## Facts

- David H. Sims and Sherman L. Greene, Sr. were bishops in the African Methodist Episcopal Church disputing who was the lawful presiding bishop of the First Episcopal District.
- Sims alleged Greene was unlawfully holding himself out as presiding bishop and interfering with Sims’s performance of episcopal duties and administration of church affairs.
- Greene asserted Sims had been defrocked under church procedures and that Greene had been validly assigned as Sims’s replacement.
- The district court initially issued a temporary restraining order barring Greene from interference and repeatedly extended it.
- On a first appeal, the extended restraining order was treated as the functional equivalent of a preliminary injunction, and the case was remanded for proceedings consistent with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65.
- After remand, the district court entered a preliminary injunction against Greene; Greene appealed again.

## Issues

1. Whether the district court complied with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65 when issuing the preliminary injunction, including making adequate findings of fact and conclusions of law.
2. Whether Greene was afforded a fair opportunity to be heard and to present evidence in opposition to preliminary injunctive relief.
3. Whether the record, given disputed facts and church-governance questions, supported the extraordinary remedy of a preliminary injunction.

## Decision

- The Third Circuit reversed the preliminary injunction and remanded.
- The court held the injunction was improperly issued because the district court failed to make adequate findings, including an express finding of irreparable injury.
- The court also held Greene was not given a fair opportunity to present evidence opposing the injunction.
- The court did not decide the merits of the underlying church-law dispute over removal and appointment to office, limiting its review to the propriety of preliminary relief on the existing record and procedures.

## Legal Principles

- A preliminary injunction requires compliance with Rule 65, including specific findings of fact and conclusions of law supporting equitable relief.
- A court must make an explicit, supported finding of irreparable harm before granting preliminary injunctive relief.
- Due process in the preliminary-injunction context requires that the party to be enjoined receive a fair opportunity to be heard and to present evidence.
- Preliminary injunctive relief should not be granted on an incomplete or procedurally deficient record where material factual disputes remain unresolved.

## Conclusion

The Third Circuit set aside the preliminary injunction because it was entered without the findings and hearing process Rule 65 requires, including a supported finding of irreparable injury and a fair opportunity for the defendant to present evidence, leaving the underlying dispute over ecclesiastical office for further proceedings.


Sims v. Greene, 161 F.2d 87 (3d Cir. 1947)