AISHA ZRIHAN v. CAROL DULIS HARVEY COLEMAN (2016)

MEMORANDUM*

Aisha Zrihan appeals the district court's order granting summary judgment to her deceased son-in-law's family members in a dispute over life insurance proceeds.¹ We dismiss this appeal for lack of standing. Zrihan has no personal claim to the insurance proceeds. She was not an insured, owner, or beneficiary on either of the policies. Zrihan's daughter was a named beneficiary, but the daughter's estate did not appeal the district court's order. Zrihan's status as her daughter's heir does not confer standing because, under Arizona law, only the personal representative of an estate may bring claims on behalf of the estate. See In re Tamer's Estate, 179 P. 643, 644 (Ariz. 1919); City of Phoenix v. Linsenmeyer, 280 P.2d 698, 699 (Ariz. 1955). Nor can Zrihan claim the insurance proceeds as James's creditor. James was not a named beneficiary on either policy. And Arizona law precludes Zrihan from contesting formal defects in James's contingent beneficiary designation. See, e.g., Doss v. Kalas, 383 P.2d 169, 172 (Ariz. 1963).

DISMISSED.

FOOTNOTES

1.   The parties are familiar with the facts, so we will not recount them here.