St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1888-10-17
SAINT PAUL.
BALANCING THE SCALES.
Decision by the Supreme Court on In
suranee Policies.
SCHOOL BUILDINGS EXEMPT.
gTist Ground Out by the Ellis Ci
Justice in Minor
Cases.

Three decisions were filed yesterday
In the supreme court, the most impor-
tant being that of Matte Davidson, re-
spondent, VS.. The Old Peoples Mutual
Benefit Society, appellant. The policy
of this society provides that any mem
Der who has forfeited his certificate
may be again restored at any time
within six months by furnishing
proof of good health and paying
the full amount of arrears. The
bylaws, which are nowhere referred to
in the policy, provide that if the death
of the person injured shall occur within
sixty days from and after the date of
reinstatement, the society shall be liza
BILE to the beneficiary for only the
amount actually paid to the society on
account of the certificate in cash. Ac-
cOrding to the terms of the policy the
beneficiary would be entitled to $1,000,
but under the bylaws to only S16S.7S,
the assured having died within sixty
days after the the date of reinstatement.
Judge MitcheiPs decision sets forth that:
"When a policy of insurance is issued
by mutual benefit society, the terms
of which are in conflict with a bylaw
of the society Gt having power under
its charter to issue such a policy, the
society must be deemed to have waived
the provisions of the bylaw in favor of
the assured, and whenever they are in
consistent with the provisions of the
policy the latter will control the rights
of the parties. BY the terms of the
policy, a member who had forfeited his
certificate had right to be restored
upon certain conditions. Held, that a
reinstatement, upon compliance with
these conditions, constituted no con-
sideFatiOn for stipulation eXacted by
the society from the beneficiary that it
should be liable to pay him only part
of the amount to which he would be
entitled under the terms of the policy.
Order affirmed"
The second case was that of George
r. Lewis, appellant, VS.. jeremiah g.
Prendergast ct al, respondents.
Aug. ), 1876, the parties agreed and a
contract was executed for the sale of
certain land, and the purchase money
was to be paid and the deed delivered
one year from that day. May, 1888,
plaintiff offered to pay the purchase
money, with interest, and demanded
conveyance. Defendant PrendergaSt
refused to accept the money or execute
deed. Action was commenced April,
1887. The contract was wholly eXecu-
tory, and there is no allegation that the
time of performance had ever been eX-
tended. Judge MitchelI's decision iSaS
follows:
AN action to compel specific perform
ance of an eXecutOry contract for the
sale of real estate must be brought
within six years after the cause of
action accrues. Gen. Stat. 1878, chap.
66, sec. 6. The vendee's right of action
accTues when he is entitled to file his
bill for specific performance, and this
he may do on the date fixed by the con-
tract for the payment of the purchase
money and the delivery of the deed (the
two being concurrent and DEPENDENT.
although he has not previously offered
performance on his own part or de-
manded performance on the part of the
vendor. His neglect to make such offer
and demand before suit will only affect
the question of costs. Order affirmed"
Peter Jordan ct al. appellants, VS..
Board of Education of TaylOr's Falls,
respondent. The question raised was
whether, under chapter 10, General
Laws 1887, public school house was
subject to a lien for work done or ma
terial furnished towards its erection.
Judge Mitchell decides: "a public
school house is not subject to me-
chanic'S lien under chapter 10, General
Laws 1887" Order affirmed.
Routine business transacted by the
supreme court was: The State of Min
neSota. Thomas J. Leftwich, relatOr, VS..
The District Court of the Fourth Ju-
dicial District for the County of Henne-
pin, respondent. Continued to next
term.
William J. Godfrey, respondent, VS..
William j. Valentine, appellant. Argued
and submitted.
K. Mcdonald ct al, respondents, VS..
John Ryan ct al, appellants. Sub
mitted on briefs.