New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1897-07-13
THE LAW AGAINST A WIDOW.
BUT RIGHT IS ON HER SIDE. JUSTICE
sMYTH SAYS. IN DECIDING AD-
VERSEIY TO HER.

Judgment was signed yesterday b. Justice smyth
IN the Supreme Court In favor OF Peter Eagah' the
defendant in suit brought against him by MS SIS
ter-in-law, Alice Il. Eagan, TO recover from MIN
1900. the value OF a certificate OF nemoership vi
her husband In the Mount Morris Counch OF the
Catholic Benevolent Legion prior 10 MS oea'n III
1894 Justice Smyth in his opinion says that II IL
were In his power he would have decided IN the
widows favor and refuses to allow her brother-in-
law his costs
The defendant IL a lawyer at No. 22o Broadway
His brother James Joined the Catholic BeneVoient
Legion on February 10. 1885. and obtained cerui-
cate for S. 900 In which Peter Eagan was nameo rs
beneficiary James was then unmarried pu' III 1863
married the plaintiff One child. Marguerite, was
horn NJ tho union Soon after his marriage James
Eagan gave his wife his insurance certificate, ana
from that time until he died Mrs. Eagan PAID al
most all the dues and assessments upon H. IL was
testified at the trial OF the suit that James Eagan
said to his wife. when giving her the pohcy'
1.-THE insurance on my life Is for you. IL any
thing happens to me you are as sure OF the money
as II 1t was in your own name. hy pro'ie' "o"'u
not keep a dollar Of it." ,.., .,,
IL was said that when dying he reiterated tnis s
statement In the presence oil has death Mrs.
Eagan gave the certificate to her brother-in-iaw;
who cashed It, paid 500 for his broher o III ,be
EXPENSES and invested the remaining Wow IN the
nIIrchase of a house and lot at No. III East one
hundred and-seventeenths. He had tins hods Use
mace. Then only did Mrs. Eagan learn that the
title to this property was In her nch he re-
name She asked for accounting, Wnich ne -, re- !,
fused telling her that the 5000 was ms, ana .iia'
she had no right to II. She then brought her ac-
ton. 49,, -. .ho. his hro,her-
nav had never changed the name OF the Dene-
ficary in the policy registered by the IuIes Vi
the Catholic Benevolent Legion. ana that the Wiuom
had therefore, no claim on the money. Justly ne
Smyh in his opinion upholds this contention, pu I
saws The evidence clearly shows nat ~ was M
Flames Eagan's) intention have his wife supstl-
anafr
and il was his belief that by placing her IN posses
sion Of his certificate he had made valid GIT 70
his wife which sufficient TO vest IN ner th i
title and right to receive from the association az ms
decease the benefit which his benehciaiy woud men
he entitled TO receive. The intention OF James
Eagan 10 give his wife the certificate OF MS me
bership in the Catholic Benevolent Legion ana 70
vest in her the right to receive the oenent ana al
vantage 10 be derived under the contract existing
between him and the association Is SO concluslNeIy
established by the evidence that II created a sIohs
disposition on my part 10 cnertuate MS lntenton
and sustain the gift II possible. But on carefui
consideration of the evidence and authorities pear
ing upon the question involved in this case | am
10 the relief she asks for in this action
Justice Smvth then holds that the certificate was
not an asset. and that James Eagan's failure to
comply with the rules OF the Catholic Benevolent
Legion by changing the name OF the benehciary de-
bars Mrs. Eagan from succeeding in her suit. Inc
conduct OF the defendant in this matter the justice
adds has been shown 10 be such a. would NOT
Justify the Court in the exercise Of Its discretion
TO award him COSTS