From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Levy v. Iron Hall

Supreme Court of New Hampshire Rockingham
Jun 1, 1892
38 A. 18 (N.H. 1892)

Opinion

Decided June, 1892.

ASSUMPSIT. Facts agreed. The plaintiff is a member of the defendant corporation, and as such he is entitled to certain "sick benefits." Among other things, he agreed that he would not institute legal proceedings for benefits until he had exhausted all remedies therefor provided by the order. Having been sick for several weeks, he presented his claim for a sick benefit, as required by the by-laws, but it was rejected by an officer of the order whose duty it was to pass upon such claims in the first instance. From his decision several appeals were provided for by the bylaws. The plaintiff did not claim an appeal, but brought this action.

William H. Paine and Calvin Page, for the plaintiff.

Edwin G. Eastman and Thomas Leavitt, for the defendants.


As the plaintiff did not resort to the remedy of appeal provided by his contract, he cannot maintain this action. However unreasonable the multiplicity of appeals within the order may seem, he had a right to make an unreasonable contract, and cannot enforce it without complying with its express conditions.

Judgment for the defendants.

CHASE, J., did not sit: the others concurred.


Summaries of

Levy v. Iron Hall

Supreme Court of New Hampshire Rockingham
Jun 1, 1892
38 A. 18 (N.H. 1892)
Case details for

Levy v. Iron Hall

Case Details

Full title:LEVY v. ORDER OF THE IRON HALL

Court:Supreme Court of New Hampshire Rockingham

Date published: Jun 1, 1892

Citations

38 A. 18 (N.H. 1892)
38 A. 18

Citing Cases

Nadeau v. St. Albans Aerie

Unless there is some good excuse for not so doing, if the constitution and by-laws of such an association…

Mullen v. Foresters

They say the plaintiff was required not only to await the action of the finance committee of the lodge on…