|
|
|
|
|
|
Court
of Appeals Case
(continued from Page
1)
were reasonable. The court
cited several cases as precedence for a mutual benefit society to legally
change its by-laws. The court also viewed the issue in reference to the
"nature and purpose of contracts in light of their objectives." The court
continued by further explaining that while contracts vested rights to both
member and organization, it did not allow for the organization to use its
reserved power to
amend or add stipulations
without taking into account the rights of the other. "Such a construction
would put the rights of one party to the contract wholly at the mercy of
the other."
The second question addressed
by the court pertaining to the validity of the by-laws binding Anne Rehan.
The court argued that the mutual benefit society made no allegation that
the member was sane or insane; nor was it alleged that deceased died of
an inflicted pistol wound either intentionally or unintentionally. The
defense case rested upon the by-law and the mere allegation that the member
committed suicide, not taking into account how the actual act occurred.
In Travelers' Insurance Company vs. Nickles, 88 Md. 470, the court
addressed the issue of a death resulting from a gunshot being considered
suicide. "[T]he law presumes the wound was the result of accident, and
the burden of proof is upon the defendant to show by a preponderance of
testimony the wound was intentionally self-inflicted, and that it
was not the result of accident."
In its decision, the Court
of Appeals affirmed the decision of the lower court to award Mrs. Rehan
the full amount of the benefit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
debate in this case "was whether the change in the by-laws of the society
was reasonable, whereby it attempted to relieve itself from liability to
pay the stipulated benefit when the death of the member resulted from suicide
while under treatment for insanity, which it contracted for by its certificate
and original by-laws." The ramifications of this case and the precedent
that it set were felt in two areas. The court decided that the act of suicide
did not automatically disqualify the beneficiary from attaining specific
compensation, as outlined by said contract. The court also reaffirmed that
one party could not change a contract without taking into consideration
the rights of another. More importantly it said that the power of an organization
did not empower it to amend its laws in an arbitrary manner, thereby undermining
the rights of the less potent.
Roads in Montgomery County,
1777-1794
Montgomery County was formed
in 1777 from Frederick County. An examination of the minutes of the county
court, found in (Minutes) in series C1134 and dating from 1779, shows a
low level of activity regarding roads. Just as telling is the low number
of road laws passed by the General Assembly. Much of the interest in roads
during this time period centered in the areas between Western Maryland
and Baltimore City in order to facilitate the transportation of agricultural
products and other goods. Although Georgetown remained an important port,
the transportation concerns were focused on the Potomac River, rather than
on land routes except for those terminating at the river.
|
|
|
|
|
|