Diaspora

The Rhode Island Supreme Court upheld an eviction from the oldest active synagogue in the United States 

Chief Justice Suttell, for the Court. Nestled amid Newport’s narrow, winding streets and lying at the heart of this controversy is Touro Synagogue, the oldest active Synagogue in the United States. Touro Synagogue is not only one of Rhode Island’s most cherished historical edifices, it is an enduring emblem of the principles established by Roger Williams of religious freedom and liberty of conscience.  The case before us concerns the efforts of the plaintiff, Congregation Shearith Israel (Shearith Israel), to evict the defendant, Congregation Jeshuat Israel (Jeshuat Israel), from the Synagogue.

Jeshuat Israel appeals from a Superior Court judgment granting Shearith Israel the right to take immediate possession of the property located at 72 Touro Street in Newport, Rhode Island, including the Touro Synagogue building and all appurtenances and paraphernalia contained therein. Jeshuat Israel raises four arguments on appeal. First, Jeshuat Israel claims that the trial justice erred by ruling that Shearith Israel’s termination notice was valid, asserting that the Superior Court did not have subject-matter jurisdiction over the dispute. Second, Jeshuat Israel asserts that the trial justice erred by ruling that a 1945 agreement among the parties and the United States Secretary of the Interior does not contain a condition precedent to the ejectment action at bar. Third, Jeshuat Israel argues that that the trial justice erred by ruling that the 1945 agreement did not modify the 1908 lease or the terms of Jeshuat Israel’s holdover tenancy to include that condition precedent to ejectment. Fourth, Jeshuat Israel contends that the trial justice erred to the extent that she ruled that Jeshuat Israel waived its defense that Shearith Israel failed to satisfy a condition precedent to eviction under the 1945 agreement. For the reasons set forth herein, we affirm the judgment of the Superior Court.

The court traces the history of the dispute with origins in the mid-eighteenth century and the series of agreements between the parties

Sadly, Jeshuat Israel and Shearith Israel do not enjoy a harmonious relationship, leading to litigation in the federal courts seeking to resolve issues other than those which are before this Court.

Conclusion

our review of the record reveals that the trial justice did not err in entering judgment in favor of Shearith Israel, granting it “the right to take immediate possession of the [p]remises * * * together with the appurtenances and paraphernalia belonging thereto in accordance with the 1903 and 1908 leases.”

(Mike Frisch)