Eighmy v. Bhd. of Ry. Trainmen

• Decision Date: 24 October 1900
• Citation: 113 Iowa 681,83 N.W. 1051
• Parties: EIGHMY v. BROTHERHOOD OF RAILWAY TRAINMEN.
• Court: Iowa Supreme Court

113 Iowa 681

83 N.W. 1051

EIGHMY

v.BROTHERHOOD OF RAILWAY TRAINMEN.

Supreme Court of Iowa.

Oct. 24, 1900.

Appeal from district court, Boone county, S. M. Weaver, Judge.

Action on certificate of insurance. Verdict and judgment against the defendant, and it appeals. Reversed.Foster & Carlock and Robert F. Dale, for appellant.

Dyer & Stevens, for appellee.

LADD, J.

While employed as a conductor by the Chicago & Northwestern Railroad Company, the plaintiff lost the sight of one eye, and was discharged. At that time he held a certificate, issued by the Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen, which stipulated that he was “entitled to all rights, privileges, and benefits of membership, and to participate in the beneficiary department of class C of said brotherhood to the amount set forth in the constitution thereof, which amount, in the event of total and permanent disability, shall be paid to him, or at his death shall be paid to Dea Eighmy, if living; if not, to the executors and administrators of said member.” The indemnity for class C, as set forth in the constitution, is $1,200, and article 37 provides “for the payment, upon such member's death, or upon his becoming totally disabled, within the meaning of section 44, such sum as may be justly due according to the terms and conditions of the constitution.” Section 44 provides that: “Any member in good standing suffering the loss of a hand at or above the wrist joint, or the loss of a foot at or above the ankle joint, or the loss of the sight of both eyes, shall be considered totally and permanently disabled, and shall receive the full amount of his beneficiary certificate or certificates. Other claims for total disability shall be referred to the grand master, first vice grand master, and grand secretary and treasurer, who shall decide as to whether or not the disability is of such a nature as to totally and permanently incapacitate the claimant from the performance of duty in any department of the train or yard service; and, if the claim is approved by them, the claimant shall receive the full amount of the beneficiary certificate or certificates held by him.” Section 45 relates to proofs of loss, and provides that, when these are made, “if the claim be valid, it shall be filed, and paid in its regular order.” Section 48 authorizes an appeal to the grand lodge by any one whose claim has been rejected, and when that of plaintiff was disallowed by the officers named their action was approved by that body on appeal. It will be observed that by the terms of the certificate indemnity is pledged in event of total and permanent disability, and that whether claimant is so disabled is to be ascertained from article 44 of the constitution. The latter enumerates certain injuries which shall be considered to totally disable, and also pledges indemnity for others which may be found by officers named so to do. Misfortunes not mentioned may as completely disqualify trainmen for service, and because of this protection is afforded to those who have suffered injury other than as specified of such a nature as “to totally and permanently incapacitate the claimant for the performance of duty in any department of the train or yard service.” Unless so found, no indemnity is stipulated. Not for total disability resulting from injuries other than those specified, but for those decided to be such by the grand master, vice grand master, and grand secretary, is there any benefit stipulated. The condition is similar to one making a reference and finding a condition precedent to payment. The courts are not agreed as to whether such a society may create a tribunal within its organization, whose decisions shall be final, and resort to civil actions prohibited. As holding this may be done, see Hembeau v. Great Camp, 101 Mich. 161, 59 N. W. 417, 45 Am. St. Rep. 400;Osceola Tribe v. Schmidt, 57 Md. 98;McAlees v. Supreme Sitting (Pa. Sup.) 13 Atl. 755. Contra, see Austin v....