Skip to main content
· 4/8/1901

Pythias Knights' Supreme Lodge v. Beck

Citations

  • 181 U.S. 49
  • 21 S. Ct. 532
  • 45 L. Ed. 741
  • 1901 U.S. LEXIS 1341

Syllabus

<p>Patton v. Texas & Pacific Railioay Company, 1*79 U. S. 658, sustained and followed as to the relations of the trial court to the jury in regard to its finding.</p> <p>The question whether the deceased did or did not commit suicide was one of fact, and after the jury had found that he did not, and its finding had been approved by the trial court and by the Court of Appeals, this court would not be justified in disturbing it.</p> <p>On April 5, 1895, a certificate of membership, in the amount of 13000, was issued by the Supreme Lodge to Trank E. Beck, payable on his death to his widow, Mrs. Lillian II. Bock. The • application for membership contained this stipulation: “It is agreed that, if death shall result by suicide, whether sane or insane, voluntary or involuntary, or if death is caused or superinduced by the use of intoxicating liquors or by the use of narcotics or opiates, or in consequence of a duel, or at the hands of justice, or in violation of or attempt to violate any criminal law, then there shall be paid only such a sum in proportion to the whole amount of the certificate as the matured life expectancy at the time of such death is to the entire expectancy at date of acceptance of the application by the board of control.” It was on the conduct of Beck before he committed suicide an instruction was asked for, which the trial court, in its charge to thé jury referred to as follows: “ Here is an instruction asked, which I refused, and I wish to state here that is the instruction that if Prank E. Beck was violating any law at the time he was killed, why under the policy he cannot recover — under the by-laws. As I understand that by-law, it must be a case where a man is in the act of violating the law. Por instance, if a man in breaking into a house is killed in the act, he cannot recover. If a man is in a quarrel and gets killed he cannot recover. But if a man contemplating that he was going to kill his wife if she didn’t go home with him, but was not in t

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that statements in proof of loss are not conclusive; claimant could explain statements
  • holding that statements in proof of loss are not conclusive; claimant could explain statements

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Bee

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.