Court Opinion

ID: 5603063
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-11 03:34:15.403394+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:36:50.761633
License: Public Domain

Russell, J.
Even if, under the hy-laws of a benevolent fraternal association or assessment insurance society, no affirmative action is necessary in order to enforce the forfeiture of a policy of insurance, for nonpayment of dues or assessments, as the ease may be, the subsequent demand for the payment of such dues or assessments is a waiver of the forfeiture, and an acknowledgment that the delinquent policy-holder is still entitled to the benefits conferred by his contract with the association. Judgment affirmed.
Upon an agreed statement of facts, from which the foregoing appeared, the case was submitted to the judge, to be determined by him without a jury; and he rendered judgment for the plaintiff. The defendant excepted.
Edgar Latham, for plaintiff in error,
cited: Civil Code, §2135 et seq.; Georgia Masons v. Gibson, 52 Ga. 642 (3); Harrington v. Asso., 70 Ga. 340; Wright v. Supreme Commandery, 87 Ga. 426; Haupt v. Ins. Co., 110 Ga. 146; Hutson v. Ins. Co., 122 Ga. 847, 852; Bank of Commerce v. Ins. Co., 125 Ga. 552 (3), 557; 16 Am. & Eng. Enc. L. (1st ed.) 83; 21 Id. (2d ed.) 286, 288, 293, 294; Niblack, Ins. & Benefit Soc. (2d ed.) §§289, 291, 306; Illinois Masons v. Baldwin, 86 Ill. 479.
James Davison, Berner, Smith & Hastings, contra,
cited: Starnes v. Asso., 2 Ga. App. 237; Wright v. Supreme Commandery, 87 Ga. 426; 19 Am. & Eng. Enc. L. (2d ed.) 59 et seq.; 25 Cyc. 871 et seq.; Griesa v. Asso., 133 N. Y. 619 (30 N. E. 1146); affirming 15 N. Y. Supp. 71; Mee v. Asso., 69 Minn. 210 (72 N. W. 74); Murray v. Asso., 90 Cal. 402 (27 Pac. 309); Roswell v. Union, 13 Fed. 840; Modern Woodmen v. Jameson, 49 Kan. 677 (30 Pac. 460); Farmers Mut. Life Asso. v. Koontz, 30 N. E. (Ind. App.) 145; Moreland v. Ins. Co., 20 Ky. L. Rep. (46 S. W. 516); Beatty v. *344Asso., 75 Fed. 65; Stylow v. Ins. Co., 69 Wis. 224 (34 N. W. 151); Jackson v. Asso., 78 Wis. 463 (47 N. W. 733). The following cases were distinguished: Toeller v. Central Verein, 72 N. W. (Wis.) 630; Miles v. Asso., 108 Wis. 421 (84 N. W. 159); Schmidt v. Modern Woodmen, 54 N. W. (Wis.) 264; Leffingwell v. Grand Lodge, 86 Iowa, 273; Carlston v. Supreme Council, 115 Cal. 466 (35 L. R. A. 643).