Westerman v. Supreme Lodge K. P.
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
| Writing for the Court | Fox |
| Citation | Westerman v. Supreme Lodge K. P., 196 Mo. 670, 94 S.W. 470 (Mo. 1906) |
| Decision Date | 01 June 1906 |
| Parties | WESTERMAN v. SUPREME LODGE K. P. |
Act March 8, 1881 (Laws 1881, p. 87), authorized foreign beneficiary associations to do business in the state, and exempted beneficiary associations from the general insurance laws. By the Revision of 1889, the provisions as to foreign associations were omitted, but Laws 1897, p. 132, exempted all such associations from the insurance laws, and permitted foreign associations to do business in the state. While the law of 1881 was in force, a foreign association issued a death benefit certificate, but in 1893 the member was issued a new certificate for a greater amount, and subsequent to 1897 the member defaulted in the payment of his assessment. Held, that the certificate was subject to the law of 1897, and hence the association was exempt from Rev. St. 1899, §§ 7897, 7898, prohibiting the forfeiture of policies for nonpayment of premiums, and providing for extended insurance and paid-up policies proportioned upon the amount of premiums paid.
4. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW—IMPAIRING OBLIGATION OF CONTRACT—INSURANCE.
Laws 1897, p. 132, exempting beneficiary associations from the provisions of the general insurance laws, did not, as to the beneficiary in a certificate issued prior to the statute, violate Const. art. 2, § 15, prohibiting the enactment of any law impairing the obligation of contract or retrospective in its operation as the beneficiary had no vested right in the certificate.
In Banc. Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court; D. D. Fisher, Judge.
Action by Mary L. Westerman against the Supreme Lodge Knights of Pythias. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendant appeals. Reversed.
This cause is here upon appeal by the defendant from a judgment rendered by the circuit court of the city of St. Louis for the sum of $5,236.27. A statement of this cause was made in Division No. 1 of this court prior to its transfer to court in banc. The statement is substantially correct, and with the permission of my colleagues it will be here adopted:
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
-
Ordelheide v. Modern Brotherhood of America
...and as he deems the decision rendered herein contrary to the decision of the Supreme Court, in Westerman v. Supreme Lodge Knights of Pythias, 196 Mo. 670, 94 S. W. 470, 5 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1114, State ex rel. v. Vandiver, 213 Mo. 187, 111 S. W. 911, Loos' Guardian v. John Hancock Mut. Life I......
-
Clark v. Security Benefit Assn., 35276.
...of Security v. Allen, 306 Mo. 633, 269 S.W. 388; Modern Woodmen of Am. v. Mixer, 267 U.S. 544, 45 Sup. Ct. 389; Westerman v. Supreme Lodge K.P., 196 Mo. 670, 94 S.W. 470, 489; Richmond v. Supreme Lodge, 100 Mo. App. 8, 19, 71 S.W. 736, 739. (4) The court erred in holding that the contract w......
-
Bowers v. Mo. Mutual Assn.
...144 S.W. 185; Rasch v. Bankers Life of Des Moines, 201 S.W. 919; Herzberg v. Brotherhood, 85 S.W. 986, 110 Mo. App. 328; Westerman v. Lodge, 94 S.W. 470, 196 Mo. 167; Williams v. St. Louis Life Ins. Co., 87 S.W. 499, 189 Mo. 70. (3) If the application for insurance, the by-laws, and article......
-
In re Hall's Estate
... ... R. R. Nacy, State Treasurer Supreme Court of MissouriJuly 30, 1935 ... ... Rehearing Overruled July 30, 1935 ... State ex rel ... McAllister v. Power Co., 283 Mo. 115, 223 S.W. 75; ... Westerman v. Supreme Lodge, 196 Mo. 670, 94 S.W ... 470; State ex rel. v. Reichmann, 239 Mo. 81, 142 ... ...