Opinion ID: 1517343
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: General Nature, Structure and Power of Prince Hall, D.C. and Eastern Star, D.C.

Text: To ascertain the principles applicable in this case regarding the appropriateness of judicial intervention, we will first engage in a general review of the undisputed facts regarding the general nature, structure and power of the Prince Hall, D.C. and the Eastern Star, D.C. organizations. Mr. Whitley suggests that Prince Hall, D.C. is a quasi-religious and a private, incorporated fraternal organization. Thus, its dispute with Ms. Levant, the GWM of the GT Grand Chapter, should be treated in the same manner as the church in Kelsey v. Ray, 719 A.2d 1248 (D.C.1998), or the proprietary educational institution in Marjorie Webster Junior College, Inc. v. Middle States Ass'n of Colleges & Secondary Sch., Inc., 139 U.S.App.D.C. 217, 432 F.2d 650 (D.C.Cir.1969), and consequently, the judiciary should not intervene in this matter. Ms. Levant describes Prince Hall, D.C. variously as a private fraternal organization and a private voluntary organization, and the Eastern Star, D.C. as an historic fraternal organization affiliated with Prince Hall, D.C. Both parties agreed during oral argument, however, that Prince Hall, D.C. and the Eastern Star, D.C. properly may be characterized as private voluntary membership organizations. Prince Hall, D.C. is an incorporated private voluntary organization or association and Eastern Star, D.C. appears to be an unincorporated private voluntary association. While there are overtones of a religious orientation in the governing documents of Prince Hall, D.C. and Eastern Star, D.C., we conclude that both groups may best be called private voluntary membership associations, not religious or professional organizations akin to the Bible Way Church [6] or the Middle States Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools. [7] With respect to the structure and power of the organizations, it is clear that while the GT Grand Chapter of the Eastern Star, D.C. and its GWM have extensive executive, legislative and judicial powers resembling those accorded to the Grand Lodge of Prince Hall, D.C. and its MWGM, the Grand Lodge and the MWGM have greater powers. [8] Under the Prince Hall, D.C. Constitution, the GT Chapter of the Eastern Star, D.C. is an appendant or subordinate organization. [9] Thus, Prince Hall, D.C.'s legislative, executive and judicial powers, and the prerogatives of its MWGM surpass and impact those of the Eastern Star, D.C. and its GWM. Indeed, the Constitution of Prince Hall, D.C. specifies, in Article XIII, § 2, that: [E]very Grand Lodge is the supreme authority in its jurisdiction. . . . The Grand Lodge has the authority to prescribe . . . regulations for the administration of its lodges. . ., as well as Appendant Bodies empowered to work [within its jurisdiction]. Id. The Prince Hall, D.C. Constitution calls for faithful allegiance and implicit obedience from lodges, masons and Appendant Bodies. Id. Moreover, the Grand Lodge has authority over appeals from aggrieved parties. CONST. OF PRINCE HALL, D.C., art. XIII, § 3. In its legislative capacity, [Prince Hall, D.C.] makes the laws; in its judicial capacity, it applies them; and in its executive capacity, it enforces them. CONST. OF PRINCE HALL, D.C., art. XIII, § 2. The only restrictions on the actions of Prince Hall, D.C., its Grand Lodge and MWGM, are found in a document known as the Ancient Landmarks, and there is no appeal from the decisions of the Grand Lodge. Id. Specifically included in Section 5 of Article XIV of the Prince Hall, D.C. Constitution is the power to arrest [remove] the Jewel of office of any officer, grand or subordinate . . ., pending the next session of the Grand Lodge or masonic trial by a commission of Master Masons assembled for that purpose, whichever is earlier. In addition, under Article VII, § 2, of the Eastern Star, D.C.'s By-Laws, the Grand Worthy Patron, who is an official representative of Prince Hall, D.C.'s MWGM, is assigned specific duties in relation to the GT Grand Chapter. For example, he must preside at the annual election and installation of officers of the GT Grand Chapter. The position of the Grand Worthy Patron is further evidence that the powers of the GT Grand Chapter and its GWM are limited by those of Prince Hall, D.C. and its officers. Having determined the nature, structure and powers of Prince Hall, D.C. and Eastern Star, D.C., we turn now to an examination of the legal principles applicable to a private incorporated voluntary membership association (Prince Hall, D.C.), and a private unincorporated voluntary membership association (Eastern Star, D.C.). [C]ourts ordinarily will not interfere with the management and internal affairs of a voluntary association. Avin v. Verta, 106 A.2d 145, 147 (D.C.1954) (citing Fish v. Huddell, 60 App.D.C. 263, 51 F.2d 319 (1931)); see also National Ass'n for the Advancement of Colored People v. Golding, 342 Md. 663, 679 A.2d 554, 558 (1996) (as a general rule, courts will not interfere in the internal affairs of a voluntary membership organization). Nonetheless, and notwithstanding Prince Hall, D.C.'s status, and that of the Eastern Star, D.C. as private voluntary membership associations, and the general rule against interference in the internal affairs of such organizations, Ms. Levant asserts that where voluntary membership organizations fail to follow their own procedures, the courts should intervene. [10] The circumstances under which the courts are justified in ruling on disputes involving voluntary membership organizations are not entirely settled. [11] For purposes of this appeal, we simply assume, without deciding, as Ms. Levant argues, that intervention would be appropriate when an organization failed to follow its own rules. We turn now to an examination of that question.