Haynes v. Annandale Golf Club
Before: Preston
[29]
PRESTON, J.
This action is by a golfer against his club for declaratory relief. He wishes to resign as a member of the club and be allowed to go in peace, after paying all obligations levied against him and turning in his certificate of membership properly endorsed. Doubtless this is the only case in history where a golf club has failed to heed the plaintive cry of one of its flock. And the court below endorsed its action by refusing to say that plaintiff was entitled to any balm-at all. The judgment of the court was that he was “stymied” and must so remain forever and aye unless perchance the board of directors might experience ■ a change of heart and vote him a furlough. Hence this appeal upon an agreed statements of facts.
We must review the action in a manner becoming the importance of the issue and the prominence of the litigants. Plaintiff fails to appreciate the implied compliment to him in defendant’s desire to retain him as a member. But the record pointedly suggests that plaintiff in the “twilight dim” is bridging this chasm “dark and grim” for some “forlorn” or “shipwrecked” brother, who may follow after him. Defendant insists that unless and until it changes its mind and consents to plaintiff’s release, and follows it by a suitable entry in its book of life, plaintiff must gracefully submit and continue to “roll in the fiery gulf”. However, when we consult the statute under which defendant is organized, we are forced to hold that it requires defendant to provide a way of escape for members, imposing only such restrictions upon the right of resignation as may be just and reasonable. .
Defendant was organized in 1916 as a nonprofit corporation under title XXII, part IV, division 1 of the Civil Code (section 653t et seq.). Later in the same year plaintiff became a regular member of defendant corporation and continued as such until September 18, 1931, on which date he paid all dues and assessments against him, endorsed his certificate of membership in blank, and tendered it, along with his written resignation, to the club. Defendant, acting through its board of directors, declined to release him, relying upon a by-law which reads: “The resignation of any member shall be made in writing addressed to the Board of
[30]
More from California Supreme Court
- People v. Wende (1979)
- People v. Watson (1956)
- People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996)
- People v. Kelly (2006)
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962)
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001)
- People v. Lewis (2021)
- In Re Estrada (1965)
- Denham v. Superior Court (1970)
- People v. Marsden (1970)