Jackson v. Shaw
Henderson, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. This is an appeal from an order overruling a demurrér to a bill of complaint, brought by Bishop Shaw of the Washington Annual conference of the Methodist Church, Reverend Dyson, pastor of the Gillis Memorial Methodist Episcopal Church, and six persons constituting a majority of the Board of Trustees of the Gillis Memorial Methodist Church of America. The defendants are certain persons constituting the Board of Trustees of the Gillis Memorial Community Church, Incorporated, certain minority members of the Board of Trustees of the Gillis Memorial Methodist Church of America, and Reverend Theodore C. Jackson, former pastor of the Gillis Memorial Methodist Episcopal Church. The controversy involves primarily the ownership and right to possession of certain church property in Baltimore City.
The facts shown by.the bill and exhibits seem to be that a corporation under the name of Gillis Memorial Methodist Protestant Church of Baltimore City was incorporated under the laws of Maryland in 1899, and acquired title to church property at 10-12 S. Stockton Street in-1911. One of the articles of incorporation fore bade the transfer of any property “without the consent 581 and approbation of at least two-thirds of all the male members of said church over the age of twenty-one years.” In 1923, it is alleged that a majority of the members of the congregation decided to affiliate with the Methodist Episcopal Church in America, and to change the name of the congregation to Gillis Memorial Methodist Episcopal Church. On March 15,1923, a deed was executed by the president under the corporate seal of Gillis Memorial Methodist Protestant Church of Baltimore City, to nine persons, and their successors in office, trustees for Gillis Memorial Methodist Episcopal Church, an unincorporated body. This deed was duly recorded.
The trust was stated in the habendum clause to be “for the use of the members of the Methodist Episcopal Church in the United States of America according to the rules and Discipline of said church which from time to time may be authorized by the regularly constituted authorities of said church.” The deed recited that it was made “in pursuance of a call previously given therefor and in which a great majority of the members were present and voting.” Although the bill alleges that the grantor corporation was thereafter dissolved, it is not shown or contended that there was any legal dissolution or amendment of the charter, other than the severance of relations with the Methodist Protestant Church and affiliation with the Methodist Episcopal Church. The bill recites .that since 1923 the congregation at 10-12 S. Stockton Street has been under the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the resident Bishop of the Methodist Episcopal Church, who appointed Reverend Jackson in 1935. In 1940, the Methodist Episcopal Church, Methodist Episcopal Church South, and the Methodist Protestant Church combined under the name of the Methodist Church of America. It is not shown whether the Methodist Church of America is a corporation or not, but the bill seems to concede that its jurisdiction is confined to ecclesiastical as distinguished from property matters.
On July 4, 1946, Reverend Jackson and the successor trustees, with the approval of the Bishop, entered 'into a 582 contract to purchase a church at 400-410 N. Calhoun Street. He secretly caused a corporation to be formed under the name of Gillis Memorial Community Church of Baltimore City, Incorporated, on July 30, 1947. The stated object of the corporation was religious worship, “after the form, regulation and doctrine of Community Churches”. The' charter also provided that the Reverend Jackson should “be and continue to be the Pastor in full charge of said Congregation, as long as he desires to do so.” By these actions it is alleged that he severed his connection with the Methodist Church and its Discipline.
On August 3, 1947, he wrongfully caused the property at Calhoun Street to be deeded to the new corporation, and executed a mortgage in its name. Thereafter, he wrongfully and illegally
This is a preview of Jackson v. Shaw. About 50% of the opinion remains. Read the complete opinion in RecordCite.