Friendship Baptist Church v. Hill

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Friendship Baptist Church v. Hill

112 S.E. 826, 120 S.C. 145, 1922 S.C. LEXIS 93

CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina

DecidedJuly 5, 1922

Docket10897

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 112 S.E. 826 (Friendship Baptist Church v. Hill) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Friendship Baptist Church v. Hill, 112 S.E. 826, 120 S.C. 145, 1922 S.C. LEXIS 93 (S.C. 1922).

Pincite

Opinion

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Fraser.

This is an action to enjoin the defendant from exercising, or attempting to exercise, the duties of pastor of the plaintiff Church.

R There was a motion to strike out certain allegations of the Complaint as irrelevant. The motion was granted in part and refused in part. The defendant appeals from so much of the order as refuses to strike out other allegations. Woodward v. Woodward, 87 S. C., 249; 69 S. E., 232:

“An order refusing to strike out allegations of the pleadings as irrelevant and redundant is not appealable.”

II. The defendant demurred to the complaint on the ground that it did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. Demurrer overruled. The defendant appealed from this order. The complaint alleged that the defendant was elected pastor of the plaintiff Church on the 28th day of November, A. D. 1917, for a term of one year; that the defendant was deposed on the 27th June, 1921; that, in spite of such deposition, he continued, and threatened to continue, to exercise the duties of pastor of said Church, to the great injury of the Church. Those statements, if true, would entitle plaintiff to relief. The government of the Baptist Church, the regularity of the proceedings by which the defendant has been deposed, whether he has been deposed or not, the au *147 thority to bring this suit, etc., are matters of defense to be determined on the trial.

The orders appealed from are affirmed.

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

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Fraser.

This is an action to enjoin the defendant from exercising, or attempting to exercise, the duties of pastor of the plaintiff Church.

R There was a motion to strike out certain allegations of the Complaint as irrelevant. The motion was granted in part and refused in part. The defendant appeals from so much of the order as refuses to strike out other allegations. Woodward v. Woodward, 87 S. C., 249; 69 S. E., 232:

“An order refusing to strike out allegations of the pleadings as irrelevant and redundant is not appealable.”

II. The defendant demurred to the complaint on the ground that it did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. Demurrer overruled. The defendant appealed from this order. The complaint alleged that the defendant was elected pastor of the plaintiff Church on the 28th day of November, A. D. 1917, for a term of one year; that the defendant was deposed on the 27th June, 1921; that, in spite of such deposition, he continued, and threatened to continue, to exercise the duties of pastor of said Church, to the great injury of the Church. Those statements, if true, would entitle plaintiff to relief. The government of the Baptist Church, the regularity of the proceedings by which the defendant has been deposed, whether he has been deposed or not, the au *147 thority to bring this suit, etc., are matters of defense to be determined on the trial.

The orders appealed from are affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

112 S.E. 826, 120 S.C. 145, 1922 S.C. LEXIS 93, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/friendship-baptist-church-v-hill-sc-1922.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack