Sautter v. Supreme Conclave

• Citation: 76 N.J.L. 763,71 A. 232
• Parties: SAUTTER v. SUPREME CONCLAVE, IMPROVED ORDER OF HEPTASOPHS.
• Decision Date: 16 November 1908
• Court: United States State Supreme Court (New Jersey)

71 A. 232

76 N.J.L. 763

SAUTTER

v. SUPREME CONCLAVE, IMPROVED ORDER OF HEPTASOPHS.

Court of Errors and Appeals of New Jersey.

Nov. 16, 1908.

(Syllabus by the Court.)

Error to Supreme Court.

Action by Margaret Sautter against the Supreme Conclave, Improved Order of Heptasophs. From a Judgment for plaintiff in the Supreme Court (72 N. J. Law, 325, 62 Atl. 529), defendant brings error. Affirmed.

W. Holt Apgar and Olin Bryan, for plaintiff in error.

Joseph A. Beecher, for defendant in error.

VOORHEES, J. The judgment removed by this writ of error was entered in the Supreme Court after demurrer to a special plea had been sustained by that court. See opinion in Sautter v. Supreme Conclave, 72 N. J. Law, 325, 62 Atl. 529. The action is founded upon a benefit certificate of the defendant association issued to the plaintiff's husband, August Sautter. The declaration sets out that on the 10th day of January, 1899, the certificate in question was issued to the said August Sautter, whereby, the conditions thereof being complied with, the defendant promised to pay out of its benefit fund to Margaret Sautter, the wife of the assured, within 60 days from the receipt of satisfactory proof of the death of August, the sum of $1,000, in accordance with and under the provisions of the laws governing said fund; that said August died on the 27th of March, 1904; and that the benefit fund of the defendant was and is sufficient to pay the amount of the certificate, alleging a general compliance with all the rules of the association by the assured. By the copy of the certificate annexed to the declaration, and referred to, it appears that one of the conditions under which the issue was made is "that the member complies in the future with the laws, rules, and regulations now governing said conclave and fund, or that may hereafter be enacted by the Supreme Conclave and govern said conclave and fund."

The special plea interposed set forth that the assured, in his application for membership, agreed "to conform in all other respects to the laws, rules, and usages of the order now in force, or which may be hereafter adopted by the same," and also recited the foregoing condition excerpted from the certificate, and, further, that on the 9th to the 12th of June, 1903, about one year before the death of the assured, the Supreme Conclave in regular session adopted an order or bylaw, viz.: "Sec. 257. No benefits shall be paid to the beneficiary of any member committing suicide, sane or insane"—and then alleged that said August, on the 27th of March, 1904, did commit suicide while sane or insane, and that by reason thereof the contract was voided and vitiated. On demurrer to this plea, on the ground that it did not set out a bar to the plaintiff's right to recover, that the by-law adopted was not retroactive and never became a part of the contract, that the contract was not impaired by the adoption thereof subsequent to the execution and delivery of the certificate, and that it was not in furtherance of the contract between the defendant and that it was unreasonable and illegal, the Supreme Court entered judgment that the plaintiff recover.

It seems to be settled by the weight of authority that, where there is an agreement in the application for membership in a fraternal beneficial society that the member shall be bound by by-laws and rules thereafter to be adopted, such member is bound by any reasonable amendment of the by-laws made after he has become a member; but it is also quite as well settled that the right of amendment must be exercised so as not to interfere with vested rights. Amendments impairing such vested rights are invalid. The difficulty is in applying the facts. The opinion of the court below proceeds on the ground that the by-law in question alters the contract of insurance and is equivalent to authorizing an association to limit its liability to such extent as it choses. The record in this case shows an unconditional promise to pay the benefits to the decedent's wife within 60 days from receipt of proofs of death. In the condition upon which the certificate was issued, obliging the member in the future to comply with the laws, rules, and regulations then governing the conclave or that might thereafter be enacted, nothing is said regarding the power to alter the contract, nor is that subject referred to. The...