Seventh Elect Church in Israel v. First Seattle Dexter Horton Nat. Bank

• Decision Date: 04 May 1931
• Docket Number: 22911.
• Citation: 299 P. 359,162 Wash. 437
• Parties: SEVENTH ELECT CHURCH IN ISRAEL v. FIRST SEATTLE DEXTER HORTON NAT. BANK et al.
• Court: Washington Supreme Court

299 P. 359

162 Wash. 437

SEVENTH ELECT CHURCH IN ISRAEL v. FIRST SEATTLE DEXTER HORTON NAT. BANK et al.

No. 22911.

Supreme Court of Washington

May 4, 1931

Department 2.

Appeal from Superior Court, King County; Chester A. Batchelor Judge.

Action by the Seventh Elect Church in Israel against the First Seattle Dexter Horton National Bank, formerly Dexter Horton National Bank of Seattle, as administrator of the estate of Daniel Salwt, deceased, Stella Rouke, Chris Johnson, J. H Fitzgerald, Ludwig Jacobson, Irene Jacobson, Clarence J Johnson, B. H. Marriott, and others, wherein the last seven named defendants filed a cross-complaint. From the judgment the last seven named defendants appeal.

Reversed.

Alexander H. McKinnon and Christopher Jacobsen, both of Seattle, for appellants.

Poe, Falknor, Falknor & Emory, of Seattle, for respondents.

BEELER J.

Daniel Salwt died intestate June 11, 1929, at which time there was on deposit in his name, in two banks at Seattle, money in excess of $100,000. In addition thereto, several parcels of real estate situated within the state of Washington stood in his name. Salwt, also known as Sult, left surviving him as his sole heirs the defendants Arnell R. Sult and Clayton A. Sult. The Dexter Horton National Bank of Seattle, now the First Seattle Dexter Horton National Bank, was appointed and qualified as administrator of the estate of Daniel Salwt, deceased, and filed an inventory as required by law. Claims were filed by the appellants with the administrator which the administrator rejected. Thereafter, on February 4, 1930, the plaintiff church instituted this action, and in its complaint, in addition to the foregoing facts, alleged that Salwt had received the real estate and the money on deposit in the two Seattle banks for the use and benefit of the church and of its members, and that all of the property and money was held by the deceased in trust for the plaintiff church; and further alleged that the claims of the appellants were spurious and false, that they were not verified, served, or filed as required by law, that the deceased, Daniel Salwt, was not indebted to the appellants or either of them, nor was the property held in trust by the said Daniel Salwt for the appellants or either of them, and the church undertook to impress a trust on these funds in its favor.

The appellants in their answer denied all the material allegations of the complaint of the plaintiff church, and by way of cross-complaint prayed that these same funds be impressed with a trust in their favor. The cross-complaint contains six affirmative causes of action wherein each one of the several appellants sets forth his respective claim to the funds under the control of the respondent.

The plaintiff church interposed a demurrer to appellants' cross-complaint, which was sustained by the court on three grounds: First. That several causes of action were improperly united in the cross-complaint; second, that the causes of action set forth in the cross-complaint are independent of and unrelated to the subject-matter of the plaintiff's alleged cause of action; and, third, that the cross-complaint failed to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against the administrator. The appellants declined to plead further, and elected to stand upon their cross-complaint. This appeal followed.

The question then is whether the facts pleaded in the cross-complaint are sufficient to entitle the appellants to the relief they seek.

It is alleged in the cross-complaint that Daniel Salwt, the self-appointed 'Messenger of God,' claiming divine power over mortal bodies and souls, organized a religious sect, cult, or brotherhood; one of the requirements promulgated by the 'Messenger' being, that all members must turn over to him all their property and wages and receive in return from the common fund food, lodging and necessary raiment, and the assurance of an entry into heaven without going through the agony of death. The appellants became members and turned over to Salwt funds and wages in various amounts, and now seek the return of the same from the administrator on the theory of a constructive trust. In passing upon this question it is essential to bear in mind the relation which existed between the appellants and Salwt as their teacher, head, and inspired leader, and the boundless confidence which they reposed in him. It is not necessary to determine whether Salwt was simply an enthusiast, a fanatic, or whether he was a shrewd schemer, using religion and the credulity of his disciples to further his own material ends.

Where for any reason the legal title to property is placed in one person under such circumstances as to make it inequitable for him to enjoy the beneficial interest, a trust will be implied in favor of the persons entitled thereto. This arises by construction of equity, independently of the intention of the parties. Equity will raise a constructive trust and compel restoration where one through actual fraud, abuse of confidence reposed and accepted, or through other questionable means gains something for himself which in equity and good conscience he should not be permitted to hold. 26 R. C. L. 1236, 1237; 35 A. L. R. 307; Rozell v. Vansyckle, 11 Wash. 79, 39 P. 270; Pollard v. McKenney et al., 69 Neb. 742, 96 N.W. 679, 101 N.W. 9; Quinn v. Phipps, 93 Fla. 805, 113 So. 419, 54 A. L. R. 1173; Scott v. Thompson, 21 Iowa, 599.

The facts in the case of Scott v. Thompson, supra, are strikingly similar to the facts in the instant case. In that case one Thompson founded a society or organization called 'Jehovah Presbytery of Zion.' He held out to his followers that the special revelations required certain things of them, among which were to turn over to him all of their property for the purpose of enriching the treasury of the Lord, and to labor under his directions for two years without remuneration other than board, clothing, religious instruction, and spiritual exultation. The court held that Thompson held the property and funds in trust for his deluded and confiding followers, and that they were entitled to recover all they had contributed to the common fund.

'The record in this case exhibits a transaction almost as marvelous as the pretended revelation of Thompson would have been if true. The meager statement above gives but a faint idea of the uncontrolled and absolute subjection of the members in 'body, mind and estate,' to him whom they for a time sincerely regarded and obeyed as the 'chief steward of the Lord, and the...