Sovereign Camp Wow v. Bolin’s Empirical Analysis
305 U.S. 66 · 1938
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 3 district · 42 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 76 later decisions (8 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2017 · most notably Order of United Commercial Travelers of America v. Wolfe (1947), Carroll v. Lanza (1955)
10 federal appellate · 3 district · 42 state decisions — followed in 12 states
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Remington Rand, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board · Supreme Council of the Royal Arcanum 419 v. Samuel Green · Hartford Life Insurance Company v. Eliza Ibs · Modern Woodmen of America v. Mixer · Mathews v. Modern Woodmen of America
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 76 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The beneficiary certificate was not a mere contract to be construed and enforced according to the laws of the state where it was delivered. Entry into membership of an incorporated beneficiary society is more than a contract; it is entering into a complex and abiding relation and the rights of membership are governed by the law of the state of incorporation. Another state, wherein the certificate of membership was issued, cannot attach to membership rights against the society which are refused by the law of the domicile." (Emphasis supplied.)”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The court below was not at liberty to disregard the fundamental law of the petitioner and turn a membership beneficiary certificate into an old line policy to be construed and enforced according to the law of the forum. The de-cisión that the principle of ultra vires contracts was to be applied as if the petitioner were a Missouri old line life insurance company was erroneous in the light of the decisions of this court which have uniformly held that the rights of members of such associations are governed by the definition of the society’s powers by the courts of its domicile.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““In 1895 the petitioner adopted a by-law authorizing the issue of life membership certificates. i Under this bylaw a member entering the order at an age greater than 43 years was entitled to life membership without the pay ment of further dues and assessments when the certificate had been outstanding 20' years. In June 1896> while the by-law remained unrepealed, Pleasant Bolin, who was over 43 years of age, joined a Missouri lodge of the petitioner and received a certificate of membership, which recited that while in good standing he would be entitled to participate in the beneficial fund to the amount of $1,000 payable to his beneficiaries and to the sum of $100 for placing a monument at his grave. The certificate recited that it was issued subject to all the conditions named in the constitution and laws of the fraternity and was endorsed with the words ‘Payments to cease after 20 years. ’ “After Bolin’s death, the respondents, as beneficiaries, brought action to recover upon' the certificate. The petitioner’s answer set up that Bolin had ceased to pay the required dues and assessments in July 1916, and his certificate had therefore become void; that the by-law making the certificate fully paid after twenty years was ultra vires the association and had been so declared by the Supreme Court of Nebraska in the class suit brought by one Trapp, the holder of a certificate similar to that of Bolin; that, under Article 4, Section 1 of the- Constitution [of the United States], U”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.