People v. Elgin Home Protective Ass'n

194 N.E. 584, 359 Ill. 379
CourtIllinois Supreme Court
DecidedFebruary 21, 1935
DocketNo. 22833. Reversed and remanded.
StatusPublished
Cited by14 cases

This text of 194 N.E. 584 (People v. Elgin Home Protective Ass'n) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Illinois Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
People v. Elgin Home Protective Ass'n, 194 N.E. 584, 359 Ill. 379 (Ill. 1935).

Opinion

Mr. Justice Farthing

delivered the opinion of the court:

A direct appeal has been perfected to this court from a decree of the circuit court of Kane county because the State is an interested party. The Attorney General filed a bill 011 behalf of the People to restrain the Elgin Home Protective Association, J. H. Jones, its president, and Ada L. Brown, its secretary, from conducting a mutual insurance business unless and until the association complied with “An act to incorporate mutual benefit associations on the assessment plan, intended to benefit the widows, orphans, heirs and devisees of deceased members thereof and members who have received a permanent disability and to provide for and regulate the control of such associations and to provide penalties for violation of the provisions thereof,” approved June 27, 1927, (Laws of 1927, p. 583,) or until the association should in some other respect become qualified under the laws of this State to engage in the insurance business. The chancellor heard the cause on the pleadings and a stipulation of facts and entered a decree finding that the Elgin Home Protective Association was not subject to the provisions of the Mutual Benefit act and dismissing the appellant’s bill for want of equity.

The Elgin Home Protective Association is a voluntary unincorporated association. It conducts the business of a mutual benefit society. Its office is located in the city of Elgin, in Kane county. It has operated continuously since its organization in 1910. It has approximately fourteen hundred members. Membership is restricted to persons between the ages of fourteen and forty-five years and to residents of the city of Elgin. It agrees to pay to beneficiaries of members the sum of one dollar for every member in good standing at the time of death of the insured member but not to exceed $1000. A membership fee of $3.75 is charged, and upon the death of a member an assessment of one dollar is made upon each surviving member. The dues are a dollar and a half a year. The secretary, who is the only salaried officer, receives $1500 a year.

The sole question presented is whether an unincorporated mutual benefit society organized and doing business in this State prior to the enactment of the Mutual Benefit act of 1927 can be compelled to incorporate under that or some other act as a prerequisite to continuing its insurance business. The purpose of the act as set forth in its title is, “An act to incorporate mutual benefit associations on the assessment plan, * * * and to provide for and regulate the control of such associations and to provide penalties for violation of the provisions thereof.” Section 1 provides: “Mutual benefit associations, on the assessment plan, * * * may be formed under this act as hereinafter provided.” Section 2 provides: “Any five or more persons, who are bona fide citizens and voters of this State, desiring to form a mutual benefit association under this act shall file with the Director of Trade and Commerce, [now the Director of Insurance,] in writing, a declaration of their desire to form such association,” etc. Then follows a list of the things that they must set forth in that declaration. Section 13 provides: “Any association organized to insure the lives of its members which provides for the payment of losses and the expenses of the management and prosecution of the business by payments, to be made upon assessments as required, by members holding similar contracts and wherein the members’ liability to contribute to the payment of losses accrued, or to accrue, is not limited to a fixed sum shall be deemed to be mutual benefit associations engaged in the business of life insurance upon the mutual benefit assessment plan and shall be subject to the provisions of this act, and such associations shall be subject to the provisions of no other insurance law of this State except as in this act definitely provided. This act shall not apply to associations, the membership of which is confined to the membership of any fraternal organization operating on a secret or ritual basis, or of any lodge thereof.” Section 15 provides: “Any existing domestic corporation transacting business under an act entitled, ‘An act concerning corporations,’ approved April 18, 1872, as a corporation not for pecuniary profit, for the purpose of benefiting the widows, orphans, heirs and devisees of deceased members thereof, and members who have received a permanent disability, and where the member shall receive no money as profit or otherwise except for permanent disability; and all associations engaged in the business of insurance of lives of its members and not subject to any other of the insurance laws of this State, shall re-incorporate under its existing corporate name, or a corporate name selected for that purpose in accordance with this act under the provisions of this act upon filing with the Director of Trade and Commerce, a declaration of its desire to do so, signed and duly acknowledged by a majority of the board of directors, trustees or managers, together with a certificate of association as required of associations proposing to organize under the provisions of this act. Upon receipt of such declaration and certificate of association, the Director of Trade and Commerce [now the Director of Insurance] shall examine same and if he shall find that such certificate of association is not inconsistent with the provisions of this act he shall cause same to be recorded in a book to be kept for that purpose * * * and such corporation shall thereupon be deemed to be incorporated under the provisions of this act.” By section 21 the Director of Insurance is given the power to inspect the associations organized under this act. Section 27 prescribes the fees he may charge, and section 28 requires that an annual report shall be filed with him in such form as he may direct. Section 9 gives him power to approve the form of the certificates of membership issued by mutual benefit associations.

The primary object in construing a statute is tó ascertain and give effect to the true intent and meaning of the legislature in enacting it, and it is the intention of the lawmakers that makes the law. (Hoyne v. Danisch, 264 Ill. 467.) For the purpose of ascertaining and giving effect to the intention of the law-makers it is proper to consider the occasion and necessity for the law. Where the intention of the legislature in adopting the act is clearly expressed and its objects and purposes are clearly set forth, the courts are not confined to the literal meaning of the words used when to do so will defeat the obvious legislative intention and result in absurd consequences not contemplated or intended by the legislature. In such cases the literal language of the statute may be departed from, and words may be changed, altered, modified and supplied, or omitted entirely, if necessary to obviate any repugnancy or inconsistency between the language used and the intention of the legislature as gathered from a consideration of the whole act and the previous condition of legislation upon that subject. (People v. Fox, 269 Ill. 300; People v. Patten, 338 id. 385.) Where the rights of the public or of third persons are involved, words in the statute importing permission or authority may be read as mandatory and words imposing a command may be read as permissive, whenever, in either case, such a construction is made necessary by the evident intention of the legislature. The words “may” and “shall,” when used in a statute, will sometimes be read interchangeably, as will best express the legislative intent. (People v. Board of Supervisors, 308 Ill. 543, 548; Canal Comrs. v.

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

Related

RL Polk and Co. v. Ryan
694 N.E.2d 1027 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1998)
Rohm & Haas Co. v. Continental Assurance Co.
374 N.E.2d 727 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1978)
Miles v. Bank of Heflin
328 So. 2d 281 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1975)
Opinion No. 69-256 (1969) Ag
Oklahoma Attorney General Reports, 1969
McCormick v. Statler Hotels Delaware Corp.
203 N.E.2d 697 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1964)
Johnson v. Pautler
174 N.E.2d 675 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1961)
United States v. Jones
204 F.2d 745 (Seventh Circuit, 1953)
VanAusdall v. McCanon
133 F.2d 604 (Seventh Circuit, 1943)
Carter Oil Co. v. Norman
131 F.2d 451 (Seventh Circuit, 1942)
People Ex Rel. Kerner v. Railway Mail Mutual Benefit Ass'n
20 N.E.2d 91 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1939)
Kurzawski v. Kurzawski
5 N.E.2d 597 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1937)
Illinois Power & Light Corp. v. City of Centralia, Ill.
11 F. Supp. 874 (E.D. Illinois, 1935)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
194 N.E. 584, 359 Ill. 379, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-elgin-home-protective-assn-ill-1935.