The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1899-05-04
EQUITABLE LIFE SURPLUS.
ST1TEMENTF FOR THE COMPANY ABOUT
TIE GREEFF DECISION.

The Surplus belongs to the Policyholders
and tho Questions When and How It
Shall He Divided Remain to He Settled.
James W. Alexander. e-Presldent OF the
Equitable Llfe=Assurance Society, who, II is
understood. will sue iced the late Henry b.
HYDE as President OF the company. made u
abatement yesterday about the decision rem
dered on Tuesday by the Appellate Division
of the Supreme Court in Brooklyn In the suit
of Emil GreefY. a policyholder. Not many de-
cislons by the courts In recent years have at
tracted so much attention as this decision.
which states that. when the Equitable Society
has determined what its surplus i. It must
make an equitable distribution. not OF a por-
ton Of the fund. but of all Of IT," Mr.. Alex
ander said:
The bald statement Of the decision Is cal
culated to give the affair an air Of greater i'm
portance than It deserves. For example. there
is no question about the entire surplus OF the
Equitable and other mutual companies belong
ing TO the policyholdera. The only question
IA how IL shall; be divided and when. Neither
is there any question about the immediate d.
vision OF the entire surplus OF the society.
The question arises In regard 10 a marginal
surplus OF SG.000.000 or thereabouts. very
properly carried over from year to year as a
guarantee against fluctuations In values. The
plaintiff in this action believes he Is entitled
share Of surplus. which he has received.
BY reason Of the forms OF legal proceeding
an amin iInIqg Hdys into nn o wh u tri h9 y g9 9Ss ae ss entitled ie Ito to
der 70 brush away certain legal questions. the
society's counsel, preferred to demur to the
complaint. which in comm0n narlance is as
legged. the plaintiff has no standing, in court
Judge DAILY in the court. below held in a
fcerS could not, be invaded. The Appellate
Court 10 divided In its opinion. but the ma
iority hold that the matter is a fair subject for
THE Surplus Of the society is divided into
two parts, one.. and by far the larger part,
6 6finE se, poli @SSoE son'r TRe fS5 tns a Of: { shese
policies receive their full, share OF surplus
profits as determined by the actuaries of the
The other and smaller par. is Invisible from
year to year. according TO the existing state OF
affairs among the annual dividend policyhoTd-
dend policyholders. and i his view Of the case
prevailed his share would be not the $1,000
claimed. but a very small sum.
AN application Is to be made at once to
have the case certified to the. Court OF Appeals.
and even upon an adverse decision there the
light OF facts which In the opinion OF our coun-
sci would dispose OF the whole thing s~atisfac-
torily, i must T. he remembered that in arga,
IL necessarily. and perhaps unfortunately. that
Of an acceptance Of the statement OF facts made
and modified. and would he 10 the present case
on going into that side OF the subject. The
suit has not yet been brought to trial on the
facts. the society preferrinR TO settle in I'D
vance some questions. arising on the plead
ings. among which is the question how far tho
Protecting the policyhoiders against a too ex-
treme division OF surplus. Unless the decision
OF the Appellate Division is reversed on appeal.
and all questions as to division Of surplus will
be satisfactorily disposed Of"