Hass v. Mutual Relief Ass'n of Petaluma
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County denying a new trial. Walter Van Dyke, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtTemple, J.
The complaint in this case inter alia shows that the defendant is an incorporation, the purpose of which is to secure certain money benefits to the friends of deceased members. By-laws are set out which promise to the nominee of a member dying in good standing “one dollar in coin for every member of this association in good standing at the time of said death.” Also a by-law which provides that the nominee of a deceased member who had been such member for ten years, “shall receive two thousand dollars, though the association may not have that number of members at the time of his death.”
*8It is…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Condee v. GygerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Pool v. Brotherhood of Railroad TrainmenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- Marr v. WhistlerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1920
- O'Connor v. Grand Lodge of Ancient Order of United WorkmenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
- Conway v. Supreme Council Catholic Knights of AmericaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.