O'Brien v. Brotherhood of the Union

55 A. 577, 76 Conn. 52, 1903 Conn. LEXIS 68
CourtSupreme Court of Connecticut
DecidedJuly 24, 1903
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 55 A. 577 (O'Brien v. Brotherhood of the Union) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Connecticut primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
O'Brien v. Brotherhood of the Union, 55 A. 577, 76 Conn. 52, 1903 Conn. LEXIS 68 (Colo. 1903).

Opinion

Hamersley, J.

The plaintiff seeks to recover the sum of |500 claimed to be due her by force of a contract between the defendant association and its dead member, one Daniel P. Conklin. The defendant is a secret fraternal society or order, organized under the laws of Pennsylvania. The contract in question is the one which arose between the defendant and Conklin upon his becoming a beneficial member of the order, and its nature is determined by the following facts which appear from the finding of the trial court, including the laws, forms, and rules of the defendant, made a part of the record: •—

The order is governed by an organization called the supreme circle. Membership is acquired through local circles subject, in States where, as appears to be the case in this *54 State, no grand body exists, to the direct jurisdiction of the supreme circle. The supreme circle administers a fund called “The Funeral Benefit Fund of the Supreme Circle.” Each member of this fund complying with the rules of the order is entitled at his death to the payment of a death benefit. The amount of this benefit is determined by § 15 of Art. XVI of the laws of the supreme circle, as follows : “ The death benefit of a member of this Fund dying within 183 days from date of admission, with nephritis (Bright’s Disease), phthisis, phthisis pulmonalis (consumption), or valvular disease of the heart, shall be five dollars and no more. In all other cases it shall be five hundred dollars.” No one can be admitted as a beneficial member of the order unless he is “ in sound bodily health, and between the ages of 18 and 45 years.” Any person duly admitted by initiation, reinstatement or admission by card, as a beneficial member in a local circle, shall thereby become a member of the funeral benefit fund of the supreme circle. The candidate for admission in the local circle must make written application upon the application-blank for admission into the funeral benefit fund, acknowledging his familiarity with § 15 of Art. XVI of the supreme laws, and accepting membership in the fund on these conditions ; and before admission must execute an agreement with the supreme circle upon the registration-blank, whereby he again acknowledges his familiarity with § 15 and his acceptance of membership in the fund on these conditions. The only contribution to the fund required of members is the payment of 50 cents a month, or, under certain conditions, of 60 cents a month. Members may be expelled for nonpayment of the monthly dues, and for various causes set forth in the laws. A member suspended or expelled from membership in a local circle, for any cause, shall forfeit membership in the fund. No member expelled from the fund shall be again admitted or reinstated, without again making application on the application-blank and executing the agreement on the registration-blank. The officer of the supreme circle, called the supreme scroll keeper, keeps the register of the members of the funeral benefit *55 fund, recording their admission, expulsion and reinstatement. The officer of the local circle, called the Hon. scroll keeper, certifies to the supreme scroll keeper, from the records of the circle, the admission of members and their suspension or expulsion. When a member is registered by the supreme scroll keeper, the local circle remains responsible for the monthly payment of his dues until he is expelled or suspended, and if it fails for one month to make this payment, the circle may be expelled, and all its members thereby forfeit membership in the fund. The death benefit is payable to the beneficiary named by the member in his application, or, if there is no such beneficiary, to certain relatives of the deceased, as prescribed by their rules ; or, if there are no such relatives, to the legal heirs of the deceased.

We think it clear that the contract arising upon the admission of a beneficial member involves, on the part of the defendant, an agreement to pay, upon the death of a member, to his beneficiary, the sum of $5 in case he dies from any one of the diseases named within 183 days from the date of his admission; and in case he does not die from one of those diseases, or dies after the expiration of the 183 days, to pay to his beneficiary the sum of $500. It involves, on the part of the member, an agreement to pay his circle the monthly dues required, and his acceptance of the laws of the order relating to the administration of the funeral benefit fund and expulsion from the fund; and the same contract arises whenever a former member is reinstated after suspension or expulsion.

It further appears that Conklin was duly entered on the register of the supreme circle as a member of the funeral benefit fund, through admission as a beneficial member of the Ferris Bishop Circle, No. 6, on February 20th, 1899; that he did not pay his dues for the months of July, August, September and October, 1900, as required by the laws. At a meeting of the local circle held October 15th, 1900, record was made of Conklin’s suspension for nonpayment of dues. On October 29th the Hon. scroll keeper certified to the supreme scroll keeper the expulsion of Conklin for nonpayment *56 of dues, and on October 31st the supreme scroll keeper recorded the expulsion. On December 3d, 1900, Conklin attended a meeting of his circle, and paid his indebtedness to the circle for the funeral benefit fund dues up to the time of his expulsion, including the dues for October, which were payable on the 15th of that month, being the date of the last stated meeting for the month. Having thus made good his standing in the circle, he afterwards, on January 21st, 1901, made application for reinstatement in the funeral benefit fund, signing, as required, the application-blank,was elected to membership of the fund by the circle, executed the requisite agreement with the supreme circle upon the registration-blank, and paid the registration fee. The written application and agreement were duly forwarded to the supreme scroll keeper, and by him duly recorded February 1st, 1901, the written agreement being retained by the supreme circle as its laws .require when the admission of a member is registered. July 1st, 1901, Conklin died of phthisis pulmonalis, and proofs of his death were duly made out and presented to the supreme circle.

Upon this state of facts it is clear that the plaintiff is entitled to recover $5, and is not entitled to recover $500.

Upon the trial, the validity—under the rules of the order— of Conklin’s expulsion from the funeral benefit fund was contested. In respect to this claim the court found the following facts: At the meeting of the circle held October 15th, 1900, the Hon. register called off the name of Conklin for nonpayment of assessment for the funeral benefit fund of the supreme circle, and then entered in his funeral benefit fund book of the supreme circle the suspension of Conklin on that day; the Hon. scroll keeper entered in his book at said meeting the suspension of Conklin for nonpayment of dues ; no action was taken at said meeting in reference to said Conklin, by vote or otherwise, and the entries in said books were based on the action of the Hon. register.

From these facts, in connection with the other facts appearing in the finding, the court drew the conclusion that Conklin, at the time of his death, had been a member of *57 the funeral benefit fund for more than 183 consecutive days.

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

Related

Rosen v. Brotherhood of Painters, Decor. Paper
23 A.2d 153 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1941)
Richardson v. American Nat. Ins. Co.
137 So. 370 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1931)
Kane v. Knights of Columbus
79 A. 63 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1911)
Taufer v. Brotherhood of Painters
137 A.D. 838 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1910)
Coughlin v. Knights of Columbus
64 A. 223 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1906)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
55 A. 577, 76 Conn. 52, 1903 Conn. LEXIS 68, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/obrien-v-brotherhood-of-the-union-conn-1903.