Barker v. Valentine

• Decision Date: 04 December 1900
• Citation: 84 N.W. 297,125 Mich. 336
• Court: Michigan Supreme Court
• Parties: BARKER et al. v. VALENTINE et al.

84 N.W. 297

125 Mich. 336

BARKER et al. v. VALENTINE et al.

Supreme Court of Michigan

December 4, 1900

Appeal from circuit court, Wayne county, in chancery, Robert E Frazer, Judge.

Suit by Mary H. Barker and others against Margaret I. Valentine and another to restrain payment of certain money. From a decree in favor of defendants, complainants appeal. Affirmed.

Edward S. Grece (William B. Jackson, of counsel), for appellants.

Phillips & Jenks, for appellee Valentine.

De Vere Hall, for appellee Great Camp of Knights of Maccabees of Michigan.

MOORE J.

April 20, 1892, George A. Valentine, a resident of Detroit, made a written application for membership in the Great Camp of the Knights of Maccabees. In that application among others, the following questions were asked and answered: 'Q. Are you married? A. Yes. Q. The name and relation of the party or parties for whose benefit your certificate is to be applied? A. Margaret I. Valentine wife.' He declared that the above were fair and true answers to the questions. The Margaret I. Valentine mentioned in the application is the same person who is defendant in this case. A certificate was issued in which it was stated that, if the certificate was in force at the time of the death of Mr. Valentine, upon satisfactory proof of his death 'his beneficiary, to wit, Margaret I. Valentine, his wife, will be entitled to receive one assessment on the membership, but not to exceed two thousand dollars.' Mr Valentine died December 3, 1896. Due proofs of his death were furnished the great camp. After the proofs had been filed, a protest was filed with said order by the complainant, Mary H. Barker, who is a sister of Mr. Valentine, against the payment to the said Margaret I. Valentine of the amount of such certificate, on the ground that the said Margaret was not the wife of the said George A. Valentine. After the filing of said protest, notice was given by said order to both said Margaret and the said Mary H. Barker, or their attorneys, and the matter was referred to the executive committee of the great camp; and said committee, acting under and in accordance with its laws, appointed a time and place for the hearing of the respective claims of the said Margaret and the said Mary H. Barker. Several adjournments were had, and finally the matter was heard before said committee, a large amount of proofs being filed before them; and the said committee, acting without fraud and in good faith, decided that under the proofs the payment of the amount of said certificate should be made to the said Margaret I. Valentine. An appeal was taken, as provided by the laws of said order, by Mary H. Barker to the Great Camp of the Knights of the Maccabees for the state of Michigan. This appeal was heard before the committee on appeals and grievances, on the testimony presented before the executive committee, and also on additional testimony presented to them. At the hearing before the executive committee, and at the hearing before the committee on appeals and grievances, both parties were represented by counsel; and after a full hearing the last-named committee decided in favor of Margaret I. Valentine, and recommended to the great camp that the amount of the certificate be paid to her. The report was adopted by the great camp, then in session, after a hearing before the great camp, in which the complainant was represented by counsel, and by the action of the great camp its officers were instructed to pay the amount of such certificate to the said Margaret I. Valentine. Thereupon, and before the payment of the amount of such certificate, the complainant filed a bill in this case to restrain the organization from paying the money to the said Margaret, and to require the payment of the same to the said Mary H. Barker. After a full hearing the court dismissed the bill of complaint, and the case is brought here by appeal.

The questions presented to the court are: First. Was the beneficiary named in the certificate the wife of George A. Valentine? Second. Under the laws of the order, have these parties a right to appeal to the courts, or is the action of the order final? Third. In any event, can the complainants, or either of them, be entitled to the fund in question? As we think the answer to the first question is decisive, we shall not discuss the others.

The facts are not in dispute. So far as material, they are as follows: In 1872 Mr. Valentine was married to Ida Barron in the state of New York. Differences arose between them, and Mr. Valentine instituted divorce proceedings against his wife. An order was made requiring him to pay alimony and solicitor's fees. He did not comply with this order, and it does not appear that anything further was done in that proceeding. In 1884 Mr. Valentine came to Detroit, Ida Valentine remaining in the state of New York. Margaret Desbrough was a resident of Detroit. In 1881 she filed a bill of complaint for divorce against her husband, Henry Desbrough, which resulted in the court granting her a decree of divorce. The decree was not entered in the records at that time, though Mrs. Desbrough did not know of that fact until after the death of George Valentine, when the court made an order directing the decree to be entered nunc pro tunc. It is claimed in the brief of counsel that in May, 1885, a marriage ceremony was performed at Detroit between George A. Valentine and Margaret Desbrought. Upon the trial of this case the fact was not proven, but it was proven that he introduced Mrs. Desbrough as his wife, and stated that they had been married, and that they lived and cohabited together as husband and wife. Some time after this occurred Mr. Valentine and Margaret Valentine returned to Mr. Valentine's former home, in New York; and in September, 1889, Ida Valentine made a complaint against Mr. Valentine as a disorderly person, for failing to support her, and a warrant was issued. The docket of the police court showed that Mr. Valentine pleaded 'Not guilty,' and that on the adjourned day the parties failed to appear. Mr. Valentine claimed to his acquaintances in New York that he had then been divorced from the first wife, but there is nothing in the record to show that he had in fact been divorced. In October, 1889, Ida Valentine died. The record does not disclose just when Mr. Valentine returned to Detroit, but he had been living there some time when he made application for membership in the defendant order, with Margaret Valentine; he introducing her as his wife, and she introducing him as her husband, and they living together as husband and wife. Shortly after this Mr. and Mrs. Valentine moved to Cleveland, and rented a house of Mr. Case, in which they lived for more than six years, and until the time of his death. The testimony is overwhelming that in Cleveland they lived together as husband and wife. Mrs. Valentine was a member of a church belonging to one of the leading denominations. They introduced each other as husband and wife. They lived in a respectable neighborhood, were visited by respectable people, and in turn visited respectable people. The complainant in this case lived with them for a time, and also corresponded with them, as did other relatives of Mr. Valentine, and treated the defendant as the wife of George Valentine. It is now said by counsel that they did this because they supposed that George Valentine had been divorced from his first wife when he marrled the defendant. There is nothing to show that Mrs. Valentine knew that there was any impediment to her marriage with Mrs. Valentine...