Supreme Court hears dispute over whether congregation membership or recorded deeds decide church property

Chad Peterson, counsel for the appellant Shalom Presbyterian Church of Washington Incorporated, told the court that the dispute should be resolved under neutral principles of law, pointing to Jones v. Wolf (1979) and state precedent and arguing that "recorded deeds trump everything." Peterson said multiple deeds and financing documents in the record show the property was held "for the benefit of the congregation" and do not reference the denomination.

Christopher Glaser, counsel for the Atlantic Korean American Presbytery, responded that membership is a "pure ecclesiastic issue" and that the trial court should not have resolved membership on summary judgment where the ecclesiastical body had addressed the matter. Glaser argued the record contains evidentiary gaps and that a factfinder at trial should decide contested facts such as whether membership paperwork was executed.

Justices pressed both sides on procedure and facts. Justice Russell observed that "If they're not a member, you have no claim to the property," probing whether membership is a dispositive material fact that makes summary judgment inappropriate. Counsel agreed the parties had submitted affidavits and depositions under a rule-56-style agreement but disputed whether the existing documentary record resolves the question.

The attorneys disputed the legal effect of the ecclesiastical process. Glaser said the synod and senate proceedings indicated the general church had treated the congregation as within its jurisdiction; Peterson said the ecclesiastical proceedings addressed pastoral discipline and reinstatement, not ownership, and that the lack of an express, recorded trust means the denomination cannot seize property based on internal rules alone.

Peterson asked the court to decide the case on First Amendment grounds and to apply neutral principles to protect property owners who hold title by deed. Glaser asked the court to affirm the lower court's view that membership and the applicability of the Book of Order require deference to ecclesiastical determinations or, at minimum, a trial to resolve factual disputes. Neither side reported a final ruling; arguments concluded with counsel's rebuttal and closing remarks.

The court heard extended questioning on whether factual predicates (signatures, membership cards, recorded resolutions) are secular questions a court can decide without intruding on religious doctrine. The justices also discussed recording requirements for express trusts under Virginia law and the consequences if a denomination had no notice of transfers. The argument closed with Peterson framing the case as involving First Amendment protections for congregations and their property holdings.