Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

KANSAS ENDOWMENT ASSOCIATION v. KANSAS.

decided: January 24, 1887.

KANSAS ENDOWMENT ASSOCIATION
v.
KANSAS.



ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF KANSAS.

Author: Waite

[ 120 U.S. Page 103]

 MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the court.

This was a suit begun by the state of Kansas in the District Court of Lyon County against the Endowment and Benevolent Association of Kansas, for a forfeiture of its charter because it had neglected to comply with the requirements of chapter 131 of the laws of Kansas of the year 1885, approved March 7, 1885, "providing for the organization and control of mutual life insurance companies in this state." The case was submitted without pleadings on an agreed statement of facts, from which it appears that the corporation was organized under the general laws of Kansas, January 7, 1885, with the following objects:

"1st. To guard its members, to a great extent, against the ills of pecuniary want during life, and especially during the period of infirm old age, and at their death to make a provision for their families and friends, which latter is supposed to be the only physical anxiety of dying man.

[ 120 U.S. Page 104]

     "2d. To create a fund to be paid to the members of the society, in accordance with rules and regulations thereof, whereby the members may the better be enabled to perpetuate and sustain their membership, which in so doing will secure to them and their dependents the continued support and protection of the association.

"3d. To encourage and promote benevolence, industry, and charity among its members."

The district court gave judgment against the corporation, but on what ground does not appear, except as it may be inferred from the following reasons assigned in support of a motion for a new trial:

"1. That said chap. 131 is unconstitutional and void.

"2. For error of law occurring at the trial and excepted to by the defendant.

"3. That the facts of this case do not warrant either the conclusion of law made by the court or the judgment herein rendered."

When the case went to the Supreme Court of the state on a petition in error, the following was ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.