Crusade for Christ, Inc. v. Town of New Lebanon

50 Misc. 2d 774, 271 N.Y.S.2d 886, 1966 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1863
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedMay 19, 1966
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 50 Misc. 2d 774 (Crusade for Christ, Inc. v. Town of New Lebanon) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Crusade for Christ, Inc. v. Town of New Lebanon, 50 Misc. 2d 774, 271 N.Y.S.2d 886, 1966 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1863 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1966).

Opinion

Charles B. Honikel, Ref.

The plaintiff seeks judgment against defendant, declaring void and canceling of record certain real estate taxes, and a refund to it of amounts paid. Plaintiff claims exemption from taxation by virtue of subdivision 1 of section 420 of the Real Property Tax Law (eff. Oct. 1, 1959) and former subdivision 6 of section 4 of the Tax Law.

The individual items, including reassessed school taxes and interest, are:

Taxes for 1956, payable in 1957, $2,205.82, paid by plaintiff; taxes for 1957, payable in 1958, $2,401.76, paid by plaintiff; taxes for 1958, payable in 1959, $2,767.27, redeemed from tax sale to the county by United Society of Believers, as mortgagee; taxes for 1959, payable in 1960, $2,463.63, included in item of $6,631.58 paid by Ralph O. Hoffman, referee in mortgage foreclosure.

[776]*776The assessors were apprised of plaintiff’s objection to the assessments, although formal protests preliminary to tax review proceedings under article 13 of the Tax Law (now Real Property Tax Law, art. 7) were not filed.

Plaintiff is a membership corporation. It has no affiliation with any formally organized church or religion. Its certificate of incorporation contains the following statement of purposes:

“ (a) To spread the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ throughout the United States of America and other countries through the printed page, through Bible conferences, through radio programs and television pictures, through the support of missionaries throughout the world, and through any other method.

“ (b) To devise, provide and pursue ways, methods and means and to receive and acquire money and funds for the distribution of Bibles, Testaments, Tracts, religious periodicals and portions of the Holy Scripture, and to print, publish and distribute books containing religious songs, teachings and readings, and to issue said Christian literature, periodicals and pamphlets as may be helpful and which will serve to carry out the purposes herein.

(c) To support teachers, preachers and missionaries within the United States or in foreign fields to spread the Gospel, especially to child and youth.

(d) To purchase, lease, own, mortgage, sell and manage real estate, buildings, and lands, farms and accommodations to be used in conjunction with the training, teaching and houseing [sic] of Missionaries, preachers and religious workers, and to otherwise acquire real estate, by gift or devise necessary for any of the purposes herein set forth.”

In my opinion paragraph (d) of the certificate of incorporation does not limit the power of plaintiff “ to purchase, lease, own, mortgage, sell and manage ” real property solely in conjunction with the training, teaching and housing of missionaries, preachers and religious workers. The words, in my opinion, constitute a grant of authority, not a limitation. Section 13 of the General Corporation Law (in effect until Sept. 1, 1963) provided: “ 1. A corporation shall not possess or exercise any powers unless given by law, or necessary to the powers so given. 2. The certificate of incorporation of a corporation may contain any provision for the regulation of its business and the conduct of its affairs, and any limitation upon its powers, or upon the rights of its stockholders or upon the powers of its directors and members, which does not exempt them from the performance of any obligation or duty imposed by law.” Subdivision 3 of section 14 of the General Corporation Law (in effect until September 1; 1963) granted to every corporation, though not [777]*777specified in the law under which it is incorporated, the power “ To acquire property for the corporate purposes by grant, gift, purchase, devise, or bequest, and to hold and to dispose of the same, subject to such limitations as may be prescribed by law.”

Section 300 of the Real Property Tax Law (formerly Tax Law, § 3) subjects to real property taxation all real property within the State unless exempt therefrom by law. The exemption statute is to be construed strictly against those arguing for nontaxability. (People ex rel. Mizpah Lodge v. Burke, 228 N. Y. 245.)

The purposes set forth in plaintiff’s certificate of incorporation are within the exemptions authorized by subdivision 1 of section 420 of the Real Property Tax Law (formerly Tax Law, § 4), since the statute prima facie grants an exemption to a corporation organized exclusively for bible, tract and missionary purposes.

Although no other interpretation can be given the articles of incorporation than that plaintiff is organized exclusively for purposes which meet the exemption requirements of the statute, the actual operations of the corporation must be examined since there is the additional statutory requirement that the real property be used exclusively for carrying out thereupon one or more of such purposes ”. Actual use of the real property might not correspond with the declared purposes stated in the certificate. Further the statute mandates that if the real property is used for activities and purposes other than those authorized by and stated in the certificate of incorporation, the exempt status is lost. The court stated in Good Will Club of Amsterdam v. City of Amsterdam (31 Misc 2d 1096, 1098): “ a reasonable compliance would mean that not only must the plaintiff’s articles of incorporation and by-laws admit of no construction other than strict adherence to the activities enumerated in the statute, but further, that actual use and operation must correspond and agree with the declared use stated in the certificate and by-laws ’ ’.

Crusade for Christ, as an unincorporated group, or its president and treasurer, Mr. William H. Vogt, had been active in gospel work long before 1956 and had conducted radio broadcasts in Pittsfield, Massachusetts, North Adams, Massachusetts, and Albany, New York, for some years prior to the purchase of the real property for which exemption from taxation is now sought.

The certificate of incorporation was approved by a Justice of the Supreme Court November 18, 1955 and was filed in the office of the Department of State on December 1, 1955.

[778]*778On June 15, 1956 plaintiff purchased a tract of land described in one of plaintiff’s brochures as more than four hundred acres and by the president and treasurer as about five hundred acres, upon which were located 13 buildings. The latter were in dilapidated condition at the time of purchase.

Plaintiff named the real property “ Lebanon Boys Village A fund-raising campaign in connection therewith was conducted by plaintiff and from the campaign the down payment upon the purchase of the real property, $10,000, was realized.

Plaintiff’s Exhibit 9 is a brochure which was used by plaintiff. It is entitled “Lebanon Boys Village ”. On the cover is the picture of a boy about to enter a door with the words “ Your Donation will open the Door for him give now ! ’ ’. This brochure contains aerial photographs of portions of the property. One of the photographs is accompanied by a message from the Bible and the words “ help! Save a Boy at Lebanon boys village sponsored by crusade eor Christ ”. Excerpts from the brochure are:

On the Western slopes of Mt. Lebanon a gigantic vision is taking shape which you can help build into a glorious reality — a boys orphanage which can shelter and give guidance to several hundred youngsters in need of these vital advantages.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Church of Pan, Inc. v. Norberg
507 A.2d 1359 (Supreme Court of Rhode Island, 1986)
Crusade for Christ, Inc. v. Town of New Lebanon
36 A.D.2d 247 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1971)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
50 Misc. 2d 774, 271 N.Y.S.2d 886, 1966 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1863, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crusade-for-christ-inc-v-town-of-new-lebanon-nysupct-1966.