Vant v. Grand Lodge, Knights of Pythias, of South Carolina

• Decision Date: 27 October 1915
• Docket Number: 9221.
• Citation: 86 S.E. 677,102 S.C. 413
• Parties: VANT v. GRAND LODGE, KNIGHTS OF PYTHIAS, OF SOUTH CAROLINA.
• Court: South Carolina Supreme Court

86 S.E. 677

102 S.C. 413

VANT v. GRAND LODGE, KNIGHTS OF PYTHIAS, OF SOUTH CAROLINA.

No. 9221.

Supreme Court of South Carolina

October 27, 1915

Appeal from Common Pleas Circuit Court of Richland County; C.J Ramage, Special Judge.

Suit by Mary Vant upon a policy of insurance against the Grand Lodge Knights of Pythias, of South Carolina. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Reversed.

Watts J., dissenting.

N. J Frederick, of Sumter, for appellant.

J. H. Hammond, of Columbia, for respondent.

HYDRICK J.

This is an action on a policy of insurance issued to C. H. Vant, plaintiff's husband, by defendant, which is a fraternal benefit association conducted on the lodge system. A by-law of the order provides:

"Any member living in a state of concubinage at the time of his death shall not be entitled to any benefits herein mentioned."

Violation of this by-law was the sole defense; and it was proved by undisputed evidence that Vant abandoned the plaintiff, married another woman, and lived with her in a state of concubinage for 16 years, and was so living with her at the time of his death. The sole ground upon which plaintiff sought to overcome the defense was that it had been waived by the acceptance and retention of premiums or assessments from Vant after knowledge of the facts.

There was testimony that certain members and officers of the local lodge of which Vant was a member knew the facts, and accepted and retained his premiums or assessments after such knowledge; but there was no testimony that any knowledge or notice of the facts was imparted to the Grand Lodge, the defendant herein, or any officer thereof, so as to bring the case within the principle decided in Currence v. Woodmen, 95 S.C. 61, 78 S.E. 442.

Section 2755, vol. 1, Code 1912, provides:

"No subordinate body or any of its officers or members shall have the power or authority to waive any of the provisions of the laws and constitution of the association, and the same shall be binding upon the association, and each and every member thereof and their beneficiaries."

This statute, passed in 1910, was designed, no doubt, to prevent the waiver of violations of the laws of such associations by the local bodies, their officers or members, in favor of their own members, as a result of the fraternal feeling or sympathy which the members of such local orders, being more closely associated together, naturally entertain for each other, at the expense and to the detriment of the entire membership of the order.

It is contended, however, that the testimony shows that the local lodge is the agent of the Grand Lodge for certain purposes; for instance, that it is the medium through which policies or certificates are issued to the members of the local lodges, and the premiums or dues thereon collected and returned to the Grand Lodge. The record shows that the court sustained this contention and based its refusal of defendant's motion for a directed verdict upon it, the court saying, in response to the motion:

"There is some evidence that the subordinate lodge knew, or was put in possession of facts which, if properly pursued, would have brought it to them, put them on inquiry or notice, that this man had two wives. Such being the case, comes in the question of waiver, whether or not knowing these facts. The Supreme Court held in the Powell Case [97 S.C. 375, 81 S.E. 654], against the insurance company, that where the agent had knowledge of certain facts that would tend to forfeit the policy, and they go ahead and receive the premium, and do not cancel the policy until after the man's death, that is a question to go to the jury upon a question of waiver."

And, again, in response to the citation of the statute by defendant's counsel:

"Your last witness testified that the subordinate lodge was its agent in issuing the policy and collecting the

...