Court Opinion

ID: 6353948
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-06-24 18:31:26.329695+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:49:37.395346
License: Public Domain

Per Curiam :
We think the learned judge below took the correct view of this case.
Briefly stated, it is as follows:
*235Some time after the defendant society became liable to the plaintiff for dues at the rate of two dollars and' fifty cents per week, and after it had paid them for more than one year, it proceeded to amend its by-laws so as to reduce the amounts of benefits. This was certainly an easy mode of relieving the society from an obligation, and if successful, will doubtless be followed by other similar associations. The difficulty in the way of this convenient mode of paying debts is that it is repudiation pure and simple. The argument that the plaintiff, being a member of the society, is bound by the by-law, does not meet the difficulty. It may be a good by-law as to future cases, but at the time it was passed the plaintiff was something more than a member. He was a creditor whose rights had previously attached, and those rights cannot be swept away by such a scheme as this by-law.
Since the above was written, our attention has again been called to tbe case of St. Patrick’s Benef. Soc. v. McVey, 92 Pa. 510. That case, however, does not conflict with this, for the reason that the resolution to suspend the weekly payment of benefits was passed before McVey became entitled to benefits as a sick member. He was a member of the society at the time, and bound by the resolution. There was no attempt to deprive him of benefits after the society became chargeable therefor.
Judgment affirmed.