Wright v. Smith

• Decision Date: 01 February 1955
• Docket Number: Gen. No. 54-0-22
• Citation: 4 Ill.App.2d 470,124 N.E.2d 363
• Parties: William WRIGHT et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. J. Edwin SMITH et al., Defendants-Appellees.
• Court: United States Appellate Court of Illinois

Page 363

124 N.E.2d 363

4 Ill.App.2d 470

William WRIGHT et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. J. Edwin SMITH et al., Defendants-Appellees.

Gen. No. 54-0-22.

Appellate Court of Illinois, Fourth District.

Feb. 1, 1955.

Chester Crabtree, Pontiac, Murray & Stephens, Centralia, for appellants.

Meyer & Meyer, E. Harold Wineland, Flora, for appellees.

CULBERTSON, Presiding Justice.

This cause comes to this Court on transfer from the Supreme Court after an original appeal to such Court.

Plaintiffs filed an action in equity in 1950, seeking to have the Circuit Court of Marion County declare that the title to a church building and a parsonage in Salem, Illinois was vested solely in the twenty-six plaintiffs, to the exclusion of certain defendants, and also the other members (383), of the Christian Church at Salem, who were not made parties to the action. Plaintiffs are members of the Christian Church at Salem. The defendants, including the minister of the church, elders, deacons, and trustees of the church at the time of the filing of the complaint, are being sued in their individual capacity. Another defendant is also, First Christian Church of Salem, a corporation.

The action resulted from a schism in the Christian Church at Salem. It is alleged in the complaint by plaintiffs that there were eighteen separate purported departures by defendants from the doctrines, tenets, and practices held by the founders of the church in 1866 and held by the members at the time of the acquisition of the church building site in 1879. It is sought in this proceeding to perpetually enjoin defendants from setting up any right, title, or interest in the church property and from interfering with plaintiffs holding religious services in the building. A motion to dismiss the complaint was denied in the Trial Court.

In the answer filed on behalf of the original defendants (no answer being filed by the not-for-profit corporate defendant), it was asserted, among other things, that the trustees of the Church of Christ at Salem and certain beneficiaries of the trust, that is, the 383 members of the church, were not before the Court and were necessary parties to the suit. A counter-claim was also filed which stated that the church property at Salem was impressed with an implied trust that the members could by majority vote determine the mode or manner by which missionary work would be carried on, and that plaintiffs had sought to destroy this authority so that missionary work could only be carried on in one manner, that is, through certain specific missionary societies. After the answer was filed, Trustees of the church were added as parties defendant, but the other party beneficiaries were not made parties.

A great deal of evidence was heard by the Court. From such evidence it was shown that the majority of the official board and the congregation voted to adopt a written constitution setting up certain articles of faith, which plaintiffs contend are contrary to the doctrines and tenets of 'Disciples of Christ.' The official board of the church also adopted a resolution in which it denied the missionary societies and the auxiliary organizations the right to use the church building for meetings, and also organized a new not-for-profit corporation which recites, in its articles of incorporation, 'this church is not affiliated with any congregational or inter-congregational organization or unit thereof, either local, State, National, or Inter-national.' The plaintiffs now worship in a room in the courthouse in Salem, and defendants worship in and are in possession of the church building and parsonage. The Court below did not find the title to the church premises to be in either group, but entered a decree dismissing for want of equity, both the complaint as amended and the counter-claim of defendants.

It is contended on appeal in this Court that the Circuit Court of Marion County erred, (first) in not finding that the title to the real estate of the church was vested in the plaintiffs as members of the old religious corporation, 'The Church of Christ,' and not in the new religious corporation, the 'First Christian Church'; (secondly) in not finding that defendants in attempting to incorporate the church under the name 'First Christian Church' abandoned the old religious corporation and set up a new corporation, and that this constituted a withdrawal by defendants from the old corporation; (third) in not finding that by adopting the constitution with its Articles of Faith, defendants had departed from established doctrines and tenets of the Church; (fourth) in not finding that defendants have forfeited all their rights to the real estate of the church; and (fifth) in not finding that in closing the doors of the church to the members of the local missionary society, defendants abandoned and violated the doctrines and modes of worship for which the church was originally dedicated.

The Court below in determining this cause, specifically stated that his findings in the case were ultimately based on the fact that the Court has no jurisdiction of this property,...