Bankers Security Life Insurance Society v. Shakerdge
Cases that cite this one
93 later published cases cite this decision. The 23 that cite it most often are listed here.
- Superintendent of Insurance for New York v. Ochs (In re First Central Financial Corp.) (2d Cir. 2004)
- Jaffer v. Hirji (2d Cir. 2018)
- In re: Koreag, Controle Et Revision S.A. (2d Cir. 1992)
- Van Brunt v. Rauschenberg (District Court, S.D. New York 1992)
- Koreag, Controle et Revision S.A. v. Refco F/X Associates, Inc. (In re Koreag, Controle et Revision S.A.) (2d Cir. 1992)
- Koreag, Controle et Revision S.A. v. Refco F/X Associates, Inc. (2d Cir. 1992)
- Robert Brand v. Herbert Brand (2d Cir. 1987)
- Re-Alco Industries, Inc. v. National Center for Health Education, Inc. (District Court, S.D. New York 1993)
- Genger v. Genger (United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York 2021)
- Speedfit LLC v. Woodway USA, Inc. (District Court, E.D. New York 2014)
- Icebox-Scoops, Inc. v. Disney Enterprises, Inc. (2d Cir. 2013)
- BNP Paribas Mortgage Corp. v. Bank of America, N.A. (District Court, S.D. New York 2013)
- Silverman v. K.E.R.U. Realty Corp. (In re Allou Distributors, Inc.) (United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. New York 2007)
- Petrello v. White (District Court, E.D. New York 2006)
- Guardian Music Corp. v. James W. Guercio Enterprises, Inc. (District Court, S.D. New York 2006)
- Gaffney v. Rubino (In re Builders Capital & Services, Inc.) (United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. New York 2004)
- Breeden v. Ades Investor Group (2d Cir. 2003)
- Goya Foods, Inc. v. Unanue-Casal (1st Cir. 2000)
- In re Treco (United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York 1999)
- Bausch & Lomb Inc. v. Alcon Laboratories, Inc. (District Court, W.D. New York 1999)
- United States v. Jose Ribadeneira (2d Cir. 1997)
- United States v. Ribadeneira (2d Cir. 1997)
- United States v. Richard Coluccio, Theresa Coluccio, Claimant-Appellant (2d Cir. 1995)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
In general, though as an equitable doctrine its application to particular circumstances is susceptible of some flexibility, to establish a constructive trust there must be provided: (1) a confidential or fiduciary relation, (2) a promise, express or implied, (3) a transfer made in reliance on that promise, and (4) unjust enrichment (Simonds v Simonds, 45 NY2d 233, 241-242; Sharp v Kosmalski, 40 NY2d 119, 121). On the record here, the only showing that any promise had been made would have to be culled from several remarks made by the decedent’s brother Abraham. These, in the form of statements to Joseph and his wife, in the main after the former’s death, went no further than to assert that he would "do the right thing” and "take care of’ decedent’s wife and child. These expressions, though perhaps evidencing some moral obligation, cannot be taken to mean that Abraham was bound to fulfill the expressed intention by applying to that purpose the proceeds of the two insurance policies on which, without interruption, he had been the beneficiary from the time they were written more than a decade earlier. Moreover, the statements contained no reference to the policies. Inasmuch as the constructive trust doctrine serves as a "fraud-rectifying” remedy rather than an "intent-enforcing” one, without more, the circumstances offered by the decedent’s widow were insufficient to establish the promissory element which is essential to the proof of such a trust (Matter of Wells, 36 AD2d 471, 474-475 [Gabrielli, J.], affd 29 NY2d 931).
Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.