“Given the specific property provisions of Gashland’s Articles of Agreement, we would be hard-pressed to find that [Gashland’s] By-Laws’ general statements concerning subordination to the PCUSA’s Constitution establish a trust by clear, cogent and convincing evidence, dispelling all doubt as to whether Gashland intended a trust relationship.”

A Missouri appeals court has sided with a Kansas City Presbyterian church in its battle to keep its property following a legal assault by its former presbytery.

On Jan. 10, the Court of Appeals of Missouri, Western District, ruled that Gashland Presbyterian Church is not bound by the Presbyterian Church (USA)’s constitutional property-trust clause and that it holds clear title to its property, affirming a 2009 lower-court dismissal of a lawsuit filed by Heartland Presbytery.

The lawsuit claimed that the presbytery was entitled to Gashland’s assets after the church disaffiliated from the denomination in 2008 and joined the Evangelical Presbyterian Church (EPC).

The property-trust clause in the PCUSA Book of Order states:

“All property held by or for a particular church, a presbytery, a synod, the General Assembly, or the Presbyterian Church (USA), whether legal title is lodged in a corporation, a trustee or trustees, or an unincorporated association, and whether the property is used in programs of a particular church or of a more inclusive governing body or retained for the production of income, is held in trust nevertheless for the use and benefit of the Presbyterian Church (USA).”

Writing for a unanimous court, Appeals Court Judge Alok Ahuja said Gashland had never expressly agreed to the trust clause and that, in such property disputes, Missouri property law trumps any denominational trust claims. Ahuja noted that Gashland’s Articles of Agreement clearly state all titles (to assets) shall vest in the local church’s corporate capacity.

“Article I of Gashland’s Articles of Agreement does not establish its agreement to be bound by the property provisions of the PCUSA’s Constitution; instead, it suggests the opposite,” Ahuja said.

“Given the specific property provisions of Gashland’s Articles of Agreement, we would be hard-pressed to find that [Gashland’s] By-Laws’ general statements concerning subordination to the PCUSA’s Constitution establish a trust by clear, cogent and convincing evidence, dispelling all doubt as to whether Gashland intended a trust relationship,” the judge added.

The dispute between church and presbytery began in September 2007, when Gashland requested dismissal from the PCUSA with its property intact. Citing theological differences, the church sought to join the EPC but received no response to its dismissal request.

After waiting four months, the church voted to disaffiliate from the denomination, leading Heartland to belatedly form an administrative commission to hold a dismissal hearing in April 2008.

Gashland refused to attend the hearing since it had already disaffiliated but Heartland held the hearing, despite Gashland’s absence. In November 2009, Heartland filed suit in circuit court.

The circuit found that the PCUSA had no interest in Gashland’s assets under state law and dismissed the suit, prompting Heartland – a presbytery that has sued or is currently suing several of its former churches – to appeal the decision.

According to a 2011 presbytery document, Heartland incurred $231,726 in legal fees between 2007 and 2011.

Read More

[Editor’s note: the original URL (link) referenced in this article is no longer valid, so the link has been removed.]