Upon a bench trial of an interpleader action to determine the rightful beneficiary of the decedent’s life insurance policy, the court found that the evidence showed that the decedent herself had misunderstood that she only possessed one policy when she sent concurrent letters naming her children as the beneficiaries under one policy number and her former daughter-in-law as the beneficiary under another policy number. Given all the evidence and testimony presented at trial, the court concluded that the decedent had intended for each of the five defendants to receive some amount of the proceeds from her life insurance policy, and the court entered judgment to effectuate that intent.