Court Opinion

ID: 9832761
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 22:10:17.399249+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:51.802928
License: Public Domain

COBBS, J.
It is rather difficult for us to make a brief statement of the nature and result of this case from the lengthy pleadings.
Appellee, as the surviving wife of Claud Fenner, deceased, brought this suit against appellant, the Most Worshipful Grand Bodge of Free and Accepted Masons of Texas, a fraternal benefit society, incorporated, having its domicile in Fort Worth and its membership consisting of colored people, to recover certain sums alleged to be due appel-lee, growing out of the membership of Claud Fenner, deceased; and it was alleged, among other things:
“That plaintiff is the surviving wife of one Claud Fenner, deceased, who died at New Braunfels, Tex., pn or about -the 13th day of November, 1924.
“That at the time of the death of the said Claud Fenner, and long prior thereto, he was a member of defendant society, having been admitted and initiated in said society in the Abraham Lincoln Lodge, at New Braunfels, Tex., a subordinate lodge to defendant, Grand Lodge. And for and in consideration of the payment by the said Claud Fenner to defendant, and for the further payment by the said Claud Fenner to defendant, Grand Lodge, and subordinate lodge of certain taxes, dues, and assessments, through his natural life, defendant, Grand Lodge, promised to insure and did then and there insure the life of the said Claud Fen-ner-upon the following conditions and manner; viz., by the payment of certain dues, taxes, and assessments to said subordinate lodge for its upkeep and maintenance; by the payment of the sum of $1 each year to defendant, Grand Lodge, as Grand Lodge tax; by the payment to defendant, Grand Lodge, each year the sum of $10 as relief to be equally divided among the surviving widows, -orphans, and nearest relatives of all the Master Masons that may have died during such Masonic year; defendant agreed that if the said Claud Fenner would deport himself as a Mason during the remainder of his natural life, his actions to be prescribed by defendant society, then and in that event, defendant, Grand Lodge, would insure his life for such amounts that may be equally divided between the widows, orphans, or nearest relatives of Master Masons that may have died during the Masonic year that he may die.
“That'the said Claud Fenner at the time of his death, as aforesaid, had paid all dues, taxes, and assessments due and owing from himself to defendant society and had in all respects complied with all the rules of said society.
“Plaintiff says that each widow, or the orphans and nearest relatives of the Master Masons, who died during the Masonic year in which the said Claud. Fenner died, received the sum of $610 as relief benefits derived from the death of such Master Masons.”
The case was tried by the court without a jury. No findings of fact nor conclusions of law were requested to be found by the court by either party, but it is recited in the judgment of the court:
“And the court, having heard the pleadings read, the evidence adduced in support of the same, and the arguments of counsel, is of opinion that the law and facts are with the plaintiff, Mrs. Josephine Fenner, and that she has established by full and satisfactory evidence that she is entitled to recover of and from defendant the sum of $410.
“It appearing to the court that plaintiff’s suit is for $610, $200 of which sum to be used to pay the funeral expenses of the deceased husband of plaintiff, and that said sum of $200 has heretofore been paid by defendant and has been applied to the funeral expenses of the deceased husband of plaintiff:
“It is accordingly ordered, adjudged, and decreed by the court that plaintiff, Mrs. Josephine Fenner, do have and recover of and from defendant, the Most Worshipful Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons of Texas, the sum of $410, together with interest thereon from date of June 19, 1925, until paid, at rate of 6 per cent, per annum.”
As this is largely a fact case and no difficult questions of law are presented, we shall leave the case as decided by the trial court. While there is testimony, pro and con, in respect to the right of the appellee, as the wife of deceased, to receive the benefits, there are sufficient facts upon the issue to support the judgment of the trial court. There are no errors assigned that should cause a reversal. We think the case has been fairly tried and substantial justice administered. The judgment is affirmed.