Baker v. Ducker

California Supreme Court Jun 1, 1889 No. No. 12471Published

Before: Belcher

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that church property purchased for a specific religious purpose is held in trust for its members and cannot be diverted to a different religious organization, even by a majority of the congregation.

Issues

Whether the complaint stated a cause of action for the recovery of church property diverted from its original purpose.
Whether the court erred in admitting the church's constitution and by-laws into evidence.
Whether evidence regarding the religious beliefs of original contributors was relevant to the property's use.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“Assuming, as We must on demurrer, that all facts stated are true, we think the complaint states a cause of action.”

“the property in question was held by the Reformed Church in trust for its members, and the defendants, even though they constituted a majority of the members, had no right and no power to divert it to the use of another and different church”

Synopsis

Corporation—Religious Society—Reformed Church of Stockton— Fraudulent Change of Denomination — Action by Members — Pleading. —In an action to recover for the use of members of the First Reformed Church of the City of Stockton a lot of land with the dwelling-house thereon, which was purchased and formerly used as a parsonage of the church, a complaint stating in substance that the plaintiffs and their associates, for whose benefit the action is also prosecuted, are a religious society in full membership with a national religious society known „as the Reformed Church in the United States; that they were organized for the purpose of teaching the gospel according to the particular tenets of that church, as embodied in the Heidelberg Catechism, and were duly incorporated, under the name of the First Reformed Church of the City of Stockton; that the said corporation purchased the property with donated funds for a residence for its pastors, and for no other purpose; and that the defendants had fraudulently conspired to change the name of said corporation to that of the First German Evangelical Lutheran Zion Society of Stockton, for the purpose of repudiating the tenets of said Reformed Church, and of diverting the property from the use to which it was dedicated, for the support of the Lutheran Church, which has a different doctrine, different church government, and different laws from those of the Reformed Church, and that defendants are now holding and using the same, as trustees of said Lutheran Church, as a residence for the pastors of said Lutheran Church, — states a cause of action, and is not indefinite and uncertain in not stating particularly wherein the doctrinal standards of the two churches differ.

Id. —Parties — Suing for Benefit of Many. —The complaint in such action averring that plaintiffs, together with a large number of other persons, are associated together for religious purposes, and are members of the First Reformed Church of the City of Stockton, and that they prosecute the action for all the members of the church as well as themselves, shows the question to be one of common or general interest of many persons, and that the action was authorized hy section 382 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Id. — Evidencie — Church Constitution and By-laws.—When, in such action, it appears from the evidence that the original constitution and by-laws of the First Reformed Church were written hy the minister thereof in its record-book, and that the church had always acted on them and considered them as its constitution and by-laws, they are admissible in evidence, without proof of any direct vote of the congregation adopting them.

Id.—Evidence — Religious Belief of Individual Members and Contributors. — In such action, evidence that certain individual members of the Reformed Church were Lutherans in their religious belief, and that many Lutherans had contributed money for the purchase of the parsonage, is properly excluded as irrelevant and immaterial; it appearing that the subscription was made for a parsonage for the Reformed Church, and that the deed of the property was made thereto, whereby the property was dedicated to the use of that church.

Belcher, C. C. This is an action to recover for the use of the members of the First Reformed Church of the City of Stockton a lot of land with the dwelling-house thereon, which is situate in the city of Stockton, and was purchased and formerly used as a parsonage for the church. The defendants demurred to the complaint, on the ground that it did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action; that it was indefinite and uncertain in certain specified particulars; and that the plaintiffs had not legal capacity to sue and maintain the action. The demurrer was overruled, and thereupon the defendants answered. The findings and judgment were in favor of plaintiffs, and the appeal was taken by defendants from the judgment and order denying them a new trial.

The first question to be considered is as to the sufficiency of the complaint. The complaint is very long, but it states, in substance, that the plaintiffs and those with whom they are associated, and for whose benefit the action is also prosecuted, are a religious society in full membership with a national religious society known as the Reformed Church in the United States; that they were organized for the purpose of teaching the Gospel according to the particular form of worship, rules of government, discipline, and doctrines of that church, and after such organization they were duly incorporated under the name of the First Reformed Church of the City of Stockton; that the corporation purchased the property in controversy with funds donated by its members and by the public for the purpose of using it as a residence for its pastors, and for no other or different purpose whatever; that the defendants for fraudu[372]lent purposes procured the name of the corporation to be changed, and thereafter diverted the property from the use for which it was purchased and originally intended

1. Assuming, as We must on demurrer, that all facts stated are true, we think the complaint states a cause of action.

2. We do not think the complaint indefinite and uncertain in any important particular. The plaintiffs accepted the doctrinal standard contained in the Heidelberg Catechism and the defendants that of the Lutheran Church. These doctrinal standards are alleged to be different, but we can see no necessity for stating particularly what they were and wherein they differed.

3. The plaintiffs aver that they, together with a large number of other persons, are associated together for religious purposes, and are members of the First Beformed Church of the City of Stockton, and that they prosecute the action for all the members of the church as well as themselves. This shows the question to be one of a common or general interest of many persons, and that the action was authorized by section 382 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Baker v. Ducker

AI Brief

Synopsis

More from California Supreme Court

Related research

AI Brief