designation or policy provides. See what happens if your beneficiary dies before you.
3. The policy's default order, then the insured's estate, if no one named is eligible. See what happens if no beneficiary is named.

The killer's own family generally does not receive the money through the killer. The statutes treat the killer as predeceased, so the killer's share is not passed to the killer's heirs.

How the question is decided in practice

A criminal trial is not required. Insurers and courts use a lower civil standard when there is no conviction, which is why a person acquitted of murder can still lose a civil case about the proceeds, since the civil court asks whether it is more likely than not that the killing was intentional and unlawful, not whether guilt is proven beyond a reasonable doubt. (A conviction ends the question, as the statutes above state.)

What happens after an insured's death with a suspected beneficiary:

1. The family or insurer notifies the insurer and police are involved. The insurer may take time to investigate, which can delay payment; see how to file a life insurance claim.
2. If someone with a stake in the money gives the insurer written notice of a claim under the slayer statute, the insurer can no longer pay safely, because statutes like Florida's protect it only if it hasn't received notice before payment.
3. The insurer often files an interpleader, depositing the proceeds with a court so claimants can resolve who is entitled. See life insurance beneficiary disputes and interpleader.
4. The court decides based on a conviction, if there is one, or on the evidence.
5. Once decided, the court directs payment to the contingent beneficiary or other eligible person.

Everyone should expect delay, because these cases can wait for the criminal case.

Hypothetical example

Say a husband names his wife as primary beneficiary and his brother as contingent beneficiary on a $500,000 policy. If the wife is convicted of intentionally killing him, a statute like Florida's treats the conviction as conclusive, the wife is treated as having died first, and the insurer pays the brother. If she is not convicted, the brother might still ask a civil court to find, by the greater weight of the evidence, that she killed him intentionally, and the insurer might file an interpleader while the matter is decided. The facts are invented to show the sequence and do not describe a real case.

Related situations

The slayer rule is about a beneficiary's wrongdoing. Other rules cover a different set of facts:

• Murder-for-insurance schemes, where the motive is the policy, are discussed in murder-for-insurance cases: how insurers and police respond, and policy-application misrepresentation or staged claims are covered in life insurance fraud: what it is and how it's caught.
• Suicide is handled by the Does life insurance pay for suicide? The suicide clause explained, not by the slayer rule.
• Accidental deaths and negligence do not trigger forfeiture. A beneficiary whose carelessness caused a fatal accident is generally still paid, though a court looks at the facts.
• Owners and beneficiaries who are not the same person. If a policy owner who is not the insured kills the insured, the same logic applies to the owner's rights, so check the state statute and consult an attorney.

If you believe a beneficiary caused an insured's death and the insurer is about to pay, tell the insurer in writing, and talk to a lawyer; see when to hire a life insurance lawyer.

Key takeaways

• A beneficiary who feloniously and intentionally kills the insured forfeits the death benefit, and it is paid as though the killer had died first.
• UPC section 2-803 and statutes such as California Probate Code §252, Florida §732.802 and Texas Insurance Code §1103.151 spell out the rule; wording and edge cases differ by state.
• A conviction is conclusive, and without one a court may decide by a civil standard of proof, so an acquittal doesn't automatically restore the benefit.
• The proceeds usually go to the contingent beneficiary, then the policy's default order or the estate.
• Insurers are generally protected if they pay without notice of a claim, which is why interested parties should give written notice promptly and why interpleader is common.