Bird v. Mutual Union Ass'n

30 A.D. 346, 52 N.Y.S. 1044
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided July 1, 1898·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Hatch, J.:

This is an action at law brought to recover a sum contracted to be paid by virtue of a contract of insurance. The evidence given upon the trial is quite meagre and unsatisfactory in'respect of the condition of the senior life branch of the defendant at the date of the death of Thomas Bird, the insured, and prior thereto. The defendant is an assessment association, and depends for the payment of its contracts of insurance npon the sums collected from its members. It has two classes or departments of insurance; one known as class “ A,” which is a regular life department, and one known as the “ Senior Life Department.” Bird was' insured in the latter department. By the terms of his policy or certificate of-membership in such department, so far as material to the questions we are about to consider, he was required to pay monthly the' sum of one dollar and thirty-three cents. Of this sum the association was authorized to retain such a per cent as would produce an average of four dollars a year upon each' certificate issued, for expenses; the sum of fifteen per cent for the cost of collecting the monthly payments, and twenty-five per cent to be deducted from the mortuary fund, and deposited to the credit of a reserve fund. The creation of the latter fund was authorized' by section 21 of chapter 175 of the Laws of 1883, as amended by section 6 of [348]*348■chapter 285 of the Laws of 1887. This- fund, hy the provisions, of the certificate and the conditions indorsed thereon, and of the constitution and by-laws qf tlie.-assqciatiqn, was to be invested in United States bonds, or in first mortgages upon real estate. It could not be used to pay death or indemnity claims of holders of certificates, except under such conditions as should be stated in' the certificate of membership, or in the constitution and by-laws of the association: Fo member was entitled to participate in the benefit accruing from such fund, except he should have been a full beneficiary member of his department for one year after the completion of the reserve fund. By the terms of the certificate, if there was a surplus in the ■ mortuary fund above $25,000, and no claims chargeable thereon were due and unpaid, such surplus should be withdrawn from the . mortuary fund and be deposited in the reserve fund. In this respect the certificate differs from the by-laws (§ 14), which require that the surplus shall be $50,000 before it can be withdrawn. The differ- . ence, however, is not material. The only authority for the use of the reserve fund is stated in the certificate in these words: “ Wlien- - ever the amount realized, any one month, for the mortuary fund is ' -insufficient tó pay a claim in full, then the increase to the. completed reserve fund over $100,000 shall be credited to the mortuary fund for the payment and adjusting of said claims.” By the terms of the-certificate issued to Bird his beneficiary was to receive a sum •not to exceed $1,000, “payable, as- is-provided by the constitution and the by-laws, from the net- amount received for the mortuary fund by- the association from the second monthly payment collected from the members liable therefor, after tlie receipt of ■satisfactory proof-of death.”'- The condition-indorsed upon the certificate regulating payment and its extent is found in these words:

“ Should the net amount collected during any one month from the members liable therefor, for the payment of all approved' death or disability claims on file .after first deducting 15'per cent for the ■ cost of collecting; and, second, the amount required for expenses • and adjusting; and, third, 25 per cent for the reserve fund, ever-be insufficient to pay all said approved claims in full, then a just average -of the amount so collected and . credited -to the mortuary fund for the payment of claims shall be made,, and all of the said approved claims on file shall then be paid fro rata, and such pro [349]*349rata payment shall be accepted by the beneficiaries as payment in full for all of said claims.”

• Section 4 of the constitution and section 28 of the by-laws are in all substantial respects of the same import. Under well-settled law the certificate and its conditions, and the constitution and by-laws, furnish the contract from which the rights of the parties are to be determined. (People ex rel. Atty.-Gen. v. Life & Reserve Assn., 150 N. Y. 94.) Bird received his certificate and became a member on the 13th day of February, 1892. He thereafter complied with all the requirements of the association until his death, on the 29th day of June, 1895. It is admitted that thereafter all the steps essential to be taken to fasten liability upon the association in favor of the beneficiary were had and taken. The only question raised by the association relates to the amount the plaintiff is entitled to recover. The association claims that, acting in pursuance of its contract with the assured, it has collected the assessments it contracted to collect, as provided in the contract, and that it now stands ready to pay the same. It appears from the record that the defendant did, after receiving notice of the death of Bird, collect the regular mortuary assessment, and that at that time there were only 400 members in its senior life department; that the assessment only realized the sum of §376.06, from which three death claims were to-be paid, and that plaintiff’s share amounted to the sum óf §94.49, which it offers to pay. It is quite evident that if the defendant has conducted its business in the ordinary way, and in pursuance of -its-constitution and by-laws, and has collected the assessment as required, it has fulfilled its contract and cannot be required to do more. It. did not guarantee to pay the policy which it issued, in its maximum amount, or in any other sum. It simply agreed to collect the monthly ¡payment and apply the same in discharge of the amount secured by the certificate, so far as that sum would go, after making the stipulated reductions, not, however, exceeding §1,000.

The plantiff claims, however, that although it may be true- that an assessment was collected, as required by the rules of the association, yet that she is entitled to resort to the reserve fund for the payment of her claim; and this right is claimed to arise by virtue of the following conditions: By chapter 690, section 210, of the Laws of 1892 the Legislature enacted that every policy issued by such association [350]*350should specify the sum of. money which' it promises to pay upon . each contingency insured against,, and that the association should be obligated .to the beneficiary to pay, upon the happening of the contingency insured against, the maximum amount specified in the policy. Shortly after the passage of this law the defendant was notified by the Insurance Department of the State that it could not issue any new policies under the plan of its senior life department, and thereafter no new members were received in this department. Business by the association was not immediately discontinued under this department, although there is'some evidence, quite meagre in character, from which, perhaps, it could be inferred that shortly after the" passage of the act they transferred some business and members from the senior life department to class “ A ” in the regular life department. The association, however, continued to collect the regular monthly assessment from Bird and others^ after the- passage of this act and until his death.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Bird v. Mutual Union Ass'n, 30 A.D. 346, 52 N.Y.S. 1044 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1898).

30 A.D. 346 (Bird v. Mutual Union Ass'n) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Best Renting Co. v. City of New York
162 N.E. 497 (New York Court of Appeals, 1928)
Dexter v. Supreme Council of Royal Templars of Temperance
97 A.D. 545 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1904)
O'Brien v. Supreme Council
81 A.D. 1 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1903)
Grossmayer v. District No. 1, Independent Order of Benai Berith
70 A.D. 90 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1902)
Eagan v. Eagan
68 N.Y.S. 777 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1901)
Wilson v. Bryce
43 A.D. 491 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1899)