Gooding v. Broadway Baptistchurch

• Decision Date: 26 June 1924
• Docket Number: No. 636.,636.
• Citation: 125 A. 211
• Parties: GOODING et al. v. BROADWAY BAPTISTCHURCH et al.
• Court: Rhode Island Supreme Court

125 A. 211

GOODING et al.

v. BROADWAY BAPTISTCHURCH et al.

No. 636.

Supreme Court of Rhode Island.

June 26, 1924.

Appeal from Superior Court, Providence and Bristol Counties; Arthur P. Sumner, Judge.

Suit by Walter Gooding and others against Broadway Baptist Church and others. Decree for complainants, and defendants appeal. Reversed, and cause remanded, with directions to dismiss.

Benjamin W. Grim, of Providence, for appellants.

Waterman & Greenlaw and Charles E. Tilley, all of Providence, for appellees.

SWEENEY, J. This bill in equity is brought to restrain the respondents from selling a certain lot of land and the building thereon situated on Hartford avenue in the city of Providence, and from interfering with the use of said building by the complainants and others who may desire to use it for religious services. The cause was heard upon bill, answer, issues of fact, and proof. Final decree was entered granting the relief prayed for. The respondents have brought the cause to this court by their appeal and allege as reasons therefor that the decree is against the law and the evidence and the weight thereof. The bill alleges that October 5, 1905, the respondent church took legal title to the property known as the Hartford Avenue Baptist Chapel as a gift, to hold the same for the purpose of allowing the attendants at said chapel to conduct religious instruction and services therein and maintain a Sunday school, and not for its own use. The bill further alleges that March 31, 1921, the chapel was found closed with a sign on it stating that it had been closed by order of the Broadway Baptist Church; that since then the complainants have been unable to use the chapel for religious services; and that the respondent church intends to sell said chapel and use the proceeds of. the sale for its own purposes. The complainants pray that the respondent church may be declared to hold said property as trustee for the complainants and others who may wish to use the same for religious services and the conducting of a Sunday school, and that the respondents may be restrained from interfering with such use of said chapel by the complainants and others. The respondent church denies that it holds said property in trust for the benefit of the complainants, and avers that it took title to said land and constructed said chapel thereon as a mission and in furtherance of its religious work; and that the use and control of said chapel has always been subject to its control and direction. The trial justice said in his rescript that he "believes that the complainants have established their contention that the property was deeded to the Broadway Baptist Church upon trust to conduct religious services in it, for the benefit of the neighborhood, so long as that could be done effectively."

The question is whether a resulting trust is to be imposed upon the property for the benefit of the complainants.

It appears in evidence that the Broadway Baptist Church was organized May 11, 1865, and was incorporated by the General Assembly at its May session, 1869. The church prospered, and in addition to maintaining a large Sunday school in its own church, it maintained one at Dyer avenue and another at Belknap district. It published a monthly magazine called "Home Chimes," which has been introduced in evidence by the complainants. In the June number, 1904, of said magazine, appears the record of attendance at these three Sunday schools, and the announcement is made that the Hartford Avenue Baptist Sunday School was opened May 1, 1904. In the February and March numbers, 1906, of said magazine appears the statement that the Hartford Avenue Baptist Sunday School was started May 1, 1904, as a result of the labors of the "Broadway Prayer Circle," which had been holding cottage meetings for some months in the district. It was also stated that on account of the building being inadequate it was decided that the best thing to do was to build a new chapel. The matter was laid before the prudential committee of the home church. After discussing...