Virginian-pilot. (Norfolk, Va.) 1898-1911, 1900-08-30
COURT DECISIONS.
DlGESTED BY w. B. MARTIN
EXCLUSIVELY FOR
vlRCtNlANsPILoT.
Notes Of Cases Recently Decided
Which Are Of interest to
Our People.
STRAUSS ". NUT. RESERVE r. l.
ASSO

STRAUSS ". NUT. RESERVE r. /.
ASSO.
Supreme Court OF North Carolina.
June 8, 1900.
A MUTUAL INSURANCE SOCIETY
CANNOT CHANGE THE CON-
TRACT WITH A MEMBER BY
& PLACING HIM IN A CLASS
WHICH is ASSESSED ACCORD
ING TO AGE AT THE TIME OF
ASSESSMENT. WHILE OTHER
MEMBERS ARE ASSESSED AS TO
AGE AT THE TIME OF ENTRY.
IN SUCH CASE THE MEMBER CAN
RECOVER THE PREMIUMS AND
DUES PAID BY HIM, WITH IN
.TEREST FROM THE DATE OF
EACH PAYMENT.
The facts appear from the opinion
Of the court.
The court says:
This Is an action brought to recover
damages for the alleged wrongful can
collation. of q policy of insurance The
record comprises over 500 pages, with
large number of insertions, amount
ing In the aggregate to perhaps 600
pages OF printed matter. The case was
fully and ably argued at length, and
we have been favored with well-pre-
pared and exhaustive briefs, and yet
we see but one simple point essential
TO the determination Of the case: Can
a mutual association, by whatever
name 1t may be called, or whatever
may be Its purposes, enter into con-
tract with one of it's members, and,
after receiving large sums upon said
contract, alter its essential terms
without the consent of the member, SO
n ~ lNT 70 1actr 70,
think not. The plaintiff became
member of the plaintiff association in
1888, and received a policy in the form
OF u certificate of membership, where
In 1t was expressly agreed that assess
ments should "be made upon the en-
tire membership in force at the date
of the last death for such sum as the
Executive Committee may deem sufIi-
cient to cover said claims; the same to
be apportioned among the members ac-
cording to the age of each member as
per table Endorsed" on said certificate.
1t appears from the findings of fact
that the plaintiff paid all demands
made upon him up to the year 1898,
and call No. sc. This last call he re-
fused to pay on the ground that 1t was
eXorbitant and contrary to the express
terms of his policy. 1t seems that by
successive resolutions, none OF which
were amendments to its constitution,
the association has placed in a sepa-
rate class all members who entered
prior TO 1890, and requires them TO pay
on the basis of the age attained by.
each at the date of each assessment,
While other members continue to be as
sessed only as of their age of entry.
That the result of such discrimination
is injurious to the plaintiff clearly APP
pears from the 10th. 18th. 21st and 22d
findings of fact. estimate or even APP
proximated. Upon his findings OF
TACT. the court below concluded. as
matter OF law, that the assessment
made in pursuance of the resolutions of
1898 was in pursuance of the resolu-
tons of 1895 was ''in violation OF de-
PENDANTS constitution and excessive
and invalid; that the defendant, hav-
ing ceased and refused to recognize the
plaintiff as member on account of
his having refused to pay such excess
sive and Invalid assessment, had broken
it's contract, and had become liable to
the plaintiff i'm damages. to be meas
ured by the amount of premiums and
dues paid by plaintiff prior to call &c.
with interest thereon from date of each
payment" Judgment was rendered
accordingly. In it we see no error. All
that we decide In the present case is
that the defendant has violated its
contract with the plaintiff in ma
terial matter. whereby the plaintiff
having suffered substantial injury is
entitled to substantial damages. We
do not decide that a mutual insurance
company, or any other kind of in
surance company. cannot issue poll
Cfes or dfvers Kinds and cfasses. II SO
authorized by It's charter; nor do we
decide that member of purely mu-
tual association is not bound by all
reasonable bylaws and changes law
fully made therein. We are not con-
sidering the enforcement of contract
inequitable on its face. but the viola
ton of n lawful contract by attaching
thereto. without the consent of the
plaintiff, conditions which utterly de-
stroy it's value. 1t is evident that, il
the resolution of 1893 is binding upon
the plaintiff he would in any event be
eventually forced out of the company
by the constantly increasing premiums
There is one fact that does not clear
ly appear from the record, and upon
which counsel themselves seem to diff
fer. which, while not essential to the
determination of this case, seems
worthy of notice: On the hearing it
was contended that the defendant as