Cook v. Modern Brotherhood
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action, in the district court for St. Louis county to recover $1,000> upon an insurance certificate of defendant. The defense was that plaintiff’s husband was engaged in a prohibited employment.
Read the full summary
Action, in the district court for St. Louis county to recover $1,000> upon an insurance certificate of defendant. The defense was that plaintiff’s husband was engaged in a prohibited employment. The-reply alleged that defendant repeatedly represented to the insured that his employment was not within the class of labor classified by defendant as railway freight brakeman, but was mere common labor and not railroad service, and that within the meaning of its articles, laws, by-laws, rules and regulations it was not prohibited, and that the railway service by it prohibited pertained solely to…
1Opinion of the CourtStart, C. J.
The defendant is a fraternal beneficial association engaged in the business of insuring the lives of its members. On April 6, 1909, it accepted the plaintiff’s husband, John G. Cook, hereafter referred to as the insured, as a member of the order, and issued to him a certificate, whereby it agreed to pay to her, in case of his death while in good standing, the amount of one full assessment on all members, not exceeding $1,000. The certificate stipulated that the by-laws *301of the order should be a part of the contract, of which the here material ones are these:
“Sec. 104. — Prohibited Occupations.…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Kline v. Minnesota Iron Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1904
3Cited by3 opinions
- Hendrickson v. Grand Lodge A. O. U. W.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1912
- Rudd v. Great Eastern Casualty & Indemnity Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1911
- Geronime v. German Roman Catholic Aid Ass'n of MinnesotaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1914