State Ex Rel. Sanborn v. Kalb

Supreme Court of Kansas

State Ex Rel. Sanborn v. Kalb

546 P.2d 1406, 219 Kan. 231, 1976 Kan. LEXIS 356

CourtSupreme Court of Kansas

DecidedMarch 6, 1976

Docket47,943

StatusPublished

Cited by8 cases

This text of 546 P.2d 1406 (State Ex Rel. Sanborn v. Kalb) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Kansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State Ex Rel. Sanborn v. Kalb, 546 P.2d 1406, 219 Kan. 231, 1976 Kan. LEXIS 356 (kan 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Owsley, J.:

Our opinion in this case was filed December 13, 1975. At page 466, it was said:

“. . . In addition, we construe'‘bona fide . . . fraternal’ to require an applicant to satisfy the issuing agency it is an organization with a representative form of government and either that (1) it operates under the lodge system with a ritualistic form of work; (2) it is organized to promote the payment of life, sickness, .accident, or other insurance benefits to its members; or (3) it is organized to carry on some worthy civic or service purpose.”

Appellee’s motion seeks modification of the above statement by adding the words “and operated” after the word “organized” in the two instances where it appears.

The motion is supported by a memorandum which sets forth the argument of appellee. The memorandum points out that the language is subject to two inconsistent constructions; namely, (1) an organization need only be organized for fraternal purposes and need not be engaged in those purposes, or (2) an organization need be organized and operated for those fraternal purposes, to be deemed a “bona fide . . . fraternal” organization. Appellee’s argument has merit. In order to clarify the decision of this court and prevent any misunderstanding as to the requirements of a “bona fide . . . fraternal” organization, the above quoted statement is stricken from the opinion and the following is inserted in its place:

“. . . In addition, we construe ‘bona fide . . . fraternal’ to require an applicant to satisfy the issuing agency it is an organization with a representa *232 tive form of government and either that (1) it operates under the lodge system with a ritualistic form of work; (2) it is organized and operated to promote the payment of life, sickness), accident, or other insurance benefits to its members; or (3) it is organized and operated to carry on some worthy civic or service purpose.”

We adhere to our original opinion in all other respects.

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

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Owsley, J.:

Our opinion in this case was filed December 13, 1975. At page 466, it was said:

“. . . In addition, we construe'‘bona fide . . . fraternal’ to require an applicant to satisfy the issuing agency it is an organization with a representative form of government and either that (1) it operates under the lodge system with a ritualistic form of work; (2) it is organized to promote the payment of life, sickness, .accident, or other insurance benefits to its members; or (3) it is organized to carry on some worthy civic or service purpose.”

Appellee’s motion seeks modification of the above statement by adding the words “and operated” after the word “organized” in the two instances where it appears.

The motion is supported by a memorandum which sets forth the argument of appellee. The memorandum points out that the language is subject to two inconsistent constructions; namely, (1) an organization need only be organized for fraternal purposes and need not be engaged in those purposes, or (2) an organization need be organized and operated for those fraternal purposes, to be deemed a “bona fide . . . fraternal” organization. Appellee’s argument has merit. In order to clarify the decision of this court and prevent any misunderstanding as to the requirements of a “bona fide . . . fraternal” organization, the above quoted statement is stricken from the opinion and the following is inserted in its place:

“. . . In addition, we construe ‘bona fide . . . fraternal’ to require an applicant to satisfy the issuing agency it is an organization with a representa *232 tive form of government and either that (1) it operates under the lodge system with a ritualistic form of work; (2) it is organized and operated to promote the payment of life, sickness), accident, or other insurance benefits to its members; or (3) it is organized and operated to carry on some worthy civic or service purpose.”

We adhere to our original opinion in all other respects.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

546 P.2d 1406, 219 Kan. 231, 1976 Kan. LEXIS 356, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-sanborn-v-kalb-kan-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack