Christian Science Bd. of Directors of First Church of Christ, Scientist v. Evans

• Decision Date: 23 February 1987
• Citation: 105 N.J. 297,520 A.2d 1347
• Parties: , 2 U.S.P.Q.2d 1093 The CHRISTIAN SCIENCE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF the FIRST CHURCH OF CHRIST, SCIENTIST, in Boston, Massachusetts, and the Board of Trustees of the Christian Science Publishing Society, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Doris W. EVANS, Stephen T. Evans, Roy Dobbelaar, Joanne Jannuzzi, Ruth Pfeifer and Mary Beth Singleterry, as members of the Board of Trustees of the First Church of Christ, Scientist, Plainfield, New Jersey, and the First Church of Christ, Scientist, Plainfield, New Jersey, also known as the Independent Christian Science Church, Plainfield, New Jersey, Defendants-Respondents.
• Court: New Jersey Supreme Court

Page 297

105 N.J. 297

520 A.2d 1347, 2 U.S.P.Q.2d 1093

The CHRISTIAN SCIENCE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF the FIRST CHURCH OF CHRIST, SCIENTIST, in Boston, Massachusetts, and the Board of Trustees of the Christian Science Publishing Society, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Doris W. EVANS, Stephen T. Evans, Roy Dobbelaar, Joanne Jannuzzi, Ruth Pfeifer and Mary Beth Singleterry, as members of the Board of Trustees of the First Church of Christ Scientist, Plainfield, New Jersey, and the First Church of Christ, Scientist, Plainfield, New Jersey, also known as the Independent Christian Science Church, Plainfield, New Jersey, Defendants-Respondents.

Supreme Court of New Jersey.

Argued March 18, 1986.

Decided Feb. 23, 1987.

Arthur J. Greenbaum, New York City, a member of the New York bar, for plaintiffs-appellants (McCarter & English, Newark, attorneys; Arthur J. Greenbaum, New York City, and John L. McGoldrick, of counsel; John L. McGoldrick and Roslyn S. Harrison, Newark, on the briefs)

James J. Shrager, Roseland, for defendants-respondents (Hannoch Weisman, attorneys; Miriam E. Cahn, on the brief).

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

CLIFFORD, J.

Plaintiffs seek to enjoin defendants from using the phrase "Christian Science" as any part of the name of a church not affiliated with plaintiffs. The trial court granted injunctive relief, but the Appellate Division reversed, one judge dissenting, 199 N.J.Super. 160, 488 A.2d 1054. Plaintiffs' appeal is therefore here as of right. R. 2:2-1(a)(2). We affirm.

I

Christian Science is a religion founded by Mary Baker Eddy in 1866. As the religion grew, there developed an organizational structure. In 1879 The Church of Christ, Scientist, was founded in Lynn, Massachusetts. From 1881 until 1889 Mrs. Eddy was principal of the Massachusetts Metaphysical College, which was replaced by the First Church of Christ, Scientist (the "Mother Church"), established in 1889 and relocated in Boston, Massachusetts in 1892. 2 J. Melton, The Encyclopedia of American Religions 74-77 (1978). Plaintiff Board of Directors is a Massachusetts corporation that conducts the business of the Mother Church. The Church has a separate publishing arm, governed by the plaintiff Board of Trustees.

The Mother Church, which is the center of a world-wide religious organization, bears the formal name "The First Church of Christ, Scientist." Local members of the organization consist of branch churches or societies, the difference between the two being primarily a matter of size. Branch churches are formally designated "First Church of Christ, Scientist," followed by a geographical designation, unless they are the second or third branch within one city, in which case the numerical designation changes. These names are prescribed by the Church Manual, and are provided for in New Jersey by The individually-named defendants are trustees of the defendant church (the "Plainfield Church"), which was formerly a branch church affiliated with plaintiffs. The Plainfield Church became an authorized branch of the Mother Church in 1892, the year the Mother Church was first located in Boston. In 1977 a doctrinal schism developed between the Boston organization and the Plainfield Church. On June 16, 1977, plaintiff Board of Directors gave notice that it was withdrawing its recognition of the Plainfield Church as a branch of the Mother Church. The letter of notice also declared, "Former First Church, Plainfield, no longer has the legal right to identify itself publicly as a 'Church of Christ, Scientist' or a 'Christian Science Church' or in any other way use the term 'Christian Science' or similar words to describe any of its activities."

statute, N.J.S.A. 16:3-2. Typically, the branch churches establish "Christian Science Reading Rooms," where publications relating to the religion are made available to the public.

After receipt of this notice, defendants began taking steps to disassociate the Plainfield Church from the Mother Church. The Plainfield Church terminated its status as a corporation formed under N.J.S.A. 16:3-1 to -11 (which refer consistently to "church of Christ, Scientist," and nowhere use the expression "Christian Science church"), and reincorporated as a general religious corporation under N.J.S.A. 16:1-1 to -12. It adopted the name "Independent Christian Science Church of Plainfield, New Jersey."

Plaintiffs filed this suit on July 21, 1980. Their cause of action rested on asserted trade mark and service mark rights in the phrases "Church of Christ, Scientist" and "Christian Science." They sought to enjoin defendants

from using as the name of, or in connection with, any church, religious group, society, association, organization, or service now existing or which may be organized or exist, independently of the Mother Church and its branches, the names or designations, "Church of Christ, Scientist," "First Church of Christ, Scientist," "Branch Church of Christ, Scientist," "Christian Science Church," "Independent Christian Science Church," "Christian Science Reading Room," Plaintiffs alleged that the terms used by defendants so nearly resembled plaintiffs' names and marks (trademarks and service marks) as to be likely to cause confusion, mistake, and deception, to constitute false representation, and to result in unfair appropriation of plaintiffs' name, reputation, and good will. They charged that use of the terms constituted a false designation of origin and a false description or misrepresentation under federal trademark law, section 43 of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C.A. § 1125.

"Independent Christian Science Reading Room," [520 A.2d 1350] or any name so similar thereto as to be likely to deceive the public or lead to confusion.

Plaintiffs alleged further that defendants' use of the terms infringed on plaintiffs' registered trade and service marks (marks for publications, e.g., "Christian Science Monitor"), violated N.J.S.A. 56:4-1 ("No merchant, firm or corporation shall appropriate for his own use a name, brand, trade-mark, reputation or goodwill of any maker in whose product such merchant, firm or corporation deals."), and constituted "unfair competition, trademark and service-mark infringement, palming off, dilution and injury to reputation, all in violation of the common law of the State of New Jersey."

The trial court granted injunctive relief. Christian Science Bd. of Directors v. Evans, 191 N.J.Super. 411, 467 A.2d 268 (Ch.Div.1983). The court assumed, without deciding, the threshold issue, namely, that plaintiffs had a protectible trademark interest in "Church of Christ, Scientist" and "Christian Science" when used in or as part of the name of a church, id. at 422, 467 A.2d 268, and then pursued a "likelihood of confusion" analysis--that is, it concluded that plaintiffs had shown likelihood of confusion and potential damage by defendants' continued use of the terms, sufficient to justify an injunction Id. at 422-23, 467 A.2d 268. The trial court's faulty premise, endorsed by the dissent as a finding of fact, post at 1357, 1360 (we see it rather as a holding of law, and an incorrect one at that) led it to enter judgment enjoining defendants from using for any of its organizations any name or designation that includes any of the following phrases: Church Defendants appealed, and pending appeal proposed to use the name

of Christ, Scientist; Christ, Scientist; Christian Science Church; Christian Science. It also enjoined defendants from making a representation likely to lead the public to believe they were affiliated with the plaintiffs, "provided that this * * * shall not prohibit Defendants from using, in a fair, truthful, and non-deceptive manner, both as to form and content, the term 'Christian Science' in phrases or sentences to refer to the religion developed by Mary Baker Eddy."

PLAINFIELD COMMUNITY CHURCH

AN INDEPENDENT CHURCH PRACTICING CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

Because plaintiffs viewed defendants' use of that name as violative of the trial court's judgment, they sought an Order in Aid of Litigants' Rights enjoining use of the proposed name. The trial court agreed that the proposed use of the term "Christian Science" as part of the name of the church amounted to a trademark use in violation of the judgment. It therefore ordered that the second line, "An Independent Church Practicing Christian Science," be used, if at all, only as an explanatory phrase rather than as part of the name. The order included specific restrictions on the size, type, and style of lettering.

On appeal to the Appellate Division defendants challenged only the restraints on their use of "Christian Science" and "Christian Science Church." Therefore the injunction stands against their use of "Christ, Scientist" and "Church of Christ, Scientist."

A divided Appellate Division held that plaintiffs were not entitled to exclusive use of the phrase "Christian Science" when used as part of the name of a church. Christian Science Bd. of Directors v. Evans, 199 N.J.Super. 160, 488 A.2d 1054 (1985). The court rested that holding on its conclusion that the primary significance to the public of the phrase "Christian Science" is as the name of a religion, hence the phrase could not be protected as a trade name for the name of a church. Id. at 168, 488 A.2d 1054. The court further held that "Christian Science" was protectible when used as part of the trade name "Christian Science Reading Room." Id. at 171-72, 488 A.2d 1054. The Appellate Division therefore restrained defendants from using any variation of "Christ, Scientist," or "Christian Science" in connection with a Reading Room. One judge dissented from so much of the majority opinion and judgment as reversed the trial court's injunction against defendants' use of "Christian Science" in the name of their church, id. at 172, 488 A.2d 1054, thereby framing the sole issue presented on this appeal. The injunction regarding Reading Rooms continues without challenge.

II

The...