Really? I have trouble believing David did this intentionally. The story says he may have been misled into filing. Besides, where in the story does it tell you that the insurance company for the woman who killed his brother is denying the Brights any benefits because they were "only" half-brothers, based on CO law? David was his brother's keeper and is entitled to the benefit of the doubt. They are also entitled to the insurance money. They are lovely people who try very hard to do the right thing. A little more investigating by the reporter would have been nice.