Western Conference of Original Free Will Baptists of N. C. v. Creech, 674

• Decision Date: 12 January 1962
• Docket Number: No. 674,674
• Citation: 256 N.C. 128,123 S.E.2d 619
• Court: North Carolina Supreme Court
• Parties: The WESTERN CONFERENCE OF ORIGINAL FREE WILL BAPTISTS OF NORTH CAROLINA, an unincorporated religious association, et al. v. Ronald CREECH. J. G. TEASLEY et al. v. Ronald CREECH. The WESTERN CONFERENCE OF ORIGINAL FREE WILL BAPTISTS OF NORTH CAROLINA, an unincorporated religious association, et al. v. James A. MILES et al.

Page 619

123 S.E.2d 619

256 N.C. 128

The WESTERN CONFERENCE OF ORIGINAL FREE WILL BAPTISTS OF

NORTH CAROLINA, an unincorporated religious

association, et al. v. Ronald CREECH.

J. G. TEASLEY et al. v. Ronald CREECH.

The WESTERN CONFERENCE OF ORIGINAL FREE WILL BAPTISTS OF

NORTH CAROLINA, an unincorporated religious

association, et al. v. James A. MILES et al.

No. 674

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Jan. 12, 1962

Fletcher, Lake & Boyce, Raleigh, for defendants-appellant.

Jones & Vann, Durham, and Clarence Kirk, Wendell, for plaintiffs-appellees.

MOORE, Justice.

We do not decide here the ultimate questions and issues raised by the pleadings. Defendants appeal from temporary restraining orders. The sole question before us is whether or not the court erred in granting the temporary injunctions pending trial on the merits. Public Service Co. v. City of Shelby, 252 N.C. 816, 115 S.E.2d 12.

Ordinarily a temporary injunction will be granted pending trial on the merits, (1) if there is probable cause for supposing that plaintiff will be able to sustain his primary equity, and (2) if there is reasonable apprehension of irreparable loss unless injunctive relief be granted, or if in the court's opinion it appears reasonably necessary to protect plaintiff's right until the controversy between him and defendant can be determined. Edmonds v. Hall, 236 N.C. 153, 72 S.E.2d 221.

It ordinarily lies in the sound discretion of the court to determine whether or not a temporary injunction will be granted on hearing pleadings and affidavits only. In the exercise of such discretion the court should consider the inconvenience and damage to defendant as well as the benefit that will accrue to the plaintiff. Public Service Co. v. City of Shelby, supra; Lance v. Cogdill, 238 N.C. 500, 78 S.E.2d 319; Huskins v. Yancey Hospital, Inc., 238 N.C. 357, 78 S.E.2d 116.

On appeal we are not bound by the findings or ruling of the court below in injunction cases, but may review the evidence on appeal. 'Even so, there is a presumption that the judgment entered below is correct, and the burden is upon appellant to assign and show error. ' Lance v. Cogdill, supra.

Defendants contend that Edgemont Church is an independent, autonomous, congregational church and its association with the Western Conference is on a voluntary basis. Windley v. McCliney, 161 N.C. 318, 319, 77 S.E. 226. Plaintiffs, on the other hand, contend that it is, in part at least, a connectional church, is subject to the Discipline, customs and usages of the Original Free Will Baptists of North Carolina, and the Western Conference is the highest tribunal and final disciplinary authority over the local church. Lumbee River Conference of Holiness Methodist Church v. Locklear, 246 N.C. 349, 98 S.E. 2d 453. A church may be congregational in some respects and connectional in others.

On final hearing it must be determined to what extent, if any, the Western Conference has authority and jurisdiction (1) to decide between factions in a member congregation, and determine whether or not a faction has forfeited the right to be recognized as the true congregation by reason of departure from the faith and policy of the denomination, and (2) to ordain, try, discipline, revoke ordination, and restore ministerial credentials to member ministers.

Such matters are, of course, ecclesiastical in nature and in the establishment and exercise of church polity the civil courts have no jurisdiction or right of supervision. Bouldin v. Alexander, 15 Wall. 131, 21 L.Ed. 69; Watson v. Jones, 13 Wall. 679, 20 L.Ed. 666; Reid v. Johnston, 241 N.C. 201, 85 S.E.2d 114. '* * (W)henever the questions of discipline, or of faith, or ecclesiastical rule, custom, or law have been decided by the highest of the church judicatories to which the matter has been carried, the legal tribunals must accept such decisions as final, and as binding on them, in their application to the case before them. ' Watson v. Jones, supra. 'The legal or temporal tribunals of the State have no jurisdiction over, and no concern with, purely ecclesiastical questions and controversies * * * but the courts do have jurisdiction, as to civil, contract and property rights which are involved in, or arise from, a church controversy. ' Reid v. Johnston, supra. Where civil, contract or property rights are involved, the courts will inquire as to whether the church tribunal acted within the scope of its authority and observed its own organic forms and rules. 45 Am.Jur., Religious...