Midland Building & Loan Ass'n v. Sparks Chapel Colored M. E. Church in America

35 S.W.2d 774
CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedFebruary 7, 1931
DocketNo. 10934.
StatusPublished
Cited by21 cases

This text of 35 S.W.2d 774 (Midland Building & Loan Ass'n v. Sparks Chapel Colored M. E. Church in America) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Midland Building & Loan Ass'n v. Sparks Chapel Colored M. E. Church in America, 35 S.W.2d 774 (Tex. Ct. App. 1931).

Opinion

JONES, C. J.

This suit was instituted by appellees, Sparks Chapel Colored M. E. Church in America, G. W. Watson, George Tates, H. Jackson, H. R. Johnson, M. Bigins, R. B. Bogan, and J. J. Carson, trustees of said church, and A. B. Johnson, pastor of the church, and F. M. Fountain, presiding elder of the district to which the church belongs, acting for and on behalf of said church, the Quarterly Conference, and the Church Extension Board of the Colored M. E. Church in America, against appellants, Midland Building & Loan Association and Yerne D. Adamson. The purpose of the suit is to cancel four deeds of trust and certain notes secured by liens created by the respective deeds of trust on the local church property; to have payment of usurious interest declared and for judgment in favor of appellees for double the amount of such usurious interest alleged to have been paid; to enjoin appellants from executing the power of sale, authorized by each deed of trust, and for a temporary writ of injunction to restrain appellants from making a threatened sale of the church property under the power of sale in the deeds of trust, until the final determination of this suit. The court granted a temporary writ of injunction upon a hearing, and appellants have duly perfected an appeal from such order to this court.

In the year 1928, and previous thereto, the congregation of the Sparks Chapel Colored M. E. Church in America was occupying a church building on a portion of the property in controversy, .and held the services of their church therein. Title to property was held by the said church in the manner local churches are permitted to take title under the constitution and laws of the M. E. Church in America. The church building had become old and dilapidated, and was badly in need of repairs. Certain members of the local church held the office of trustees and in this capacity had such possession and control of the property as is *775 given them by the said constitution and laws. A. E. Johnson had been assigned by the Annual Conference as pastor of such church and in 1928 held such charge.

It was desired by the pastor and trustees 10 improve and remodel the church building and two small residences located on the church property, and in possession of the trustees, in the same manner in which they held the church property. Plans and specifications were prepared and drawn up, and appellant loan company was solicited for a loan in order to secure the funds necessary for such improvements. As a result of these negotiations, the loan company agreed to advance the necessary money for the improvements and to evidence same by promissory notes representing, in the aggregate, the amount of money to be advanced. These notes were executed by the trustees in their capacity as such trustees, and their payment secured by four separate deeds of trust liens on the church property executed by the trustees.

There was existing at the time a mechanic’s lien in favor of Booth Lumber Company, amounting to approximately $1,700. This mechanic’s lien had been executed by the then trustees of the church, and secured by a deed of trust executed by such trustees. The money borrowed from the loan company was sufficient in amount to take up this prior lien and to pay for all of the improvements made, such amount being approximately $9,000. The loan company took from the Booth Lumber Company an assignment of their lien and note, extended the note, and another deed of trust was executed to the loan company to secure this extension note.

The incumbrance on the church property by these respective deeds of trust was created without authority from the Quarterly Conference of such church, the presiding elder, or any church authority other than the trustees and pastor. The notes and deeds of trust provided that the debt should be paid and the lien discharged by monthly payments with the amount of such payments specified. These instruments also provided that, if default in these monthly payments should be made when they became due, the holder of the notes could declare all of the indebtedness due. The deeds of trust conveyed the property to a trustee, and each vested the trustee with a power of sale in case default in payment should be made. Appellant Verne D. Adamson is the substitute trustee. On the face of the instruments, the default of appel-lees gave to the holder of the indebtedness the ■ power to declare same due and vested in the trustee the right to sell the property to pay the indebtedness. The trustee, after due notice, was advertising the property for sale when this suit was instituted and the temporary injunction, restraining such sale, was issued.

This record discloses that the constitution and by-laws of the ■ Colored M. E. Church in America are published in a church book known as “The Discipline.” The Discipline forbids the incumbering of any church prop-. erty by the trustees, the pastor, or the local congregation, except when authorized by a Quarterly Conference, at a session when the presiding elder of the district is present. The record also discloses that no authority was-given by the Quarterly Conference to appel-lees for incumbering this property with the various deeds of trust liens, for borrowing the money, or for remodeling the church. The record makes it plain that the transaction that culminated in the borrowing of the money, in- the execution of the notes and the deeds of trust, was the independent action of the trustees and pastor. The law of the Colored M. E. Church in America, as shown by The Discipline, declares that any debt incurred, or any pretended lien attempted to be fixed on church property, without the authority of the Quarterly Conference, given at a session when the presiding elder is present, shall be null and void.

This record also discloses that probably usurious interest has been charged by the loan company and paid by appellees, in that, ' it is shown that the notes bear the maximum rate of interest allowed, and that about $800 on the amount of the loan, as shown by the notes, was never paid to appellees.

The issuance of a temporary writ of injunction is merely a provisional remedy allowed by the court, before the trial of this case on its merits, for the sole purpose of preserving the subject-matter of the controversy as it existed at the time the suit was instituted. As a provisional remedy, the function of the temporary injunction in the instant case is to prevent appellants from selling the property until the trial of the suit, which challenges the right to sell, has determined the issues of law and fact made by ap-pellees’ petition. The issuance of the temporary writ of injunction did not determine the issues of law or fact involved in the main suit, and they are left as they existed prior to the issuance of such writ.

In any particular case the issuance of a temporary writ of injunction rests largely in the discretion of the trial court, and his action, in either granting or refusing to grant such writ, cannot be disturbed, unless it be made to appear that the discretion thus lodged was abused by the -order made. So, in the instant case, the sole question for review is: Did the trial court abuse its discretion in granting this writ and thereby maintaining the existing status of the property. If the petition filed by appellees in the suit alleges *776

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

Related

Tom James of Dallas, Inc. v. Cobb
109 S.W.3d 877 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2003)
Center for Economic Justice v. American Insurance Ass'n
39 S.W.3d 337 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2001)
Perkola v. Koelling & Associates, Inc.
601 S.W.2d 110 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1980)
Hill v. Gibson Discount Center
437 S.W.2d 289 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1968)
Bank of the Southwest National Ass'n v. La Gasse
321 S.W.2d 101 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1959)
City of Waco v. Marstaller
271 S.W.2d 722 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1954)
Brouse v. Miers
261 S.W.2d 734 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1953)
Southwestern Associated Tel. Co. v. City of Dalhart
254 S.W.2d 819 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1952)
Jeter v. State
184 S.W.2d 716 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1944)
Houston Natural Gas Corp. v. Nueces County Water Improvement Dist. No. 1
157 S.W.2d 170 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1941)
Haden Employees' Ass'n v. Lovett
122 S.W.2d 230 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1938)
Leonard v. Smith
99 S.W.2d 328 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1936)
Southland Life Insurance v. Egan
86 S.W.2d 722 (Texas Supreme Court, 1935)
Texas Co. v. Watkins
82 S.W.2d 1079 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1935)
Jones v. Hilliard
63 S.W.2d 909 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1933)
Diamond v. Hodges
58 S.W.2d 187 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1933)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
35 S.W.2d 774, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/midland-building-loan-assn-v-sparks-chapel-colored-m-e-church-in-texapp-1931.