Elsey v. Odd Fellows Mut. Relief Ass'n

• Decision Date: 03 July 1886
• Parties: ELSEY v. ODD FELLOWS MUT. RELIEF ASS'N and others.
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

142 Mass. 224

7 N.E. 844

ELSEY

v.ODD FELLOWS MUT. RELIEF ASS'N and others.

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Hampden.

July 3, 1886.

Bill in equity by George Elsey, a member of the Odd Fellows Mutual Relief Association of the Connecticut River Valley, against said association, Henry S. Lee, its treasurer, Addie E. Wetmore, and Abigail C. Wetmore, for an injunction enjoining the said Lee from paying to the said Abigail C. Wetmore a certain order drawn in her favor by the secretary of the association, by authority of its directors, for a certain sum of money payable upon the death of Davis L. Wetmore. Hearing in the supreme court before W. ALLEN, J., who dismissed the bill. The facts appear in the opinion.

[142 Mass. 224]A.M. Copeland, for plaintiff.

E.H. Lathrop, for defendants.

MORTON, C.J.

The defendant is an association organized under St.1874, c. 375. This statute was amended by St.1877, c. 204, and the two statutes have been continued and re-enacted in chapter 115, Pub.St. The statute provides that such associations may, “for the purpose of assisting the widows, orphans, or other dependents of deceased members, provide in their by-laws for the payment, by each member, of a fixed sum, to be held by such association until the death of a member occurs, then to be forthwith paid to the person or persons entitled thereto, and such funds, so held, shall not be liable to attachment by trustee or other process.” It authorizes an association of a peculiar character. Its object is to enable a man to lay aside a portion of his income or property in the nature of an insurance upon his life, to be applied at his death to the use of his widow, orphans, or other persons dependent upon him. But the provisions of the general laws relating to life insurance companies do not apply to this association. The fund held by it is not attachable by the creditors of the member, and, by clear implication of the statute, after he has set it aside, he loses the absolute control over it which he has over his other property. He cannot assign it, and divest it from the class of beneficiaries described in the statute, and direct its disposition to other persons outside of that class.

It was clearly the intention of the defendant corporation to conduct its business under the authority of these statutes, though the agreement of association and the by-laws do not follow the exact words of the statutes. The corporation is formed “for the purpose of defraying the expenses of the sickness and burial of its members, and rendering pecuniary aid to the families of deceased members, or to their heirs,” and the by-laws provide the benefit a member is entitled to at his death shall be applied to the payment of the expenses of his last sickness and funeral, if not otherwise paid, and “the balance shall be paid to the person or persons designated by the member in his application for membership, or last legal assignment, provided such person or persons are heirs or members of the decedent's family.”

But the by-laws should be construed with reference to the statute, and, if practicable, such a...