Court Opinion

ID: 9772823
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 17:30:49.455461+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:31:48.648122
License: Public Domain

STEPHENS, Chief Justice,
dissenting.
Respectfully, I dissent.
I agree with the reasoning of Judge Wil-hoit of the Court of Appeals in his concurring opinion. I adopt it as part of my dissenting opinion.
“[T]he decision of the trial court should be reversed. Regardless of whether a ‘neutral principles of law’ or a ‘polity’ test is applied to the particular facts of this case, that result should obtain. The articles of incorporation of St. John’s Protestant Episcopal Church, which was incorporated in 1899, plainly show a corporate purpose to be affiliated with, and to be subject to the canons of, the Diocese of Lexington by providing that the government and operation of the corporation shall not be ‘inconsistent with the Canons of the Diocese of Lexington.’ The 1907 ‘Instrument of Donation’ signed by the managing body of the corporation (the vestry) is further compelling evidence of this corporate purpose. There is no evidence of substance to suggest that prior to 1976 the corporation took title by purchase to property with the intent to hold it other than subject to whatever the canons of the diocese might provide from time to time, or that the grantors in the 1899 deed to the new corporation intended that the property be held for any purpose apart from those expressed in the corporate articles.”
In the Instrument of Donation, the governing body of St. John’s Church imposed conditions constituting a constructive trust in favor of the national church on the use of its church property. In my opinion, this document is dispositive of the issue before us. It is a contract, by which St. John’s, as an entity, affiliated itself with PECUSA, and created the constructive trust. Following the gift of the building to the Episcopal Bishop of Lexington, to be under the Bishop’s “spiritual jurisdiction,” the governing body then stated (in the instrument),
“And we do moreover hereby relinquish all claim to any right of disposing of the said [church] building, or allowing *588of the use of it in any way inconsistent with the terms and true meaning of this INSTRUMENT OF DONATION, and with the consecration hereby requested of the ... Bishop of the diocese.” (Emphasis added).
In other words, the local church desired affiliation with PECUSA, through the diocese of Lexington. As part and parcel of that request, the local church not only placed the building under the “spiritual jurisdiction” of the Bishop, but it also specifically and unequivocally relinquished authority to control the use of the building. While the instrument understandably focused on the church building itself, it follows from the purpose of the document that the real property on which the church was situated, and affiliated structures and land, were also donated.
By the majority opinion, this Court has totally rewritten and negated the simple, precise intent of this document, i.e., for the donor (St. John’s) to become a member of PECUSA and to donate its church to PE-CUSA, through the diocese of Lexington. St. John’s Church enjoyed the benefits of membership in PECUSA for many long years — its members were confirmed by the Bishop of Lexington, its clergy participated in a PECUSA pension plan, PECUSA insured the church, and the church regularly asked for and received help and advice from the Bishop of Lexington. It was in fact and in law, a member of PECUSA.
I challenge the majority’s statement that the equities of this case “preponderate” in favor of the movants. In 1907, when the vestry of St. John’s donated the church to the diocese of Lexington, that decision was made by the men and women who built the church and who wanted to affiliate with PECUSA. They considered the benefits of such affiliation and they also understood the obligations of such affiliation. This is clearly shown by the execution of the Instrument of Donation.
For lo these many years the successors to the vestry of 1907 have grown and thrived because of their membership in PE-CUSA. Because of a disagreement with national church policy, St. John’s cannot now repudiate a legal document executed 81 years ago.
I would affirm the Court of Appeals.
LEIBSON, J., joins in this dissent.