Underwood v. Modern Woodmen of Am.
| Decision Date | 16 February 1909 |
| Citation | 141 Iowa 240,119 N.W. 610 |
| Parties | UNDERWOOD v. MODERN WOODMEN OF AMERICA. |
| Court | Iowa Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from District Court, Scott County; D. V. Jackson, Judge.
Action upon a benefit certificate issued on the life of Rollin Underwood. Trial to the court upon an agreed statement of facts. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.W. M. Chamberlain and Walter H. Peterson, for appellant.
Truman Plantz and Salinger, Scott & Theophilus, for appellee.
The statement of facts so far as the same is material on this appeal may be condensed as follows: In June, 1902, Rollin Underwood, son of plaintiff, became a member of the defendant society which issued to him a benefit certificate, undertaking at his death and upon the performance of certain conditions to pay to the plaintiff the sum of $2,000. As a part of the consideration for said benefit, he undertook to pay all dues and assessments regularly levied within the time limit provided by the laws and rules of said society. The society was not of a merely local character, but was extended in the form of local branches or lodges over many states, and had a membership of about 650,000 persons. Assessments were made from time to time by a board of directors, notice thereof being printed in a monthly publication called “The Modern Woodmen,” issued by the society; one copy being mailed to each member in good standing. By a by-law of the society which was in force when Rollin Underwood became a member, this method of notification was provided for, and failure upon part of any member to pay such assessment on or before the 1st day of the month following the date of said notice, or upon failure to pay the quarterly dues to the local camp at or before their maturity, was made to operate of itself as a suspension from membership, and during such suspension his benefit certificate was to be “absolutely null and void.” Rollin Underwood died November 20, 1902, and due notice and proofs of his death were furnished to the defendant, which refused to recognize any liability upon said benefit certificate because of the nonpayment by said deceased of an assessment levied for the month of October, 1902.
As the question here raised concerning the alleged delinquency of the deceased in the payment of said assessment is the one upon which the entire controversy is made to turn, we here quote the stipulation of the parties in respect thereto:
“(9) It is stipulated between the parties to this action that the matters set out in said answer of Modern Woodmen of America, claimed to be a part of the application made by said Rollin Underwood, were contained in and were a part of said application. It is also stipulated and agreed that a regular and legal assessment by the board of directors of said Modern Woodmen of America for the month of October, 1902, was properly levied and called for the benefit of said Modern Woodmen of America, and that said Rollin Underwood was liable for the payment of said assessment to said Modern Woodmen of America, if legally notified of the same, and that said Rollin Underwood did not pay said assessment, and that the same was not paid by any one. * * *
(12) It is stipulated and agreed between the plaintiff and the defendant that the only evidence in existence on the question as to whether said Rollin Underwood received the notice of the assessment for October, 1902, is the affidavit of the publisher of said official paper attached to a copy thereof, together with a copy of the mailing list, and that the name of said Rollin Underwood appeared on said list, and that the only matter in dispute in the case is the reasonableness or legality of said sections 47, 48, and 49 of the by-laws.
(13) It is admitted by the plaintiff and the defendant...
To continue reading
Request your trial