Reversing.
The Sovereign Camp of the Woodmen of the World is a fraternal insurance organization, with numerous local camps throughout the country. Alexander H. Burklow was a member of the Silver Leaf Camp No. 252 of Kentucky. On April 9, 1920, the Sovereign Camp issued to him a certificate insuring his life in the sum of $1,000 in favor of his wife, Pearl Burklow. The insured *Page 683 died on December 14, 1931, and liability having been denied, this action was brought to recover on the certificate. Recovery was based on the ground that all the premiums, dues, and assessments had been paid up to the time of the death of the insured, and that he was then in good standing. In addition to denying the allegations of the petition, the answer pleaded that the monthly installments due on October 1, 1931, and November 1, 1931, were not paid before the end of the month, and that by reason thereof the certificate became null and void; that decedent did on December 12, 1931, make payment of the October and November installments, but on said date he was not in good health and did not remain in good health for 30 days thereafter, but prior to the payment of the two installments he had suffered a stroke of paralysis from which he died on December 14, 1931. The affirmative allegations of the answer were denied by a reply. The reply further averred that on November 3, 1925, the local camp passed a resolution providing that the camp pay monthly installments and dues of Alexander H. Burklow until he was able to work and obtain employment; that from said date until the 1st day of October, 1931, the financial secretary paid the dues and assessments; that on October 1, 1931, and November 1, 1931, he had sufficient funds to pay said assessment; that during the month of October or November plaintiff inquired of him if the assessments were still being paid by the members of the lodge and her contract kept in force, and she was assured that the matter was being looked after and the assessments were being paid; that she relied upon this information, and by reason thereof the Sovereign Camp was estopped to deny that the payments were made, and to plead that the policy was lapsed. At the conclusion of the evidence for plaintiff, the court directed a verdict in favor of the Sovereign Camp. Mrs. Burklow appeals.
The facts disclosed by the evidence are these: On November 3, 1925, the local camp passed the following order or resolution: "Sovg. A.H. Burklow reported in bad condition. Motion made and seconded that Clk. take care of his dues until he gets employment." From that time on Burklow was unable to work, and his assessments were regularly paid out of the camp dues until October 1, 1931. For the months of October and November the local camp dues collected from other members were used to pay the commission of the secretary *Page 684 and for other purposes, and Burklow's dues and assessments were not paid on the ground that the camp was overdrawn at the bank. L.R. Burklow, a nephew of the insured, was appointed to look after the matter. In the month of October he went to the financial secretary, Mr. Cates, to see if his uncle's dues were all right. Cates told him it was all right, that A.H. Burklow was in good standing, and that "all the lodge was keeping it up for A.H. Burklow." Several days before his death he again saw Mr. Cates, the secretary, who informed him that it was all right. Later on he became uneasy about the matter, and he and Mrs. Burklow paid the past dues and obtained a receipt from the secretary.
Under the by-laws, assessments must be paid before the end of the month, and if not paid, the member is suspended and his certificate becomes null and void. They further provide in substance that he may be reinstated by payment of past dues on condition that he is then in good health, and remains so for a period of 30 days. In view of the latter provision, and of the further fact that the insured was seriously ill when the assessments were paid, and died within a few days, it doubtless is true that the acceptance of the past-due assessments did not have the effect of reinstating him as a member.
It remains to determine whether the facts make out a case of estoppel. The situation is different from that shown in Supreme Lodge of Knights Ladies of Honor v. Anderson,
It follows that the question of estoppel should have been submitted to the jury, and that the court erred in directing a verdict in favor of appellee.
Judgment reversed, and cause remanded for a new trial consistent with this opinion. *Page 686