Supreme Lodge, Knights of Pythias v. Mims

241 U.S. 574, 36 S. Ct. 702, 60 L. Ed. 1179, 1916 U.S. LEXIS 1681
CourtSupreme Court of the United States
DecidedJune 12, 1916
Docket345
StatusPublished
Cited by50 cases

This text of 241 U.S. 574 (Supreme Lodge, Knights of Pythias v. Mims) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Supreme Lodge, Knights of Pythias v. Mims, 241 U.S. 574, 36 S. Ct. 702, 60 L. Ed. 1179, 1916 U.S. LEXIS 1681 (1916).

Opinion

Mr. Justice Holmes

delivered the opinion of the court.

This is a suit against a corporation chartered by Congress on June 29, 1894 (c. 119; 28 Stat. 96), to recover all sums paid by the plaintiff, the defendant in error, to the defendant and its predecessors; the ground alleged being that the defendant, the plaintiff in error, has demanded monthly dues in excess of its rights and thereby has entitled the plaintiff to recover all that he had paid, with interest.

• The facts are as follows: The plaintiff originally took out two certificates of insurance from an earlier corporation of the same name, the charter of which expired on *576 August 5, 1890. In May, 1885, he surrendered these certificates and took out a new one in what was called the Fourth Class by which, in consideration of his original declarations and representations and of the payment "of all monthly payments as required, and the full compliance with all the laws governing this Rank, now in force, or that may hereafter be enacted and shall be in good standing under said laws” the sum of $3,000 was to be paid to the plaintiff’s wife, or such other beneficiary as he might direct in proper form, upon notice and proof of death and good standing at the time; provided, as ■hereafter stated. It was further stipulated that any violation of the conditions mentioned or the requirements of the laws governing this Rank should avoid all claims. By the certificate of incorporation the corporation had power ‘to alter and amend its Constitution and By-laws at will ’; the laws of 1880, then in force, provided that ‘ these laws [regulating assessments inter alia,] .may be altered or amended at any regular session of the Supreme Lodge K. of P.’; and by his original application the plaintiff agreed to conform to the laws and regulations of the order then in force or that, might thereafter be enacted, or submit to the penalties therein .contained.

The plaintiff contends that his contract took him out of these reiterated provisions for possible change; and his ground is that by Article Y, § 4, of the laws of 1884, creating the Fourth Class, the endowment fund for the payment of benefits in that class was to be derived from monthly payments from each member for each one thousand dollars of endowment, to be graded according to the age of the member at the time of making application, and his expectancy of life, the age to be taken at the nearest birthday, "Said monthly payments shall be based upon the average expectancy of life of the applicant, and shall continue the same so long as his membership continues.” A table appended gave the rate for the different ages from *577 21 to 60. At that time members were transferred to the Fourth Class at the original entry age, which in the plaintiff’s case was 42. These same laws of 1884 repeated the former provision as to amendment by the Supreme Lodge, now requiring a two-thirds vote. The recension of 1886 repeated the last-mentioned provision and set forth a form of application by which the applicant agreed not only, as heretofore, that he, but also that 'this contract shall be controlled’ by the laws then in force or that might be enacted thereafter. The power to alter was applied in 1888 to the payments, to be made by the Fourth Class. The Board of Control was ordered to rerate members transferred to the Fourth Class as the plaintiff was, so that thereafter they should pay as of the age at which they were transferred instead of that at which they first became members. Thereafter the plaintiff paid as. of the age of 48.

After the charter expired in 1890 the business was kept going under the same name by a voluntary association, the plaintiff paying his assessments as before, until on June 29, 1894, the act of Congress mentioned incorporated certain persons named, 'officers and members of the Supreme Lodge, Knights of Pythias’ by the name of 'The Supreme Lodge Knights of Pythias’ and authorized them to use the powers 'incidental to fraternal and benevolent corporations within the District of Columbia.’ By the third section of the charter-''all claims, accounts, debts, things in action or other matters of business of whatever nature now existing for or against the present Supreme Lodge Knights of Pythias, mentioned in § 1 of this act, shall survive and succeed to and against, the body corporate and politic hereby created; provided that nothing contained herein shall be construed'to extend ■the operation of any law which provides for the extinguishing of claims or contracts by limitations of time.” This is the main ground upon which the defendant is *578 sought to be charged with the certificate issued by the former corporation. By § 4 “said corporation shall have a constitution, and shall have power to amend the same at pleasure; provided, that such constitution or amendments thereof do not conflict with the laws of the United States or of any State.” Amendments to the laws of the association were adopted this same year, 1894, by one of which the existing rates were retained and it was provided that each member of the endowment rank should continue to pay the same amount each month thereafter so long as he remained a member, 'unless otherwise provided for by the Supreme Lodge or Board of Control of the endowment rank.’ A similar provision was made in 1900, but the rate for the age of 48 was made $2.45 or $7.35 for the $3,000 in the certificate. The plaintiff paid the rates as established from time to time.

The split came in 1910. In that year the corporation passed a law providing for a rerating of every member of the Fourth Class on January 11, 1911, in accordance ■with his attained age and occupation, under which the plaintiff’s monthly'payment-would be raised to $34.80, unless he accepted one of several options offered to him. It should be added that his occupation played no part as it was not ranked as hazardous. He was notified, but declined to pay or otherwise accede to the change. On January 20, 1911, he tendered $22.05 for the months of January, February and March of that year, the tender was refused and in May this suit was begun. The Court of Civil Appeals affirmed a judgment for the plaintiff on a verdict directed by the trial court, modifying it so far as to confine the recovery to payments made since the issue of the certificate of 1885, with interest. An application to the Supreme Court for a writ of error was refused.

There is a motion to dismiss but as the case necessarily will turn on the construction of the present charter, an act of' Congress, and the defendant justifies under it, the *579 motion is denied. Creswill v. Knights of Pythias, 225 U. S. 246, 258. There is. no ground for treating the plaintiff as not having come into the new company by virtue of § 3. That section provided for his doing so and when he was treated and acted as a member the presumption is conclusive that he did so in pursuance of the law that authorized it.

We assume without argument that by § 3 of the charter and his assent thereto the plaintiff became a member of the organization with whatever rights he might have as such.

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

Related

CareFirst, Inc. v. Taylor
235 F. Supp. 3d 724 (D. Maryland, 2017)
District of Columbia v. Group Hospitalization & Medical Services, Inc.
576 F. Supp. 2d 51 (District of Columbia, 2008)
Superior Bedding Company v. Serta Associates, Inc.
353 F. Supp. 1143 (N.D. Illinois, 1972)
Roland Electrical Co. v. Black
163 F.2d 417 (Fourth Circuit, 1947)
Kentucky Home Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Leitner
196 S.W.2d 421 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976), 1946)
Bright v. Hobbs
56 F. Supp. 723 (D. Maryland, 1944)
Henry v. Railway Mail Mut. Ben. Ass'n
179 S.W.2d 333 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1944)
Taggart v. Wachter, Hoskins & Russel, Inc.
21 A.2d 141 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1941)
State, Ex Rel. v. Sovereign Camp Woodmen of the World
180 So. 33 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1938)
Shultz v. Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen
188 S.E. 474 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1936)
White v. Woodmen of the World
50 P.2d 422 (Utah Supreme Court, 1935)
Woodmen of the World v. Lamson
47 P.2d 399 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1935)
Shapiro v. Independent Order
154 Misc. 85 (City of New York Municipal Court, 1934)
McElfresh v. MacCabees
156 S.E. 58 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1930)
Jenkins v. Talbot
170 N.E. 735 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1930)
Sovereign Camp, W. O. W. v. Cousins
26 S.W.2d 453 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1930)
Haynes v. Fraternal Aid Union
34 F.2d 305 (D. Kansas, 1929)
American Insurance Union v. Mead
1929 OK 50 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1929)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
241 U.S. 574, 36 S. Ct. 702, 60 L. Ed. 1179, 1916 U.S. LEXIS 1681, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/supreme-lodge-knights-of-pythias-v-mims-scotus-1916.