Legal Opinion

Pool v. Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen

California Supreme Court

Decided June 21, 1904No. S.F. No. 3521PublishedCited by 16 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the Court

COOPER, C.

At the close of plaintiff’s testimony the court granted a nonsuit, and judgment was entered for defendant. This appeal is from the judgment.

The action was brought to recover twelve hundred dollars claimed to be due plaintiff on a benefit certificate issued by defendant, an unincorporated fraternal and mutual benefit association, of which plaintiff was a member, for a total and permanent disability, caused by an injury to plaintiff’s spine, received in the course of his employment.

Plaintiff’s right to recover must be measured by his contract, which must be read with the constitution…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Anacosta Tribe, No. 12 v. MurbachCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1859
  2. Levy v. Magnolia Lodge, No. 29, I. O. O. F.California Supreme Court · 1895
  3. Van Poucke v. Netherland St. Vincent De Paul SocietyMichigan Supreme Court · 1886
  4. Robinson v. Templar Lodge, No. 17California Supreme Court · 1897
  5. Hass v. Mutual Relief Ass'n of PetalumaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Robinson v. Brotherhood of Railroad TrainmenWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1917
  2. Kelly v. Brotherhood of Railroad TrainmenIllinois Supreme Court · 1923
  3. Parrott v. Brotherhood of Railroad TrainmenCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1935
  4. Grand Lodge, Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v. SmithMississippi Supreme Court · 1922
  5. Williams v. Inglewood Board of Realtors, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1963

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API