## Facts

- L’Union St. Joseph, a fraternal benefit association, provided benefits to members subject to its bylaws.
- The bylaws made payment of sick benefits contingent on the association receiving a sworn certificate from the member’s attending physician.
- Louis Audette, a member in good standing, became ill and sought benefits.
- Audette’s attending physician refused to provide the required sworn certificate, citing conscientious scruples.
- No sworn physician’s certificate was ever obtained or submitted to the association.
- The association refused payment based on noncompliance with the bylaw requirement.
- After Audette’s death, Malvina Audette, as administratrix, sued to recover the benefits, arguing that diligent efforts to obtain the certificate should suffice.

## Issues

1. Whether a benefit association may treat a bylaw requirement of a physician’s sworn certificate as an express condition precedent to payment.
2. Whether a claimant is excused from satisfying an express condition precedent when the condition depends on a third party’s act and the third party refuses to act without interference by the association.
3. Whether “best efforts” to obtain a required third-party certificate can substitute for strict compliance with an express condition.

## Decision

- The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts affirmed judgment for the association.
- The court held the physician’s sworn certificate requirement was an express condition precedent to any duty to pay benefits.
- The physician’s refusal to provide the certificate did not excuse nonperformance of the condition where the association did not interfere.
- Because the certificate was never produced, the action was premature and could not be maintained on that record.
- The court indicated that a later action could be brought if the required condition were satisfied.

## Legal Principles

- Express conditions precedent must be strictly satisfied unless excused, waived, or otherwise displaced by law.
- When a party’s right to performance is conditioned on the act of a third person, the party who has “engaged for the act of a stranger” bears the risk of the third party’s refusal; absent interference by the other contracting party, the refusal is no excuse.
- Diligent efforts to obtain a required third-party certificate do not substitute for the certificate when the contract makes its production a condition to liability.
- Nonoccurrence of an express condition prevents the duty to perform from arising, so suit is premature until the condition occurs.

## Conclusion

The court enforced the association’s bylaw requiring a physician’s sworn certificate as a strict condition precedent to benefits, holding that the attending physician’s refusal—without interference by the association—did not excuse noncompliance and barred recovery until the condition was met.


Audette v. L'Union St. Joseph, 178 Mass. 113 (Mass. 1901)