Opinion
03-18-1912
POOLE v. SUPREME CIRCLE, BROTHERHOOD OF AMERICA, et al.
Frank S. Katzenbach, Jr., of Trenton, for complainant. John F. Harned, of Camden, for defendants.
Suit by Hamlet Poole against the Supreme Circle, Brotherhood of America, and others. Heard on motion for preliminary injunction. Granted.
Frank S. Katzenbach, Jr., of Trenton, for complainant.
John F. Harned, of Camden, for defendants.
WALKER, V. C. The bill in this cause was hied by the complainant, a member of the death benefit fund of the supreme circle, for and on behalf of himself and all other members of the fund who should come in and contribute to the expense of the suit. When the complainant became a member of the order and of the fund, monthly dues of 50 cents from each member were required, which might be raised, under certain circumstances, to 60 cents. Several years later, and in December, 1909, the supreme body of the order changed the rates so that now the complainant's dues will be 90 cents per month, an Increase of 80 per cent. over the rate required of him upon admission. The complainant claims that his relation to the order in respect to the death benefit fund is a contractual one, and that the proposed increase of dues is an attempt to impair that contract. The defendants insist that they have a right to make the change because of a reservation in the laws of the order existing at the time the complainant became a member, authorizing amendments to be made. They have filed an answer, and show that their bookkeeping scheme has, at great labor and considerable expense, been entirely changed, and that great inconvenience and loss will be entailed if they are to be enjoined in this suit from carrying out the changed law, which went into effect March 1, 1910.
In my judgment the complainant is entitled to have the status preserved until the final hearing of this cause. There are several thousand members of the order in this state, and the complainant's suit, if successful, would beneficially affect them all, notwithstanding none of them might make themselves active parties complainant. This is my understanding of the effect of a class bill. Dan, Ch. Pl. & Pr. *191 et seq.
Upon filing the bill an order was made restraining the defendants from collecting and enforcing the payment from the complainant of the increase of 40 cents in the monthly dues, and from expelling or striking from the roll of the death benefit fund the complainant, or any other member, for failure to pay the increased dues. In order not to overturn the elaborate new bookkeeping scheme of the defendants, the present order will be modified pendente lite so as to permit the defendants to send out bills and attempt the collection of the increased dues as they appear upon their books charged to the members. The members may pay the same, and such payment will be regarded as being made under protest, without any formal protest being entered, so that, if this suit shall be finally determined in favor of the complainant and the class he represents, the whole class will receive the benefit of the payments by having credited the overplus to future accruing dues. If, however, any member shall refuse to pay the bill for increased dues, he shall not be expelled or dropped from the roll, if he pays the amount for which he was heretofore obligated. In this event, if the suit shall be finally determined against the class, then the delinquents will be afforded a reasonable opportunity under the protection of the court to pay and satisfy the amounts which shall be ascertained to be in arrears and due from them. This will fully preserve the status until final disposition of the cause. Costs will abide the event of the suit.