First Born Church of the Living God Inc. v. Bank of Am.

The trial court erred in retaining jurisdiction to consider the propriety of the church board's successive attempts to remove its senior bishop because the Court of Appeals' decision in the parties' first appeal ended their case.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

This case involves a heated contest that began in 1994 for control of the First Born Church of the Living God, Inc.1 The contestants are the Executive Board of the church on one side, and Senior Bishop Albert Hill and his alleged successor Bishop Leonard Goode on the other.2 Essentially, the Board contends that according to the church constitution it holds the supreme authority of the church and that it used that authority to remove Hill. Hill, and now Goode, contend that even if the Board has the supreme authority, it failed to follow the procedural requirements of the constitution when it removed Hill.

This is the second appearance of this case in this Court. The litigation began as an interpleader action filed by Bank South, N. A. now known as Bank of America, N. A. in the Superior Court of Ware County to determine who at the church had authority over the church’s accounts at the bank. The bank was responding to the fact that in November 1994, at an emergency meeting, the Executive Board of the church voted to remove Senior Bishop Hill, to designate Bishop W. L. Johnson as the new senior bishop, and to remove Hill as a signatory on the church bank accounts. The Board then instructed the bank not to honor checks signed by Hill. After receiving a check signed by Hill, the bank filed the interpleader action. The trial court held a hearing apparently a bench trial, upheld the Board’s decision removing Hill, and ordered the bank to comply with the direction of the Board. The trial court stated that its order “shall be a final order in this case.”

First Born Church of the Living God Inc. v. Bank of Am.

The trial court erred in retaining jurisdiction to consider the propriety of the church board's successive attempts to remove its senior bishop because the Court of Appeals' decision in the parties' first appeal ended their case.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report