422 S.W.3d 646
Tex.2013Background
- The Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth (Diocese) formed in 1982 as part of The Episcopal Church (TEC); the Diocese incorporated a Fort Worth Corporation to hold diocesan property.
- Beginning in 2006–2008, diocesan leaders amended corporate documents and diocesan canons and voted to withdraw from TEC; TEC responded by recognizing rival diocesan leadership at a 2009 convention.
- TEC filed suit seeking title and possession of diocesan property and control of the Diocesan Corporation; both sides moved for summary judgment.
- The trial court granted summary judgment for TEC using the deference/identity methodology (deferring to hierarchical-church decisionmakers) and enjoined defendants to turn over property and cease acting as diocesan leaders.
- This Court in Masterson recently held Texas courts must apply the neutral-principles-of-law approach (not deference) in church-property schism cases; this appeal presents the same core issue and whether summary judgment was proper under neutral principles.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (TEC) | Defendant's Argument (Diocese) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Proper methodology for resolving church-property disputes after a schism | Brown v. Clark supports applying deference/identity; summary judgment appropriate because TEC recognized the 2009 leadership | Brown actually applied neutral principles; Texas should use neutral-principles approach, which favors Diocese | Court: Trial court erred using deference; Texas must use neutral principles per Masterson |
| Whether summary judgment for TEC is proper under neutral principles | Even if neutral principles apply, TEC still entitled to judgment | Neutral principles favor Diocese and factual issues exist | Neither party entitled to summary judgment under neutral principles; remand for further proceedings |
| Effect of Dennis Canon (TEC Canon 1.7.4) — does it create an irrevocable trust in favor of TEC? | Dennis Canon creates an (irrevocable) trust or other trust interest enforceable under Texas law | Even if it creates a trust, Texas law requires writing and express irrevocability; Diocesan amendment revoked any trust | Court: Record insufficient to decide; under Texas law an express irrevocability requirement may bar treating the Canon as creating an irrevocable trust; remand to develop record |
| Whether trial court order raised constitutional question permitting direct appeal | TEC argued Nonprofit Corp. Act application would raise First Amendment issues; trial court framed relief to avoid constitutional application | Diocese argued statutes govern corporate acts and amendments; no constitutional holding was made below | Court: The trial court’s injunction had the effect of ruling the Nonprofit Corporation Act could not be applied (thus implicating constitutionality); Supreme Court exercised jurisdiction and reversed |
Key Cases Cited
- Masterson v. Diocese of N.W. Tex., 422 S.W.3d 594 (Tex. 2013) (Texas Supreme Court adopting neutral-principles approach for church-property schisms)
- Brown v. Clark, 116 S.W. 360 (Tex. 1909) (historical Texas decision on hierarchical church property disputes; court interprets it as substantively reflecting neutral principles)
- Jones v. Wolf, 443 U.S. 595 (1979) (Supreme Court: neutral-principles approach constitutionally permissible and describes factors for secular review)
- Serbian Eastern Orthodox Diocese v. Milivojevich, 426 U.S. 696 (1976) (courts must avoid deciding ecclesiastical questions; secular issues like property may be decided by neutral principles)
- Watson v. Jones, 80 U.S. 679 (1871) (early Supreme Court guidance on church–state relations and deference to ecclesiastical bodies)