Hudnall v. The Modern Woodmen of America

• Decision Date: 23 November 1903
• Citation: 77 S.W. 84,103 Mo.App. 356
• Parties: SARAH F. HUDNALL, Appellant, v. THE MODERN WOODMEN OF AMERICA, Respondent
• Court: Kansas Court of Appeals

77 S.W. 84

103 Mo.App. 356

SARAH F. HUDNALL, Appellant, v. THE MODERN WOODMEN OF AMERICA, Respondent

Court of Appeals of Missouri, Kansas City

November 23, 1903

Appeal from Buchanan Circuit Court.--Hon. A. M. Woodson, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Cause affirmed.

W. K Amick for appellant.

(1) Defendant being a foreign fraternal benefit society can not avail itself of the defense of suicide. Secs. 1396 and 1408 R. S. Mo. 1899; Kern v. Legion of Honor, 167 Mo 471. (2) Such was the law prior to the act of 1897. Laws 1899, p. 132; Secs. 2823 and 2824, R. S. 1889; Kern v Legion of Honor, 167 Mo. 471. (3) This law has never been changed, for by the act of 1897 (Laws 1897, p. 132), sec. 2824, R. S. 1889, was reenacted, and it is known as section 1396 in the revision of 1899, or as section 15a in the session acts of 1897, p. 137. Sec. 2823, R. S. 1889, was also re-enacted, and is known as Sec. 1408, R. S. 1899, or as section 1 in the session acts of 1897, p. 132. (4) Since the passage of the act of 1897 (Laws 1897, p. 132), Sec. 1396, R. S. 1899, has never been brought to the attention of the court in deciding any case as to whether foreign fraternal benefit societies were exempted from Sec. 7896, R. S. 1899, of the general insurance laws.

Allen & Mayer for respondent.

(1) Fraternal beneficiary associations are expressly exempted from the operation of the general insurance laws. Sec. 1408, R. S. 1899. (2) Fraternal beneficiary associations organized under the laws of other States are given the same exemption. Secs. 1408, 1409 et seq., R. S. 1899; McDermott v. Modern Woodmen, 71 S.W. 833; Shotliff v. M. W. of A., 73 S.W. 326; Brassfield v. Knights of Maccabees, 92 Mo.App. 102; Brasfield v. Modern Woodmen, 88 Mo.App. 208; Morton v. Royal Tribe of Joseph, 93 Mo.App. 78. (3) The case of Kern v. Legion of Honor, 167 Mo. 471, relied upon by appellant, does not affect the case at bar. McDermott v. Modern Woodmen, 71 S.W. 833.

OPINION

BROADDUS, J.

This is an action on a life insurance policy numbered 524567, issued June 29, 1899, by the Modern Woodmen of America for $ 2,000 to Claude W. Hudnall, benefits payable at his death to his wife, Sarah F. Hudnall. The defendant was a foreign fraternal beneficiary society under the laws of the State of Illinois. On the 22d day of May, 1901, Claude W. Hudnall died at Buchanan county. Defendant alleges in its answer that he committed suicide, but does not allege that he contemplated suicide at the time he made application for the policy. The policy contained the following clause: ". . . or if he (Hudnall), shall within three years after becoming a beneficial member of this society die by his own hand, sane or insane . . . then this certificate shall be null and void and of no effect." The by-laws of the defendant corporation contained the same clause. The defendant, in its answer, admitted execution of the policy, payment of dues, proof of loss and everything to make plaintiff's case and entitle her to a judgment, but sought to avoid payment on the policy by alleging that Claude Hudnall died by his own hand. At the trial of the cause the court held that suicide was no defense in this suit, because the defendant was a foreign society, and that defendant did not allege in its answer that Hudnall contemplated suicide at the time he made application for the policy. The court refused to permit defendant under its answer to offer any evidence of suicide. Under the instructions the jury found a verdict for plaintiff for the face of the policy ($ 2,000) and $ 160 interest, making in all $ 2,160. After verdict, and in due time, defendant filed its motion for a new trial. In passing on this motion the court held that it had erred in refusing to allow defendant to avail itself of the defense of suicide as pleaded in its answer and granted a new trial. From this action and order of the court in granting a new trial plaintiff prosecutes this appeal.

But one question is presented by the record and that is, was the defendant as a foreign beneficial society authorized to do business as such in this State under exemption from the provisions of the general insurance laws? It is agreed that from the date of the revision of the laws of Missouri in 1889 until the act of March 6, 1897, foreign fraternal beneficial societies were not authorized to do business as such in this State, but were governed by the provisions of the general insurance laws. It is plaintiff's contention that the later act did not change the status of such societies and that they continued subject to said general insurance laws, under which suicide is no defense on an insurance policy unless it be shown that the insured contemplated suicide at the time he obtained his policy.

Article XI, Revised Statutes 1899, entitled "Benevolent Religious, Scientific, Fraternal, Beneficial, Educational and Miscellaneous Associations" provides how these different kinds of organizations may be incorporated under section 1408 thereof, and defines what shall constitute a fraternal beneficiary association. Section 1396 provides the method by which the foregoing associations so organized under said article may avail themselves of the benefit of section 1408 and become also fraternal beneficiary associations. The language of said section is as follows: "Any such society, order or association heretofore or hereafter incorporated under...