The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1905-12-15
In addition to the Shevlin decision,
noted elsewhere, the supreme court
handed down the following decisions:

Araminta H. Taylor, respondent. rs. Grand
Lodge of the Ancient Order OF United Work
men OF Minnesota, appellant
Syllabus: A made a written application
for membership In a lodge and therein stated
that he was A. years of age. The laws of
the order restricted the membership to persons
who are under - years Of age at the time of
their admission. Accompanying the application
and as part thereof, was certificate signed by
the applicant which contained the following
language: II certify that the answers made
by me to tie questions propounded by the medi
cal examiner of this lodge. which attached
to the application and form part thereof are
true; and If it should hereafter appear that
have made false statements In any particular,
Notwithstanding in the meantime may pay all
regular assessments, it is hereby agreed upon
my part that the false statements and actions
shall render null and void forever any beneficiary
certificates to be hereafter issued upon the basis
Of this agreement and medical examiners re-
port attached to his application" A beneficiary
certificate was issued to in 1893 and from
that time until his death in 1908 all dues and
assessments were regularly paid After death
the lodge learned for the first time from the
proofs Of death that when the application was
made was more than As years of age and the
trial court found that the statement that he was
A years Of age was false and fraudulently made
for the purpose of obtaining a membership in
the lodge. After the lodge learned that there
was q discrepancy between the statements con-
tanned in the application and the proofs of
death it was suggested to the beneficiary that
1t would be well for her to select an attorney
with whom negotiations could be carried on,
and this was done. The assessments which had
been paid were never returned but the lodge was
at all times willing to return it and so notified
the Attorney for the Beneficiary and administra.
trix. Upon these facts 1t is held:
First-That the understatement Of his age by
the applicant increased the risk and was material
as matter of law.
second-That the beneficiary certificate which
was issued to the applicant was null and void
alb initio.
| HN,;r S..
obtained by actual fraud, the lodge was under
no legal obligation to return what had been paid
| as assessments before It could claim that the
contract was not in force.
Fourth-That the lodge was not estopped tc
claim that the beneficiary certificate was void
by its request that the beneficiary name some
one with whom 1t could negotiate with refer
ence to the claim.
circumstances disclosed by this record to create
an estoppel or show that the lodge waiYed its
right to claim that the contract is void.
Order reversed. Elliot. ].
State ex rel George Engelhard respondent, vs.
! Jacob Weber, appellant
Fl Syllabus: First-A sham answer may b.
stricken out, where its falsity is clearly shown
even tho interDosed In the belief OF fits truth
second-A court of record having common av
Jurisdiction" within the meaning of Sectio,
2l65, B. s. Y. s. 1878 providing for the natural
L ID
and seal, and whose powers are exercised &C
cording to the course Of the common law-tha
| is, court wherein controversies are JUDICIAL,
determined after notice to the interested partie!
and opportunity given them to be heard
Third-When court OF record Of anothe
state has assumed jurisdiction of contrpvers
or proceeding and pronounced judgment therein
1 it will be presumed in the courts Of this state
| upon the production OF certified copy of til,
/ judgment, authenticated as required by the ac
OF congress. that the court had jurisdiction o
| the subject matter and authority to render tn,
! Judgment.
8 Fourth-The common pleas court of sfeig
| county, Ohio, court having Judge. clerk ant
seal, having entertained application for tn,
admission Of nm alien to citizenship in the Unite,
States and ordered Judgment granting thu
same. 1t is presumed that the court was one O
record, exercising connnion-law Jurisdiction witt
1 authority to hear and determine the application
Il Fifth--A Judgment of "a court is the fna
determination and adjudication of a controvers,
/ or proceeding. and may, under the common Law
/ procedure, be formally entered in a so-calle,
4 Judgment book, orally announced by the cour
and recorded in the minutes by the clerk. or Ii
/ the form OF an order signed by the presidin,
i Judge finally dieposing Of the case.
Sixth-The record of that court, referred i
! In the opinion, held to constitute judgmen