MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDERI. INTRODUCTION This action has been referred to this Court to conduct all proceedings and order the entry of final judgment by consent of the parties to jurisdiction by a United States Magistrate Judge. (Dkt. No. 29.) See 28 U.S.C. §636(c); Rule 73 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.State Farm Life and Accident Assurance Company (“State Farm”) commenced this interpleader action to determine the proper beneficiary or beneficiaries of a life insurance policy issued by State Farm on the life of decedent Robert T. Acey (“Decedent”), which had a death benefit of $250,000 payable as of the date of his death (“Death Benefit”). (Dkt. No. 1.) State Farm named Nicole D’Allessandro (“D’Allessandro”), minor children of D’Allessandro and the Decedent, R.A. and G.A., Kelley Caruso (“Caruso”), as guardian of minor A.A., and Mary Acey, mother of the Decedent and successor beneficiary under the State Farm policy on the life of Decedent. Id.A Consent Order was issued allowing State Farm to deposit the sum of the Death Benefit with accrued interest, less $7,500 for reimbursement to State Farm for attorneys’ fees and costs, with the Court. (Dkt. No. 20 at 4.1) State Farm was dismissed with prejudice from the action upon deposit of the remaining balance of the Death Benefit with the Court. Id. at 5.Prior to her death, Mary Acey signed a general release releasing any claim she may have had to the Death Benefit in favor of D’Allessandro, as guardian of R.A. and G.A., and Caruso, as guardian of A.A., and entered into a stipulation of settlement. (Dkt. Nos. 28, 30-3 at 13.)D’Allessandro and Caruso were left to litigate their respective minor children’s claims to the remaining balance of the Death Benefit. Id. at 6. Defendant D’Allessandro has moved for summary judgment. (Dkt. No. 30.) Defendant Caruso has filed a response to the motion (Dkt. No. 31), and D’Allessandro has filed a reply. (Dkt. No. 32.) For reasons explained below the Court finds that R.A. and G.A. are entitled to the remaining balance of the Death Benefit under the State Farm life insurance policy insuring the life of the Decedent.II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND2D’Allessandro and the Decedent were married in 2005, and R.A. and G.A. are the natural children born from the marriage union. (Dkt. No. 30-3 at 1.) On or about February 13, 2008, Decedent and D’Allessandro, as husband and wife, took out companion life insurance policies with State Farm, each insuring their own lives and naming the other as beneficiary. (Dkt. No. 30-3 at 3.) Decedent named D’Allessandro as his primary beneficiary and his mother, Mary Acey, as successor beneficiary. Id.In 2012, D’Allessandro commenced divorce proceedings against Decedent in Oneida County Supreme Court under Index No. D2012-046824. Id. at 4. The State Farm life insurance policies were disclosed in Decedent’s Statement of Net Worth and, in negotiating the divorce action, Allessandro and Decedent agreed to maintain the companion life insurance policies and name their children R.A. and G.A. as beneficiaries. (Dkt. Nos. 30-1 at 7; 30-3 at 5.) Decedent was thereafter mandated by the terms of the Judgment of Divorce, dated December 13, 2013, to continue his State Farm life insurance policy and change the beneficiary from D’Allessandro to his minor children, R.A. and G.A. (Dkt. No. 30-3 at
5, 7.)Allessandro first learned that Decedent had failed to change the primary beneficiaries of the State Farm life insurance policy from D’Allessandro to R.A. and G.A. after his death in 2016. (Dkt. Nos. 30-1 at 9; 30-3 at
