Sweeney v. . Modern Woodmen of America
New York Court of Appeals
1Per curiam
The evidence is uncontradicted and unimpeached (Hull v. Littauer, 162 N. Y. 569) that the member holding the defendant’s certificate became “ intemperate in the use of alcoholic drinks.”
The effect of such intemperance was, by the terms of the contract, a forfeiture of the certificate and of all benefits thereunder.
The judgment of the Appellate Division and that of the Trial Term should be reversed, and the complaint dismissed, with costs in all courts.
His cock, Ch. J., Hogan, Cardozo, Pound, McLaughlin, Crane and Andrews, JJ., concur.
Judgment reversed, etc.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hull v. . LittauerNew York Court of Appeals · 1900
3Cited by2 opinions
- DeRoller v. BohanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1924
- Utica Trust & Deposit Co. v. DeckerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1926