Allen v. Merrimack County Odd Fellows Mut. Relief Ass'n

CourtNew Hampshire Supreme Court
Writing for the CourtBINGHAM, J.
CitationAllen v. Merrimack County Odd Fellows Mut. Relief Ass'n, 57 A. 922, 72 N.H. 525 (N.H. 1904)
Decision Date05 April 1904
PartiesALLEN v. MERRIMACK COUNTY ODD FELLOWS MUT. RELIEF ASS'N.

Exceptions from Superior Court.

Assumpsit by Luthera A. Allen against the Merrimack County Odd Fellows Mutual Relief Association. A verdict was found in favor of defendants subject to plaintiff's exception, and the case was transferred to the Supreme Court. Exception overruled.

The certificate stated that the assured was a member of the association, and entitled to all the privileges and benefits thereof, so long as he complied with its by-laws as then existing and such as might thereafter be made, and no longer. The application for membership stated that the assured was 32 years of age and in good health; and he therein agreed to abide by the laws, rules, and regulations of the association then in force or that might thereafter be made, to pay promptly to the secretary all assessments authorized by the laws of the association upon being notified thereof, and, if in default, to forfeit his membership and all rights and privileges. The by-laws in force when he became a member were changed in 1888. As amended, they required him to pay to the secretary upon the death of a member, and within 30 days after notice, an assessment of 80 cents, and upon his death entitled his beneficiary to receive a sum representing $1 for each surviving member, but not to exceed $1,000. Upon one month's notice in writing, a motion to repeal, alter, or amend the by-laws could be adopted by a two-thirds vote of the members present and voting. In January, 1900, 13 death benefits were due and unpaid, and the directors of the association called 10 assessments in that month. This created such dissatisfaction among the members that many withdrew, and others threatened to do so. It was apparent that, if the association was to continue in business, some method must be devised to induce new members to join. The attention of members was called to the serious financial condition of the association in the notice for the semiannual meeting, which was mailed to each member on July 2, 1900. At that meeting, held July 20th, the following motion was adopted: "I move that this meeting adjourn to four weeks from to-night, to wind up the association, and devise some new way to insure the members, and that the directors let the business stand as it stands to-day." The meeting was adjourned to August 17th. July 23d a notice signed by the president and secretary was mailed to each member of the association, stating that at the previous meeting a resolution in favor of paying one-half the July call for assessments from the guaranty fund was defeated, reciting the motion above quoted and the fact of its adoption, announcing that an adjourned meeting would be held on August 17th, and concluding as follows: "The discontinuance of the association and the formulation of new plans for the future, as contemplated by the above vote, is a matter of the utmost importance to every member, and there should be a large attendance at this meeting to give the subject due consideration." The adjourned meeting was held August 17th, and again adjourned to August 24th; and on the latter date, without notice except as above, by-laws were adopted providing that assessments should be paid monthly, and that the amount to be paid should be regulated according to the age of members at the date of admission. According to this schedule the assured was required to pay $1.20 each month. It was also provided that the beneficiary of a member 50 years of age and over at the time of the adoption of these by-laws should receive a sum equal to, but not exceeding, the total amount of all assessments paid by him at the date of his decease, until the guaranty fund should amount to $10,000. These by-laws went into effect August 24, 1900, and a copy of them was mailed to the plaintiff's husband within a few days after their adoption. At that time he was more than 50 years of age. He knew, or ought to have known, of the changes in the by-laws at the time they were made or shortly after, and with this knowledge he continued to pay monthly assessments until his death on January 25, 1902, without doing anything to...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
8 cases
  • McGinley v. Maine Cent. R. Co.
    • United States
    • New Hampshire Supreme Court
    • December 2, 1919
    ...inconsistent with the general finding. Concord Coal Co. v. Ferrin, 71 N. H. 33, 36, 51 Atl. 283, 93 Am. St. Rep. 496; Allen v. Association, 72 N. H. 525, 527, 57 Atl. 922; Wheeler v. Metropolitan, etc., Exchange, 72 N. H. 315, 318, 319, 56 Atl. 754; Levasseur v. Berlin, 75 N. H. 146, 71 Atl......
  • O'KEEFE v. Pearson
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — First Circuit
    • December 1, 1934
    ...was the real owner of the stock, if there was evidence from which such finding could be made. Allen v. Merrimack County Odd Fellows' Mut. Relief Association, 72 N. H. 525, 527, 57 A. 922. When the defendant received the first trust certificate representing 50 shares of stock in the Federal ......
  • Haynes v. Masonic Benefit Association
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • March 27, 1911
    ...to comply therewith on the ground of omissions or acts of other members or officers. 2 Bacon, Ben. Soc. p. 1114; 40 Mo.App. 605, 606; 57 A. 922. J. KIRBY, J., dissents. OPINION WOOD, J., (after stating the facts). 1. The provision in the policy that the assured "shall have fully and faithfu......
  • State v. Gross
    • United States
    • New Hampshire Supreme Court
    • February 6, 1912
    ...177, 66 Atl. 127; Dusseault v. Association, 74 N. H. 407, 68 Atl. 461; Jaques v. Chandler, 73 N. H. 376, 62 Atl. 713; Allen v. Association, 72 N. H. 525, 57 Atl. 922; Concord Coal Co. v. Ferrin, 71 N. H. 331, 51 Atl. 283, 93 Am. St. Rep. 496; Noyes v. Patrick, 58 N. H. Taking the view most ......
  • Get Started for Free