Case Name: Lillian E. Stafford, Appellant, v. Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen, Defendant, and Rena M. C. Braisted, as General Guardian of Albert W. Cooke, an Infant, Respondent
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1918-11-01
Citations: 224 N.Y. 653
Docket Number: 
Parties: Lillian E. Stafford, Appellant, v. Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen, Defendant, and Rena M. C. Braisted, as General Guardian of Albert W. Cooke, an Infant, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 224
Pages: 653–654

Head Matter:
Lillian E. Stafford, Appellant, v. Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen, Defendant, and Rena M. C. Braisted, as General Guardian of Albert W. Cooke, an Infant, Respondent.
Stafford v. Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen, 170 App. Div. 937, affirmed.
(Submitted October 17, 1918;
decided November 1, 1918.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered July 29, 1915, unanimously affirming a judgment in favor of defendant, respondent, entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term. George H. Cooke, deceased, was a member of the defendant Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen in good standing during his life. Under his certificate of membership a death benefit was payable at his death to his designated beneficiary. The sole question involved was whether Albert W. Cooke, the infant son of George H. Cooke, the assured, or Lilhan E. Stafford, a sister, was the legal beneficiary. The defendant, respondent, as guardian of said Albert W. Cooke, claimed title to the fund by reason of the fact that Albert W. Cooke was designated as beneficiary in the aforesaid certificate of membership and was, therefore, entitled to the fund, in accordance with the by-laws of the defendant brotherhood. The plaintiff, appellant, claimed title to the fund-by reason of the fact that on April 9, 1912, the said George H. Cooke executed an affidavit addressed to the defendant brotherhood requesting that the beneficiary be changed from Albert W. Cook to Lilhan E. Stafford. Respondent contended that the change was not effective because not made in compliance with the by-laws which required that a transfer be made by filling out a blank form on the back of the certificate of membership. Plaintiff argued that the insured was not able to use the blank- for the' reason that the certificate was in the possession of the brotherhood and that to require him to do what under the circumstances was impossible was unreasonable.
M. W. Van Auken for appellant.
Harold Milbank for respondent.

Opinion:
Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: His cock, Ch. J., Chase, Hogan, Cardozo, Pound and McLaughlin, JJ. Absent: Andrews, J.