Case Name: WINTER v. INDEPENDENT ORDER AHAWAS ISRAEL
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1904-05-19
Citations: 88 N.Y.S. 354
Docket Number: 
Parties: WINTER v. INDEPENDENT ORDER AHAWAS ISRAEL.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 88
Pages: 354–355

Head Matter:
WINTER v. INDEPENDENT ORDER AHAWAS ISRAEL.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
May 19, 1904.)
Í. Fraternal Insurance—Widow’s Death Benefit—Suspension of Member.
Where It appears In an action by the widow of a member of a fraternal beneficiary association against the association to recover a death benefit alleged to be due to plaintiff on account of the death of her husband that deceased had been suspended by the defendant prior to his death, the defendant is not liable for the death benefit.
V1. See Insurance, vol. 28, Cent. Dig. § 1892
Appeal from City Court of New York.
Action by Anna Winter against the Independent Order Ahawas Israel to recover a benefit to which plaintiff alleged she was entitled, under the defendant’s constitution, on account of the death of her husband. On the trial a motion was made to dismiss the action, predicated on the fact that the deceased during his lifetime had instituted mandamus proceedings to compel a reinstatement on the ground that he had been wrongfully suspended from membership in the defendant; the decision in that case being pleaded as res adjudicata. From a judgment for defendant, and from an order denying a motion for a new trial, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
Argued before FREEDMAN, P. J., and TRUAX and SCOTT, JJ.
M. Cukor, for appellant.
A. B. Jaworower, for respondent.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from a judgment of the City Court dismissing the plaintiff's complaint at the end of the whole case, and also from the order denying plaintiff's motion for a new trial.
It is unnecessary for us to determine whether the proceedings in the Supreme Court on application for the mandamus were or were not a determination of the issues in this action, because it clearly appears that the husband of the plaintiff had been suspended by the defendant prior to his death.
Judgment and order appealed from affirmed, with costs.