Morris v. Protected Home Circle

Michigan Supreme Court

Morris v. Protected Home Circle

220 N.W. 664, 243 Mich. 542, 1928 Mich. LEXIS 672

CourtMichigan Supreme Court

DecidedJuly 24, 1928

DocketDocket No. 64, Calendar No. 33,749.

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 220 N.W. 664 (Morris v. Protected Home Circle) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Morris v. Protected Home Circle, 220 N.W. 664, 243 Mich. 542, 1928 Mich. LEXIS 672 (Mich. 1928).

Pincite

Opinion

Wiest, J.

In 1907, John B. Morris took out a benefit certificate in the Protected Home Circle of Sharon, Pennsylvania, for $500, payable to “Jessie M. Morris, wife.” Mr. Morris paid his monthly dues to and including the month of December, 1923. He died February 5, 1924, without having designated any change of beneficiary. Some time before his death the beneficiary obtained a divorce and married a man by the name of Kadir. At the time of his death Mr. Morris had failed to make the payments due for the insurance for the month of January, 1924, and, under *543 the law of the society, was automatically suspended. A few days before his death his former wife tendered the proper officer of the society the dues for the month of January and the tender was refused. This suit was brought upon the certificate by the beneficiary named therein, and, at the trial, defendant offering no evidence, verdict was directed in favor of plaintiff. At the close of plaintiff’s proofs defendant moved for a directed verdict in its favor. This was denied. Defendant also moved for a new trial, but did not request the circuit judge to file reasons in case of denial. The motion was denied, no reasons were filed and no exceptions entered. . Defendant reviews by writ of error.

It is claimed, in behalf of defendant, that, when the beneficiary was divorced, she lost her status as beneficiary. The law of the society contains no provision respecting the divorce of a beneficiary. This is not a case of a fraternal society limiting membership to a particular religious belief, or benefits to $500 or less, and, therefore, without the terms of the statute (Comp. Laws Supp. 1922, § 9100 [194, 219]), and within our decision in Ancient Order of Hibernians v. Mahon, 221 Mich. 213, but a society within the provisions of the statute limiting beneficiary to that of wife, and, therefore, within our decision in Modern Woodmen of America v. Patton, 229 Mich. 62.

Plaintiff, upon divorce, was no longer beneficiary.

The judgment is reversed, without a new trial, with costs to defendant.

Fead, C. J., and North, Fellows, Clark, McDonald, Potter, and Sharpe, JJ., concurred.

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

Wiest, J.

In 1907, John B. Morris took out a benefit certificate in the Protected Home Circle of Sharon, Pennsylvania, for $500, payable to “Jessie M. Morris, wife.” Mr. Morris paid his monthly dues to and including the month of December, 1923. He died February 5, 1924, without having designated any change of beneficiary. Some time before his death the beneficiary obtained a divorce and married a man by the name of Kadir. At the time of his death Mr. Morris had failed to make the payments due for the insurance for the month of January, 1924, and, under *543 the law of the society, was automatically suspended. A few days before his death his former wife tendered the proper officer of the society the dues for the month of January and the tender was refused. This suit was brought upon the certificate by the beneficiary named therein, and, at the trial, defendant offering no evidence, verdict was directed in favor of plaintiff. At the close of plaintiff’s proofs defendant moved for a directed verdict in its favor. This was denied. Defendant also moved for a new trial, but did not request the circuit judge to file reasons in case of denial. The motion was denied, no reasons were filed and no exceptions entered. . Defendant reviews by writ of error.

It is claimed, in behalf of defendant, that, when the beneficiary was divorced, she lost her status as beneficiary. The law of the society contains no provision respecting the divorce of a beneficiary. This is not a case of a fraternal society limiting membership to a particular religious belief, or benefits to $500 or less, and, therefore, without the terms of the statute (Comp. Laws Supp. 1922, § 9100 [194, 219]), and within our decision in Ancient Order of Hibernians v. Mahon, 221 Mich. 213, but a society within the provisions of the statute limiting beneficiary to that of wife, and, therefore, within our decision in Modern Woodmen of America v. Patton, 229 Mich. 62.

Plaintiff, upon divorce, was no longer beneficiary.

The judgment is reversed, without a new trial, with costs to defendant.

Fead, C. J., and North, Fellows, Clark, McDonald, Potter, and Sharpe, JJ., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

220 N.W. 664, 243 Mich. 542, 1928 Mich. LEXIS 672, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/morris-v-protected-home-circle-mich-1928.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack