Morgan v. Hog Raisers' Mut. Ins. Co.

• Decision Date: 10 July 1901
• Citation: 62 Neb. 446,87 N.W. 145
• Parties: MORGAN v. HOG RAISERS' MUT. INS. CO.
• Court: Nebraska Supreme Court

62 Neb. 446

87 N.W. 145

MORGAN

v.HOG RAISERS' MUT. INS. CO.

Supreme Court of Nebraska.

July 10, 1901.

Syllabus by the Court.

1. A mutual insurance company organized under chapter 46, Sess. Laws 1899, cannot by contract limit the number or amount of assessments for which its members are liable.

2. That portion of a contract of insurance between a company organized under the provisions of chapter 46, Sess. Laws 1899, and one of its members, which seeks to limit the liability of a member as to number or amount of assessments, is contrary to law, and cannot be sustained.

3. The liability of a member of such insurance company to pay his proportionate share of all assessments required to satisfy the indebtedness of the company is a continuing one, so long as he remains a member of the company.

Error to district court, Lancaster county; Frost, Judge.

Action by the Hog Raisers' Mutual Insurance Company against John S. Morgan. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error. Affirmed.A. G. Greenlee and T. M. Wimberly, for plaintiff in error.

E. J. Clements, for defendant in error.

KIRKPATRICK, C.

This is an action brought by the defendant in error, the Hog Raisers' Mutual Insurance Company, against John S. Morgan, Sr., plaintiff in error, to recover the sum of $23.65, being a 9 per cent. assessment on the amount of his insurance, made to cover losses sustained by the members of the company. Judgment was entered in the district court for the company, and Morgan brings his case here by proceedings in error.

The defendant in error organized under the provisions of chapter 46, Sess. Laws 1899, providing for the organization of mutual insurance companies to insure against the loss of hogs by disease. From the record it appears that plaintiff in error made an application in due form to the insurance company for insurance on his hogs in the sum of $250. His application was approved, a policy was issued to him, and he became a member of the company. At the time of making his application, plaintiff in error paid the company $5, and signed an application which, among others, contained a clause in the following language: “Future liability of the applicant for assessments or otherwise under this application, or the policy issued thereon, shall not exceed double the amount paid for this policy, as stated on the back of this application.” The policy issued by the company contained, among other provisions, one as follows: “Future liability of the applicant for assessment or otherwise under the original application, or this policy issued thereon, shall not exceed double the amount paid for this policy, as stated on the back hereof.” It appears that two assessments were made against plaintiff in error, which he paid, aggregating $10, which was double the amount he paid when he made his application, and, according to the foregoing provisions in the application and policy, was all he was obligated to pay. The sole question presented by the record in this case is whether or not plaintiff in error can be required to pay an additional assessment of 9 per cent., which is his proportionate share of the losses and expenses of the company. A determination of this question requires a consideration of sections 130, 137, and 140 of chapter 43, Comp. St. 1899, which are part of the statute under which the company was organized, and for convenience they will be set out:

“Sec. 130. All persons who take insurance in such company shall thereby become and continue members of such company during the period their insurance is in force and no longer. Such persons shall...