Southern Tier Masonic Relief Ass'n v. Laudenbach
New York Supreme Court
Bernhard Laudenbaoh, on the 28th day of November, 1874, became a member of the Southern Tier Masonic Belief Association, and received a certificate thereof, by which his wife was entitled to receive $2,000 at his death. The by-laws of the corporation then provided that no change should be made in the beneficiary of the certificate unless the certificate was itself returned, with a request for such change duly acknowledged.
Read the full summary
Bernhard Laudenbaoh, on the 28th day of November, 1874, became a member of the Southern Tier Masonic Belief Association, and received a certificate thereof, by which his wife was entitled to receive $2,000 at his death. The by-laws of the corporation then provided that no change should be made in the beneficiary of the certificate unless the certificate was itself returned, with a request for such change duly acknowledged. In 1878 the by-laws were so amended that when for any cause such certificate could not be returned the board of directors might permit the change without the return.…
1Opinion of the CourtRumsby, J.
It seems to be settled law that Mrs. Laudenbach had no vested interest in the certificate issued by the plaintiff to her husband in 1874, but he was at liberty to change the beneficiary at his pleasure. Sabin v. Grand Lodge, 6 N. Y. St. Rep. 151, Bradley, J It is objected that the constitution or by-laws of the plaintiff required that the certificate should be returned with the new designation, and that a new certificate shall be issued with a new designation indorsed on it. This was certainly a provision of the bylaws at the time the designation to Thalheimer was first made. But this…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Livingston v. MayorCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1831
- Wadsworth v. . Sharpsteen and MoffatNew York Court of Appeals · 1853
- Atkinson v. ManksNew York Supreme Court · 1823
- L'Amoureux v. CrosbyNew York Court of Chancery · 1831
- In re TracyNew York Court of Chancery · 1829
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Stevens v. StevensIndiana Supreme Court · 1891
- In re HillsNew York Surrogate's Court · 1924
- Jacobs v. JacobsNew York Supreme Court · 1926
- Martello v. CagliostroNew York Supreme Court · 1924
- Murphy v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1943
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.