Golden Star Fraternity v. Martin

• Decision Date: 16 November 1896
• Parties: GOLDEN STAR FRATERNITY v. MARTIN.
• Court: New Jersey Supreme Court

35 A. 908

59 N.J.L. 207

GOLDEN STAR FRATERNITY

v. MARTIN.

Court of Errors and Appeals of New Jersey.

Nov. 16, 1896.

(Syllabus by the Court.)

Error to circuit court, Essex county; Child, Judge.

Action by Lyman D. Martin against the Golden Star Fraternity on a benefit certificate. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant brings error. Reversed.

The schedule annexed to the declaration contained in the record shows that plaintiff's action was founded upon the following instrument: "The Golden Star Fraternity. (Prudens Futuri.) Beneficiary Certificate. This certificate, issued by authority of the supreme council of the Golden Star Fraternity, witnesseth: That Lizzie P. Martin, a member of Excelsior Council No. 3, of Newark, N. J., is entitled to all the rights and privileges guarantied to beneficiary members of the Fraternity by our constitution and laws, and issued upon the express condition that she shall, while a member of said Fraternity, faithfully comply with all the laws, rules, regulations, and requirements of said Fraternity; otherwise, it shall be of no effect. And, in case she is in good standing at the time of her decease, then the person or persons hereinafter named shall be entitled to the amount of one assessment, not exceeding the sum of one thousand dollars; or should she become totally disabled for life while a member of the Fraternity, in good standing, so as to prevent her following her own or any other avocation, provided such disability did not arise from any immoral conduct on her part, then, upon satisfactory proof of such total disability, she shall be entitled to one-half of the abovementioned amount, the remaining one-half to be paid at the time of her decease; and she now directs that, in case of her decease, it be paid to C. S. Martin (her mother). No. 582. In witness whereof we have caused this to be signed by our supreme moderator and supreme secretary, and the seal of this supreme council attached, this twelfth day of January, eighteen hundred and eighty-five. [L. S.] I. A. Looker, Supreme Moderator. J. B. Faltoute, Supreme Secretary." The declaration contains three counts. The first count grounds plaintiffs claim upon that instrument as entitling the administrator of Charlotte S. Martin, deceased, to recover from defendant $1,000 on the death of Lizzie P. Martin, and avers an assignment from said administrator to plaintiff. The second count grounds plaintiff's claim upon the same instrument as entitling the administrator of Lizzie P. Martin, deceased, to recover from defendant $1,000 upon her death, and avers an assignment from said administrator to plaintiff. The third count is for money had and received. The plea is the general issue. The cause was tried before the court, without a jury; and, the finding having been for the plaintiff, judgment was entered thereon, and this writ of error was brought.

Philip W. Cross, for plaintiff in error.

Thomas N. McCarter, Jr., for defendant in error.

MAGIE, J. (after stating the facts). None of the assignments of error need be considered except that which challenges the finding of the trial judge upon the ground that, upon the facts before him, a finding in favor of defendant in error was unwarranted in law. The facts established by uncontradicted testimony or admitted by the parties are, in substance, these: Lizzie P. Martin was admitted as a member of Excelsior Council No. 3, of Newark, N. J. (a council of the Golden Star Fraternity), early in January, 1885, and on January 12, 1885, there was issued to her the beneficiary certificate a copy of which precedes this opinion. Charlotte S. Martin, the beneficiary named therein, was the mother of Lizzie P. Martin, and died March 15, 1888. Lizzie P. Martin survived her, and faithfully complied with all the laws, rules, regulations, and requirements of the Fraternity, and was in good standing therein at the time of her decease, which occurred March 2, 1894. The Golden Star Fraternity was incorporated by the filing of a certificate dated January 21, 1882, which recited, as authority for its assumption of corporate existence, the "Act to incorporate benevolent and charitable associations," approved March 9, 1853. An act of that title was approved on that date, but was repealed by the revision, and in its place was substituted the act of the same title which was approved April 9, 1875 (Revision, p. 79), to which latter act the certificate was doubtless intended to refer. Among the objects of the organization expressed in its constitution was the following: "Sec. 3. To establish a beneficiary fund from which, on satisfactory evidence of the death of a member of the Fraternity, who has complied with all its lawful requirements, a sum not exceeding two thousand ($2,000) dollars shall be paid to whom he or she may direct." The constitution and rules of the Fraternity do not seem to provide for the terms of the certificate indicating the rights of a member in such fund, commonly called a "beneficiary certificate," but by section 12 of article 6 it is provided as follows: "Beneficiary members may at any time, when in good standing, surrender their certificate, and have a new one issued, payable to such beneficiary, dependent upon them, as they may direct, upon the payment of a certificate fee of fifty (50) cents." After the death of Charlotte S. Martin, the beneficiary, Lizzie P. Martin, the member, did not surrender her certificate, nor did she name a new beneficiary. After the death of Lizzie P. Martin, administration was taken out upon the estate of Charlotte S. Martin, and her administrator assigned her claim upon the beneficiary certificate to defendant in error. Administration was also taken out upon the estate of Lizzie P. Martin, and her administrator assigned her claim upon the beneficiary certificate to defendant in error. 'Defendant in error was a brother of Lizzie P. Martin, and he, with two other brothers, are her next of kin. They have also assigned any claim under the beneficiary certificate to defendant in error.

Upon these facts, the trial judge found that defendant in error was entitled to recover from the Fraternity the $1,000 named in the beneficiary certificate. Under the assignment of errors now being considered, plaintiff in error claims that no legal liability on its part to pay that sum to defendant in error is established. Before considering the matter thus presented, I think there is a preliminary question which ought to be disposed of, although, for obvious reasons, it has not been raised by the parties. The beneficiary certificate issued by plaintiff in error is plainly a contract of the nature of life insurance. The act to incorporate benevolent and charitable associations, under which I have assumed that plaintiff in error acquired its corporate powers, and the supplements to that act, which were in existence in 1882, declare the objects of such associations to be the relief or support of members rendered incapable of attending to their usual occupation or calling by sickness, casualty, or other cause, the decent interment of deceased members and their widows, benevolent and charitable relief to persons not members, and other charitable purposes. In 1883 a further supplement to the same act was passed, which, by its second section, enacted that it should be lawful for associations incorporated under the original act to contract with their members to pay death benefits according to their rules and by-laws, and to agree to pay the same to the "husband, wife, father, mother, brother, sister or legal representative of such member after his or her death, which contract the beneficiary therein named shall have full legal power to enforce in proceedings at law or equity." Laws 1883, p. 57. By a further supplement, approved April 12, 1886, the words "son and daughter" were added to those contained in the supplement of 1883. In a case in the supreme court, Mr. Justice Garrison suggested the question whether the legislature could endow such associations with the power to carry on the business of ordinary life insurance; but, as the question was not required to be solved for the decision of that case, no opinion was expressed thereon. State v. Taylor, 56 N. J. Law, 49, 27 Atl. 797. It is not open to doubt that, under a title declaring the object of the act to be the incorporation of benevolent and charitable associations, it would not be within legislative power to authorize such associations to engage in any business having neither a benevolent nor charitable purpose. The grant of such authority, not falling within the expressed object of the title, would be void under our constitutional provision on this subject, as construed by decisions of this court too well...