Opinion
Argued April 3, 1979 —
Decided April 27, 1979.
Before Judges MATTHEWS, KOLE and MILMED.
On appeal from the Superior Court, Chancery Division.
Mr. Daniel J. Matyola ( Messrs. Wharton, Stewart Davis, attorneys), and Mr. William B. Ball of the Pennsylvania Bar, admitted pro hac vice ( Messrs. Ball Skelly, attorneys), argued the cause for appellants ( Mr. Philip J. Murren, on the brief).
Mr. John Wood Goldsack argued the cause for respondents ( Messrs. King, King and Goldsack, attorneys).
We affirm the judgment of the chancery division for the reasons expressed by Judge Ackerman in his opinion which is reported in 161 N.J. Super. 230.
When reduced to its simplest terms, the argument of defendants would have us base our ultimate determination of this case on a finding that they were justified in "leaving" the church as represented by plaintiffs. This we obviously cannot do as is made clear in Watson v. Jones, 80 U.S. (13 Wall.) 679 (1872), and the numerous cases which have followed it, the most important of which are cited in Judge Ackerman's opinion.
Affirmed.