Ruling Reserved Over Mid-Town Historical Church

MEMPHIS, Tenn. - The proposed $2.3 million sale of the former Union Avenue United Methodist Church remains in limbo until a Chancery Court judge reviews a lawsuit to stop it in December.

At the crux of the case is validity of a 100-year old deed to the property held by the relatives of the previous owners.

This could be a newspaper ad: looking for someone to interpret the true intentions of a pair of deed owners who signed over their property rights to a church more than 100 years ago.

If you've got a clue or inkling please contact the Shelby County Chancery Court.

Perhaps only a higher power would be able to provide an answer to the perplexing question.

When it comes to demolishing or not the historic union avenue united methodist church, when does forever ever end?

Providing a legal opinion to the conundrum will squarely fall on the shoulders of Chancery Judge Walter Evans who postponed until December 16th a full hearing on what's become a frustrating tug-of-war pitting history against progress.

“The church is not being demolished. The church has left the building. The church is now part of St. Luke's Church. The members of the church have simply left a crumbling building that they can no longer maintain,” said Evans.

A thoughtful Evans presided over a Thursday hearing in which relatives of the property's previous owners filed an injunction against the current owners, St. Luke's United Methodist, to preserve the building from demolition.

Attorney Webb Brewer, representing the Plaintiffs, asserted a recently unearthed deed states the church and property can only be used as a place of worship under the "restricted covenant" of a trust clause.

Brewer argued if the sale of the property to CVS Pharmacy goes through and the more than 100-year old structure is demolished, it would cause irreparable harm to the community.

That assertion led Evans to a convoluted hypothetical question of "what if" tossed at St. Luke's attorney Hank Shelton.

“The court concludes that the language of the deed is effective to have prevented such a transfer? Then how would the building be reconstructed if it's been demolished?” said Evans.

For his part Shelton resorted only to the facts of the case in challenging the validity of the deed itself and the ability of Methodist churches to sell property to secular entities.

“What the deed itself shows is that the grantors sold the property for cash. They didn't give the property away,” said Shelton. “The discipline of the church, then and now, permits the church to sell property to drug stores, to homeowners, to farmers or anyone else.”

“Reset this matter for a lengthy and detailed argument when the court can consider all the relevant issues and also the motion to dismiss,” said Evans.

In the end Evans said he would reserve his ruling rather than issue an injunction to stop the sale or demolish the church.