Kauphusman v. Home Mutual Hail-Tornado Insurance

The following opinion was filed November 11, 1930:

Wickhem, J.

In the view that the court takes of this controversy it is not necessary to consider whether Fisher’s .agency for the defendant was sufficiently established. It is assumed that it was.

Plaintiff signed an application for membership in the defendant company — an application which was plainly and expressly made subject to the by-laws of the company. It is clear that he is bound by the terms of his application unless Fisher, as agent for the defendant, -could waive the *187provisions of the application and conclude a contract of oral…