Grand Lodge, Brotherhood Trainmen v. Bash

66 S.W.2d 25, 251 Ky. 826, 1933 Ky. LEXIS 964
CourtCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976)
DecidedDecember 15, 1933
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 66 S.W.2d 25 (Grand Lodge, Brotherhood Trainmen v. Bash) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Grand Lodge, Brotherhood Trainmen v. Bash, 66 S.W.2d 25, 251 Ky. 826, 1933 Ky. LEXIS 964 (Ky. 1933).

Opinion

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Richardson

Reversing.

The Grand Lodge, Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen, engages in the business of issuing insurance to employees of railroads for stipulated premiums. Harry R. Bash in August, 1911, was yardmaster, at Paducah, Ely., of the Illinois Central Railroad Company. He made application for a beneficiary certificate through the subordinate lodge at Paducah, which was transmitted by its secretary to the Grand Lodge, Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen, located at Cleveland, Ohio.

Pursuant to his application, they issued him a beneficiary certificate of insurance of Class C, under date of September 11, 1911, which with a copy of the application attached was dileveréd to Bash, through the local lodge, and on which he regularly paid the premiums required for Class C. In August, 1928, he made application, through the local lodge, for a beneficiary certificate of Class G. This application was approved and the beneficiary certificate was issued, designating his wife the beneficiary, and thereby it agreed to pay her at his death from $1,875 to $5,000. To this certificate was attached a photostatic copy of his application. His application therefor was transmitted through the local lodge to the Grand Lodge and the beneficiary certificate was delivered to him by its secretary. To its secretary he regularly paid the premiums due thereunder. W. T. Straub was secretary of the local lodge. In April, 1931, Bash, on a regular form of the lodge, “made applica *828 tion to the grand lodge for a benevolent claim,” which, was authorized by the by-laws and constitution of the-Grand Lodge.

Between the date of the issuance of the beneficiary certificate of Class C and that of the certificate of Class G, Bash sustained an injury while-traveling in an automobile, and on this account was temporarily confined in á hospital under the care of a physician. In his application for beneficiary certificate of Class G, and to the-examining physician who examined him to determine-his eligibility for the increased insurance, it is claimed by the Grand Lodge he failed to make known the circumstances of his confinement in the hospital and treatment by a physician.

On receiving his application for the benevolent claim, the benevolent board of the Grand Lodge determined and declared that Bash in his application for beneficiary certificate of Class G did not “give truthful answers in his Form 131, application for increased insurance [Class G] with refernce'to his previous health and condition,” and it so advised the secretary of the local lodge of .Paducah, and also mailed to Bash a copy of the letter carrying this information. It canceled the beneficiary certificate of Class G, calculated the difference in the premium between Class C and Class G, for the period since the issuance of Class G, amounting to $127.75, reinstated his certificate of Class C, and then canceled it and sent to the secretary of the local lodge, for delivery to Bash, two drafts, one for $127.75, the difference in premium between the two classes of policies, and the other for $1,875, the face of the policy of Class C, with receipt attached. Straub, the secretary of the local lodge, delivered these drafts to Bash, who accepted them and signed and delivered receipts for them to the secretary of the local lodge, on the 24th of November, 1931. The receipt for the $1,875 was signed by Bash in the presence of his wife, the secretary of the local lodge, and Miss Elizabeth Curtis and Mrs. Alma Page; the last two attested the signature of Bash.

Bash died December 19, 1931, leaving surviving him Elsie- Bash as his widow. This action was instituted by her- as the beneficiary to recover on certificate G, the $5,000 that was agreed thereby to be paid to the beneficiary after the death of Bash.

In the early part of the year 1931, Bash became *829 totally and permanently disabled, and on this ground he made application to the Grand Lodge for an allowance of the benevolent claim allowable under his certificate. His widow, Elsie Bash, as the basis of avoidance of the act of the Grand Lodge in its payment to Bash of the $2,002.75, charges that he was in such health and mental condition at the time the Grand Lodge canceled his beneficiary certificate of Class G, reinstated certificate of Class C, and issued and delivered to him the drafts of $127.75 and $1,875, he was incapable of consenting thereto, and that T. S. Jackson, an official of the Grand Lodge, with supervisory powers over .its members, and W. T. Straub, secretary of the local lodge, because of the relationship, confidence, and trust between them and Bash, exerted such influence over Bash to such an extent “as to and did subvert his will and independence”; that he was in such “weakened mental and physical condition” he did not comprehend the nature and purpose of the transaction at the time he accepted the action of the benevolent board of the Grand Lodge in the cancellation of one policy, the reinstating of another, and issuing, delivering, and causing him to accept the two drafts.

The Grand Lodge, Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen, traversed and affirmatively set up the actions of the benevolent board and of Bash as a bar to a recovery. It offered to file an amended answer, setting out certain sections, of its by-laws as a defense. The court declined’to permit it to be filed, but 'allowed it to be made a part of the record.

On the issues thus formed, under instructions of the court, the jury returned a verdict in her favor of $2,969.85. It is here insisted that incompetent evidence was admitted; the Grand Lodge was entitled to a peremptory instruction at the close of the evidence in behalf of Elsie Bash, and also at the close of all of the evidence.

Lay witnesses were permitted in behalf of Mrs. Bash, without a statement of the facts, to give their opinions as to the soundness of mind or mental capacity of Bash at the time he accepted and receipted for the two drafts. Drs. Kidd and Powell testified in her behalf. Dr. Powell was not asked concerning the mental condition of Bash. Dr. Kidd treated him during his *830 last illness. His death was caused by aerticannerism. Dr. Kidd testified that he was in a weakened physical condition in July, 1931; weaker in September, and still weaker in November, 1931. He was requested to give his opinion whether Bash was “mentally capable of attending’ to business, such as having a policy surrendered or exchanged for another.” His response was: “That is rather a hard question to answer.” He was further asked and answered thus:

“Q. Was he a normal man mentally and physically at any time after the first of July until his death? A. No.-
“Q. What would you sáy about his mental condition and capacity for attending to business on the 19th day of September 1931 or November 24th, 1931? A. Not good.”

The opinions of the lay witnesses, without their statements of the facts, are not sufficient to authorize a submission of the case to the jury. In Dossenbach v. Reidhar’s Ex’x, 245 Ky. 449, 53 S. W. (2d) 731, 735, we said:

“It is the accepted rule in this jurisdiction that the opinions of witnesses constitute competent evidence * * * but such opinions will not be sufficient evidence to take a case to the.

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

Related

Huber & Huber Motor Express v. Martin's Adm'r
96 S.W.2d 595 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976), 1936)
Equitable Life Assur. Soc. of U.S. v. Reynolds
82 S.W.2d 509 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976), 1935)
Grand Lodge, Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v. Bash
76 S.W.2d 604 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976), 1934)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
66 S.W.2d 25, 251 Ky. 826, 1933 Ky. LEXIS 964, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/grand-lodge-brotherhood-trainmen-v-bash-kyctapphigh-1933.