Jeane v. Grand Lodge, Ancient Order United Workmen
Inez B. Jeane v. Grand Lodge, Ancient Order United Workmen
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Haskell, J.
The plaintiff must recover, if at' all, upon the ground that her husband died while a member of defendant corporation in good standing. Before his death, he had been expelled from membership. It is said that the proceedings leading to his expulsion were irregular, and did not conform to the rules of the order. Suppose they were; the laws of the order give an- appeal to a supreme tribunal constituted for the very purpose of correcting such errors, and they provide that each member failing to take such appeal "shall be deemed to have thereby agreed to abide by such decision or enforcement of the laws or rules of the order.”
The deceased failed to take any appeal from his expulsion, and thereby must be held to have acquiesced in the decision. If courts of law should undertake to review the regularity of procedure in all secret or private societies or associations, the burden would become onerous. Moreover, it is just and reasonable to hold, that when a member of such society has a remedy, under the rules of his order, from any supposed erroneous action injurious to himself, that he should first exhaust that remedy before appealing to the courts for relief. Karcher v. Knights of Honor, 137 Mass. 368 ; Chamberlain v. Lincoln, 129 Mass. *437 70 ; Grosvenor v. United Soc. Believers, 118 Mass. 78 . This court approved the doctrine of the above cases in Lowell v. The Iron Hall, an unreported case decided in July, 1892.
Judgment for defendant.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 8 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.