Reynolds v. Sovereign Camp W. O. W.
Reynolds v. Sovereign Camp W. O. W.
Dissenting Opinion
(dissenting) : There is not a particle of evidence tending to show that the Sovereign Camp or any of its officers waived the conditions of the certificate. Section 2755, Vol. 1, Code, renders it impossible for the local clerk to have done so. Hence, there is no evidence of waiver anywhere. Further, the insured was obligated, upon a change of occupation, to do two things : (1) To notify the local clerk; (2) to pay the extra assessment. There is no evidence that he did either. The fact that the local clerk in an individual capacity knew of the change does not relieve the insured from his obligation. There is no pretense that the extra assessment was paid.
Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
William E. Reynolds was insured with Sovereign Camp, Woodmen of the World. When the policy was issued, Reynolds was engaged in the ice business. Rater he worked for the express company, and finally became fireman on a locomotive engine. Such a position was classed as extra-hazardous and recprired an extra payment of 30 cents a month. The local clerk was notified of the change of occupation, but did not demand the -extra payment, but collected only the initial sum of 90 cents per month. This continued about four months, when Reynolds was killed in a freight wreck. The Association refused to pay and this action was brought. A verdict was directed for the defendant, and the plaintiff appealed. The case of Crumly v. Sovereign Camp, W. O. W., 102 S. C, 386; 86 S. E., 954, and other cases! show that there was evidence enough to carry the case to the *389 jury on the question of waiver, and it was error to direct a verdict for the defendant.
The judgment is reversed, and a new trial ordered.
Reference
- Status
- Published