Sovereign Camp, W.O.W. v. Tucker

• Decision Date: 27 October 1921
• Docket Number: 6 Div. 276
• Citation: 90 So. 801,206 Ala. 562
• Parties: SOVEREIGN CAMP, W.O.W., v. TUCKER.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

90 So. 801

206 Ala. 562

SOVEREIGN CAMP, W.O.W., v. TUCKER.

6 Div. 276

Supreme Court of Alabama

Oct. 27, 1921

Appeal from Circuit Court, Jefferson County; J.C.B. Gwin, Judge.

Action by Ethel L. Tucker against the Sovereign Camp, Woodmen of the World, for the beneficiary life certificate issued upon the life of her husband. Judgment for the plaintiff, and the defendant appeals. Reversed and remanded.

C.H Roquemore, of Montgomery, for appellant.

Chas A. Calhoun and John T. Glover, both of Birmingham, for appellee.

GARDNER J.

Appellant is a fraternal beneciary society, and issues to its members benefit certificates of insurance. O.C. Tucker became a member of this fraternal organization, and in June, 1916 there was issued to him a certificate of insurance in the sum of $1,000, Ethel L. Tucker, his wife, who brings this suit upon said certificate, being designated the beneficiary therein. From a judgment for the plaintiff, defendant prosecutes this appeal.

The principal defense relied upon in the court below, and pressed for consideration here, was as follows: O.C. Tucker, at the time of the issuance of the certificate, was a car repairer and obtained the rate of insurance accordingly. In December, 1917, he changed his occupation to that of switchman, and in November, 1918, met his death by accident while engaged in his work as switchman. The position of switchman is designated in the by-laws as a hazardous occupation, requiring additional premium rate. When Tucker changed his occupation to that of switchman no notice was given the local camp, or any officer or agent thereof, or of the defendant organization, nor was any additional assessment or rate paid. It was expressly provided that upon such change such was his (insured's) duty, and that upon failure to do so the certificate of insurance would become void. The various provisions of the laws of the order, and of the certificate and agreement of insured to abide thereby, and the binding force thereof, all appear in the following decisions of this court, wherein this organization was a party litigant, and need no repetition here: Sov. Camp, W.O.W., v. Virgie Allen (Ala.Sup.) 89 So. 58; W.O.W. v. Alford (Ala.Sup.) 89 So. 528; Sov. Camp, W.O.W., v. Eastis (Ala.Sup.) 89 So. 63; W.O.W. v. Maynor (Ala.Sup.) 89 So. 750.

But conceding that the certificate, under these undisputed facts in connection with the laws of the order, was void, appellee insists there has been a waiver of these provisions by the clerk of the local camp, one Priester. Section 20 of the act of 1911, p. 700, is found...