The dispute centers on a $405,000 investment made in 2009 by Michelle Johnson into two businesses owned by David Val Finlayson, who was her attorney at the time. To protect Johnson’s financial interest in the companies, Finlayson purchased a life insurance policy naming her as the sole beneficiary.
Finlayson changed the beneficiary designation to his brother, Daniel Vett Finlayson, on March 7, 2024. He died by suicide on April 2, 2024. Daniel Finlayson claimed the $900,000 death benefit after Primerica Life Insurance Company deposited the funds with the court.
Johnson sued Daniel Finlayson, alleging he lacked testamentary capacity to change the beneficiary and that his actions constituted fraud, undue influence, conversion, and promissory estoppel.
District Judge Ann Marie McIff Allen granted summary judgment in favor of Daniel Finlayson on all claims except unjust enrichment. The court held that Johnson’s evidence regarding the decedent’s mental capacity and fraud was speculative, failing to overcome the presumption of competency.
The court also rejected Johnson’s conversion and promissory estoppel claims, noting that Daniel Finlayson was not the party who made promises to her and that he had lawful justification for asserting his right to the funds as the designated beneficiary.
However, the court denied summary judgment on Johnson’s unjust enrichment claim. The judge reasoned that the attorney-client relationship between Johnson and the decedent, combined with his repeated assurances over nearly a decade that she remained the sole beneficiary, created a factual dispute regarding whether it would be inequitable for Daniel Finlayson to retain the proceeds.
Johnson’s request to file an amended opposition brief was also denied after the court discovered her initial filing contained inaccurate case citations and quotations. Counsel attributed these errors to clerical mistakes resulting from improper AI use, but the court declined to allow supplemental briefing.