Supreme Ruling of the Fraternal Mystic Circle v. Annie Snyder
Decision Date | 24 February 1913 |
Docket Number | No. 34,34 |
Parties | SUPREME RULING OF THE FRATERNAL MYSTIC CIRCLE, Plff. in Err., v. ANNIE SNYDER |
Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
Mr. F. Zimmerman for plaintiff in error.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 497-500 intentionally omitted] Messrs. J. B. Sizer and Robert Pritchard for defendant in error.
In 1887, the plaintiff in error issued a certificate or policy of insurance for $3,000 upon the life of Charles C. Snyder. His wife, the defendant in error, was the beneficiary. He died in 1908, and liability upon the policy having been denied by the company, this suit was brought by Mrs. Snyder in the chancery court of Tennessee to compel payment. The court gave judg- ment in her favor, and finding that the refusal to pay was not in good faith, added to the recovery 25 per cent of the principal, or $750, which was adjudged to be 'reasonable compensation and reimbursement to the complainant' for the 'additional loss, expense, and injury' which had been inflicted upon her as the holder of the policy by the refusal. This addition was made pursuant to an act passed by the legislature of Tennessee in 1901 (chap. 141). The supreme court of the state, sustaining the statute, affirmed the judgment, and the insurance company has sued out this writ of error. 122 Tenn. 248, ——L.R.A.(N.S.) ——, 122 S. W. 981.
The sole Federal question for decision is whether the above-mentioned statute, as applied, impaired the obligation of the contract in suit, and thus violated article I, § 10 of the Constitution of the United States.
The act in question provides:
The contention is that the provision for added liability placed a burden upon the assertion of the rights which the contract secured, and thus in effect changed the contract by allowing a recovery to which the parties had not agreed, and which was not sanctioned by the law as it existed at the time the contract was made. Bronson v. Kinzie, 1 How. 311, 317, 11 L. 2d. 143, 145; Barnitz v. Beverly, 163 U. S. 118, 41 L. ed. 93, 16 Sup. Ct. Rep. 1042; Bedford v. Eastern Bldg. & L. Asso. 181 U. S. 227, 45 L. ed. 834, 21 Sup. Ct. Rep. 597; Oshkosh Waterworks Co. v. Oshkosh, 187 U. S. 437, 439, 47 L. ed. 249, 250, 23 Sup. Ct. Rep. 234. It is pointed out that in the cases in which statutes have been sustained providing for the addition to the recovery of attorneys' fees or damages, or penalties, the question arose under the 14th Amendment; and that, so far as they applied to suits upon...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Spicer v. Benefit Ass'n of Ry. Employees
... ... v. BENEFIT ASS'N OF RY. EMPLOYEES. Supreme Court of Oregon April 18, 1933 ... fraternal society, the plaintiff shall recover, in addition ... a defense as in the case of Supreme Ruling of ... the F. M. C. v. Snyder, 227 U.S ... ...
-
Barber v. Hartford Life Ins. Company
...Hartford Life Ins. Co., 269 Mo. 21; Keller v. Home Life Ins. Co., 198 Mo. 440; Farmer Ins. Co. v. Dobney, 189 U.S. 301; Fraternal Mystic Circle v. Snyder, 227 U.S. 497; Manhattan Life Ins. Co. v. Cohen, 234 U.S. Fidelity Mutual Life Assn. v. Mettler, 185 U.S. 308; Iowa Life Ins. Co. v. Lewi......
-
Barber v. Hartford Life Insurance Co.
... ... LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant Supreme Court of Missouri, First Division July 3, 1916 [ ... Co. v. Dobney, 189 U.S. 301; Fraternal" ... Mystic Circle v. Snyder, 227 U.S. 497 ... \xC2" ... ...
-
93 2177 La.App. 1 Cir. 11/18/94, Manuel v. Louisiana Sheriff's Risk Management Fund
...Glass Co. v. Niagara Fire Ins. Co., 59 So. at 972, the United States Supreme Court decided Supreme Ruling of the Fraternal Mystic Circle v. Snyder, 227 U.S. 497, 33 S.Ct. 292, 57 L.Ed. 611 (1913). In Snyder, a life insurance policy was issued in 1887 on the life of Mr. Snyder, a Tennessee r......