Meyer v. Oklahoma City, 43955
| Decision Date | 28 March 1972 |
| Docket Number | No. 43955,43955 |
| Citation | 496 P.2d 789 |
| Parties | Kent MEYER, a Resident Taxpayer of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma County, State of Oklahoma, on behalf of himself and all other similarly situated taxpayers, Plaintiff in Error, v. OKLAHOMA CITY, a municipal corporation, et al., Defendants in Error. |
| Court | Oklahoma Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court
To withstand the challenge of a general demurrer, a petition seeking injunctive relief, which alleges a violation of Art. 2, § 5, of the Constitution of Oklahoma, must allege facts that reveal that public money or property are appropriated, applied or donated for the use, benefit or support, in some effective way, of any sect, church, denomination, system of religion or sectarian institution as such.
Appeal from the District Court of Oklahoma County; William S. Myers, Jr., Judge.
Action by a resident taxpayer of Oklahoma City on his own behalf, and on behalf of all other similarly situated taxpayers, to enjoin Oklahoma City, its Mayor and City Manager from maintaining, landscaping and illuminating a prestressed 50 feet tall Latin Cross on land owned and controlled by Oklahoma City, The Fair Grounds. A general demurrer was sustained by the trial court. Plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
Jack P. Trezise, Midwest City, for plaintiff in error.
Roy H. Semtner, Municipal Counselor, Irving L. Faught, Asst. Municipal Counselor, Oklahoma City, for defendants in error.
Warren Cameron, Seattle, Wash., amicus curiae, for affirmance.
This is an appeal from a judgment of the District Court of Oklahoma County, Oklahoma, sustaining defendants' general demurrer to plaintiff's petition and dismissing plaintiff's petition. Plaintiff, a resident taxpayer of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, on his own behalf and on behalf of other similarly situated taxpayers instituted this action against the City of Oklahoma City, a municipal corporation, its Mayor James H. Norick and City Manager Robert H. Oldland, defendants, to perpetually enjoin and restrain said defendants from maintaining upon a triangular lot (129 feet 126 feet 177 feet) located at the Fair Grounds on Oklahoma City land and facing Stagecoach Street, General Pershing Boulevard and Land Rush Street, a religious symbol alleged to be representative of the Christian Faith, in the form of a 50 foot high, Latin Cross designed to stand forever and which defendants allowed the Oklahoma City Council of Churches to install. Plaintiff alleges additionally that at Oklahoma City expense, the lot on which The Cross stands has been landscaped with flowers, shrubs and a lawn; The Cross has six electrical outlets, Oklahoma City pays the electricity for the use of the triangular lot; that The Cross was designed by a Presbyterian architect at the request of an employee of Oklahoma City who was then Secretary of the Oklahoma City Council of Churches and two Presbyterian pastors; that although said cross has been designed to 'stand forever, it has been somewhat abandoned, is presently in a state of disrepair, and as such is an egregious insult to many Christians and followers of other faiths.'
Plaintiff further alleges that all the above was done at the instigation of and by the Oklahoma City Council of Churches and by defendants in violation of Article 2, § 5 of the Oklahoma Constitution which says:
'No public money or property shall ever be appropriated, applied, donated, or used, directly or indirectly, for the use, benefit, or support of any sect, church, denomination, or system of religion, or for the use, benefit, or support of any priest, preacher, minister, or other religious teacher or dignitary, or sectarian institution as such.'
We should emphasize here that plaintiff alleges a violation only of the indicated part of the Oklahoma Constitution and does not allege a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States embracing as it does the mandate of the First Amendment that 'Congress (a state) shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.' While without doubt certain violations of Art. 2, § 5 of the Oklahoma Constitution may be also violations of the First Amendment implications in the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, we shall concern ourselves only with the meaning and application of Art. 2, § 5.
At the threshold of our consideration of whether plaintiff's petition states grounds for injunctive relief under Art. 2, § 5, of the Oklahoma Constitution, we must take note of two cases each involving an effort to enjoin the maintenance and display of a cross upon public property. Lowe v. City of Eugene, 254 Or. 518, 459 P.2d 222 (former opinion 254 Or. 518, 451 P. 117) and Paul v. Dade County, Fla.App., 202 So.2d 833. In the latter case decided in 1967 by the District Court of Appeals of Florida (Third District) the plaintiff, a non-christian, instituted action to enjoin Dade County from maintaining a lighted cross, a religious symbol, on the Dade County Court House during the month of December, 1966. The evidence reflected that this cross with other lights and decorations was originally placed on the court house at the request of members of the Miami Chamber of Commerce and that this was done in order to help decorate the streets of Miami and attract holiday shoppers to the down town area. There was a finding that the money for the maintenance and removal of the lights for the cross was donated by private persons and no public funds would be used in connection therewith. Notwithstanding this finding appellant argued that his (constitutional) rights were violated by maintaining a religious symbol on a public building which his taxes helped support. Since no money was taken from the public treasury Art. 1, § 6, of the Florida Constitution of 1885 did not come into play. The court held there was no violation of plaintiff's 'First Amendment Rights.' Both the Supreme Court of Florida and the Supreme Court of the United States denied certiorari. Paul v. Dade County, 207 So.2d 690, 390 U.S. 1041.
In Lowe, the Oregon case, the trial court, in a suit for declaratory relief ordered the City of Eugene to remove from a public hill top park a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Eugene Sand & Gravel, Inc. v. City of Eugene
... ... Those cases are as follows: ... (1) Meyer v. Oklahoma City, 496 P.2d 789 (Okl.1972), cert denied, 409 U.S. 980, 93 S.Ct. 314, 34 L.Ed.2d 244 ... ...
-
Fox v. City of Los Angeles
... ... (See Eugene Sand & Gravel, supra (cross in hilltop park); Meyer v. Oklahoma City (Okl.1972) 496 P.2d 789 (cross at fairgrounds); Paul v. Dade County (Fla.App.1967) ... ...
-
American Civil Liberties Union of Georgia v. Rabun County Chamber of Commerce, Inc.
... ... City of Bellwood, 441 U.S. 91, 99, 99 S.Ct. 1601, 1607, 60 L.Ed.2d 66 (1979), ... (1977) (cross erected as veteran's war memorial had secular purpose); Meyer v. Oklahoma, 496 P.2d 789 (Okl.1972) (cross erected in distinctly secular ... ...
-
American Civil Liberties Union of Georgia v. Rabun County Chamber of Commerce, Inc.
... ... City of Bellwood, 441 U.S. 91, 99, 99 S.Ct. 1601, 1607, 60 L.Ed.2d 66 (1979), ... ) (cross erected as veteran's war memorial had secular purpose); Meyer v. Oklahoma, 496 P.2d 789 (1972) (cross erected in distinctly secular ... ...