D.O. McComb & Sons, Inc. v. Feller Funeral Home, Inc.
Docket: No. 17A04-9905-CV-195
Court: Indiana Court of Appeals; December 8, 1999; Indiana; State Appellate Court
D.O. McComb Sons, Inc. (McComb) appeals a trial court decision denying its claim for a five percent transfer fee from Feller Funeral Home, Inc. (Feller) following a designation change of a funeral insurance policy beneficiary. McComb argues that Indiana Code 30-2-13-13 mandates payment of a transfer fee when a purchaser changes the designated seller of funeral services, regardless of whether funds or merchandise are involved.
Both McComb and Feller are Indiana-licensed funeral homes authorized to sell pre-need funeral insurance through Forethought Life Insurance Company. Virginia E. Romine entered a funeral planning agreement with McComb, funded by a Forethought policy, which designated McComb as the beneficiary. Romine later chose Feller as the new beneficiary, triggering procedural steps outlined in the statute.
Despite fulfilling the statutory requirements, McComb sought a transfer fee of $326.25 from Feller, which Feller refused to pay. The trial court, after reviewing the case, determined that the statute likely did not apply since no property was held in trust or transferred. The Referee recommended judgment in favor of Feller, which the trial court adopted. McComb's appeal contends that the trial court's decision was erroneous, as the findings do not support the judgment. The reviewing court will affirm if the evidence supports the findings and if the findings support the judgment, considering evidence favorable to the judgment.
When a statute is clear and unambiguous, its plain meaning should be applied without interpretation. Interpretation is only necessary for ambiguous statutes, which are those that can be understood in more than one way. In the case of I.C. 30-2-13-13, both parties agree on the undisputed facts, and the primary issue is its application. The statute specifies that when a funeral planning agreement is transferred, the previous seller must relinquish rights, transfer the contract, and release any held property. In this instance, the previous seller, McComb, could not fulfill the last requirement due to a lack of transferable funds or merchandise.
The statute, enacted to clarify relationships in prepaid funeral arrangements, aims to protect parties who lose their designated role in such agreements by ensuring they are compensated for prior services. The requirement to release property held in trust implies that the previous seller has performed services for which they have not yet been compensated. McComb, acting as an agent for Forethought, sold an insurance contract and earned a 7.25% commission, which was deemed sufficient compensation for the sale.
McComb's claim for a 5% fee for funeral planning counseling was rejected, as the commission already covered the work involved in selling the contract. Thus, the court ruled that the 5% fee requirement does not apply in cases where no transfer of funds or property occurs with a new seller designation. The trial court's findings were supported by evidence, leading to the affirmation of its judgment in favor of Feller.
