McWilliams v. Modern Woodmen of America
Decision Date | 02 December 1911 |
Citation | 142 S.W. 641 |
Parties | McWILLIAMS v. MODERN WOODMEN OF AMERICA.<SMALL><SUP>†</SUP></SMALL> |
Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Appeal from District Court, Navarro County; N. B. Daviss, Judge.
Action by Annie E. McWilliams against the Modern Woodmen of America. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
J. M. Blanding and Richard Mays, for appellant. Pat M. Neff and Benj. D. Smith, for appellee.
This suit was instituted in the district court of Navarro county, Tex., by Annie E. McWilliams, appellant, against the Modern Woodmen of America, appellee. The suit was brought to enforce the payment by the appellee of $1,000 on account of a certain benefit certificate issued by the said appellee for delivery to one John M. McWilliams, in which the appellant was designated as beneficiary. Plaintiff's petition alleges that It was alleged that McWilliams died July 10, 1908, and that plaintiff thereafter filed proofs of death and her claim was denied. Defendant's answer consists of a general demurrer, a general denial, and an affirmative plea: That the defendant is a fraternal beneficiary society organized under the laws of the state of Illinois, and transacting business as such pursuant to the provisions of the laws of Texas. That the contract sued on was evidenced by the bylaws of the defendant, the application for membership, executed by McWilliams, and the benefit certificate issued thereon, but which was never delivered to and accepted by McWilliams. That on the 24th day of January, 1908, McWilliams executed and delivered his application for membership to the society wherein he agreed
Defendant alleged that the said application was the basis of a benefit certificate issued on the 18th day of February, 1908, to be delivered to McWilliams subject to compliance by him of the by-laws and his agreements in said application. Defendant further alleged that the said benefit certificate never became in force and effect for the reason that said benefit certificate was never delivered to the said McWilliams in compliance with the provisions of the by-laws, and that the said John M. McWilliams was never duly and regularly adopted as a member of the defendant, by reason whereof the said benefit certificate never took effect. Appellant replied to said answer by way of a supplemental petition and alleged a waiver of the provisions of the by-laws by Cunningham and pleaded estoppel. The case was tried on the 8th of December, 1910, and the court, upon motion of defendant, instructed the jury to return a verdict against the plaintiff, which was done, upon which verdict judgment was rendered. Plaintiff excepted to the judgment and perfected an appeal.
It is contended in the first assignment that the court erred in peremptorily instructing a verdict in favor of defendant, because there was evidence raising the issue as to the power and authority, actual as well as apparent, of J. N. Cunningham, deputy head consul, and agent of defendant, to waive the by-laws, requiring the adoption of John M. McWilliams in the lodge room, and to himself adopt the said McWilliams and give him the obligation, whereby he became a member of defendant order in good standing.
The proposition is presented that the evidence was such that the court ought to have submitted the case to the jury, on the issue of Cunningham's authority, real or apparent, to act for and bind the defendant. This proposition cannot be sustained. The defendant is a fraternal beneficiary society organized under the laws of the state of Illinois and having its head office at Rock Island, Ill. It was duly...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Clinton v. Modern Woodmen of America
...none of them were complied with and there was no waiver of them. The Arkansas cases are conclusive. 104 Ark. 538; 111 Id. 435. See, also, 142 S.W. 641; Id. 861; 87 Id. 535; 119 N.W. 426; 64 S.W. 36; 52 L. R. A. 444; 109 N.W. 159; 88 Ark. 120; 142 S.W. 641; 130 Id. 858; 144 N.W. 843; 149 Id.......
-
Bennett v. Sovereign Camp, Woodmen of the World
... ... W. 774; Brotherhood of Railway Trainmen v. Dee, 101 Tex. 597, 111 S. W. 396; McWilliams ... v. Modern Woodmen of America (Civ. App.) 142 S. W. 641 ... The third ground ... ...
-
Calhoun v. The Maccabees
...local officers or tent. United Moderns v. Pike, 76 S. W. 774; Brotherhood of Trainmen v. Dee, 101 Tex. 597, 111 S. W. 396; McWilliams v. Modern W. of A., 142 S. W. 641; Vernon's Sayles' Statutes, art. So that, even if it had been shown here, which was not the case, that the local record kee......
-
Sovereign Camp Woodmen of the World v. Wagnon
...R. S.; United Moderns v. Pike, 76 S. W. 774; Brotherhood of Railway Trainmen v. Dee, 101 Tex. 597, 111 S. W. 396; McWilliams v. Modern Woodmen of America, 142 S. W. 641. Nor was the deceased entitled to reinstatement on account of the tender of assessments and dues, because such tender was ......