The Irish standard. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn. ;) 1886-1920, 1895-03-23
AN IMPORTANT DECISION.
Filled Monday In a Catholic Building and
, Loan Case.


&c Loan Case.
The decision filed Monday by Judge
Belden in the case Of Catherine Hughes
vs.. the Hennepin County Catholic Build
ing and Loan Association is Of sufficient
Importance to be stated at length.
The contention in this case is upon.
the construction Of q bylaw providing Tor
rebate OF the premiums paid by the
borrower when such borrower pays back
his loan. tt was intended by the associ-
alton to apply TO- cases where 9 stock.
holder had paid dues on his shares Of
stock in series for certain number Of
years without borrowing, and then desir-
ed to borrow. Thus, if he had paid dues
on his stock for two years from the issue
Of the series, and then borrowed, the as
sociation would credit him with rebate
of two-ninths os the premium bid by him
for these two years expired Of the series.
This bylaw has been in force for IA years,
and always interpreted by the association
as above stated. The Interpretation put
upon it by the association is disputed by
the plaintiff in this action, who claims in
her complaint that under this bylaw she
should receive q rebate Of one ninth of
the premium for each year expired Of the
series up to the time OF settlement, in
stead OF the time of borrowing, as intend
ed by the association.
She owned five shares of stock in the
10Th series, issued in August, 1889, and
three shares in the 18th series, issued in
August, 1891. These shares are Of the
par value Of 5000 each when paid ur. In
August, 1891, she bid premium Of $50
per share to get loan on the eight
shares, or q total premium OF $640. The
association advanced her 1850 in cash
and she gave a mortgage to secure the
payment Of 81 900, being the amount Of
this premium bid and cash advanced.
She paid back so much Of the loan as
was on the three shares in the 18th
series in November, 1893. When she
commenced this action the 10Th series
had been in force six years. Her claim
is that she is entitled under this bylaw
to rebate of six ninths of the premium
bid on the five shares in the 10th series,
for six expired years, or $266.64. On the
other hand, the association claims that
the rebate should be only two .ninths, or
$88.88, for the two years OF the series
that had expired when she borrowed,
making difference Of $l77.76 between
the two accounts.
Judge Belden decided that inasmuch
as if this bylaw is susceptible of different
constructions that which has been put
upon it by the association shauid be fol
lowed, for the reason that the customs
and practices Of the association, under
it's bylaws, are binding upon the mem
bers in their dealings with each other.
and that Mrs Hughes is to receive 9
credit OF two ninths Of the premium, or
$88s8 only.
i She also claimed q rebate for three
ninths Of the premium for three unexpired
years under another bylaw and re-
formation of the mortgage as to the in
tereet clause, but these two latter points
were not disputed by the association.
Judge Belden finds thatin the settle
ment Mrs. Hughes is to be charged with
premium 500, loan received $3.50, total
81 600 and that she is to be credited with
$500 loan on shares in 18th series paid
back Noy. 80, 1893; s8S8s rebate Of premi
UNI on five shares 18th series for two OK.
PRED years $l3a33 rebate Of premium
For three unexpired years; $49O3 80 value
OF said five shares Of stock, total $63251
Balance due from Mrs. Hughes 1867 a.
This decision sustains the association
Oh every disputed point and differs from
that Of Judge Jamison in the case Of Peter
McDonough vs. this association, recently
decided, in that Mod onough e loan was
81 the 18th series and more than nine
years old when he demanded q settler
ment, and the court followed the decision
ii Fitzgerald against this association,
decided in the supreme court . year ego.
The association claims that the Fitzger-
aid case does not apply u the construction
Sc is bylaws, asiit was tried on 9 state
mont 81 facts that did not show the
practice and usage of the aasocation
The effect q Judge Beldens decision
d thu the borrower must pay the pre-
mum &c The rata q ono ninth Tor e.sch
year shat he has tic loan and the premlil- i
I'm flass learned ONES part The pro
fits,t lint the earned ortion of the pre1 D
Uni Il, 1ot rl,eturnel1 to the borrower ex
sent 81 Is inc tn value d biz stock;
tl,at TIC. boat.rros,wer onl s .aettlenasnt prior
u III MOI uriitt oe Hi d ~ is IL
da tor ~ m ~ ] u