Beck v. Pa. R. Co.

• Decision Date: 19 June 1899
• Citation: 43 A. 908,63 N.J.L. 232
• Parties: BECK v. PENNSYLVANIA R. CO.
• Court: New Jersey Supreme Court

43 A. 908

63 N.J.L. 232

BECK

v. PENNSYLVANIA R. CO.

Court of Errors and Appeals of New Jersey.

June 19, 1899.

(Syllabus by the Court.)

Error to supreme court.

Action by Henry Beck against the Pennsylvania Railroad Company. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error. Reversed.

The action was in tort for the recovery of damages for injury received by Beck, defendant in error, while in the employ of the company, plaintiff in error. In its defense the company proved the establishment by it and some of its employés of a relief department, and put in evidence the regulations governing the same, the pertinent parts of which are as follows: "(1) The relief department is a department of the company's servants, in the executive charge of a superintendent, whose directions in carrying out its regulations are to be complied with, subject to the control of the general manager. * * * (3) The object of this department is the establishment and management of a fund, to be known as the 'Relief Fund,' for the payment of definite amounts to employés contributing to the fund, who, under the regulations, shall be entitled thereto when they are disabled by accidents or sickness, and, in the event of their death, to the relatives or other beneficiaries specified in the applications of such employés. (4) The relief fund from which the proposed benefits are to be paid will be formed by the voluntary contributions from employés, appropriations (when necessary to make up any deficit) by the company, and income or profit derived from the investment of the moneys of the fund, and such gifts or legacies as may be made to the company for the use of the fund. (5) The company will take general charge of the department, guaranty the fulfillment of the obligations assumed by it, in conformity with the regulations from time to time established, take charge of the funds and be responsible for their safe-keeping, supply the necessary facilities for conducting the business of the department, and pay all the operating expenses thereof. * * * (10) ?* * If during the period prior to the first day of January, 1889, or during any one of the successive periods of three years thereafter, the amount contributed by the members of the fund, and received from other sources, should not be sufficient to meet the liabilities incurred for such period, the company will pay the deficiency. * * * (14) Those participating in the benefits of the relief fund must be employes of the company, and will be known as 'Members of the Relief Fund.' * * * (17) No employe will be required to become a member of the relief fund. * * * (19) Members of the relief fund may withdraw from the same on giving notice prior to the twenty-fifth day of any month, on a printed form provided for the purpose. * * * (22) Participation in the benefits of the relief fund must be based upon an application by the proposed member. * * * (58) Should a member or his legal representative bring suit against the company for damages on account of injury or death of such member, payment of the benefits from the relief fund on account of the same shall not be made until such suit is discontinued. If prosecuted to judgment or compromise, any payment of the judgment or amount in compromise shall preclude any claim upon the relief fund for such injury or death." The regulations contained a form of application for membership in the relief fund. The company also put in evidence an application for membership made by Beck, the pertinent parts of which application are as follows: "I, Henry C. Beck, of Jersey City, in the county of Hudson and state of New Jersey, employed in the service of the Pennsylvania Railroad Company as brakeman upon the N. Y. Division, Ct. Dept., do hereby, by reason of such employment, apply for membership in the relief fund, and consent and agree to be bound by the regulations of the relief department of the said company. * * * I also agree that the said company, by its proper agents, and in the manner provided in said regulations, shall apply, as a voluntary contribution from any wages earned by me under said employment, or for the benefits that may hereafter become payable to me, at the rate of seventy-five cents per month, for the purpose of securing the benefit provided for in the regulations for a member of the relief fund of the first class. Death benefits shall be payable to my wife, Annie.* * * And I agree that the acceptance of benefits from the said relief fund for injury or death shall operate as a release of all claims for damages against said company arising from such injury or death which could be made by or through me, and that I or my legal representatives will execute such further instrument as may be necessary formally to evidence such acquittance. I also agree that this application, when approved by the superintendent of the relief department, shall make me a member of the relief fund, and constitute a contract between myself and the said company, and that the terms of this application and the regulations of said department shall, during my membership, be a part of the conditions of my employment by the company." It was also proved that the application of Beck had been approved according to the regulations, and that, after the Injury received by Beck, he accepted benefits in accordance with the regulations from September 12, 1897, the date of his injury, to May 8, 1898. This evidence was admitted under objection. At the close of defendant's case, counsel for the company moved that a verdict be directed for it on the ground that the proof established a release or discharge of any liability of the company to Beck. This motion was denied, and the trial judge, on motion of Beck's counsel, overruled and struck out all the above-stated evidence. To these rulings the company took exceptions, which were duly allowed. The case was submitted to the jury only upon the question whether the company was liable for Beck's injury because of a breach of its duty as master to him as employe.

James B. Vredenburgh, for plaintiff in error.

William H. Speer, Jr., for defendant in error.

MAGIE, C. J. (after stating the facts). The argument before us has been mainly directed to the assignments of error based on the rulings of the trial judge indicated in the statement prefacing this opinion. The bills of exception show that the rulings in question were made by the learned judge because he deemed the contract between the company and an employe, member of the relief fund, to be void, as opposed to public policy. In the argument here the rulings are supported on that ground, and also upon the further grounds that the contract lacks consideration, that it is void for want of mutuality, and that it is ultra vires the corporation, and is forbidden by law.

If the transaction between Beck and the company included an enforceable contract on its part that, in case of an injury to him for which the company would be liable, acceptance of the benefits from the relief fund for such injury should operate as a release of all claims against the company for damages therefor, it is obvious that it was erroneous to exclude the evidence of the contract, and of the acceptance of benefits in this case, and to submit to the jury the liability of the company for damages which such acceptance operated to discharge. This leads to the consideration of the transaction, to discover if a contractual relation between the parties was established, and what contract, if any, arose thereon, and whether it is open to the objections urged against its validity. That a...