The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1895-09-23
INSURANCE DECISION.
Of1nterest to Lawv-rs and Iuves,ors ii
Life In.urancr.

Of1nterest to LawY-rs and Iuvesiors in
Life In.uranc-.
Judge Hazen of the district court this
morning handed down his decision in
the Bank of Enterprise-M Maria
! Hatfner insurance case which has al
trdcted such wide interest and Discus
sion. His ruling is in favor of the de-
PENDANT, Mrs II fner. and the plaintiff
! will now take the case 10 the supreme
court
The position taken BY Judge Hazen
is an important one. 1t concerns every
Que who insures in life insurance COM
panies or fraternal orders. The whole
question was whether creditor can gar :
ulshee an. Insurance company for bene-
fciary money payable 10 a debtor.
Judge Hazen holds that the creditor can
OF do So
This case is of vast importance to
regular life companies as wen as to ben
eiciary orders, AS it practically sustains
the main principle VI on whicik insurance
companies aud beneficiary orders are
founded that is, protection 10 the widow
and the orphan. 1t at abe lme tune
susiains the exemption of regal reserve
companies from payment of taxes on
! Their reserves.
The Bank Of Enterprise originally gar
! nlsheed both the A o. Z. ", and tue
Kansas Murual Life. The deceased hu,-
band of Mrs IIatfuer i Carrie $2.v00
I insurance in the A. O. q. W, aud S5,Uuu
in The other company. The garntsh-
ment against the A 0 I. W. was after
| ward dismissed as the amount in the
Mutual Lie. $500, was enough TO
| satisfy the banks claims if it Won the
! Case
On the death of Mr.. Haffner the bank
| commenced suit against the estate and
! ali q
Tor the amount, payable 10 MS widow as
beneficiary.
Herrlck s. Lynch, attorneys for Mrs
| Hatfner, then moved TO set SIDE the
) gdrnIsnmeni, on the ground that it was
uniaw fuI under the aute of 1895 max
ing the proceeds of all lie insur-
ance policies and certificates of
| beneficiary societies, together with the
legal reserves belonging 10 all sucn poll
cles issued by regular Life companies
exempt from the C aims of creditors both
of the person insured and The person
named in the policy or certificate.
3 fore the enactment of 1895, the law
exempted only he pr ceeds of such in
surance policies as had been issued by
regular life companies, aud only against
the claims of creditors of the person TAX
ing out the insurance aud to the extent
of but 500 annual premiums.
w men TIE mOLlOn WAS trSu0Q O6lOr0
Judge tiazen the attorneys tor the bank
claimed that the law Of 1895 was uncun-
striuiionaL They ur ed that the con-
tract with the company as made br Mr..
| Haffner before this law was passed and
therefore not applicable to the case in
question They said that the law of 1895
is unconstitutional as it impairs The
validity of contracts and exempts an un-
limited amount of in urance.
Judge Hazen SAID his morning that
he had been delayed giving his decision
because TWO other cases of the same
nature are pending in other district
courts of the state, and he hoped that
these judges would settle first One is
before Judge Humphrey of junction City
Judge of known affinity. Judge Hazen
said he would not wait longer and All
nounced his decision sustaining the mo-
ton TO dismiss the garnishnent.
In number of the counties of the
state actions ready to be commenced
have been withheld for this DECISION.