Preview
Hearing Date: No hearing scheduled
Location: <>
Judge: Calendar, 4
FILED
10/13/2023 4:02 PM
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS IRIS Y. MARTINEZ
COUNTY DEPARTMENT, CHANCERY DIVISION CIRCUIT CLERK
COOK COUNTY, IL
FILED DATE: 10/13/2023 4:02 PM 2023CH05734
2023CH05734
LORETTA-KIDD-BRADY, JIMMIE DANIELS ) Calendar, 4
and THELMA DODD, as Trustees on behalf of ) 24785685
GARDEN OF PRAYER MISSIONARY )
BAPTIST CHURCH, )
An Illinois Not-For-Profit Corporation, )
) No. 2023 CH 05734
Plaintiff, ) (consol. with 2023 CH 05899)
)
vs. )
)
ARTHUR BISHOP, ANTONI DAVIS, )
KATHY DAVIS, )
SHELLIE LAWS, LEON ODEN, )
JAMES CLARK, )
)
Defendants. )
MOTION TO DISMISS FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY
JUDGMENT AND OTHER RELIEF PURSUANT TO 735 ILCS 5/2-615(a)
Defendants Arthur Bishop, Antoni Davis, Kathy Davis, Shellie Laws, Leon Oden and
James Clark, by and through their undersigned counsel HENDERSON PARKS, LLC, and pursuant
to 735 ILCS 5/2-615 move to dismiss the First Amended Complaint for Declaratory Judgment and
Other Relief (“Amended Complaint”) filed in Case No. 2023 CH 05734 (“Complaint”), stating the
following as their grounds.
PERTINENT FACTS IN THE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
1. This case concerns claims of right to conduct the affairs of a Garden of Prayer
Missionary Baptist Church, Inc., an Illinois not-for-profit corporation (referred to hereafter as
“GOP” or the “Church”). GOP is located at 2001 S. 17th Avenue, Broadview, IL. Amended
Complaint at 2.
2. Defendants asks the to Court take judicial notice of the undisputed fact that GOP
has operated at its current location in Broadview, IL, for more than 23 years since it acquired the
property at its current in Broadview in January 2001.
3. The Amended Complaint attaches at Exhibit 1 a document claimed to be the
“current Bylaws” of the Church. ¶ 8. However, that undated document gives a Maywood, IL
FILED DATE: 10/13/2023 4:02 PM 2023CH05734
address for GOP, a location that the Church moved from more than 23 years ago. (Exhibit 1 to the
Amended Complaint is sometimes referred to hereafter as the “Maywood Bylaws.”)
4. According to the Maywood Bylaws, there are “three types of positions within the
Church, an Administrator, the Trustees, and the Deacons.” Amended Complaint at ¶10.
5. The Maywood Bylaws identify the Pastor of the Church as the Administrator of the
Church. Amended Complaint at ¶ 11.
6. Until his death in October 2022, Pastor Johnnie Haynie served “as the long-time
Pastor” of GOP. Amended Complaint at ¶¶ 24, 52.
7. In ¶¶ 22-25, the Amended Complaint describes the Church’s biannual meeting
process, when the meetings are generally held, and that Pastor Haynie preceded over those
meetings.
8. ¶ 25 of the Amended Complaint describes a specific meeting held on July 21, 2018.
The minutes of that meeting are attached to the Amended Complaint at Exhibit 3 (referred to
hereafter as the “July 21, 2018 Minutes”).
9. Key to the claims in this action, the July 21, 2018 Minutes state the “Agenda Items”
to include: “Elections of Deacons/Definition,” “Presentation of Deacons,” “Election of Trustee”
and “Bylaws.”
10. The July 21, 2018 Minutes include a statement and Biblical passage read by Pastor
Haynie. In his statement, Pastor Haynie stated “[t]he church is a different organization from the
state. The church has to get it right with Jesus.” (July 21, 2018 Minutes, Exhibit 3, at p. 1.)
11. The July 21, 2018 Minutes record that in his Opening Statement, Pastor Haynie
described inquiries to several different pastors of Baptist churches in the region as to whether they
bring deacons before the church for elections. As recorded in the Minutes, each of the four (4)
pastors with whom Pastor Haynie consulted said that in their churches, deacons are appointed by
the pastor, not elected by the church body, and serve for an indefinite period. Id. at p. 1.
2
12. The July 21, 2018 Minutes indicate at p. 2 that “Trustees are elected every year …”
This requirement is also repeated later in the Minutes in the discussion about the duties and
FILED DATE: 10/13/2023 4:02 PM 2023CH05734
qualifications of trustees.
13. The July 21, 2018 Minutes describe the Office of Deacon according to the New
Testament. Very significant to this case, the July 21, 2018 Minutes describe the duties of the
Deacons as follows:
The principal duties of the deacons consist in administering the temporal affairs of the
church; these include relief of the poor, the support of public worship, the care of the
church property, and the proper provision for the due administration of the ordinances …
(Emphases added.)
July 21, 2018 Minutes, at p. 2, Exhibit 3 to Amended Complaint.
14. Immediately after describing the duties of the Deacons, the July 21, 2018 Minutes
at p. 2 further state:
NOTE: In the absence of a pastor, it becomes the duty of the deacons to conduct the
devotional meetings; to administer the affairs of the body generally; and to provide for the
supply of the pulpit until the church has appointed a committee for that purpose.
(Emphases in the original.)
15. The July 21, 2018 Minutes next address the election of trustees. Pastor Haynie read
the qualifications of Trustees as “officers [ ] necessary only because state laws require them for
holding the titles to the property of the church,” to be elected annually. He defined the primary
duty of Trustees to “execute documents of transfer or sale of property,” subject to specific “power
vested in them by vote of the church.” He further stated that Trustees can also be members of the
Deacon Board, and that “some authorities hold that they should be.” July 21, 2018 Minutes, p. 2.
16. The Minutes next record the nomination of various persons to serve as Trustees.
When nominations were concluded, the Minutes reflect that the church was looking to “add/vote
for (3) trustees.” After congregational vote, the top three highest votes went to Thelma Dodd,
Jimmie Daniels, and Deacon Jimmie Kimbrough. July 21, 2018 Minutes at p. 3.
17. Following the election of the three Trustees, Pastor Haynie stated that the Bylaws
would be discussed later. There was discussion that a Bylaws committee would address
amendments to the Bylaws.
3
18. The Amended Complaint states that the church held its next biannual business
meeting on December 1, 2018. ¶ 35. The minutes from that meeting are attached to the Amended
FILED DATE: 10/13/2023 4:02 PM 2023CH05734
Complaint at Exhibit 7 (referred to hereafter as “December 1, 2018 Minutes”). 1
19. The adoption of new bylaws was the central focus of the December 1, 2018
meeting. Pastor Haynie opened the meeting with comments about the need to “obey the law of the
land” and “keep God’s law.” He went on to describe “bylaws” as a “rule made by a company or
society to control the actions of its members.” He agreed bylaws were needed and commended
the Deacon Ministry for its work in developing the proposed bylaws. After these comments, Pastor
Haynie retreated from the meeting to work on his message for the next day. December 1, 2018
Minutes at p. 1.
20. The December 1, 2018 Minutes next reflect discussion about the proposed bylaws,
indicating disagreement by some members present about the proposed bylaws and how they were
developed. Due to the confusion and questions, the proposed bylaws were read (presumably in
their entirety) by (Defendant) Deaconess Shellie Laws. December 1, 2018 Minutes at p. 2.
21. After the reading of the Bylaws, Plaintiff Thelma Dodd raised the concern that there
was no mention of a trustee and asked why trustees were not included. The Minutes record no
response to this question.
22. As noted by Ms. Dodd, the Bylaws presented and read at the December 1, 2018
contain no mention of Trustees, and vests governance authority of Church affairs in the Pastor
along with the Deacon Ministry. See Bylaws of Garden of Prayer M.B.C., Exhibit 8 to Amended
Complaint, at Article IX, p. 12.
23. After the proposed Bylaws were read, Deacon Hobbs, Chairman of the Deacons
(Amended Complaint at ¶ 32), then moved for a vote to accept the Bylaws presented by the Deacon
1
Defendants note that the version of the December 1, 2018 Minutes attached to the Amended Complaint
contains a stamped marking on the second page that does not appear on any other version of the Minutes previously
circulated in the Church. The stamped marking states: “NOT FILED, NOT SIGNED BY PASTOR, STILL
OPERATING WITHOUT OFFICIAL BYLAWS.” While Defendants recognize that the Court generally accepts as
“true” the allegations in a complaint and exhibits attached thereto, Defendants point out that this additional content on
Exhibit 7 was not part of the document as prepared or previously circulated but was obviously added for purposes of
this litigation. However, other than this notation, the minutes as presented in Exhibit 7 accurately reflect what
transpired at the December 1, 2018 church meeting.
4
Ministry, attached to the Amended Complaint at Exhibit 8. These Bylaws are referred to hereafter
as the “December 2018 Bylaws.”
FILED DATE: 10/13/2023 4:02 PM 2023CH05734
24. The Minutes at p. 2 reflect a vote of 15 yays and 7 nays to accept the December
2018 Bylaws.
25. The Minutes reflect that 39 were present at the meeting, which adjourned after
prayer by Pastor Haynie.
26. At ¶¶ 77-82, the Amended Complaint describes what is purported to be a meeting
of the membership held on June 17, 2023 in which the Deacon Officers were allegedly voted out
of office. So-called “Minutes” of that Meeting are attached to the Amended Complaint at Exhibit
11.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
The First Amended Complaint in CH5734 Should Be Dismissed as Legally Insufficient
Pursuant to ILCS 735 5/2-615
A motion to dismiss pursuant to 5/2-615 of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure tests the
legal sufficiency of the complaint based on defects apparent on its face. 735 ILCS 5/2-615(a). In
reviewing the sufficiency of a complaint, the Court accepts as true all well-pled facts and all
reasonable inferences that may be drawn from those facts. Marshall v. Burger King Corp., 222
Ill.2d 422, 429 (2006). The allegations must be construed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff.
Id. Illinois is a fact pleading jurisdiction. While the plaintiff is not required to set forth
evidence in the complaint, the plaintiff must allege facts sufficient to bring a claim within a legally
recognized cause of action, rather than alleging conclusions. Marshall at pp. 429-430.
Applying this standard, the First Amended Complaint in Case No. 2023 CH 05734 is fatally
defective on its face because the very documents it presents to the Court as exhibits, specifically,
the Minutes from two key meetings of the congregation in 2018, belie the allegations made therein.
More importantly, the First Amendment Complaint fails as a matter of law because it requires this
Court to involve itself in the “internal decisions” of GOP in direct contravention to the well-settled
ecclesiastical abstention doctrine.
I. The Allegations in the First Amendment Complaint Would Require the Court to
Directly Review – and Overturn – Internal Decisions Made by the Pastor and
Members of GOP Church Rooted in Theological Interpretation
5
The core factual allegations in the First Amendment Complaint may succinctly be
FILED DATE: 10/13/2023 4:02 PM 2023CH05734
summarized to allege that the “temporal affairs” of Garden of Prayer Missionary Baptist Church
are being illegally operated by Defendant Deacons, and that Defendant Minister Arthur Bishop is
illegally serving in the role as interim pastor following the death of the Church’s longtime Pastor
Johnnie Haynie. The Amended Complaint further contends that certain persons, specifically,
Jimmie Daniels, Loretta Kidd-Brady, Thelma Dodd and Baron Ruffin are the duly elected trustees
of the Church, who should be conducting the affairs of the Church instead of the Defendant
Deacons.
The Amended Complaint further alleges that the Defendant Deacons were never properly
in office because they were not elected by the congregation. The Amended Complaint also asserts
that currently, GOP either has no bylaws (according to the notation on Exhibit 7) or that the Church
is still operating under Bylaws going back more than 23 years when the Church was located in
Maywood.
Ironically, and fatally, the very documents presented as Exhibits to the Amended Complaint
which reflect internal deliberations and decisions concerning roles and responsibility of Church
leadership unequivocally state the opposite of these core claims. To rule in favor of these claims,
the Court would have to find that Church business meetings held more than five (5) years ago,
outcomes reached at those meetings, and the operations of the Church since that time, were not
“proper” decisions of the Church. The ecclesiastical abstention doctrine, 2 and the First
Amendment on which it is based, prohibit such direct interference with internal decisions
concerning church theology and its operations based on that theology.
1. The July 21, 2018 Meeting Minutes Confirm That at GOP, Deacons Are Appointed to
Serve by the Pastor, Not Elected by the Congregation.
The Minutes of the July 21, 2018 Church Business Meeting are unequivocal that at GOP,
Deacons are appointed by the Pastor, not elected by the congregation, nor limited to a specific
2
Rooted in the First Amendment’s requirement of separation of Church and State, the ecclesiastical abstention
doctrine was confirmed and clarified in Serbian Eastern Orthodox Diocese v. Milivojevich, 426 U.S. 696, 96 S. Ct.
2372, 49 L. Ed. 2d 151 (1976). In Milivojevich, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Illinois Supreme Court exceeded
First Amendment parameters in affirming a lower court ruling to remove a clerical leader accused of misconduct and
ordering reorganization of a local diocese.
6
term. Pastor Haynie made clear that concerning the role and authority of Deacons “[t]he church
is a different organization from the state. The church has to get it right with Jesus.” Pastor Haynie
FILED DATE: 10/13/2023 4:02 PM 2023CH05734
also described his consultation with other Baptist pastors in the region who also appointed deacons
rather than have them elected by the congregation.
This teaching and guidance as to the Office of the Deacon was presented to the
congregation in its theological context by Pastor Haynie as GOP’s spiritual and organizational
leader. This Scripturally based teaching was embraced and accepted by the Church’s membership
and confirmed in the Church’s official Minutes of the business meeting in which this matter was
addressed. However, the Amended Complaint makes the bald and completely unsupported
assertion at ¶ 51 that “Pastor Haynie was a contract employee of [GOP] and did not have the
authority to appoint leadership positions in the Church without a vote of the Church membership.”
This claim cannot even be traced to or squared with the few vague provisions contained in the
undated Bylaws document from the Church’s Maywood era.
It would be difficult to imagine a greater violation of the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine
were the Court to accept this assertion as a basis to invalidate Pastor Haynie’s appointment of
Deacons. First, it would require the Court to posthumously convert the employment status and
leadership of GOP’s pastor of 32 years. It would require the Court to “substitute its determination”
of Pastor Haynie’s position and authority as the long-time Pastor of GOP, as well as his
interpretation of Biblical teachings concerning the operation of the Church. See Serbian Eastern
Orthodox Diocese v. Milivojevich, 426 U.S. 696, 721 (1976). This is precisely what is prohibited
under the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine. There is no “neutral principle” by which the Court
could engage in such a revision of the teachings and organization of GOP to validate the claim that
the appointed Deacons were not properly installed as Officers of the Church.
2. The July 21, 2018 Minutes Confirm That the Role and Duties of the Deacons at GOP
Included Administration of the Church’s Business Affairs.
In addition, in the July 21, 2018 meeting, Pastor Haynie reviewed in detail the “Duties of
the Deacons” as they were to operate at the Church, consistent with his interpretation of Biblical
teachings. He identified the “principal duties” of Deacons to include “administering the temporal
affairs of the church” making provision for the poor, supporting public worship and care of church
property, among other duties and responsibilities. This makes clear that the plan for the Office of
7
Deacon at GOP was not limited to spiritual matters but specifically included responsibility for the
business affairs of the Church. This was ratified in the Bylaws adopted at the December 1, 2018
FILED DATE: 10/13/2023 4:02 PM 2023CH05734
Meeting, attached to the Amended Complaint at Exhibit 8. Again, to find otherwise would require
the court to invalidate the theologically based plan for organization of the Church pursuant to the
teaching and guidance of its spiritual leader, as expressly prohibited by the ecclesiastical abstention
doctrine. Bruss v. Przybylo, 385 Ill. App. 3d 399, 424 (2nd Dist. 2008) (“[c]ivil courts may not
involve themselves in ‘matters of discipline, faith, internal organization, or ecclesiastical rule,
custom, or law’. … ‘Religious bodies must be free to decide for themselves, free from state
interference, matters which pertain to church government, faith and doctrine.”) (Internal citations
omitted.)
3. The July 21, 2018 Minutes Confirm a Far More Limited Role of the Would-Be Trustees
Than Claimed in the Amended Complaint.
In defining the role and qualifications of Trustees, the July 21, 2018 Minutes indicate the
Pastor Haynie’s view that trustees are “only necessary because state laws require them for holding
titles to the property of the church” and to execute legal papers in the name of the church, subject
to any such authority specifically authorized by vote of the church. 3 P. 2.
The July 21, 2018 Minutes clearly state that “Trustees should be elected annually by the
church.” However, the Amended Complaint alleges that Mr. Daniels, Ms. Dodd, Ms. Kidd-Brady,
and Mr. Ruffin “have been acting in their capacity as trustee since the date of this election on July
21, 2018.” ¶30. To accept this claim would require the Court to ignore or override the deliberations
and decisions of the Church as reflected in the July 21, 2018 Minutes requiring annual election of
trustees. 4
The Amended Complaint states at ¶26 “[t]here are supposed to be 5 total trustees on the
trustee board.” This is in direct conflict with the Minutes of the July 21, 2018 Meeting which
states “we are looking to add/vote for (3) trustees” and confirmed the election of the persons
3
Defendants further note that the additional defect that there is nothing reflecting a vote of the congregation
authorizing this action to be filed in the name of the Church.
4
The Amended Complaint also implies that subsequent elections did not occur due to the Covid-19
pandemic which precluded in person meetings after the June 2019 business meeting. Amended Complaint at ¶47.
The Covid-19 infection was not declared a pandemic until almost a year later in March 2019. In addition, as the
minutes of the December 1, 2018 meeting confirm, with the adoption of the Bylaws presented at that meeting the
Church no longer had trustees.
8
receiving the top three highest votes. July 21, 2018 Minutes at p. 3. The Amended Complaint
proceeds to impeach its own exhibit by stating “the meeting minutes do not reflect the accurate
FILED DATE: 10/13/2023 4:02 PM 2023CH05734
statement of the top 5 election winners” and then proclaims that the “proper 5-person Trustee
Board was comprised of Jimmie Daniels, Jimmy Kimbrough, Thelma Dodd, Loretta Kidd-Brady,
and Baron Ruffin. Amended Complaint ¶¶ 26-28.
Again, to accept this allegation as establishing a claim of right upon which relief could be
granted, this Court would have to insert itself into a Church meeting that took place more than 5
years ago, and either read into the “official” record of that meeting something that is not there (that
the “proper” Trustee Board was supposed to be five persons), or substitute its judgment that a 5
person board would be more appropriate than the 3 persons actually elected at the July 21, 2018
meeting. There is absolutely no basis in fact or law to support such a conclusion. Of the persons
claiming to be trustees of the Church in the Amended Complaint, according to the Church’s official
minutes, only two of the persons claiming to be current trustees were elected in July 2018 (Jimmie
Daniels and Thelma Dodd). Further, there is nothing to support the contention that the tenure of
Mr. Daniels or Ms. Dodd as Trustees has continued since 2018. In fact, the very proceedings in
which they were elected state exactly the opposite. On these facts, the Amended Complaint does
not establish the existence of any duly-elected Trustees of GOP.
4. The December 1, 2018 Minutes Confirm the Adoption of Bylaws Vesting Authority
Over the Church’s Temporal Affairs in the Pastor and Deacon Ministry.
The Minutes of the December 1, 2018 Meeting confirm that the Church approved the
adoption of a set of Bylaws attached to the Amended Complaint (referred to as the December 2018
Bylaws). The December 2018 Bylaws set forth the Church’s scriptural foundation and theological
tenets. Importantly, at Article IX, the 2018 Bylaws provide that “[t]he management of the business
affairs of this Church shall be vested in the Pastor and the Deacon Ministry.” Article IX specifies
that the Deacon Ministry “shall be responsible for the care and welfare of the Church’s building
and property.” Article IX further specifies that the Deacon Ministry shall have a Finance
Committee to oversee the count and deposit of all funds received by the Church, give accurate and
written reports to the membership at the semi-annual Business Meetings, be responsible for
managing the Church’s financial wellbeing and financial practices, and ensuring that all business
practices comply with local, State and Federal law. The Bylaws further confirm that there shall be
no term limits on the Deacon Ministry members. Amended Complaint Exhibit 8, p.12.
9
The December 2018 Bylaws were approved at a regularly held biannual Church meeting
by a vote of 15-7. The 22 people who voted to approve the Bylaws in December 2018 represented
FILED DATE: 10/13/2023 4:02 PM 2023CH05734
a majority of the 39 persons present at the meeting according to the minutes. Additionally, the 15-
7 vote represented approval by two-thirds of those voting. 5 December 1, 2018 Minutes at p. 2.
The Amended Complaint at ¶¶ 37-44 asserts various objections that presumably the persons
seeking to be Trustees had and continue to have as to the validity or propriety of the December 1,
2018 vote. However, those objections do not change the outcome of that vote approving Bylaws
that vested governance authority in the Pastor and the Deacon Ministry. Nor do those objections
and the claims that the alleged trustees have “been acting in their capacity as trustees” since July
21, 2018 change the fact that in the nearly five (5) years since, the Church operated Bylaws that
have no office of trustee.
From December 2018 until his death in October 2022, Pastor Haynie and the Deacon
Ministry led and operated the GOP according to the December 2018 Bylaws. In Article X, the
Bylaws vest authority in the Deacons to appoint a Pulpit Committee in the event of a pastoral
vacancy, and to appoint an Interim Pastor until a new pastor is selected. Further, the July 21, 2018
minutes specifically states that in the absence of a Pastor, the Deacons would take over full
administration of the Church.
The Bylaws make clear that the authority over Church affairs exercised by the Deacons
which are at the heart of this action, are completely consistent with the authority vested in them
according to a Biblically based plan for leadership of the Church as presented by GOP’s long term
Pastor, later ratified by the vote to adopt Bylaws consistent with this plan. It is a deliberate plan
for management of the temporal affairs of the Church by the Pastor supported by ordained deacons.
It is founded on the view that the “New Testament sanctions these officers [deacons] … as mutual
helpers of the pastor; his assistants in carrying on the great work of the Master.” (July 21 2018
Minutes at p.2).
Not unusual in many congregational settings, not everyone agreed with this plan. Clearly
the persons who wanted to be trustees did not, and they were presumably among those who casts
5
Accepting for purposes of this Memorandum that the “Maywood Bylaws” were still technically in effect as
of December 1, 2018, the Maywood Bylaws provide that elections are ratified by a two-thirds vote. See Exhibit 1 to
Amended Complaint at p. 1.
10
votes in opposition on December 1, 2018. However, they were out-voted. The plan for Church
leadership presented by Pastor Haynie in July 2018 was approved, ratified, implemented in the
FILED DATE: 10/13/2023 4:02 PM 2023CH05734
December 2018 Bylaws, and was followed through Pastor Haynie’s death. Since December 2018
the Deacons have fulfilled their duties obligations according to the teachings of their Pastor and
the December 2018 Bylaws, even after Pastor Haynie’s death, disrupted only by the actions of the
persons claiming to be Trustees following Pastor Haynie’s death, culminating in this action. 6
The Amended Complaint does not provide the Court with a claim that can be properly
adjudicated under “neutral principals.” Instead, by bringing this action, a faction whose view did
not prevail in the Church’s internal deliberations and decisions is now asking this Court to override
the pastoral teaching, leadership, and the internal decisions that were made to install a form of
church governance they prefer. They have done so by presenting distorted and erroneous claims
of authority and bogus claims of misconduct. However, the very documents they present make
clear that the only way this Court can grant the relief they request would be to substitute its secular
judgment over the scripturally based governance under which GOP has operated for years. This
is exactly what the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine prohibits a court from doing.
Since the Amended Complaint provides the court with no permissible basis to invalidate
them, the 2018 Bylaws must be treated as the governing Bylaws of GOP. Those Bylaws make the
administration of the Church by the Deacons since Pastor Haynie’s entirely lawful. It also makes
the purported congregational meeting and vote held on June 17, 2023 allegedly “voting out” the
Deacon officers invalid. (Amended Complaint at ¶¶ 77-82 and Exhibit 11) The “congregational
meeting” and “ousting” of the Deacons and Minister Bishop as Interim Pastor occurred one day
after the filing of this action on June 16, 2023, and was clearly done in an attempt to change the
“status quo” of GOP operations to support the claim for injunctive relief in this action. For the
Court to accept as “true” that the Deacons were “voted out of office” in a meeting called by persons
asserting themselves as “Trustees” but who are not authorized or empowered under the most
6
Significantly, though it is claimed that Mr. Daniels and the other alleged Trustees have operated as such since
their election in July 2018, the matters complained about and the relief sought in this action belie that claim. If these
persons were actually functioning as trustees, they would have the control over the church’s property and affairs they
are asking this Court to give them. However, under the current Bylaws as adopted in December 2018, they have no
such authority since, as Ms. Dodd stated in the December 1, 2018 meeting, the trustees were not included in the
leadership plan pursuant to the December 2018 Bylaws. This action asks the Court to give them the very authority
they were denied in the deliberations and decisions of the Church.
11
recently adopted Bylaws of the Church, would, once again, require the Court to substitute its
judgment over the theologically-based plan of governance of the Church presented in the July 21,
FILED DATE: 10/13/2023 4:02 PM 2023CH05734
2018 Meeting and ratified by the approval of the December 2018 Bylaws. It would also set a
precedent of permitting any church faction to install and empower themselves in direct
contravention of the body’s theological tenets and governing rules, then run into court to seek
validation of its usurpation of power. The obvious complexities and incursions of the “secular”
into the “sacred” that would result from such action are the exact reason courts are required to
exercise a “severely circumscribe[d]” role in reviewing claims concerning church governance and
control of church property. 7 National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá'ís of the United States Under
the Hereditary Guardianship, Inc. v. National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá'ís of the United
States, Inc., 628 F.3d 837, 845-46 (7th Cir. 2010).
II. The Amended Complaint Provides Only Conclusory Allegations of Alleged
Misconduct on the Part of Defendants
The Amended Complaint makes unsubstantiated and conclusory allegations that the
Defendants have engaged in conduct that would constitute breach of fiduciary, misuse or
misappropriation of the Church’s funds, or warranting a constructive trust against any Defendant.
Indeed, the Complaint merely alleges that by “taking leadership roles” and “assuming the
responsibility of administering fiscal operations” of the Church’s financial affairs the Defendants
have breached fiduciary duties, dissipated assets, and otherwise committed acts of conversion or
otherwise injurious to the Church’s financial well-being. These conclusory assertions are made
without a single allegation of specific conduct of the part of any Defendant that could be seen as
injurious to the Church’s interests. See Complaint at Counts III, IV, V and VI.
Such bald, unsupported allegations in an unauthorized Complaint filed in the name of the
Church by persons who cannot establi
Preview
Hearing Date: No hearing scheduled Location: <> Judge: Calendar, 4 FILED 10/13/2023 4:02 PM IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS IRIS Y. MARTINEZ COUNTY DEPARTMENT, CHANCERY DIVISION CIRCUIT CLERK COOK COUNTY, IL FILED DATE: 10/13/2023 4:02 PM 2023CH05734 2023CH05734 LORETTA-KIDD-BRADY, JIMMIE DANIELS ) Calendar, 4 and THELMA DODD, as Trustees on behalf of ) 24785685 GARDEN OF PRAYER MISSIONARY ) BAPTIST CHURCH, ) An Illinois Not-For-Profit Corporation, ) ) No. 2023 CH 05734 Plaintiff, ) (consol. with 2023 CH 05899) ) vs. ) ) ARTHUR BISHOP, ANTONI DAVIS, ) KATHY DAVIS, ) SHELLIE LAWS, LEON ODEN, ) JAMES CLARK, ) ) Defendants. ) MOTION TO DISMISS FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT AND OTHER RELIEF PURSUANT TO 735 ILCS 5/2-615(a) Defendants Arthur Bishop, Antoni Davis, Kathy Davis, Shellie Laws, Leon Oden and James Clark, by and through their undersigned counsel HENDERSON PARKS, LLC, and pursuant to 735 ILCS 5/2-615 move to dismiss the First Amended Complaint for Declaratory Judgment and Other Relief (“Amended Complaint”) filed in Case No. 2023 CH 05734 (“Complaint”), stating the following as their grounds. PERTINENT FACTS IN THE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 1. This case concerns claims of right to conduct the affairs of a Garden of Prayer Missionary Baptist Church, Inc., an Illinois not-for-profit corporation (referred to hereafter as “GOP” or the “Church”). GOP is located at 2001 S. 17th Avenue, Broadview, IL. Amended Complaint at 2. 2. Defendants asks the to Court take judicial notice of the undisputed fact that GOP has operated at its current location in Broadview, IL, for more than 23 years since it acquired the property at its current in Broadview in January 2001. 3. The Amended Complaint attaches at Exhibit 1 a document claimed to be the “current Bylaws” of the Church. ¶ 8. However, that undated document gives a Maywood, IL FILED DATE: 10/13/2023 4:02 PM 2023CH05734 address for GOP, a location that the Church moved from more than 23 years ago. (Exhibit 1 to the Amended Complaint is sometimes referred to hereafter as the “Maywood Bylaws.”) 4. According to the Maywood Bylaws, there are “three types of positions within the Church, an Administrator, the Trustees, and the Deacons.” Amended Complaint at ¶10. 5. The Maywood Bylaws identify the Pastor of the Church as the Administrator of the Church. Amended Complaint at ¶ 11. 6. Until his death in October 2022, Pastor Johnnie Haynie served “as the long-time Pastor” of GOP. Amended Complaint at ¶¶ 24, 52. 7. In ¶¶ 22-25, the Amended Complaint describes the Church’s biannual meeting process, when the meetings are generally held, and that Pastor Haynie preceded over those meetings. 8. ¶ 25 of the Amended Complaint describes a specific meeting held on July 21, 2018. The minutes of that meeting are attached to the Amended Complaint at Exhibit 3 (referred to hereafter as the “July 21, 2018 Minutes”). 9. Key to the claims in this action, the July 21, 2018 Minutes state the “Agenda Items” to include: “Elections of Deacons/Definition,” “Presentation of Deacons,” “Election of Trustee” and “Bylaws.” 10. The July 21, 2018 Minutes include a statement and Biblical passage read by Pastor Haynie. In his statement, Pastor Haynie stated “[t]he church is a different organization from the state. The church has to get it right with Jesus.” (July 21, 2018 Minutes, Exhibit 3, at p. 1.) 11. The July 21, 2018 Minutes record that in his Opening Statement, Pastor Haynie described inquiries to several different pastors of Baptist churches in the region as to whether they bring deacons before the church for elections. As recorded in the Minutes, each of the four (4) pastors with whom Pastor Haynie consulted said that in their churches, deacons are appointed by the pastor, not elected by the church body, and serve for an indefinite period. Id. at p. 1. 2 12. The July 21, 2018 Minutes indicate at p. 2 that “Trustees are elected every year …” This requirement is also repeated later in the Minutes in the discussion about the duties and FILED DATE: 10/13/2023 4:02 PM 2023CH05734 qualifications of trustees. 13. The July 21, 2018 Minutes describe the Office of Deacon according to the New Testament. Very significant to this case, the July 21, 2018 Minutes describe the duties of the Deacons as follows: The principal duties of the deacons consist in administering the temporal affairs of the church; these include relief of the poor, the support of public worship, the care of the church property, and the proper provision for the due administration of the ordinances … (Emphases added.) July 21, 2018 Minutes, at p. 2, Exhibit 3 to Amended Complaint. 14. Immediately after describing the duties of the Deacons, the July 21, 2018 Minutes at p. 2 further state: NOTE: In the absence of a pastor, it becomes the duty of the deacons to conduct the devotional meetings; to administer the affairs of the body generally; and to provide for the supply of the pulpit until the church has appointed a committee for that purpose. (Emphases in the original.) 15. The July 21, 2018 Minutes next address the election of trustees. Pastor Haynie read the qualifications of Trustees as “officers [ ] necessary only because state laws require them for holding the titles to the property of the church,” to be elected annually. He defined the primary duty of Trustees to “execute documents of transfer or sale of property,” subject to specific “power vested in them by vote of the church.” He further stated that Trustees can also be members of the Deacon Board, and that “some authorities hold that they should be.” July 21, 2018 Minutes, p. 2. 16. The Minutes next record the nomination of various persons to serve as Trustees. When nominations were concluded, the Minutes reflect that the church was looking to “add/vote for (3) trustees.” After congregational vote, the top three highest votes went to Thelma Dodd, Jimmie Daniels, and Deacon Jimmie Kimbrough. July 21, 2018 Minutes at p. 3. 17. Following the election of the three Trustees, Pastor Haynie stated that the Bylaws would be discussed later. There was discussion that a Bylaws committee would address amendments to the Bylaws. 3 18. The Amended Complaint states that the church held its next biannual business meeting on December 1, 2018. ¶ 35. The minutes from that meeting are attached to the Amended FILED DATE: 10/13/2023 4:02 PM 2023CH05734 Complaint at Exhibit 7 (referred to hereafter as “December 1, 2018 Minutes”). 1 19. The adoption of new bylaws was the central focus of the December 1, 2018 meeting. Pastor Haynie opened the meeting with comments about the need to “obey the law of the land” and “keep God’s law.” He went on to describe “bylaws” as a “rule made by a company or society to control the actions of its members.” He agreed bylaws were needed and commended the Deacon Ministry for its work in developing the proposed bylaws. After these comments, Pastor Haynie retreated from the meeting to work on his message for the next day. December 1, 2018 Minutes at p. 1. 20. The December 1, 2018 Minutes next reflect discussion about the proposed bylaws, indicating disagreement by some members present about the proposed bylaws and how they were developed. Due to the confusion and questions, the proposed bylaws were read (presumably in their entirety) by (Defendant) Deaconess Shellie Laws. December 1, 2018 Minutes at p. 2. 21. After the reading of the Bylaws, Plaintiff Thelma Dodd raised the concern that there was no mention of a trustee and asked why trustees were not included. The Minutes record no response to this question. 22. As noted by Ms. Dodd, the Bylaws presented and read at the December 1, 2018 contain no mention of Trustees, and vests governance authority of Church affairs in the Pastor along with the Deacon Ministry. See Bylaws of Garden of Prayer M.B.C., Exhibit 8 to Amended Complaint, at Article IX, p. 12. 23. After the proposed Bylaws were read, Deacon Hobbs, Chairman of the Deacons (Amended Complaint at ¶ 32), then moved for a vote to accept the Bylaws presented by the Deacon 1 Defendants note that the version of the December 1, 2018 Minutes attached to the Amended Complaint contains a stamped marking on the second page that does not appear on any other version of the Minutes previously circulated in the Church. The stamped marking states: “NOT FILED, NOT SIGNED BY PASTOR, STILL OPERATING WITHOUT OFFICIAL BYLAWS.” While Defendants recognize that the Court generally accepts as “true” the allegations in a complaint and exhibits attached thereto, Defendants point out that this additional content on Exhibit 7 was not part of the document as prepared or previously circulated but was obviously added for purposes of this litigation. However, other than this notation, the minutes as presented in Exhibit 7 accurately reflect what transpired at the December 1, 2018 church meeting. 4 Ministry, attached to the Amended Complaint at Exhibit 8. These Bylaws are referred to hereafter as the “December 2018 Bylaws.” FILED DATE: 10/13/2023 4:02 PM 2023CH05734 24. The Minutes at p. 2 reflect a vote of 15 yays and 7 nays to accept the December 2018 Bylaws. 25. The Minutes reflect that 39 were present at the meeting, which adjourned after prayer by Pastor Haynie. 26. At ¶¶ 77-82, the Amended Complaint describes what is purported to be a meeting of the membership held on June 17, 2023 in which the Deacon Officers were allegedly voted out of office. So-called “Minutes” of that Meeting are attached to the Amended Complaint at Exhibit 11. STANDARD OF REVIEW The First Amended Complaint in CH5734 Should Be Dismissed as Legally Insufficient Pursuant to ILCS 735 5/2-615 A motion to dismiss pursuant to 5/2-615 of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure tests the legal sufficiency of the complaint based on defects apparent on its face. 735 ILCS 5/2-615(a). In reviewing the sufficiency of a complaint, the Court accepts as true all well-pled facts and all reasonable inferences that may be drawn from those facts. Marshall v. Burger King Corp., 222 Ill.2d 422, 429 (2006). The allegations must be construed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. Id. Illinois is a fact pleading jurisdiction. While the plaintiff is not required to set forth evidence in the complaint, the plaintiff must allege facts sufficient to bring a claim within a legally recognized cause of action, rather than alleging conclusions. Marshall at pp. 429-430. Applying this standard, the First Amended Complaint in Case No. 2023 CH 05734 is fatally defective on its face because the very documents it presents to the Court as exhibits, specifically, the Minutes from two key meetings of the congregation in 2018, belie the allegations made therein. More importantly, the First Amendment Complaint fails as a matter of law because it requires this Court to involve itself in the “internal decisions” of GOP in direct contravention to the well-settled ecclesiastical abstention doctrine. I. The Allegations in the First Amendment Complaint Would Require the Court to Directly Review – and Overturn – Internal Decisions Made by the Pastor and Members of GOP Church Rooted in Theological Interpretation 5 The core factual allegations in the First Amendment Complaint may succinctly be FILED DATE: 10/13/2023 4:02 PM 2023CH05734 summarized to allege that the “temporal affairs” of Garden of Prayer Missionary Baptist Church are being illegally operated by Defendant Deacons, and that Defendant Minister Arthur Bishop is illegally serving in the role as interim pastor following the death of the Church’s longtime Pastor Johnnie Haynie. The Amended Complaint further contends that certain persons, specifically, Jimmie Daniels, Loretta Kidd-Brady, Thelma Dodd and Baron Ruffin are the duly elected trustees of the Church, who should be conducting the affairs of the Church instead of the Defendant Deacons. The Amended Complaint further alleges that the Defendant Deacons were never properly in office because they were not elected by the congregation. The Amended Complaint also asserts that currently, GOP either has no bylaws (according to the notation on Exhibit 7) or that the Church is still operating under Bylaws going back more than 23 years when the Church was located in Maywood. Ironically, and fatally, the very documents presented as Exhibits to the Amended Complaint which reflect internal deliberations and decisions concerning roles and responsibility of Church leadership unequivocally state the opposite of these core claims. To rule in favor of these claims, the Court would have to find that Church business meetings held more than five (5) years ago, outcomes reached at those meetings, and the operations of the Church since that time, were not “proper” decisions of the Church. The ecclesiastical abstention doctrine, 2 and the First Amendment on which it is based, prohibit such direct interference with internal decisions concerning church theology and its operations based on that theology. 1. The July 21, 2018 Meeting Minutes Confirm That at GOP, Deacons Are Appointed to Serve by the Pastor, Not Elected by the Congregation. The Minutes of the July 21, 2018 Church Business Meeting are unequivocal that at GOP, Deacons are appointed by the Pastor, not elected by the congregation, nor limited to a specific 2 Rooted in the First Amendment’s requirement of separation of Church and State, the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine was confirmed and clarified in Serbian Eastern Orthodox Diocese v. Milivojevich, 426 U.S. 696, 96 S. Ct. 2372, 49 L. Ed. 2d 151 (1976). In Milivojevich, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Illinois Supreme Court exceeded First Amendment parameters in affirming a lower court ruling to remove a clerical leader accused of misconduct and ordering reorganization of a local diocese. 6 term. Pastor Haynie made clear that concerning the role and authority of Deacons “[t]he church is a different organization from the state. The church has to get it right with Jesus.” Pastor Haynie FILED DATE: 10/13/2023 4:02 PM 2023CH05734 also described his consultation with other Baptist pastors in the region who also appointed deacons rather than have them elected by the congregation. This teaching and guidance as to the Office of the Deacon was presented to the congregation in its theological context by Pastor Haynie as GOP’s spiritual and organizational leader. This Scripturally based teaching was embraced and accepted by the Church’s membership and confirmed in the Church’s official Minutes of the business meeting in which this matter was addressed. However, the Amended Complaint makes the bald and completely unsupported assertion at ¶ 51 that “Pastor Haynie was a contract employee of [GOP] and did not have the authority to appoint leadership positions in the Church without a vote of the Church membership.” This claim cannot even be traced to or squared with the few vague provisions contained in the undated Bylaws document from the Church’s Maywood era. It would be difficult to imagine a greater violation of the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine were the Court to accept this assertion as a basis to invalidate Pastor Haynie’s appointment of Deacons. First, it would require the Court to posthumously convert the employment status and leadership of GOP’s pastor of 32 years. It would require the Court to “substitute its determination” of Pastor Haynie’s position and authority as the long-time Pastor of GOP, as well as his interpretation of Biblical teachings concerning the operation of the Church. See Serbian Eastern Orthodox Diocese v. Milivojevich, 426 U.S. 696, 721 (1976). This is precisely what is prohibited under the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine. There is no “neutral principle” by which the Court could engage in such a revision of the teachings and organization of GOP to validate the claim that the appointed Deacons were not properly installed as Officers of the Church. 2. The July 21, 2018 Minutes Confirm That the Role and Duties of the Deacons at GOP Included Administration of the Church’s Business Affairs. In addition, in the July 21, 2018 meeting, Pastor Haynie reviewed in detail the “Duties of the Deacons” as they were to operate at the Church, consistent with his interpretation of Biblical teachings. He identified the “principal duties” of Deacons to include “administering the temporal affairs of the church” making provision for the poor, supporting public worship and care of church property, among other duties and responsibilities. This makes clear that the plan for the Office of 7 Deacon at GOP was not limited to spiritual matters but specifically included responsibility for the business affairs of the Church. This was ratified in the Bylaws adopted at the December 1, 2018 FILED DATE: 10/13/2023 4:02 PM 2023CH05734 Meeting, attached to the Amended Complaint at Exhibit 8. Again, to find otherwise would require the court to invalidate the theologically based plan for organization of the Church pursuant to the teaching and guidance of its spiritual leader, as expressly prohibited by the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine. Bruss v. Przybylo, 385 Ill. App. 3d 399, 424 (2nd Dist. 2008) (“[c]ivil courts may not involve themselves in ‘matters of discipline, faith, internal organization, or ecclesiastical rule, custom, or law’. … ‘Religious bodies must be free to decide for themselves, free from state interference, matters which pertain to church government, faith and doctrine.”) (Internal citations omitted.) 3. The July 21, 2018 Minutes Confirm a Far More Limited Role of the Would-Be Trustees Than Claimed in the Amended Complaint. In defining the role and qualifications of Trustees, the July 21, 2018 Minutes indicate the Pastor Haynie’s view that trustees are “only necessary because state laws require them for holding titles to the property of the church” and to execute legal papers in the name of the church, subject to any such authority specifically authorized by vote of the church. 3 P. 2. The July 21, 2018 Minutes clearly state that “Trustees should be elected annually by the church.” However, the Amended Complaint alleges that Mr. Daniels, Ms. Dodd, Ms. Kidd-Brady, and Mr. Ruffin “have been acting in their capacity as trustee since the date of this election on July 21, 2018.” ¶30. To accept this claim would require the Court to ignore or override the deliberations and decisions of the Church as reflected in the July 21, 2018 Minutes requiring annual election of trustees. 4 The Amended Complaint states at ¶26 “[t]here are supposed to be 5 total trustees on the trustee board.” This is in direct conflict with the Minutes of the July 21, 2018 Meeting which states “we are looking to add/vote for (3) trustees” and confirmed the election of the persons 3 Defendants further note that the additional defect that there is nothing reflecting a vote of the congregation authorizing this action to be filed in the name of the Church. 4 The Amended Complaint also implies that subsequent elections did not occur due to the Covid-19 pandemic which precluded in person meetings after the June 2019 business meeting. Amended Complaint at ¶47. The Covid-19 infection was not declared a pandemic until almost a year later in March 2019. In addition, as the minutes of the December 1, 2018 meeting confirm, with the adoption of the Bylaws presented at that meeting the Church no longer had trustees. 8 receiving the top three highest votes. July 21, 2018 Minutes at p. 3. The Amended Complaint proceeds to impeach its own exhibit by stating “the meeting minutes do not reflect the accurate FILED DATE: 10/13/2023 4:02 PM 2023CH05734 statement of the top 5 election winners” and then proclaims that the “proper 5-person Trustee Board was comprised of Jimmie Daniels, Jimmy Kimbrough, Thelma Dodd, Loretta Kidd-Brady, and Baron Ruffin. Amended Complaint ¶¶ 26-28. Again, to accept this allegation as establishing a claim of right upon which relief could be granted, this Court would have to insert itself into a Church meeting that took place more than 5 years ago, and either read into the “official” record of that meeting something that is not there (that the “proper” Trustee Board was supposed to be five persons), or substitute its judgment that a 5 person board would be more appropriate than the 3 persons actually elected at the July 21, 2018 meeting. There is absolutely no basis in fact or law to support such a conclusion. Of the persons claiming to be trustees of the Church in the Amended Complaint, according to the Church’s official minutes, only two of the persons claiming to be current trustees were elected in July 2018 (Jimmie Daniels and Thelma Dodd). Further, there is nothing to support the contention that the tenure of Mr. Daniels or Ms. Dodd as Trustees has continued since 2018. In fact, the very proceedings in which they were elected state exactly the opposite. On these facts, the Amended Complaint does not establish the existence of any duly-elected Trustees of GOP. 4. The December 1, 2018 Minutes Confirm the Adoption of Bylaws Vesting Authority Over the Church’s Temporal Affairs in the Pastor and Deacon Ministry. The Minutes of the December 1, 2018 Meeting confirm that the Church approved the adoption of a set of Bylaws attached to the Amended Complaint (referred to as the December 2018 Bylaws). The December 2018 Bylaws set forth the Church’s scriptural foundation and theological tenets. Importantly, at Article IX, the 2018 Bylaws provide that “[t]he management of the business affairs of this Church shall be vested in the Pastor and the Deacon Ministry.” Article IX specifies that the Deacon Ministry “shall be responsible for the care and welfare of the Church’s building and property.” Article IX further specifies that the Deacon Ministry shall have a Finance Committee to oversee the count and deposit of all funds received by the Church, give accurate and written reports to the membership at the semi-annual Business Meetings, be responsible for managing the Church’s financial wellbeing and financial practices, and ensuring that all business practices comply with local, State and Federal law. The Bylaws further confirm that there shall be no term limits on the Deacon Ministry members. Amended Complaint Exhibit 8, p.12. 9 The December 2018 Bylaws were approved at a regularly held biannual Church meeting by a vote of 15-7. The 22 people who voted to approve the Bylaws in December 2018 represented FILED DATE: 10/13/2023 4:02 PM 2023CH05734 a majority of the 39 persons present at the meeting according to the minutes. Additionally, the 15- 7 vote represented approval by two-thirds of those voting. 5 December 1, 2018 Minutes at p. 2. The Amended Complaint at ¶¶ 37-44 asserts various objections that presumably the persons seeking to be Trustees had and continue to have as to the validity or propriety of the December 1, 2018 vote. However, those objections do not change the outcome of that vote approving Bylaws that vested governance authority in the Pastor and the Deacon Ministry. Nor do those objections and the claims that the alleged trustees have “been acting in their capacity as trustees” since July 21, 2018 change the fact that in the nearly five (5) years since, the Church operated Bylaws that have no office of trustee. From December 2018 until his death in October 2022, Pastor Haynie and the Deacon Ministry led and operated the GOP according to the December 2018 Bylaws. In Article X, the Bylaws vest authority in the Deacons to appoint a Pulpit Committee in the event of a pastoral vacancy, and to appoint an Interim Pastor until a new pastor is selected. Further, the July 21, 2018 minutes specifically states that in the absence of a Pastor, the Deacons would take over full administration of the Church. The Bylaws make clear that the authority over Church affairs exercised by the Deacons which are at the heart of this action, are completely consistent with the authority vested in them according to a Biblically based plan for leadership of the Church as presented by GOP’s long term Pastor, later ratified by the vote to adopt Bylaws consistent with this plan. It is a deliberate plan for management of the temporal affairs of the Church by the Pastor supported by ordained deacons. It is founded on the view that the “New Testament sanctions these officers [deacons] … as mutual helpers of the pastor; his assistants in carrying on the great work of the Master.” (July 21 2018 Minutes at p.2). Not unusual in many congregational settings, not everyone agreed with this plan. Clearly the persons who wanted to be trustees did not, and they were presumably among those who casts 5 Accepting for purposes of this Memorandum that the “Maywood Bylaws” were still technically in effect as of December 1, 2018, the Maywood Bylaws provide that elections are ratified by a two-thirds vote. See Exhibit 1 to Amended Complaint at p. 1. 10 votes in opposition on December 1, 2018. However, they were out-voted. The plan for Church leadership presented by Pastor Haynie in July 2018 was approved, ratified, implemented in the FILED DATE: 10/13/2023 4:02 PM 2023CH05734 December 2018 Bylaws, and was followed through Pastor Haynie’s death. Since December 2018 the Deacons have fulfilled their duties obligations according to the teachings of their Pastor and the December 2018 Bylaws, even after Pastor Haynie’s death, disrupted only by the actions of the persons claiming to be Trustees following Pastor Haynie’s death, culminating in this action. 6 The Amended Complaint does not provide the Court with a claim that can be properly adjudicated under “neutral principals.” Instead, by bringing this action, a faction whose view did not prevail in the Church’s internal deliberations and decisions is now asking this Court to override the pastoral teaching, leadership, and the internal decisions that were made to install a form of church governance they prefer. They have done so by presenting distorted and erroneous claims of authority and bogus claims of misconduct. However, the very documents they present make clear that the only way this Court can grant the relief they request would be to substitute its secular judgment over the scripturally based governance under which GOP has operated for years. This is exactly what the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine prohibits a court from doing. Since the Amended Complaint provides the court with no permissible basis to invalidate them, the 2018 Bylaws must be treated as the governing Bylaws of GOP. Those Bylaws make the administration of the Church by the Deacons since Pastor Haynie’s entirely lawful. It also makes the purported congregational meeting and vote held on June 17, 2023 allegedly “voting out” the Deacon officers invalid. (Amended Complaint at ¶¶ 77-82 and Exhibit 11) The “congregational meeting” and “ousting” of the Deacons and Minister Bishop as Interim Pastor occurred one day after the filing of this action on June 16, 2023, and was clearly done in an attempt to change the “status quo” of GOP operations to support the claim for injunctive relief in this action. For the Court to accept as “true” that the Deacons were “voted out of office” in a meeting called by persons asserting themselves as “Trustees” but who are not authorized or empowered under the most 6 Significantly, though it is claimed that Mr. Daniels and the other alleged Trustees have operated as such since their election in July 2018, the matters complained about and the relief sought in this action belie that claim. If these persons were actually functioning as trustees, they would have the control over the church’s property and affairs they are asking this Court to give them. However, under the current Bylaws as adopted in December 2018, they have no such authority since, as Ms. Dodd stated in the December 1, 2018 meeting, the trustees were not included in the leadership plan pursuant to the December 2018 Bylaws. This action asks the Court to give them the very authority they were denied in the deliberations and decisions of the Church. 11 recently adopted Bylaws of the Church, would, once again, require the Court to substitute its judgment over the theologically-based plan of governance of the Church presented in the July 21, FILED DATE: 10/13/2023 4:02 PM 2023CH05734 2018 Meeting and ratified by the approval of the December 2018 Bylaws. It would also set a precedent of permitting any church faction to install and empower themselves in direct contravention of the body’s theological tenets and governing rules, then run into court to seek validation of its usurpation of power. The obvious complexities and incursions of the “secular” into the “sacred” that would result from such action are the exact reason courts are required to exercise a “severely circumscribe[d]” role in reviewing claims concerning church governance and control of church property. 7 National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá'ís of the United States Under the Hereditary Guardianship, Inc. v. National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá'ís of the United States, Inc., 628 F.3d 837, 845-46 (7th Cir. 2010). II. The Amended Complaint Provides Only Conclusory Allegations of Alleged Misconduct on the Part of Defendants The Amended Complaint makes unsubstantiated and conclusory allegations that the Defendants have engaged in conduct that would constitute breach of fiduciary, misuse or misappropriation of the Church’s funds, or warranting a constructive trust against any Defendant. Indeed, the Complaint merely alleges that by “taking leadership roles” and “assuming the responsibility of administering fiscal operations” of the Church’s financial affairs the Defendants have breached fiduciary duties, dissipated assets, and otherwise committed acts of conversion or otherwise injurious to the Church’s financial well-being. These conclusory assertions are made without a single allegation of specific conduct of the part of any Defendant that could be seen as injurious to the Church’s interests. See Complaint at Counts III, IV, V and VI. Such bald, unsupported allegations in an unauthorized Complaint filed in the name of the Church by persons who cannot establi