Legal Opinion
Arold v. Supreme Conclave Improved Order of Heptasophs
Court of Appeals of Maryland
Decided June 26, 1914PublishedCited by 3 opinions
Appeal from the Court of Common Pleas of Baltimore City. (Bobber, J.) The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.
1Opinion of the CourtStockbridge, J.
George J. Arold became a member of the Improved Order of Hepta-sophs on the twelfth of March, 1895, and received a certificate of membership by which, upon his death, his wife Mary was entitled to receive as beneficiary the sum of $1,000. The application for membership contained among'; other matters this provision:
“I agree to make punctual payment of all dues and assessments for which I may become liable, and to conform in all respects to the Laws, Rules and Usages of the Order now in force, or which may hereafter be adopted by the same.”
Two years later, in 1897, the Order adopted the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Riddlesbarger v. Hartford InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1869
- Mathieu v. MathieuCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1910
- Supreme Conclave v. RehanCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1912
- Modern Woodmen of America v. BauersfeldSupreme Court of Kansas · 1900
3Cited by3 opinions
- Jurgensen v. New Phoenix Atlantic Condominium Council of Unit OwnersCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2004
- Hannon v. Grand Lodge of the Ancient Order of United WorkmenSupreme Court of Kansas · 1917
- Royal Arcanum v. VitzthumCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1916