Carley Pesente v. Minnesota Life Insurance Company

Syllabus

1. Connecticut law, not Minnesota law, governs the enforceability of an insured's designation of a spouse as a beneficiary under a group life-insurance policy when the policy was issued in Connecticut and the insured lived in Connecticut, notwithstanding that the couple's marriage was dissolved by a Minnesota court after the spouse moved to the state. 2. When deciding a choice-of-law question involving interpretation of a group life-insurance policy, the Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws § 192 cmt. h (Am. L. Inst. 1971) does not supersede the analysis based on the choice-influencing factors set forth in Milkovich v. Saari, 203 N.W.2d 408 (Minn. 1973). Reversed and remanded.