Korn and Wisemiller v. the Mutual Assurance Society Against Fire On Buildings of the State of Virginia
| Decision Date | 01 February 1810 |
| Citation | 10 U.S. 192,3 L.Ed. 195,6 Cranch 192 |
| Parties | KORN AND WISEMILLER v. THE MUTUAL ASSURANCE SOCIETY AGAINST FIRE ON BUILDINGS OF THE STATE OF VIRGINIA |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
ERROR to the circuit court of the district of Columbia, sitting at Alexandria.
This was a motion, in the court below, in the name of the principal agent of the Mutual Assurance Society for judgment against Korn & Wisemiller for 116 dollars, 'being the amount due from them for a half quota under a declaration for insurance made to the society with 6 per cent, interest thereon from the 1st day of June, 1805.'
The court below gave judgment according to the motion, and the defendants brought their writ of error.
This society was incorporated by the legislature of Virginia, by an act passed on the 22d of December, 1794, entitled 'An act for establishing a Mutual Assurance Society against fire on buildings in this state.'
The principles of the society are declared to be, 'That the citizens of this state may insure their buildings against the losses and damages occasioned accidentally by fire; and that the insured pay the losses and expenses, each his share according to the sum insured.'- The act provides that the rules and regulations which should be concluded upon by a majority of the subscribers at the first meeting, should be binding on all those who should insure their property in that society; and that a majority of the society might at any time alter and amend the rules and regulations as they should judge necessary. That certain premiums should be agreed upon to be paid by the insured to constitute a fund to pay losses. And that if that fund should not be sufficient, a 'repartition' among the insured should be made, and each should pay on demand of the cashier his share according to the sum insured and the rate of hazard. It also provides that the property insured should be bound for the payment, and for that purpose might be sold. That such quotas when called for should be advertised, and when any person should neglect to pay his quota, his insurance should cease until it should be paid. If the property should be sold, the purchaser was to become a subscriber in lieu of the vendor. The subscribers might be compelled to pay the premiums, on request of the cashier, with 6 per cent. interest to the day of payment.
By a subsequent act, passed in December, 1795, it was enacted, 'That the said subscribers, a majority of them in person or by deputation being present, or a majority of the sum subscribed, when any meeting shall be held, being there represented, shall have power and authority to proceed and act in all matters and things in the first recited act mentioned, in as full, absolute, and unlimited a manner as they might or could do if all and every of the said subscribers were actually present and attending at any such meeting.'
By an act passed the 12th of January, 1799, it is enacted, 'That the said mutual insurance society shall have full power to recover the whole, or any part of such premiums or quotas as are, or may hereafter become, due from any delinquent subscriber or member, under his subscription or declaration for insurance made to the said society, on motion of the cashier of the society before the court of the county, or the court of the district wherein such delinquent may reside, ten days' notice of such motion being previously given; and such court shall have full jurisdiction to hear and determine such motion, and to cause their judgment to be enforced with costs by any legal executions; saving to any person, against whom a motion shall be made, the right of a trial by jury, if he shall desire it.'
By an act passed the 27th of January, 1803, it is enacted,
On the 3d of March, 1803, congress passed such an act as was contemplated by the legislature of Virginia.
On the 29th of January, 1805, Virginia passed an act, the preamble to which recites, that it had been represented on the part of the society that such a change in their constitution as would separate the interests of the inhabitants of the towns from the interests of the inhabitants of the country, is essential to the 'equalization' of the risks, and that the same had been agreed upon at a general annual meeting of the society. It therefore enacts, that the funds should be divided between the towns and the country, in proportion to the capital subscribed by the towns and country respectively, and, that the town funds should be only liable for town losses, and country funds for country losses. That during the year 1805, all the valuations of houses insured should be revised, and no loss paid but according to such revaluation subject to a deduction of one fifth thereof; 'and where such revaluation shall exceed the former valuation, an additional premium shall be paid.'- That 'it shall be lawful for any member of this society to withdraw from the same, on giving six weeks' previous notice, and upon paying all arrearages due at the time of withdrawing.'
By the 19th article of the rules and regulations of the society adopted and in force prior to the 29th of January, 1805, the duties of an agent were 'to act for the society agreeably to the constitution, to apply to the houseowners of their respective counties, explain the plan to them, make out the declarations of insurance, procure the certificate of the majority of three respectable houseowners (of whom the county agent may be one) of the valuation of the buildings, transmit the declarations, properly executed, to the principal agent, and correspond with him on what may be necessary to be done.'
The plaintiffs in error made their declaration for insurance in the usual form under seal, and thereby promised that they would 'abide by, observe and adhere to the constitution, rules and regulations which were already established, or might thereafter be established, by a majority of the assured present in person, or by representatives, or by a majority of the property insured, represented either by the persons themselves, or their proxy, duly authorized, or their deputy, as established by law, at any general meeting to be holden by the assurance society, or which were, or thereafter might be, established by the president and directors of the society.'
In consequence of this declaration, the plaintiffs in error paid the original premium of insurance and obtained a policy. The society demanded a half quotal 'that is to say, for the payment as it existed on the 25th of February, 1805, of a sum equal to one half of the original premium, which half quota was required to be paid on the 1st of April, 1805, and is the sum for which judgment is now claimed.'
By the 14th article of the original rules and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Clark v. Security Benefit Assn., 35276.
...60 Mich. 44, 26 N.W. 826; Sov. Camp v. Wirtz, 114 Tex. 471, 268 S.W. 438; Willson v. W.O.W., 64 Pac. (2d) 1064; Korn v. Mut. Assur. Assn., 6 Cranch, 192, 3 L. Ed. 195; Scow v. Supreme Council, R.L., 223 Ill. 32, 79 N.E. 42; Steen v. W.W.A., 296 Ill. 104, 129 N.W. 546; Supreme Lodge, K.P. v.......
-
Robertson v. Security Benefit Assn.
...Okla. 545, 56 Pac. (2d) 408; Sov. Camp v. Wirtz, 114 Tex. 471, 268 S.W. 438; Willson v. W.O.W., 64 Pac. (2d) 1064; Korn v. Mutual Assurance Assn., 6 Cranch, 192, 3 L. Ed. 195. Henry C. Salveter, F.M. Ross and Fred F. Wesner for (1) No constitutional question is presented, and therefore the ......
-
Baker v. Sovereign Camp, W. O. W.
... ... Hartford Ins ... Co., 220 S.W. 954; State ex rel. Wolfe v. Mo. Dental ... Board, 221 S.W ... society. It is immaterial whether the contract is a ... Wilson v. W. O. W., 64 P.2d 1064; Korn v. Mutual ... Assur. Assn., 6 Cranch 192, 3 ... case judgment against this same defendant was obtained on a ... ...
-
Clark v. Security Ben. Ass'n
... ... W. O ... W., 64 P.2d 1064; Korn v. Mut. Assur. Assn., 6 ... Cranch, 192, 3 ... 86, 213 P. 1066; ... State ex rel. Knights & Ladies of Security v. Allen, ... member of a mutual benefit society agrees to obey by-laws ... mutual assurance society and its members Korn v. Mutual ... against the company that are refused by the law of the ... ...