Freeman v. United States Grand Lodge — 42 N.Y.S. 474

Majority

p. 474

(18 Misc. Rep. 610.)

FREEMAN v. UNITED STATES GRAND LODGE.

(City Court of New York, General Term.

December 12, 1896.)

Headnote

Beneficial Associations—Expulsio.n op Members—Evidence.

Expulsion of a member of a benefit society for nonpayment of dues and installments, notice not having been given as required by the constitution

p. 475

and by-laws of the society, is not conclusively shown by the testimony of its secretary that the member was expelled, and the minutes of the meeting, at which the secretary testified the member was expelled, not being in evidence.

Appeal from trial term.

Action by Leah Freeman against the United States Grand Lodge, etc. From a judgment entered on a verdict in favor of plaintiff, and from an order denying a new trial, defendant appeals.

Affirmed.

Argued before VAN WYCK, C. J., and O’DWYER, J.

Al. D. Lind, for appellant.

Edwin F. Stern, for respondent.

The appellant’s counsel, by his brief and argument, concedes that the evidence was sufficient to justify the submission of the case to the jury, in the absence of a motion by him, at the close of the case, to direct a verdict for defendant. The plaintiff was the widow of a member of defendant’s benevolent association, and sued to recover the $500 to which such widow was entitled upon the death of such married member. The only real dispute made by defendant was that the deceased had been dropped from the roll of membership for nonpayment of dues and death assessments, and, as to this, conceded that they had not given the notice of such action which was required by the constitution and by-laws, but endeavored to supply proof of a waiver by deceased of such required notice, by having its secretary give oral evidence of admissions made by deceased to him; nor did it produce its minute or other books showing entries of their official action at the meeting at which this secretary said the deceased was expelled. Much of this evidence would certainly have been excluded if duly objected to by plaintiff. The jury’s verdict, under the proofs as made by defendant, is not against the weight of evidence, and should not be disturbed.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.