Grosse v. Beideman

• Decision Date: 23 June 1965
• Docket Number: No. 356,356
• Citation: 239 Md. 283,211 A.2d 298
• Parties: Ernest E. GROSSE, etc. v. James I. BEIDEMAN, Sr.
• Court: Maryland Court of Appeals

Page 283

239 Md. 283

211 A.2d 298

Ernest E. GROSSE, etc. v. James I. BEIDEMAN, Sr.

No. 356.

Court of Appeals of Maryland.

June 23, 1965.

Earl E. Manges, Cumberland, for appellant.

No brief or appearance for appellee.

Before HORNEY, MARBURY, SYBERT, OPPENHEIMER and BARNES, JJ.

MARBURY, Judge.

This is an appeal by Ernest E. Grosse, District Superintendent, Washington District Advisory Board, Inc., Church of the Nazarene, from a decree of the Circuit Court for Washington County dated August 26, 1964, dismissing a supplemental bill of complaint.

On May 9, 1958, a bill of complaint was filed by appellant seeking an injunction restraining the appellee, The Reverend Mr. James I. Beideman, Sr., from performing any ministerial acts within the Church of the Nazarene located at West Side Avenue and Church Street in Hagerstown. The complaint stated that Mr. Beideman had been ordained an elder by the Church of the Nazarene, but his credentials were later revoked and annulled by the Trial Board of the Church, and that appellee in spite of this had continued to perform ministerial acts. A decree pro confesso was entered June 2, 1958, but on motion of Mr. Beideman, filed on June 11, the decree was set aside, whereupon an answer was duly filed by appellee. Appellant did not press for a hearing until nearly two years later, when the late Judge Fraley heard the case. On May 11, 1960, he filed a memorandum opinion, in which he found that it was not disputed that appellee's credentials had been revoked and that he continued to perform ministerial duties. Judge Fraley ascertained that the membership of the church, in spite of the facts stated above, wished appellee to continue his services as its pastor, as shown by a majority vote of the membership at congregation meetings. From the facts developed at the hearing the judge found that there was a dispute between the local Nazarene Church and their governing authority, and held that it was not a case for intervention by a court of equity.

Later, on September 19, 1960, more than four months after his memorandum opinion was filed, Judge Fraley signed an order at appellant's request directing that cause be shown why the First Church of the Nazarene of Hagerstown, Inc. should not be made an additional party defendant to the proceedings; and that a supplemental bill of complaint be filed. On October 6, 1960, the additional proposed defendant filed an answer to the show cause order setting forth that the case had already been decided by the court and that the issues were settled. A hearing was held, and on April 7, 1961, Judge Fraley passed an order making the First Church of the Nazarene of Hagerstown, Inc. a party defendant, and authorizing a supplemental bill of complaint to be filed within fifteen days. This bill was filed by appellant on April 7 praying that the local Church of the Nazarene, its officers, trustees, and directors forthwith deliver to the appellant the keys to all of the property of the Church. Apparently, the prior movement to oust Mr. Beideman was abandoned. On April 21, 1961, an answer and demurrer to this supplemental bill was filed, setting forth that the charter of the old local church had been amended and that the name of the corporation was now Calvary Holiness Church of Hagerstown, Inc. and that this corporation was not subject to the discipline of the parent Church of the Nazarene represented by appellant.

The next proceeding did not take place until June 17, 1964, when Mr. Beideman and the First Church of the Nazarene, now Calvary Holiness Church of Hagerstown, filed a motion to dismiss because of the failure of the appellant to prosecute. The case came on for hearing on August 26, 1964, before Judge McLaughlin, Judge Fraley having died during the latter part of 1961. The transcript before us does not contain the testimony considered by Judge Fraley in 1960. However, appellant's counsel informed us at argument that the record of that testimony, including some depositions which had been taken, had been lost but through no fault of counsel for either side. No testimony was taken at the hearing before Judge McLaughlin in 1964 on the motion to dismiss since, according to his written opinion, both sides agreed that everything necessary for the court's attention to given an opinion would be furnished by counsel on both sides in their statements and arguments. The court found that the original charter provided that the property of the First Church of the Nazarene of Hagerstown, Inc., was to be managed and controlled by trustees who held title thereto and that appellant never had any interest in the property owned by the local church. It was shown that a small band of Christians dug a foundation and put a roof over it where services had been conducted since the middle nineteen thirties. The congregation desired to go ahead with the completion of the church, but when they attempted to borrow money from a bank, they could not secure a loan because of the present suit on the theory of lis pendens. The representatives of the local church told the court that the congregation was satisfied with Mr. Beideman, that the...