Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1919-11-06
DECISION FILED
By Chief Justice Cornish In
Equity Case, Grand Lodge
A. O. [. ". of Maine US.
George ". Williams and
Mary ). Williams

Decision has just been handed
down by Chief Justice Leslie 6
Cornish in the equity case, Granc
T,odre a. o [. W. Of Maine VS.
George Williams and Mary L Wi
fiarns hearing II which was recently
haId I'll he courthouse. CEIe1 JUS
nee Cornish III his decision finds
4oa+ George ". Williams is entitled
IN the r3roceeds Of the certificate II
r,,asriDn. The decision reads Ii
follows.
S-a+e OF Maine. Supreme Jutfcial
Court. keunebec, SIS. II equity
Grand Lodge A D. 7. ". Of Name
VS.. George ". Williams and Mary
- Williams.
Decision.
This cause came on n he heard be-
fore me- on October 20, = and 3otn.
1913. and now after due consldsraLlnn
thereof l decide as follows:
This is bill of interpieHder
brought by the plaintiff 10 determine
which Of the TWO defendants Is en-
titled 10 the proceeds Of q certain
beneficiary certificate for S1oee II
the plaintiff corporation The follow
ing facts are not II dispute
IN March &c, 1900. Richard J. VII
Iiar1s TOOK out d certificate IN the
pla.urifr corporation. making MS
wife. Mary I. Williams. the bene-
fic,a-v named therein. The ASSESS
-,ents were paid and the cerriflcars
remained unchanged until the SUD-
mer of 1913.
On May IS. 1913, Richard j. VIII
Hams made application to the pam
tffT for a duplicate certificate. stat
ing that the original was IN the pos
session of his wife who refused 10
return II To him. The duplicate WAS
issued On June IS, 1913, IN which as
in the original Mary L WlIiiams
was named as the beneficiary
On July 10, 1918, Richard J. VIII
Iiams revoked his directions as 70
the payment Of the beneficiary Ger
tihcate and in his application 10 Ine
Company substituted the name OF
George W. Williams. his brother
for that of Mary I. Williams, his
wife.
A new certificate was accordingly
issued by the plaintiff on August l.
1913. and this contained the name Oh
George w Williams as the bene-
fcia-v TO whom the stated amount OF
$1,000 should be paid II the case OF
the death of Richard j. Williams.
This certificate was kept IN force
nv the payment Of assessments. and
is the one in controversy here
Richard J. Williams died on Janu-
arv 20, 1919. ana after his decease
the proceeds Of this certificate were
claimed by both the brother and the
wife.
The-e,,pon the plaintiff brought
. this bill Of interpleader I'd determine
the legal owner thereof and brought
the $1,000 into court 10 await sane
Decision Under decree dated
July %. 1919, the plaintiff was DIS
missed with cocts and discharged
from further liability. the defen-
dauts fu1erpleaded, the piHinrih
bill with the answer Of Mary L VIII
liarns was taken as bill OF COM
psaiut. and the answer Of George W.
williams as the answer thereto.
Az the cause now stands. Mary l.
williams is the plaintiff and George
w. williams the beneficiary named
i'm the certificate and the nofaef
thereof is the defendant
I. Under the constitution anu
| reneraE laws Of the plaintiff corpor-
alton which are made part or the
certificate issued any memper III
r,od standing has the power to ''re-
woke iais directions us 10 the paNnenA
- b,s ,,.,ueficiary certiicate. and q