Schneider v. Bahler

• Decision Date: 02 June 1983
• Docket Number: No. L 83-10.,L 83-10.
• Citation: 564 F. Supp. 1449
• Parties: Joe L. SCHNEIDER, Plaintiff, v. Alfred BAHLER, individually and in his capacity as Elder of The Apostolic Christian Church, Edwin Bahler, individually and in his capacity as Deacon of The Apostolic Christian Church, The Apostolic Christian Church of Remington, Inc., Albert Schini and Amelia Schini, Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Northern District of Indiana

564 F. Supp. 1449

Joe L. SCHNEIDER, Plaintiff, v.Alfred BAHLER, individually and in his capacity as Elder of The Apostolic Christian Church, Edwin Bahler, individually and in his capacity as Deacon of The Apostolic Christian Church, The Apostolic Christian Church of Remington, Inc., Albert Schini and Amelia Schini, Defendants.

No. L 83-10.

United States District Court, N.D. Indiana, Hammond Division.

June 2, 1983.

Gary L. Watson, Lebanon, Ind., Jerome Withered, Lafayette, Ind., for plaintiff.

Thomas G. Fisher, Rensselaer, Ind., for defendants.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

SHARP, Chief Judge.

I.

The original complaint for damages was filed by the plaintiff in this case on the 24th day of January, 1983, which complaint was in a single count and contained 31 rhetorical paragraphs.The sole jurisdictional allegation in said complaint was alleged to be 28 U.S.C. § 1331.The JS-44 civil cover sheet prepared by counsel for the plaintiff alleged that the cause of action was under 42 U.S.C. § 1982.

Proceedings were held in open court with counsel for both the plaintiff and defendants present on the 6th day of May, 1983 in Lafayette, Indiana.In that proceeding it was agreed upon and ordered that the brief on jurisdictional issues as well as upon the legal issues raised under 42 U.S.C. § 1982and42 U.S.C. § 1985(3) would be filed simultaneously by the 31st day of May, 1983.Such has been filed by both parties.Also, in that proceeding the plaintiff was granted leave to file an amended complaint, which amended complaint was filed on May 20, 1983.The amended complaint alleges that this court has jurisdiction under Title 28 U.S.C. § 1331and42 U.S.C. § 1982andSection 1985(3).The amended complaint is in a single count and contains 37 rhetorical paragraphs.

At the outset it is clear that all parties to this case are residents of and citizens of the State of Indiana and therefore there is no possible basis for jurisdiction under Title 28 U.S.C. § 1332.

The defendant filed a motion to dismiss on March 1, 1983, which was discussed by counsel in the proceedings of May 6, 1983, and the briefs which have been filed are treating the aforesaid motion to dismiss as being addressed to the amended complaint for damages.The court will likewise treat said motion to dismiss as challenging the amended complaint for damages.

The amended complaint alleges that the plaintiff is a former member of the defendant, The Apostolic Christian Church of Remington, Inc., and that defendant, Alfred Bahler, is an influential member and Elder of the aforesaid church and that the defendant, Edwin Bahler, is an influential member and Deacon of the aforesaid church.

It is further alleged that The Apostolic Christian Church is a "closely connected church organization" which serves as the predominant influence in the lives of its members and that the elders and deacons of such church are "extremely powerful and influential persons" and that the membership of the church faithfully abides by the decisions of the elders and deacons.Under the organizational structure and teachings of the church disputes are routinely handled through the workings of the church with the elders and deacons serving as "arbiters or judges" of disputes between church members.It is alleged that there are considerable pressures exerted to persuade church members to accept the decisions of the elders and deacons.

It is alleged that defendant, Albert Schini, is a member of this church and that upon the death of the plaintiff's fatherAlbert Schini farmed certain lands which was titled in the name of the plaintiff's mother, the plaintiff's sister, and the plaintiff as tenants in common, which farming operation by Albert Schini continued from approximately 1960 to 1974.In the fall of 1974the defendant Schini decided to sell his farm equipment and let the plaintiff"have the ground".The ground consisted of land owned by the plaintiff's mother, sister and the plaintiff as tenants in common, plus 80 acres owned by the defendant Schini and another 160 acres known as the Scharlach farm.In reliance upon these statements by the defendant Schini the plaintiff incurred substantial financial obligations, apparently to prepare himself to assume the farming obligations on the aforesaid land.In early 1975the defendant Schini failed to rent certain lands of the plaintiff and instead only allowed the plaintiff to custom farm his ground.In June 1976the defendant Schini told the plaintiff that he, Schini, would not farm much longer but that the defendants felt no obligation to make land available to the plaintiff nor had they felt an obligation to leave the plaintiff's land in the past because of the defendants had always been told that the plaintiff did not want to farm.The interplay between the parties and the church can best be captured by setting forth verbatim certain rhetorical paragraphs of the amended complaint:

16.That on or about April, 1982, the plaintiff learned that the statements made by the defendant Schini and his subsequent failure to rent ground to the plaintiff had its basis in the fact that Edwin Bahler had told the defendant Schini not to relinquish control of certain farm land owned by plaintiff's mother, sister, and the plaintiff to plaintiff because plaintiff did not wish to farm.Defendant Bahler made statements knowing them to be contrary to fact.

17.That DefendantEdwin Bahler knew that due to his position as a Deacon in the Apostolic Christian Churchthe defendants Albert and Amelia Schini, as devout members of the Apostolic Christian Church, would accept his word as fact and would therefore be inclined not to make the land available to plaintiff.

18.Defendant Schini eventually rented his land to two (2) other members of the Apostolic Christian Church.

19.The defendant Schini, in an effort to protect his standing in the community, after having dealt with the plaintiff in such manner, and in an effort to defame and damage the reputation of the plaintiff made certain statements which formed the basis of a prior cause of action for slander by the plaintiff.

20.In an effort to settle this dispute over Schini's slanderous statements, defendantAlfred Bahler, in his capacity as an Elder of the Apostolic Christian Church, agreed to talk with the defendant Schini and attempt to resolve the problem.

21.On or about June 19, 1977, in an effort to resolve the problem without seeking legal redress, and in a manner consistent with the moral dictates of the Apostolic Christian Church, the plaintiff had another conversation with Alfred Bahler in which Bahler stated that he would talk with defendant Schini and advise him, thereby exerting his considerable influence as an Elder of the Apostolic Christian Church, to contact all members of the community and retract any slanderous remarks that had been made, to make a formal apology to the plaintiff, and to rent certain ground to plaintiff.Bahler also stated he would advise the two individuals to whom the defendant Schini had rented his ground to relinquish control of said ground.

22.Plaintiff, as a member of the Apostolic Christian Church, was persuaded to believe that Schini would follow the suggestion of the church Elder, defendantAlfred Bahler.When the defendant failed to correct the situation, the plaintiff filed an action in court on or about July 11, 1978.

23.On or about December, 1978, the defendant Schini requested a meeting between all interested parties, including defendant Schini, his wife, the plaintiff, his wife and defendants' Alfred Bahler and Edwin Bahler.At that meeting both Edwin Bahler and Alfred Bahler made the statement that Albert Schini had an obligation to rent certain ground to the plaintiff and to retract all previous defamatory statements made by them about the plaintiff.Said statements were made in their capacity as influential members and Elder and Deacon of the Apostolic Christian Church.

24.Relying upon assurances of defendantsAlfred Bahler and Edwin Bahler that the conflict could be resolved through the Apostolic Christian Church and in a gesture of conciliation, the plaintiff agreed to and subsequently did dismiss his pending cause of action against the defendant Schini.

25.In 1979 and 1980, the defendantsAlfred Bahler and Edwin Bahler failed to resolve the conflict but continued to assure plaintiff that the dispute would be fairly and amicably resolved through the Church.

26.That in April of 1982, the defendantsAlbert Schini, Amelia Schini, and Edwin Bahler had a meeting with the plaintiff's previous counsel without knowledge or consent of the plaintiff.As a result of this meeting, plaintiff's prior counsel refused to pursue the plaintiff's cause.

27.On or about February, 1982, the defendant, Alfred Bahler made certain statements to a member of the community that the plaintiff was simply dragging the matter out because the plaintiff was in financial trouble and implying the plaintiff was a spendthrift.

28.That on several occasions, including July, 1982 and April, 1982, the defendantAmelia Schini stated to members of the community, including Edwin Bahler, that plaintiff had a propensity to violence, that the defendants Albert and Amelia Schini feared for their lives and property, and therefore had not remedied the situation with the plaintiff.

29.That as a result of the statements and the continuing and concerned actions of defendants, the plaintiff's reputation in the community was damaged and he has experienced considerable pain and is suffering various physical ailments and mental distress.

30.Plaintiff was strongly influenced by the teachings and precepts of the Apostolic Christian Church and elected to forego certain rights with respect to the farm ground on the understanding that the Church Elders and Deacons would settle the dispute fairly and amicably within the Church structure.

31.That Albert and Amelia Schini did, in concert with Edwin...