It is hereby ORDERED, that the plaintiff's motion is denied in all respects and the defendants' motion is granted and the action is dismissed for reasons stated herein.

Plaintiffs Father Eapen and the Malankara Archdiocese of the Syrian Orthodox Church in North America ["Archdiocese"] commenced this action to declare the lease Father Eapen executed with defendant Malankara Jacobite Center of North America, Inc. ["Jacobite Center"], a religious corporation, is violative and unenforceable under Religious [*2]Corporation Law §5 and to enjoin defendants the Malankara Jacobite Center of North America, Inc. and Father Peter from interfering with plaintiffs' full-time use of the property. The lease permits the minority of the members of St. Mary's congregation, who remain loyal to the Archdiocese and present Archbishop as the governing ecclesiastical body, to use the Church facilities on alternate Sundays. The gravamen of plaintiffs' claim is predicated upon the application of two implied trust doctrines: (1) an implied trust for the denominational church - the Archdiocese, and (2) an implied trust for the benefit of those members of a divided congregation who adhere to the principles of the founders of the religion. Defendant Father Peter also entered into a lease with Jacobite Center, on the same terms as the lease signed by Father Eapen, which authorizes the majority of the congregation of St. Mary's Church, who remain loyal to an archbishop, who was excommunicated by the Archdiocese and replaced with the present archbishop, to use church facilities on alternate Sundays. According to the defendants, before the incorporation of the Jacobite Center there existed two factions in India who claim to be the supreme authority over administration of the Malankara Syrian Orthodox Church; one group who believes the church should be administered by the Patriarch in Damascus, Syria and the other who believes it should be administered by the head of the Church in India within the framework of a constitution. The current dispute between the faction of St. Mary's congregation involves the appointment of an archbishop without allegedly following proper canonical procedures and customs of the church, with each faction recognizing a different archbishop. Both Father Eapen and Father Peter characterize the members of the other's congregation as dissidents.

In this action, plaintiff moves for an order staying the summary eviction proceeding pending against him in White Plains City Court for non-payment of rent and for the removal and consolidation of that proceeding with this action for declaratory and injunctive relief. The defendants have moved to dismiss on the ground the documentary evidence establishes that plaintiffs have no valid cause of action and that this action is barred by the doctrine of collateral estoppel.

Although the judgment in a prior article 78 proceeding, which held that the remedy of prohibition did not lie, does not collaterally estop plaintiffs from litigating the issue of whether an implied trust of the subject property exists for the benefit of plaintiffs, the Court concurs that dismissal is warranted on two grounds. First, the documentary evidence conclusively negates the declaration of an implied trust for the denominational church. Second, a declaration of an implied trust for the benefit of those members of a divided congregation who adhere to the principles of the founders of the religion is beyond the power of this Court to grant, since such a determination would require an examination and interpretation of church doctrines.

An unincorporated Syrian Orthodox congregation incorporated itself under Article 10 of the Religious Corporations Law as the Malankara Jacobite Center of North America, Inc ["the Jacobite Center"]. Religious organization may generally be categorized as congregational or hierarchal, depending on the basis of the governing power, A congregational church has been defined as "an independent organization governed solely within itself, either by a majority of its members or by such other local organization as it may have instituted for the purpose of ecclesiastical government (Knight v Presbytery of Western NY, 26 AD2d 19, 21, aff'd 18 NY2d 868). Hierarchical churches may be defined as those organized as a body with other churches having similar faith and doctrine with a common ruling convocation or ecclesiastic [*3]head (Kedroff v St. Nicholas Cathedral of Russian Orthodox Church in No. America, 344 US 110). Under some systems, each church or religious society in an independent body not subject to control of any higher ecclesiastical judicature, but a law unto itself, and self-governing in its religious functions; under other systems a local church is but a member of a larger and more important religious organization, and it is under its government and control (92 NJ Jur 2d "Religious Organizations §2). However, acknowledgment of a higher church authority may be limited to ecclesiastical authority and therefore not inconsistent with local autonomy in property matters (New York Dist. of Assemblies of God v Calvary Assembly of God, 64 AD2d 311). The mere act of incorporating under Article 10 of the Religious Corporation Law, relating to other denominations, is not determinative of the issue of whether the church is independent or hierarchical (id. at 314).

To determine the organization of a church, a court must examine any constitution or regulations of the corporation as well as the history of the relationship between the incorporated/local church and its alleged overseer (see St. Mathews Church of Christ Disciples or Christ, Inc. v Creech, 196 Misc 2d 843).

The certificate of incorporation of the Jacobite Center, dated December 30, 1986, and its constitution recites that one purposes or objective, of the corporation is to promote the spiritual, religious, cultural, educational and economic well-being of the members of the Malankara Jacobite Syrian Orthodox Church of India and their descendants who settled in North America. The constitution of the Center in its preamble notes that the members of the Malankara Jacobite Syrian Orthodox Church of India, who follow the Syrian Orthodox faith, formed a Center for their religious activities and incorporated it under the name Malankara Jacobite Center of North America, Inc. The constitution also provides that all members of the Malankara Jacobite Syrian Orthodox Church of India, who are residents in North America shall be eligible to become members of the Center. According to the constitution, the General Body of the Jacobite Center was deemed the "Supreme Forum" of the organization; it shall be composed of all members and the decision of the General Body shall be final and binding. The General Body elected the Board of Directors, which had the power to manage the affairs and activities of the corporation not inconsistent with the constitution and or by laws, except over matters of general policy, which was vested exclusively in the General Body.

On November 25, 1990, the General Body of the Jacobite Center met to decide means to purchase a building to be used as the headquarters of the Jacobite Center. The General Body decided that the list of members who pledged to donate to the church building fund to purchase a church and adjacent residential building from Our Lady of Mt. Carmel to be used as the corporate headquarters and their decedents "shall be the sole owners of the Jacobite Center and all its properties and shall be responsible for maintenance and operation of the premises. The General Body rendered, in pertinent part, the following unanimous decisions:

1. The buildings and its premises shall be used for all religious activities of fund-raising activities for the Malankara Jacobite Center and all its revenues shall be strictly utilized for religious and charitable purposes only.

2. Full life-time membership of the Center shall be $5,000 * * * .

3. Those persons, listed [pledged monies to the Church Building Fund] who have not paid the full membership fee of $5,000 shall pay the balance in convenient installments on or before 1 December 1995. * * * Those who have not paid the full membership fee may participate in all the meetings of the Center but shall not vote until they are fully paid up.

4. Any amount paid in excess of $5,000 by any member shall be deemed a loan to the Center and such excess amount shall be repaid * * * on or before 1 December 2000. * * *

5. The President of the Malankara Jacobite Center, Inc. shall give a promisery [sic] note to each member who have contributed more than $5,000, stating the amount to be repaid and the due on or before date of such repayment.

6. Anyone, other than those listed above in these minutes, is welcomed to become a member of the Malankara Jacobite Center by paying in full and in one installment, a membership fee of $5,000. Such a member shall also be entitled to join others in ownership of the Malankara Jacobite Center.

7. The above decisions Nos. 1 through 6 concerning use of the premises, ownership, membership and repayment of loans shall be irreversible and therefore shall not be amended, altered, revoked, modified or cancelled under any circumstances. No person or persons or authorities, whomsoever, temporal or ecclesiastical, shall have the power under any circumstances, whatsoever, to amend, change, add or cancel the above decisions 1 through 6 of this General Body Meeting as long as the Malankara Jacobite Center exists.

* * * * *

10. The Center shall conduct regular worship services on Sundays and Special Festival days such as Christmas, Good Friday, Easter etc. and the congregation shall be called St. Mary's Church * * *. All Sacraments of the Syrian Orthodox Church * * * shall be administered in the church. No priest shall be appointed by any authority to this church without the consent of the majority of membership of the Malankara Jacobite Center . Such consent of the majority of membership shall be a must in the appointment transfer or removal of any priest at the Malankara Jacobite Center.

11. Anyone who believes in the Nicene Creed, faith, dogma and traditions of the Syrian Orthodox Church is welcomed to the worship services and other religious activities of the St. Mary's Church. The church shall have a membership entirely separate from that of the Malankara Jacobite Center and the subscription fee for the church membership shall be decided by the future General Body Meetings of the Malankara Jacobite Center.

12. The St. Mary's Church, which is a separate entity form the Malankara Jacobite Center shall have His Beatitude Baselius Poulos II, Catholicose of the East (stationed at Catholicate Aramana, Muraltupuzha, Kerala, India) and his proper Successor as it [*5]ecclesiastical head who shall be the Supreme authority in settling any questions or disputes concerning faith, Sacraments or church discipline. His decisions on such spiritual matters shall be final and without appeal. Any temporal matters or financial disputes on assets or property shall be decided without appeal by majority of the members of the Malankara Jacobite Center and by them only.

13. The St. Mary's congregation shall elect a co-ordinating committee to plan and execute the religious activities and festivals of the church. * * * This committee shall have no power, whatsoever, to plan or execute any activity or operation of the Malankara Jacobite Center.

14. Malankara Jacobite Center shall be responsible for the day-to-day operations of the St. Mary's Church and shall bear all its expenses. All activities of the Church shall be fully funded by the Center. Therefore, all revenues collected through the activities of St. Mary's congregation shall be added to the revenues of the Malankara Jacobite Center.

15. Any person who pays yearly subscription to the St. Mary's Church shall not automatically become a member of the Malankara Jacobite Center. Additional membership to the Malankara Jacobite Center shall be governed by decision No. 6 above of this General Body Meeting.

An unincorporated religious body, such as a church or religious society, and a religious corporation composed of the same or substantially the same persons as the unincorporated religious body, frequently co-exist, with the unincorporated religious body conducting the services of worship and other religious activities of the church, and the religious corporation having custody and control of the church group's temporalities and property (see 92 NY Jur 2d "Religious Organizations §4; see Cadman Memorial Congregation Soc. of Brooklyn v Kenyon, 306 NY 151; see also Islamic Center of Harrison, Inc. v Islamic Science Foundation, Inc., 216 AD2d 357).

The constitution and unanimous vote of the General Body on November 25, 1990, makes it clear that the Jacobite Center was a religious corporation and that St. Mary's Church was an unincorporated religious body affiliated with the Jacobite Center

and that the religious corporation had custody and control of the temporalities and property, with the unincorporated religious body conducting the services of worship and other religious activities and meeting in the church edifice. The acknowledgment of a higher church authority (His Beatitude Baselius Poulos II, Catholicose of the East) and his proper successors was limited to ecclesiastical authority and, therefore, not inconsistent with local autonomy in property matters. Said documents confirm the autonomy of the Jacobite Center from hierarchical control in property matters and grant the control of all temporal affairs to itself.

Subsequently, in August of 1992, the majority of members St. Mary's Syrian Orthodox Church - the unincorporated religious body affiliated with the Jacobite Center, decided to join the Archdiocese of the Syrian Orthodox Church in the United States and Canada. However, the [*6]membership of the Jacobite Center - the religious corporation - did not vote to relinquish control over the temporalities and property of the Center to this ecclesiastical authority. The Center never acknowledged its subservience to this Archdiocese.

Courts can decide exclusively property issues in litigation including a hierarchical church (Presbyterian Church in U.S. v Mary Elizabeth Blue Hull Church, 393 US 440), provided they can do so without resolving underlying controversies over religious doctrine. An implied trust for the denominational church (the plaintiff Archdiocese) cannot be established, since the documentary evidence negates a sufficient manifestation of intent to do so. Paragraph 7 of the November 1990 unanimous vote of the General Body of the Jacobite Center belies any intention to dedicate the property to the purpose of a larger body. To the contrary, the Jacobite Center expressed an intention to withhold its property from being subject to any future ecclesiastical hierarchy. The Jacobite Center acquired the property on its own without any funding assistance from the plaintiff Archdiocese. The Jacobite Center took no action from which an interest to create a trust may be implied. The Archdiocese and the Jacobite Center never entered into any commitment in writing to create an implied trust (see First Presbyterian Church of Schenectady v United Presbyterian Church, 62 NY2d 110; cf. Trustee of Diocese of Albany v Trinity Episcopal Church of Gloverville, 250 AD2d 282). Thus, no declaration of an implied trust for the denominational church is warranted.

The gravamen of plaintiff's action is for a declaration of an implied trust for the benefit of those members of a divided congregation who adhere to the principles of the founders of the religion.

Religious Corporation Law §5 provides that "the trustees of every religious corporation shall have the custody and control of all the temporalities and property, real and personal, belonging to the corporation and of the revenues therefrom, and shall administer the same in accordance with the discipline, rules and usages of the corporation and of the ecclesiastical governing body if any, to which the corporation is subject, and with the provisions of law relating thereto, for the support and maintenance of the corporation, or, providing the members of the corporation at a meeting thereof shall so authorize, of some religious, charitable, benevolent or educational object conducted by said corporation or in connection with it, or with the denomination, if any, with which it is connected; and they shall not use such property or revenues for any other purpose or divert the same from such uses. * * * But this section does not give to the trustees of an incorporated church, any control over the calling, settlement, dismissal or removal of its minister, or the fixing of his salary; or any power to fix or change the time, nature or order of the public or social worship of such church."

When the Jacobite Center was organized, and later incorporated, its members were free to select the ecclesiastical body with which it wished to affiliate or become subordinate. In property matters, it chose to remain independent of any governing ecclesiastical body. While this religious corporation chose to be affiliated with the Syrian Orthodox faith when incorporated, the members did not identify in its certificate of incorporation or its constitution/by-laws one ecclesiastical body over another, as there was no Archdiocese in existence in the United States in 1986 and, according to defendants, there existed two factions in India who vied for control over the Syrian Orthodox church. While the vote of the Governing Body in 1990 chose His Beatitude, Baselius Poulos II, Catholicose of the East and his successor as the ecclesiastical head of St. [*7]Mary's congregation in spiritual matters, a determination of which faction espouses the correct rules and usages of His Beatitude, Baselius Poulos II, Catholicose of the East or his successor would entail inquiry into religious precepts. Here, an implied trust for the benefit of those members of a divided congregation who adhere to the principles of the founders of the religion must be rejected, because it leaves the court in the position of determining what the original principles of the member of the religious corporation were - those espoused by plaintiff Father Eapen or those espoused by defendant Father Peter. This inquiry into doctrine is precluded by, Presbyterian Church in U.S. v Mary Elizabeth Blue Hull Church, 393 US 440, and State decisions (see First Presbyterian Church of Schenectady v United Presbyterian Church, 62 NY2d 110; cf. Russian Church of Our Lady of Kazan v Dunkel, 33 NY2d 456; Trustees of Diocese of Albany v Trinity Episcopal Church of Gloverville, 250 AD2d 283).

Since an implied trust for the members who adhere to the founder of the religion presents a non-justiciable religious dispute, which cannot be resolved without interfering in church doctrine and policy, and under the neutral principles of law analysis, the language on the face of the deed, certificate of incorporation, constitution and the 1990 Governing Body's unanimous decision negates any basis for finding that the Jacobite Center acquired the subject property with the intention to hold it in trust for plaintiff Archdiocese, there is no basis for nullifying the lease entered into between the Center and plaintiff Father Eapen. Accordingly, the defendants' motion to dismiss this actionis granted.

Dated: White Plains, New York

March 29, 2004

J. EMMETT MURPHY

Supreme Court Justice