Fechteler v. Jordan

D.C. Circuit

Fechteler v. Jordan

218 F.2d 865, 95 U.S. App. D.C. 54

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedJanuary 27, 1955

DocketNos. 11975, 11976

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 218 F.2d 865 (Fechteler v. Jordan) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Fechteler v. Jordan, 218 F.2d 865, 95 U.S. App. D.C. 54 (D.C. Cir. 1955).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The Navy Mutual Aid Association was formed by a group of naval officers in 1879. Its amended by-laws state that it was formed “for the purpose of aiding the families of- deceased members; first, by providing with certainty and promptness a substantial sum for their relief in the most equitable manner, and at as near the actual net cost of insurance as possible; second, by securing for them without cost the pensions to which they may be legally entitled.” (Ass’n Bylaws, Art. I, Sec. 1, as amended (1880).) These are cross appeals from a declaratory judgment that the Association is subject to the provisions of the Life Insurance Act of the District of Columbia, 48 Stat. 1125 et seq., D.C.Code 1951, §§ 35-301 to 35-803, but not subject to the tax on insurance companies provided by Title II of the Act of August 17, 1937, 50 Stat. 675 et seq., D.C.Code 1951, §§ 47-1801 to 47-1808. We think the District Court was clearly right.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The Navy Mutual Aid Association was formed by a group of naval officers in 1879. Its amended by-laws state that it was formed “for the purpose of aiding the families of- deceased members; first, by providing with certainty and promptness a substantial sum for their relief in the most equitable manner, and at as near the actual net cost of insurance as possible; second, by securing for them without cost the pensions to which they may be legally entitled.” (Ass’n Bylaws, Art. I, Sec. 1, as amended (1880).) These are cross appeals from a declaratory judgment that the Association is subject to the provisions of the Life Insurance Act of the District of Columbia, 48 Stat. 1125 et seq., D.C.Code 1951, §§ 35-301 to 35-803, but not subject to the tax on insurance companies provided by Title II of the Act of August 17, 1937, 50 Stat. 675 et seq., D.C.Code 1951, §§ 47-1801 to 47-1808. We think the District Court was clearly right.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

218 F.2d 865, 95 U.S. App. D.C. 54, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fechteler-v-jordan-cadc-1955.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack