Bates v. Houston
Supreme Court of Georgia
Equity. Injunction. Churches. Corporations. Parties. Before Judge Fleming. Chatham Superior Court. June Term, 1880. To the report contained in the decision, it is only necessary to add that counsel for defendants in error insisted in argument that the parties complainant to the bill did not appear to be proper parties, that trustees for a church should be elected, not appointed (Code, §§2343, 2345); and that the complainants were not proceeding as members of the church, but…
Read the full summary
Equity. Injunction. Churches. Corporations. Parties. Before Judge Fleming. Chatham Superior Court. June Term, 1880. To the report contained in the decision, it is only necessary to add that counsel for defendants in error insisted in argument that the parties complainant to the bill did not appear to be proper parties, that trustees for a church should be elected, not appointed (Code, §§2343, 2345); and that the complainants were not proceeding as members of the church, but as officers thereof, without setting out their powers as such.
1Opinion of the Court
Speer, Justice.
The plaintiffs in error, Baker, Young,' Butler, as trustees of “First African Baptist Church in Savannah,” and McNish, Bowles, Mitchell and McIntosh, who with the *199above named trustees are deacons of said church, in behalf of themselves and a large majority of the members of said church, complain against the defendants, Morse, Williams, Pettigrew, Jacks, Habersham, Jenkins, Haynes, Houston, Wright and Hook, all of said county. Complainants allege that they, in connection with one Campbell, are the legally constituted authorities and executive officers of said church, according…
2Cited by19 opinions
- Mack v. KimeSupreme Court of Georgia · 1907
- Mitchell v. DickeySupreme Court of Georgia · 1970
- O'Jay Spread Co. v. HicksSupreme Court of Georgia · 1937
- Tucker v. PaulkSupreme Court of Georgia · 1918
- Partin v. TuckerSupreme Court of Florida · 1937
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.