South Carolina Mut. Ins. Co. v. Price

• Decision Date: 21 July 1903
• Parties: SOUTH CAROLINA MUT. INS. CO. v. PRICE.
• Court: South Carolina Supreme Court

45 S.E. 173

67 S.C. 207

SOUTH CAROLINA MUT. INS. CO. v. PRICE.

Supreme Court of South Carolina

July 21, 1903

Appeal from Common Pleas Circuit Court of Abbeville County; Watts Judge.

Action by the South Carolina Mutual Insurance Company against T. J Price. From an order in favor of defendant, plaintiff appeals. Reversed.

Respondent asked that decree be sustained on the following additional grounds:

"First. Because the presiding judge should have sustained the following exception to the master's report viz.: (1) Because it was error in the master to allow the plaintiff to amend the complaint herein, because the complaint, as proposed to be amended, would not state a good cause of action, and would be ineffectual on three grounds viz., the complaint should be brought in the name of the Greenville Mutual Insurance Company, to which company defendant's liability was incurred.

Second. Because his honor erred in overruling, or in also not basing his decision on, the ground taken by the second exception to the master's report, and not holding that the complaint was subject to demurrer on the following grounds, viz.: (1) Because it fails to allege that the property described in the complaint is the property of the defendant; (2) because it is not alleged in the complaint that the losses were incurred by members of the company; (3) because the com plaint fails to state that the amount sued for is the pro rata share due by the defendant."

J. Fraser Lyon, for appellant. Wm. N. Graydon, for appellee.

POPE C.J.

This appeal involves the correctness of the judgment pronounced by Judge Watts when he adjudged that plaintiff's complaint should be dismissed. It seems that in the early part of the year 1897, to wit, on the 13th March, 1897, the defendant applied for and obtained a policy of insurance on his dwelling house, household and kitchen furniture, wearing apparel of himself and family, on three tenant houses, one barn, one log barn, one horse, and three mules, aggregating $1,490, and against all losses which might occur from fire wind, and lightning. This was a mutual insurance company, when, after providing for certain individual fees to be paid by the insured, it was agreed by the insurer and the insured that when any one or more members of the company sustained a loss to the property insured by such members, such loss or losses should be paid or "made good" by pro rata assessments upon the property of the members in their application and policies of insurance, which said property is pledged to said company to secure the payment of such assessments. That there were several losses, for which assessments were duly made, but were not paid. That the policy was surrendered for cancellation and actually canceled 20th April, 1898. That on the 16th day of February, 1898, the General Assembly of this state (22 St. at Large, p. 889) amended the charter of the Mutual Insurance Company of Greenville, S. C., by striking out that name and inserting in lieu thereof the words "South Carolina Mutual Insurance Company." That said Mutual Insurance Company of Greenville, S. C., is now known as the "South Carolina Mutual Insurance Company," and the latter is entitled to all the rights and privileges, as well as being subjected to all the liabilities, of the said Mutual Insurance Company of Greenville, S.C. That, in other words, the two seemingly distinct organizations are in law and fact but one and the same...