Grand Lodge A. O. v. Edwards

• Decision Date: 31 December 1913
• Citation: 111 Me. 359,89 A. 147
• Parties: GRAND LODGE A. O. v. W. V. EDWARDS et al.
• Court: Maine Supreme Court

89 A. 147

111 Me. 359

GRAND LODGE A. O.

v. W. V. EDWARDS et al.

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine.

Dec. 31, 1913.

Report from Supreme Judicial Court, Androscoggin County, in Equity.

Bill of interpleader by Grand Lodge Ancient Order of United Workmen against Harold M. Edwards and Maude M. Edwards. Case reported for determination upon the appeal, answers, decree of interpleader, and other evidence. Ordered that Maude M. Edwards, the surviving widow of the holder of a certificate in such Grand Lodge, be entitled to payment of the fund due thereon.

Argued before SAVAGE, C. J., and SPEAR, CORNISH, KING, and HALEY, JJ.

L. L. Walton, of Skowhegan, for plaintiff. McGillicuddy & Morey, of Lewiston, for defendant.

Harold M. Edwards. W. B. Skelton, of Lewiston, for defendant Maude M. Edwards.

KING, J. On December 5, 1901, the Grand Lodge, Ancient Order of United Workmen, of Maine, issued to Merton O. Edwards, member of Lewiston Lodge No. 50, a benefit certificate for $2,000, payable at his death to his wife, Clara A. Edwards. She died December 7, 1902, leaving one child, Harold M. Edwards. No changes or other legal designation of a beneficiary was thereafter made and named in the certificate. June 8, 1907, Merton O. Edwards married Maude M. Edwards, who survived him as his widow; he having died September 22, 1911. All assessments and dues were paid, and at the death of Merton O. Edwards the amount due and payable under said certificate, to whomsoever it belonged, was $1,826.96. Harold M. Edwards and Maude M. Edwards each claimed to be entitled to the amount due under said certificate, and thereupon said Grand Lodge brought its bill in equity asking that they be required to interplead touching their claims to the fund, which was ordered. By agreement the case was then reported to this court for determination upon the bill, answers, decree of interpleader, a letter from Merton O. Edwards to his son, Harold M. Edwards, written some time after June 8, 1907, and such portions of the constitution, general laws, and by-laws of the plaintiff corporation as are material.

Maude M. Edwards claims the fund as the surviving widow of Merton O. Edwards, and Harold M. Edwards claims it (1) as the only heir of Clara A. Edwards, and (2) by virtue of statements made in the letter to him from his father which is by agreement to be considered as a part of his answer.

Section 7 of general law 16 of the plaintiff corporation, so far as material to the questions here involved, provides: "And if all the beneficiaries shall die during the lifetime of the member, and he shall have made no other legal designation, the benefit shall be paid to his widow, if living at the time of his death; if he leave no widow surviving him, then said benefit shall be paid, share and share alike, to his children," etc.

It is too well settled to admit of doubt that the constitution and laws of this fraternal association, in respect to which the beneficiary contract of insurance was entered into, so far as applicable, form a part of the contract itself. Grand Lodge A. O. U. W. v. Connolly, 58 N.J.Eq. 180, 43 Atl. 286; Grand Lodge A. O. U. W. v. Gandy, 63 N.J.Eq. 692, 53 Atl. 142. This contract is to be construed and given force and effect as other contracts upon similar subjects.

Applying this well-established principle in the case at bar, we find that the beneficiary contract between the lodge and the insured member expressly provides that if the beneficiary named in the certificate shall die during the lifetime of the member, and he shall have made no other legal designation of a beneficiary, the benefit shall be paid to his widow, if living at his death. And the admitted facts are that the sole beneficiary named in the certificate died in the lifetime of the member, and that at his death his second wife survived him as his widow. It is therefore too clear to admit of controversy that the benefit in question, under the express terms of the contract, belongs to the surviving widow of the member, Maude M. Edwards, unless he made another "legal designation" of a beneficiary of it.

It necessarily follows, therefore, that there can be no merit in the first claim of Harold M. Edwards that he took the benefit as heir of his mother, the beneficiary who died, for in this case, under the admitted facts, the benefit must go either to another legally designated beneficiary or to the surviving widow.

This brings us to a consideration of the other claim of Harold M. Edwards that he was designated by his father as the beneficiary of the fund in question.

In support of this claim he relies upon the statements of his father contained in the letter referred to. That letter was a strong expression of the father's displeasure and grief on account of the son's misconduct and a most earnest appeal to him to change his course of conduct and try to become more efficient. He tries to assure his son that he still has a full measure of parental solicitude for his welfare, and that he will help him in every way that he can, consistent with his means. The following are the strongest expressions contained in the letter touching the point now under discussion: "I may not live a great while. I do not expect to but I will not tell you why for you do not care. My property I shall leave to you and no one else will get much of it. My insurance will go to you. I am not against you as you may know...