Congregation Jeshuat Israel v. Congregation Shearith Israel

Citations: 186 F. Supp. 3d 158; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 65518; 2016 WL 2869775Docket: C.A. No. 12-CV-822-M-LDA

Court: District Court, D. Rhode Island; May 16, 2016; Federal District Court

SummaryOriginalCytator Case TreatmentBackward CitatorAnalysis

EnglishEspañolSimplified EnglishEspañol Fácil

The central issue in the legal dispute involves the historical legacy of early Jewish settlers in Newport, particularly regarding Touro Synagogue and a pair of Rimonim crafted by Myer Myers. The Court concludes that Touro Synagogue is a charitable trust dedicated to public Jewish worship. The Rimonim are determined to be owned by Congregation Jeshuat Israel, which has the authority to manage its property. The Court also decides to remove Congregation Shearith Israel of New York as the trustee of Touro Synagogue and appoint Congregation Jeshuat Israel as the new trustee.

Procedurally, Congregation Jeshuat Israel initiated action in Rhode Island Superior Court against Congregation Shearith Israel concerning the ownership of the Rimonim and control of Touro Synagogue. Jeshuat Israel seeks various declarations and restraining orders related to the sale of the Rimonim, asserting its rightful ownership, and the removal of Shearith Israel as trustee. In response, Shearith Israel removed the case to federal court, counterclaiming ownership of the Rimonim and Touro Synagogue, alleging breach of agreement, and seeking damages.

The litigation has been extensive, spanning over three years, involving a nine-day bench trial with considerable documentation and witness testimony. The Court’s findings are based on an exhaustive review of the substantial evidence presented during the trial.

Jews arrived in Newport, Rhode Island, in the mid-17th century, forming Congregation Yeshuat Israel to escape persecution. By the mid-18th century, the community was taxed to purchase land for a Synagogue, which was held in trust for public worship. Three trustees—Jacob Rodrigues Rivera, Moses Levy, and Isaac Hart—were appointed to manage the property, as Rhode Island law prohibited religious institutions from owning land. The Touro Synagogue was constructed between 1759 and 1762 and consecrated in 1763, with silver Rimonim made by silversmith Myer Myers for the congregation.

Most Jews left Newport due to the Revolutionary War, leading to the cessation of regular services by 1793, and the last Jew departed in 1822. Some congregants who relocated to New York brought religious articles, including the Rimonim, and entrusted them to Congregration Shearith Israel for safekeeping, marking them as belonging to Newport.

After the original trustees' deaths, various individuals, including members of Shearith Israel, informally took on trustee roles. Shearith Israel maintained the Synagogue during the absence of Jews in Newport, holding the keys and allowing limited access. It never owned the Synagogue or Rimonim outright but acted as a trustee.

A Jewish community began returning to Newport in the 1870s and incorporated as Jeshuat Israel in 1894, continuing services at Touro Synagogue. Shearith Israel returned the Rimonim to Jeshuat Israel per prior instructions, which then owned and maintained the Rimonim without dispute until a lawsuit arose over a century later. Jeshuat Israel seeks to sell the Rimonim to fund an endowment for ongoing public worship at Touro Synagogue. Legal conflicts emerged at the turn of the 20th century due to Shearith Israel's concerns regarding the new community's adherence to Sephardic traditions.

Shearith Israel's concerns regarding the form of Jewish worship were not part of the original trust. In the early 20th century, disputes were resolved when Shearith Israel, acting as trustee of the Synagogue, leased the premises to Jeshuat Israel, allowing them to worship there. Jeshuat Israel has been worshiping at Touro Synagogue since the early 1900s, successfully maintaining it as a public place of Jewish worship for over a century. Over time, Jeshuat Israel’s responsibilities have increased while Shearith Israel’s have diminished, with Shearith Israel taking no significant action as trustee for at least the past 20 years. In the current litigation, Shearith Israel denies the existence of a trust and seeks to evict Jeshuat Israel, actions that threaten the charitable trust and warrant Shearith Israel’s removal as trustee. Jeshuat Israel has effectively assumed the responsibilities of a trustee for the past century and is deemed the most suitable candidate to continue preserving Touro Synagogue. The historical context highlights that early Jewish settlers in Newport sought freedom from persecution, particularly from the Inquisition in Spain and Portugal, establishing the oldest surviving Jewish temple in America. This legacy underscores the importance of maintaining a community dedicated to public Jewish worship, a right that was severely restricted in their countries of origin.

Official conversion did not protect Iberian Jews from persecution, as inquisitors manipulated them to betray one another. Many Marranos, when promising absolution for observing Jewish customs, were coerced into naming others under duress and torture. Consequently, fleeing their homelands became a means of survival. This context shaped the experiences of Jews who arrived in Newport, Rhode Island, in the late 17th and early 18th centuries. The first Jewish families, approximately fifteen, arrived in 1668 and initiated public worship, forming a collective known as Nefutsé Israel, later Congregation Yeshuat Israel. In 1677, they purchased land for a cemetery, marking a significant milestone for their community’s identity. 

Among the early settlers was Abraham Rodrigues Rivera, who arrived in the early 1700s after living as a Marrano in Seville. Upon settling in the British Colonies, he embraced Jewish traditions, changing his name and his children's names to reflect their heritage. His son, Jacob Rodrigues Rivera, became a notable businessperson in Newport. Other influential families included Isaac Hart and Moses Levy, both successful merchants from London who contributed to the social and economic fabric of the community. 

By the mid-18th century, the Jewish population in Newport had grown sufficiently to plan the construction of a synagogue, aspiring for it to rival other colonial structures. Due to legal restrictions preventing religious institutions from holding property, Congregation Yeshuat Israel appointed three leaders as trustees to acquire the land and buildings on behalf of the community. These trustees held legal title, but the property was intended for the collective benefit of the entire Jewish community.

The Jewish Community of Newport appointed three trustees—Jacob Rodrigues Rivera, Moses Levy, and Isaac Hart—to purchase land and oversee the construction of a synagogue, following a successful fundraising effort within the local community in 1759. Despite financial constraints after land purchase taxes, they sought additional funds through letters to congregations in locations such as New York, Jamaica, Curacao, Surinam, and London. Notably, Shearith Israel in New York dedicated a day during Passover for contributions, leading to a donation collected by Naphtali Hart in Newport. Construction of the synagogue began on August 1, 1759, and was completed by 1762, culminating in a public dedication ceremony on December 2, 1763, attended by both Jewish and non-Jewish community members, symbolizing the acceptance of Jews in Newport. At the time of dedication, Newport had 60 to 70 Jewish families, and the event was celebrated for its order and grandeur, reflecting the historical Jewish worship. The community's name changed from Nefutsé Israel to Yeshuat Israel, representing their newfound identity. The synagogue became a symbol of religious freedom and prosperity for Sephardic and Ashkenazic Jews in Newport, contrasting with the concealed locations of synagogues in Europe, showcasing their comfort and acceptance in their new home.

In Rhode Island, Jews in Newport constructed a synagogue, the Touro, completed in 1762, which served as a symbol of religious freedom. The synagogue required furnishings and ceremonial items, most of which were generously donated by local and international patrons by its dedication day. Notable gifts included brass candlesticks from Enoch Lyon, a perpetual lamp from Samuel Judah, and an Ark and reading desk from Jacob Pollock, along with three Torah scrolls, including a historic one from a Congregation in Amsterdam. By 1769, the synagogue housed six Torah scrolls with silver and gold adornments known as rimonim. Two pairs of rimonim made by prominent silversmith Myer Myers were described in detail, highlighting their intricate designs and family connections to the donors. Myers, a leading New York silversmith, had ties to Newport and played a significant role in the community, including facilitating donations for the synagogue's construction and creating ceremonial items. His involvement extended to repairing rimonim for the synagogue in 1787. Newport's Jewish community thrived during this period, becoming one of North America's largest and most prosperous, but this golden era lasted only 30 years.

In 1776, most Jewish families left Newport due to the Revolutionary War, which severely impacted the city’s economy and the Jewish community. The British occupation led to a decline in commerce, resulting in the cessation of synagogue services around 1793 and the eventual disappearance of Jews from Newport by 1822. The leadership of the Yeshuat Israel synagogue was compromised, with trustee Isaac Hart killed in Revolutionary violence, and trustees Jacob Rodrigues Rivera and Moses Levy both passing away shortly thereafter. Rivera's will explicitly stated that he held no equitable ownership of Touro Synagogue but acted solely as a trustee for the Jewish community's benefit. Levy's will, which followed Rivera's, supported the notion of the trusteeship. During the war, Moses Seixas took over as the lay leader of the synagogue and succeeded Rivera in trustee responsibilities. He notably engaged with President Washington during his visit in 1790, highlighting the values of religious freedom and equality in his letter to the President.

President Washington's correspondence with the Hebrew Congregation in Newport, Rhode Island, emphasizes the principles of liberty and equality in the United States, noting that all citizens enjoy the same rights and should support the government. The letters, celebrated annually at the Touro Synagogue, honor Newport’s original Jewish community, which faced persecution but found refuge in Newport. By 1793, synagogue services ceased, leading to the synagogue's decay and the dwindling Jewish population, primarily the families of Rivera and Seixas. Moses Seixas passed away in 1809, marking the decline of the community, with Moses Lopez being the last Jew to leave Newport in 1822. The remaining members relocated sacred items to safer locations, with many congregants joining Congregation Shearith Israel in New York, bringing Torah scrolls and decorative rimonim for safekeeping. By 1818, the last sacred items were sent to Shearith Israel, which documented the receipt of these items in its records from December 1832 and February 1833. The rimonim were also transferred during this period, remaining in Shearith Israel's care until the early 1880s.

Four pairs of rimonim likely accompanied Torah scrolls from Newport to New York, with the official transfer of four Torahs and their ornaments to Shearith Israel occurring in 1833 for safekeeping. The court established that the rimonim were indeed transported to New York after services ceased at Newport's Synagogue, which had no remaining congregants. As a result, Shearith Israel assumed custodianship of Yeshuat Israel’s religious artifacts, including the rimonim, maintaining a connection to the abandoned Newport Synagogue.

By 1822, when Moses Lopez left Newport, the Synagogue was in disrepair, lacking congregants and funds. Lopez entrusted the keys and care of the Synagogue and cemetery to Stephen Gould, a non-Jew, who managed these duties without pay. In a 1826 correspondence, Lopez indicated that the Synagogue was considered owned by Shearith Israel, which had taken on trustee responsibilities, likely due to many former members of Yeshuat Israel joining Shearith Israel after relocating to New York. The keys to the Touro Synagogue were officially transferred to Shearith Israel in 1826, but the organization could not be expected to invest heavily in restoring the dilapidated building for uncertain future use.

The survival of Newport's Synagogue was aided by Abraham and Judah Touro, sons of the first Rabbi Isaac Touro. They, although raised in Boston, remained committed to their Jewish heritage. In 1822, Abraham Touro began maintaining the Synagogue and sent funds to repair the cemetery's enclosure, although he died later that year. His will included a provision of $10,000 to support the Synagogue, to be managed by Rhode Island's Legislature and Newport's municipal authorities, thereby ensuring the Synagogue's preservation.

Abraham Touro bequeathed $5,000 to the Town of Newport for the repair and preservation of the street leading to the Jewish Cemetery, later renamed Touro Street. His contributions reflected the desires of colonial Newport Jews to maintain the Synagogue for the Jewish Society of Newport as a permanent place of worship. Following Touro’s gifts, the General Assembly established the Touro Jewish Synagogue Fund, which facilitated repairs to the Synagogue, restoring it to its pre-Revolution condition. Stephen Gould, who had previously maintained the site, received partial compensation from the Touro Fund for his services.

Judah Touro continued his brother’s legacy, funding a new Quincy granite wall for the cemetery in 1842 at a cost of $12,000 for its restoration and beautification. In his will, he allocated $10,000 to fund a minister for the Newport Synagogue and to maintain the cemetery, with the stipulation for joint management with the city if needed. The City Council approved this bequest on January 11, 1855, designating $200 annually for cemetery upkeep under the oversight of David J. Gould and Nathan H. Gould.

The Judah Touro Ministerial and Cemetery Fund grew over time, ensuring sufficient resources for the minister's salary. Collectively, the Touro brothers’ efforts supported the Synagogue, cemetery, and the necessary ministerial positions, which were vital for the continuity of Jewish worship in Newport. Without their foresight, the survival of the Synagogue might have been doubtful, especially as Jewish settlement resumed in Newport in the late 19th century. From 1822 to the 1870s, the Synagogue remained well-maintained but underused, hosting only a few funerals during that period. It briefly reopened for regular services in the summer of 1850, facilitated by personnel from Shearith Israel and funded by the Touro brothers, although Jewish life in Newport was largely dormant during the early to mid-1800s. The state of the Synagogue and cemetery was poignantly captured in Henry Wadsworth Longfellow's 1858 poem, which lamented the silence and disuse of the Jewish community's spiritual center.

The excerpt emphasizes the enduring legacy of the Touro brothers and the Gould family in maintaining the Touro Synagogue, a historic Jewish house of worship in Newport. Their contributions have been integral to the synagogue's preservation and continued existence. In the 1870s, waves of Jewish immigrants from various European nations were drawn to Newport, largely due to the synagogue’s historical significance and the promise of a revitalized Jewish community. The newcomers, forming Congregation Jeshuat Israel, sought to utilize the synagogue, but tensions arose with Shearith Israel, the New York congregation that held the keys, due to differing Sephardic and Ashkenazic traditions. Despite initial harmony, concerns about maintaining Sephardic traditions led to legal complexities that persist. Rabbi Abraham Pereira Mendes was appointed as the synagogue’s rabbi, overseeing a reconsecration ceremony in 1883 that symbolized the establishment of a permanent Jewish community in Newport. Additionally, the ceremony marked the return of ceremonial items, including Torah scrolls, from New York to the synagogue, reinforcing the connection between the past and the new Jewish arrivals.

The Rimonim have remained under the possession and control of Jeshuat Israel. Following the death of Rabbi Mendes in 1893, tensions arose between Shearith Israel and Newport's Jewish community, which sought to establish a new congregation named Jeshuat Israel. Shearith Israel opposed this incorporation, fearing it would imply the new congregation was a successor to the original Newport Congregation Yeshuat Israel. They submitted a petition to the Rhode Island State Assembly, arguing that the new members were not of Sephardic descent and posed a threat to their customs and worship practices at Touro Synagogue. To reinforce their position, Shearith Israel created "Deeds of Trust" in April 1894 to formalize their legal claim over the synagogue, mandating that all worshippers adhere to Sephardic practices. Jeshuat Israel successfully received its charter on June 13, 1894, which heightened the conflict. Rabbi David Baruch was appointed by Shearith Israel to mitigate tensions during his tenure until his death in 1899, which led to a formal split in the community and subsequent litigation. A faction broke away from Jeshuat Israel to form Touro Congregation, but they were removed from Touro Synagogue by court order and eventually rejoined Jeshuat Israel.

Friction persisted between the two Newport congregations and between Newport’s Jewish community and Shearith Israel, primarily over the Newport congregations' desire to appoint their own minister instead of accepting one chosen by Shearith Israel. Amid this discord, Shearith Israel decided to close Touro Synagogue on January 1, 1901. The Synagogue remained closed for over a year, until members of Touro Congregation broke in to pray on April 21, 1902, conducting continuous services for nearly a year, citing a state law against interference with religious gatherings. Legal actions ensued, with Shearith Israel initially prevailing in the Rhode Island Superior Court, only to have the decision reversed on procedural grounds by the Rhode Island Supreme Court. Concurrently, the Newport group pursued their case in equity, which Shearith Israel removed to the U.S. District Court for Rhode Island. On January 10, 1903, Judge Arthur L. Brown dismissed the Newport group’s case in David v. Levy, leaving both parties in their prior positions: the Newport group could continue occupying the Synagogue while Shearith Israel retained its title. Following this ruling, attitudes began to soften, and discussions of reconciliation emerged. By January 30, 1903, a compromise was reached, allowing Shearith Israel to lease Touro Synagogue to Jeshuat Israel for five years at a nominal price of $1 per year. Jeshuat Israel was permitted to select its own minister with Shearith Israel’s approval, thus resolving the conflict for the next century.

Jeshuat Israel appointed Jacob M. Seidel as Touro Synagogue’s first Ashkenazic rabbi in the year of the lease agreement that required Jeshuat Israel to use the Synagogue according to Sephardic ritual as practiced by Shearith Israel. On February 2, 1903, Jeshuat Israel resolved to surrender possession of the Synagogue to Shearith Israel, concluding a prior dispute. Subsequently, a lease was signed on February 18, 1903, allowing Jeshuat Israel to conduct public worship at Touro Synagogue while Shearith Israel retained its role as trustee. The lease was renewed in 1908 but not thereafter. Following this arrangement, Jeshuat Israel used the Synagogue without interference from Shearith Israel until recent times.

A significant development occurred with the November 7, 1945 Tri-Party Agreement between Jeshuat Israel, Shearith Israel, and the U.S. Government, aimed at preserving Touro Synagogue as a national historic site. This agreement designated Shearith Israel's trustees as holders of the fee simple title under certain trusts, obligating them to ensure public access consistent with the preservation of the Synagogue for the Jewish Society of Newport's worship practices. Jeshuat Israel retained the right to present its historical narrative regarding the trusts in future legal actions.

In modern times, interactions between the two congregations diminished, with Jeshuat Israel managing its affairs independently. An agreement allowed Jeshuat Israel to hire any rabbi from Yeshiva University without Shearith Israel’s consent. Jeshuat Israel's governing documents, amended multiple times, ceased to mention Shearith Israel by 1983. Jeshuat Israel's payment of symbolic rent became sporadic, only occurring once from 1987 onward. By 1993, under President David Bazarsky, there was no communication between the two congregations.

In 1992, Jeshuat Israel faced financial difficulties exacerbated by the global financial crisis of 2008, leading to cost-cutting measures such as eliminating its part-time administrator and closing its community center. The congregation struggled financially, having only its rabbi as a paid employee, and attempted to raise funds through member assessments and fundraising programs. Jeshuat Israel formed a committee to evaluate its assets to secure an endowment for public Jewish worship in Newport, identifying two pairs of Myer Myers rimonim as critical assets. In October 2009, Jeshuat Israel engaged Christie’s to find a buyer for one pair of rimonim. Christie’s negotiated a $7.4 million offer from the Boston Museum of Fine Arts in 2011, which Jeshuat Israel viewed as essential for its financial future. On June 29, 2012, Shearith Israel demanded that Jeshuat Israel stop the sale, prompting subsequent litigation. The court has jurisdiction under diversity of citizenship and will apply Rhode Island law to resolve the ownership of Touro Synagogue, which is central to the case.

Touro Synagogue is established as a charitable trust intended for public Jewish worship, supported by clear and convincing evidence. The legal requirements for a trust include a settlor, trustee, beneficiary, and trust property, as outlined in the case Desnoyers v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., which emphasizes that certain trusts must be substantiated by clear evidence. Charitable trusts differ from private trusts as they serve a public purpose, providing intangible benefits to the community rather than personal gain to specific beneficiaries. In Rhode Island, a charitable trust is defined as a fiduciary relationship concerning property for charitable, educational, or religious purposes, requiring a settlor, trustee, trust property, and a duty imposed on the trustee. The intention to create a trust must be expressed and proven, but does not necessitate specific terminology or formalities. Courts evaluate the existence of a charitable trust based on the totality of circumstances, prioritizing the settlor's intent over formal requirements.

A charitable trust is established when the settlor's intention is evident, as supported by case law. In this instance, Jeshuat Israel contends that it owns Touro Synagogue outright, while Shearith Israel claims it is merely the legal owner and trustee. The court ruled in favor of Jeshuat Israel, affirming that Touro Synagogue has been part of a charitable trust since its inception, aimed at ensuring a permanent location for public Jewish worship in Newport. Evidence indicates that the Newport Jewish community funded the land purchase and construction of the synagogue, negating any notion that the funds were meant for personal enrichment of three individuals named as trustees. Historical documents, including a 1759 receipt referring to the trustees for building the synagogue, support the view that the community established the trust. Due to legal constraints at the time preventing religious associations from owning real estate, the community designated three leaders to hold title on its behalf. The absence of explicit trust language in the original deed does not negate the trust's existence, as circumstantial evidence and the intent expressed in the Last Will and Testament of community leader Jacob Rodrigues Rivera further affirm the establishment of a trust.

Isaac Harte conveyed his one-third interest in a property, intended solely in trust for the Jewish Society in Newport, to be preserved as a place of public worship forever. He relinquished all exclusive rights and interests in the property while retaining the status of a member of the Society. Mr. Rivera’s will indicated that he, along with Messrs. Levy and Hart, held legal title only to support public Jewish worship, reflecting the historical significance of the synagogue as a symbol of freedom from persecution. Although Rivera did not explicitly create a trust in his will, he asserted that he never held exclusive rights to the synagogue, emphasizing that the property was always intended for the Jewish Society's use. Legally, Moses Levy was the last surviving trustee at his death in 1792, and he did not designate a successor, likely due to Moses Seixas assuming responsibilities at that time. Seixas, described as a de facto trustee, fulfilled the obligations of the original trustees. Following Seixas’ death, Moses Lopez likely took on the role of acting trustee, and after Lopez's departure in 1822, the Gould family, Touro brothers, and Shearith Israel contributed to the synagogue's preservation and religious oversight, ensuring its continued operation for the Jewish community.

Jews returning to Newport in the late 1800s found Shearith Israel as the sole surviving trustee for the Touro Synagogue and its lands. Historical documents, including 1894 deeds from descendants of original trustees, 1903 and 1908 leases, a 1932 Rhode Island legislative enactment, and a 1945 tri-party agreement, affirm the existence of a trust originating from Mr. Rivera’s Will. In 1894, amidst a new Jewish settlement, Shearith Israel sought to reinforce its legal connection to Touro Synagogue by drafting deeds that explicitly recognized the trust's existence. Legal disputes arose between the Newport Jewish community and Shearith Israel regarding control over the Synagogue, culminating in a lease agreement where Shearith Israel leased the Synagogue to Jeshuat Israel for $1 per year, acknowledging itself as “Trustees.” This lease stipulated that Jeshuat Israel must maintain the Synagogue for religious services, aligning with trust obligations. A 1932 law exempted the property from taxation due to its trust status, publicly affirming the trust's purpose. In 1945, a tri-party agreement among Jeshuat Israel, Shearith Israel, and the U.S. Government acknowledged Shearith Israel's title was held under certain trusts, reiterating obligations dictated by Mr. Rivera's Will. The agreement mandated public access to the Synagogue while preserving it for the Jewish community and maintaining specific Orthodox rituals.

The 1894 deeds drafted by Shearith Israel indicate a self-imposed obligation to uphold the terms of Mr. Rivera’s Will, which is acknowledged in the Tri-Party Agreement as an admission of this obligation. In 1996, Shearith Israel’s vice president Alvin Deutsch affirmed the Congregation's role as the “trustee of the building,” supporting the claim that the Newport Jewish community intended to establish a trust for public worship. Evidence, including historical documents and testimonies, confirms that the Touro Synagogue was built as a permanent site for public Jewish worship and is held in trust for that purpose. Shearith Israel has acted as trustee, notably during periods without a permanent Jewish community, but it cannot convert this role into equitable title to the Synagogue. The Synagogue is recognized as the corpus of a charitable trust dedicated to public worship. 

The analysis establishes that the Touro Synagogue and its lands constitute a valid trust, originally established by Congregation Yeshuat Israeli, with trustees including Rivera, Hart, and Levy. The trust’s charitable purpose—providing a place for public worship for an indefinite number of people—is well grounded in legal precedent. Shearith Israel’s arguments against the existence of the trust, including claims of exclusive ownership since the 1820s and reliance on the 1894 deeds, lack persuasive merit.

Touro Synagogue has always been the subject of a charitable trust, which was established from its inception, and Shearith Israel's actions or agreements by trustees' descendants did not change this status. The 1894 deeds claimed by Shearith Israel are deemed ineffective, as the Synagogue and its lands were held in trust, preventing the original trustees or their descendants from conveying full ownership. Shearith Israel's legal title and trustee role arose not from the 1894 deeds but from its active involvement in managing Touro Synagogue when the Jewish community in Newport had dwindled. 

Additionally, Shearith Israel argues that two early 1900s court decisions preempt the current claims. The court counters that the 1901 replevin action regarding a single Torah lacks sufficient documentation to establish claim or issue preclusion, as it primarily dealt with the retention of that Torah in Touro Synagogue. The 1903 federal case, dismissed on demurrer, also does not entail preclusive effects since it was not a judgment on the merits. The court clarifies that dismissals for failure to state a claim were not considered merits-based decisions at that time, thus rejecting Shearith Israel's arguments for preclusion based on these historical cases.

Shearith Israel disputes the existence of a trust, questioning the legitimacy of Mr. Rivera’s claim in his will that Mr. Hart conveyed his one-third interest to him, citing a lack of independent evidence for this conveyance. However, the court deems this point irrelevant to the case's outcome, asserting that Mr. Hart's sole ownership was as a trustee and that there is no indication Mr. Rivera misrepresented the transaction. The court finds it more plausible that Mr. Hart did convey his legal interest to Mr. Rivera rather than that Mr. Rivera fabricated this claim. 

Furthermore, Shearith Israel argues that Moses Levy's will does not mention any trust regarding the Touro land, suggesting it cannot be held in trust. The court counters that this omission likely indicates Mr. Levy did not believe he had an equitable interest in the land, as he did not devise his supposed one-third interest while conveying other properties. The court interprets Mr. Levy’s will in conjunction with Mr. Rivera’s prior will, concluding that Mr. Levy also viewed himself merely as a trustee. 

Mr. Levy’s will includes a provision forgiving debts owed to him for the Synagogue's construction, contingent upon prayers said in his name, which further supports the view that the Synagogue was owned in trust and that Levy, Rivera, and Hart acted as trustees. This provision implies that Levy viewed his contributions as a loan rather than an investment, reinforcing the notion of a charitable trust. Lastly, Shearith Israel's reference to the 1903 and 1908 leases, which designated it as the landlord and Jeshu-at Israel as the tenant, is deemed insufficient to negate the existence of a charitable trust, as the roles can coexist without contradiction.

In re Ryan’s Estate establishes that a beneficiary of a trust reduced their rental payments significantly, while Shearith Israel, as a charitable trustee, leased the Synagogue without profit to a group for public Jewish worship, fulfilling its responsibilities. The Court finds no evidence that Shearith Israel holds legal or equitable title to Touro Synagogue; instead, it is part of a charitable trust with original trustees Jacob Rodrigues Rivera, Moses Levy, and Isaac Hart, each holding equitable interests. This trust has operated for over 250 years with the purpose of serving as a Place of Jewish Public Worship, as outlined in Rivera’s Will.

Regarding the Rimonim, Jeshuat Israel has demonstrated ownership by a preponderance of the evidence. The Court established that Myer Myers created the Rimonim for Jeshuat Israel, which later transferred them to Shearith Israel for safekeeping with instructions for their return. Jeshuat Israel, as the congregation currently worshiping in Newport, is deemed the owner. Despite no direct evidence of provenance, the Court concluded ownership based on three factors: Jeshuat Israel's payments to Myers for repairs, the engraving of "Newport" by Shearith Israel, and a scholarly consensus attributing the Rimonim to Jeshuat Israel. The Court affirms Jeshuat Israel's ownership of the Rimonim, allowing it full discretion over them.

Guido Schoenberger's work highlights Myer Myers' creation of rimonim around 1770 for Newport's Touro Synagogue, as noted in various exhibits and research, including Jeanette W. Rosenbaum's attribution since 1765 and Tom L. Freudenheim's connection to the synagogue. The Library of Congress exhibition confirms the rimonim's association with Touro Synagogue, and Rabbi Marc D. Angel's statements reinforce Myers' role in crafting these items for Newport. Testimonies from Angel and Edinger assert that Yeshuat Israel originally possessed the rimonim, with no evidence suggesting otherwise. The court concludes that Myer Myers made the rimonim for Newport's synagogue, where they were used until regular services ended in 1793. Afterward, the rimonim were moved to New York and stored by Shearith Israel, which agreed to return them to Yeshuat Israel upon request. Shearith Israel’s acceptance of these items established it as a gratuitous bailee, bound to follow Yeshuat Israel's instructions. Upon redelivery of the rimonim, Shearith Israel's obligations ceased. Jeshuat Israel has demonstrated ownership, supported by over a century of possession, granting it a strong presumption of ownership under established legal precedents. The court notes that possession alone provides sufficient title until a better claim is shown, emphasizing the significance of long-term possession in establishing ownership rights.

In an ejectment action, the court addressed the presumption of ownership that arises from possession of property, noting that Shearith Israel could not overcome the presumption favoring Jeshuat Israel. The court drew parallels to the Fourth Circuit case Willcox v. Stroup, where the court upheld a presumption of ownership based on long-standing possession of historic documents, despite challenges from the State of South Carolina, which claimed the documents as public property. The Fourth Circuit emphasized that the absence of a clear chain of title necessitated reliance on common law tenets, which support the notion that possession indicates ownership, a principle dating back to early common law.

The court noted that the presumption of ownership benefits longstanding possessors and serves societal interests. In Willcox, the court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, finding the State had not provided sufficient evidence to rebut the presumption of possession. Similarly, Shearith Israel, facing over a century of uncontested possession by Jeshuat Israel, also failed to meet the burden of proof necessary to contest ownership.

To establish better title to the Rimonim, Shearith Israel presented expert testimony and cited three key junctures: (1) payment for the Rimonim in 1765, (2) acquisition of title to the Touro Synagogue in the 1820s, and (3) reinforcement of title through Deeds of Conveyance in 1894. However, the court determined that Shearith Israel did not successfully prove better title to the Rimonim at any of these junctures.

Shearith Israel's claim that the Rimonim were made for its congregation contradicts prior scholarly consensus, which held that the Rimonim belonged to the ancient Newport Congregation Yeshuat Israel. This shift in position is based on Shearith Israel's interpretation of a 1765 ledger entry recording a payment to Myer Myers. Dr. Mann argued this payment was for the Rimonim, analyzing its timing, amount, and wording. However, cross-examination revealed that this payment was actually a reimbursement for Myers' advance to cover a cash shortfall from the previous year, unrelated to the Rimonim. The court found Jeshuat Israel's interpretation more credible, as Dr. Mann acknowledged Myers' role as president of Shearith Israel in 1764 and the standard practice of the president covering financial deficits. The ledger indicated a deficit of exactly £36.4.1, which Myers covered. Further corroboration was found in Shearith Israel's minutes from the following year, confirming the payment was indeed a reimbursement for Myers' previous contribution to address the congregation's financial shortfall.

Dr. Mann's conclusion that the 1765 payment to Myer Myers is not a reimbursement for a previous advance to cover the Congregation's deficit is deemed incredible by the Court. The Court finds Dr. Mann's testimony not credible, particularly her reliance on the timing of the payment within an 11-year span when Myers used a specific maker's mark. The Court emphasizes that Myers, as Shearith Israel’s president in 1764, was responsible for addressing the budget shortfall that precisely matched the 1765 payment amount. Dr. Mann presented calculations suggesting the payment was fair for Rimonim, but these were undermined by Jeshuat Israel's critique regarding silver prices and the weight of the items, further discrediting her analysis. Dr. Mann argued that the payment did not align with previous reimbursements to Myers, lacking a "late parnas" notation, but the Court noted that other payments to Myers did not require such a notation to be recognized as reimbursements. The absence of specific itemization for the 1765 payment in the ledger contrasts with earlier payments that clearly identified the items reimbursed. The Court ultimately concludes that there is insufficient evidence to support Dr. Mann's assertion that the 1765 payment was for Rimonim, highlighting the flaw in her reasoning.

Dr. Mann asserted that Yeshuat Israel could not have acquired the Rimonim through purchase or gift due to its financial struggles, which made such acquisitions unlikely. She noted the absence of a donor's name on the Rimonim, ruling out potential donors like Shearith Israel and Myer Myers based on lack of records and Myers's frugality. However, the court found Dr. Mann's evidence speculative and unconvincing, particularly after dismissing her theory regarding a 1765 ledger. 

Shearith Israel attempted to establish its ownership by referencing later documents, arguing that Yeshuat Israel's return of the Rimonim to New York in the 1820s indicated they were only on loan, or that they were gifted to Shearith Israel when the Newport congregation disbanded. The court rejected both arguments, concluding instead that Yeshuat Israel sent the Rimonim to New York for safekeeping, with the instruction for their return to the congregation in Newport. 

Shearith Israel's minutes from February 10, 1833, documented the receipt of four Torah scrolls from the family of Moses Seixas, intended for safekeeping in New York. The court interpreted this record as supporting Yeshuat Israel's position, indicating that the items were to be returned to Newport as needed, rather than proving Shearith Israel's claim to the Rimonim.

Shearith Israel is identified as the bailee for specific religious items, including the Rimonim, owned by the Jews of Newport. Dr. Fisher, an expert for Shearith Israel, acknowledged that it is customary for every Torah to be accompanied by a set of Rimonim. During the trial, Shearith Israel stated that the Rimonim's role is to accompany the Torah. Although the congregation’s 1833 minutes do not explicitly mention the Rimonim, the court infers that these items traveled with the Torah scrolls from Newport and that Shearith Israel was tasked with their return. The court finds that Shearith Israel's actions, including branding the Rimonim with "Newport" and returning them to the Newport congregation, align with the principles of bailment rather than ownership.

In 1869, an inventory conducted by Rabbi J.J. Lyons included a reference to the Myer Myers Rimonim, described as "marked Myers New Port." This inventory represents the first mention of the Rimonim but does not support Shearith Israel's claim of ownership, as their possession at that time is consistent with their role as bailee. Arguments regarding the inventory's details do not significantly bolster Shearith Israel’s ownership claim.

Additionally, Shearith Israel contends that deeds executed in 1894 by the heirs of the Newport congregation confirmed its rights to the Rimonim. They also refer to a 1903 lease and a 1908 renewal that purportedly support their ownership position. However, the court finds that the evidence presented does not reinforce Shearith Israel’s claim to ownership of the Rimonim.

Shearith Israel transferred ownership of its property, including all appurtenances and estate, to its Congregation, as noted in the 1894 Deeds. Following litigation, a settlement agreement was reached on January 30, 1903, in which Jeshuat Israel acknowledged the title and ownership of L. Napoleon Levy and other Trustees over the synagogue building and its fixtures. On February 2, 1903, a lease agreement for Touro Synagogue was signed, which included all related paraphernalia, a term reiterated in a 1908 lease. Expert testimony indicated that these terms referred to essential ritual items for synagogue services.

The Court found that Shearith Israel never held title to the Rimonim and acted merely as a trustee and bailee for the synagogue's possessions in the 1820s, without usurping ownership from the Newport Jewish community. Consequently, claims by Shearith Israel that the 1894 Deeds supported its ownership of the Rimonim were rejected, as the Court deemed the Deeds legally void and ineffective. The 1903 and 1908 leases also could not confer title to the Rimonim, as neither lease clearly referenced them, failing to counter Jeshuat Israel's presumption of ownership.

Shearith Israel's attempt to block the sale of the Rimonim relies on Jeshuat Israel's 1897 By-Laws, which state that governance is vested in elected trustees from both congregations. However, no evidence exists of Shearith Israel appointing trustees since 1899. Furthermore, the By-Laws require unanimous consent from members for property sales, which complicates Shearith Israel's position.

Amendments to the sale restrictions and the status of Shearith Israel’s four Trustees require affirmative votes from those Trustees. However, on January 28, 1945, Jeshuat Israel adopted new By-Laws that prohibited proxy voting by Shearith Israel's Trustees, eliminated restrictions on Jeshuat Israel's property sales, and negated the requirement for affirmative votes to change trustee status. Jeshuat Israel subsequently provided these amended By-Laws to Shearith Israel, which did not object. In 1983, Jeshuat Israel further amended its By-Laws to remove references to Shearith Israel. 

Shearith Israel's attempts to challenge Jeshuat Israel’s governance are barred by laches, as significant time has passed since Shearith Israel last exercised governance or objected to changes, and such a challenge would cause prejudice to Jeshuat Israel. The Court concluded that Shearith Israel cannot invoke the 1897 By-Laws to interfere with Jeshuat Israel's governance. 

Regarding the Rimonim, the Court determined that Congregation Yeshuat Israel was the original owner and, upon disbanding, entrusted Shearith Israel with their care, stipulating they be returned to the congregation worshipping in Newport. Jeshuat Israel subsequently became the lawful owner of the Rimonim, having possessed and controlled them for over a century, using them in worship and various exhibitions. Jeshuat Israel's long-standing possession provides a strong presumption of ownership that Shearith Israel has not successfully challenged. Consequently, the Court finds Jeshuat Israel to be the true and lawful owner of the Rimonim.

Jeshuat Israel is free to manage its personal property without any legal challenges preventing such actions. The court agrees to remove Shearith Israel as trustee of the Touro Synagogue and its lands, rejecting Shearith Israel's claims that Jeshuat Israel lacks standing and that no grounds for removal exist. The court determines that Jeshuat Israel qualifies as an interested third party with standing to pursue the trustee's removal. 

The excerpt explains the complexities surrounding standing in charitable trust law, noting that while private trust beneficiaries are the natural parties to oversee trustees, charitable trusts serve the public and are thus monitored by the state’s attorney general. However, in Rhode Island, a party that benefits directly from a charitable trust is considered to hold a beneficial interest. The text highlights that members of a religious organization can enforce trust terms without attorney general intervention, as they have a vested interest in the trust’s charitable purpose, which serves both the community and public at large. This approach promotes efficiency in legal proceedings while preventing unnecessary litigation.

Standing to enforce a charitable trust is granted to any person with a special interest in the trust, as endorsed by the Restatement (Third) of Trusts. Rhode Island law does not require the attorney general to be a plaintiff in all charitable trust enforcement actions; instead, the attorney general must be notified of any judicial proceedings involving charitable or religious trustees and is deemed an interested party. This framework allows third parties to initiate lawsuits without the attorney general’s involvement, evidenced by past cases where such suits were permitted. The court concludes that Congregation Jeshuat Israel has standing to enforce the charitable trust in this case, as it meets both constitutional and prudential standing criteria. Specifically, Jeshuat Israel has alleged an injury, namely eviction by the trustee, Shearith Israel, which could be remedied by the court’s decision.

Potential eviction from its place of worship constitutes an injury in fact caused by the defendant, justifying the relief sought through the removal of Shearith Israel as trustee. The standing analysis involves three prudential considerations: (1) whether the plaintiff’s complaint aligns with the interests protected by the applicable law; (2) whether the plaintiff is asserting its own rights rather than those of third parties; and (3) whether the plaintiff's claims do not involve abstract public questions. Jeshuat Israel meets all these criteria, as its interests in the trust are directly tied to its long-standing worship at Touro Synagogue and its connection to the property.

Shearith Israel's role as a charitable trustee is to preserve Touro Synagogue for public Jewish worship. Historically, it fulfilled this duty by facilitating services for the new Jewish community in Newport and leasing the Synagogue to Jeshuat Israel at a nominal fee, recognizing Jeshuat Israel as the representative of Newport's Jewish community. Jeshuat Israel has since been the sole congregation using the Synagogue, and under Rhode Island law, it holds the beneficial interest in the charitable trust established for public Jewish worship.

The removal of Shearith Israel as trustee is warranted due to its failure to act in the best interest of Jeshuat Israel, which is contrary to its obligations as trustee. The court's primary responsibility in such cases is to ensure the trust's proper execution and beneficiary protection. Grounds for removal include serious breaches of trust, lack of cooperation between trustee and beneficiary, or substantial changes in circumstances. Shearith Israel's actions, which include repudiating the trust and attempting to evict the only Jewish congregation in Newport, demonstrate a departure from its obligations as trustee.

The Court determines that Shearith Israel must be removed as trustee due to a serious breach of trust and lack of cooperation. A key breach occurs when a trustee claims outright ownership of trust property and denies the existence of the trust itself. Shearith Israel asserts it owns Touro Synagogue and its associated property, including land and religious objects, for over a century, while rejecting any evidence of a trust from historical documents, including Jacob Rodrigues Rivera’s Will and Testament and various agreements. In its closing arguments, Shearith Israel reiterated its claim of ownership, stating the title is subject to conditions related to maintaining a public place of Jewish worship. This claim of outright ownership constitutes a serious breach of trust, necessitating removal as a trustee.

Furthermore, the Court notes that a lack of cooperation between the trustee and beneficiaries can impair the trust's administration. The relationship's animosity, viewed from the perspective of the equitable interest holder, has reached a level that disrupts proper trust management. Congregation Jeshuat Israel currently holds the equitable interest in the Touro charitable trust, indicating that the ongoing friction warrants Shearith Israel's removal as trustee.

The Synagogue has been used for public Jewish worship for over a century, yet the trustee, Shearith Israel, has not engaged with the trust property or Jeshuat Israel for the past 20 years. Tensions between the two have escalated to the point that Shearith Israel's continued role as trustee would harm the trust's purpose. David Bazarsky, president of Jeshuat Israel since 1993, attempted to reconnect with Shearith Israel but faced rejection, including a refusal to share a membership list and a lack of financial support for Touro Synagogue. This lack of communication and cooperation persisted, with Bazarsky confirming that both congregations had no meaningful interaction for decades. Jeshuat Israel witnesses emphasized that Shearith Israel's eviction threats would be catastrophic for their congregation, which Bertha Ross, co-President of Jeshuat Israel, described as indicative of significant friction and disloyalty. She asserted that collaboration with Shearith Israel's leadership was no longer possible. Shearith Israel did not provide evidence to counter this narrative of animosity. The ongoing litigation further threatens the trust's smooth functioning and the synagogue's role in public Jewish worship. Consequently, the court concludes that the long-standing lack of cooperation and recent hostilities necessitate Shearith Israel's removal as trustee.

Shearith Israel served as a trustee for Touro Synagogue from the 1820s to the 1880s, providing vital religious support during a time when no Jews were permanently settled in Newport. Throughout this period, it sent religious representatives to Newport and facilitated the synagogue's restoration with funding from the Touro brothers. Shearith Israel played a key role in reviving organized Jewish worship in the late 1800s by appointing a permanent rabbi for the community. However, its involvement significantly diminished over the decades, with no communication occurring between Shearith Israel and Jeshuat Israel by 1993. This decline led to Jeshuat Israel assuming full responsibility for Touro Synagogue, while Shearith Israel effectively ceased its trustee functions long ago.

Shearith Israel's recent attempt to evict Jeshuat Israel contradicts its duties as a trustee and reveals its unfitness for the role. The legal framework and evidence support the removal of Shearith Israel as trustee, resulting in the loss of its legal title to Touro Synagogue. The Court then appointed Jeshuat Israel as the new trustee, noting that the original trust documents did not name a successor trustee. Citing R.I. Gen. Laws. 18-2-1, the Court exercised its authority to appoint a new trustee to ensure continued operations of Touro Synagogue. The standard of behavior required of a trustee is stringent, emphasizing a high level of moral responsibility beyond mere honesty.

The new trustee is required to uphold the trust's original intent, which involves preserving the Touro Synagogue and its lands for public Jewish worship, as established by Yeshuat Israel and Jacob Rodriguez Rivera’s Will. Congregation Jeshuat Israel has maintained the synagogue for over a century, handling its upkeep, including utilities and repairs, and facilitating public worship at least twice weekly, with expanded access in summer. It also offers free membership to naval officers and is the sole Jewish congregation in Newport, affirming its role in public Jewish worship in the area.

The court's findings include the following: 
1. It declares that Congregation Jeshuat Israel is the rightful owner of the Rimonim and can manage their sale and proceeds, rendering Counts II and III moot.
2. It rules that the Touro Synagogue and its lands exist under a charitable trust for public Jewish worship and appoints Congregation Jeshuat Israel as the trustee, removing Congregation Shearith Israel from that role.
3. Count V is dismissed for being overly broad, and all counterclaims from Congregation Shearith Israel are dismissed. Both parties' requests for attorneys' fees and costs are denied. 

The court's opinion also clarifies the terminology surrounding Torah ornaments, specifically using "Rimonim" to refer to the finials at issue in this case.

The Museum of Fine Arts has retracted its offer to buy the Rimonim. Jeshuat Israel's motion for the Court to declare its rights to all personal property in its possession was deemed non-justiciable due to its broad scope and lack of demonstrated present danger regarding any property other than the Rimonim. The Court noted that Section 9-30-1 does not permit the resolution of abstract questions or advisory opinions. Furthermore, the Court considered this claim waived as Shearith Israel did not present it at trial. Shearith Israel had previously filed a six-count complaint against Jeshuat Israel in the Southern District of New York, which was dismissed in favor of an earlier Rhode Island action. The Court acknowledged Chief Judge William E. Smith's efforts to mediate the dispute. A stipulation was made that all documents would be deemed admitted unless specific objections were raised; no objections were filed regarding the documents relied upon in the Court's Order. Rabbi Morris Gutstein's historical account of Jews in Newport was presented by both parties as an exhibit, with the Court relying on his factual narrative rather than legal conclusions. The term "Judaizing" refers to Jews coerced into Christianity who continued to observe the Torah. The historical context includes the psychological impacts of the Inquisition on Jewish women, who maintained outward appearances of Christianity while secretly practicing Judaism. The excerpt also mentions Abraham Rodrigues Rivera’s migration from New York City to Newport.

Jacob Rodrigues Rivera, a significant figure in the Jewish community of Newport, was president of Shearith Israel in 1729 and contributed to the first Mill Street Synagogue in 1730. After living in Curacao and marrying there, he was naturalized in 1746 and introduced the manufacture of spermaceti candles in Newport, which became vital to the local economy. Aaron Hart, a relative of Isaac Hart, served as the first Chief Rabbi of Ashkenazic Jews in England, while Jews in London faced legal challenges for public worship as late as 1763. The Jewish community in North America attracted many seeking religious freedom.

Jews in this period included both Ashkenazic and Sephardic groups, each with distinct rituals and origins. Notably, Aaron Lopez, a prominent member of the Newport Jewish community, participated in the slave trade during the 18th century, underwriting numerous slave ships. The Shearith Israel congregation likely provided additional funding for the Synagogue, designed by British architect Peter Harrison, who drew inspiration from notable synagogues in London and Amsterdam. By the time of the Synagogue's construction, Newport's Jewish population was primarily Sephardic but included a significant number of Ashkenazic Jews, who cooperated harmoniously in communal affairs. Leadership positions in the congregation were shared between members of both backgrounds.

Parties submitted overlapping excerpts from the Barquist catalogue, which the Court cited with specific page and exhibit references. Mr. Myers, born in 1723, became the first Jew in the British Guild of Silversmiths at 23. The Hays family is linked by marriage to the Touro family, associated with Newport’s Synagogue. Gutstein mentions a letter from the period addressed to “New York near Newport, Rhode Island.” Moses Seixas married Jochebed Levy, daughter of Benjamin and Judith Levy, with Benjamin being the brother of Moses Levy. Mr. Levy bequeathed a significant portion of his estate to Mr. Seixas and named him as an executor. The term "Shul" refers to a synagogue. Zachary Edinger serves as Shearith Israel’s ritual director, and portions of his deposition were admitted as evidence, with the Court overruling objections from Shearith Israel. The Court addressed the return of Rimonim to Newport, noting discrepancies in the finials and that Shearith Israel has not requested exchanges. The Rimonim were under Shearith Israel's care by 1869, as recorded in their inventory. The document also highlights the significant monetary value of the Rimonim, referencing inflation data. Additionally, Titus Welles, executor of Abraham Touro’s estate, conveyed the intention behind Touro's charitable bequest to support the revitalization of Jewish worship in Newport, given the synagogue’s deteriorating state. Touro Synagogue was referred to by various names indicating its Jewish identity.

Touro Synagogue, originally known simply as "The Synagogue," was renamed in 1834 when the Newport Town Council designated the street it occupies as Touro Street in honor of Abraham Touro, a financial benefactor. Rabbi Abraham Pereira Mendes likely renamed the Synagogue "Touro Synagogue" around its reconsecration in 1893. The community's strong attachment to Sephardic traditions contributed to tensions in subsequent events. By 1913, photographic evidence confirmed the Rimonim's return to Touro Synagogue, with indications they may have been present as early as 1895. The name of the congregation, transliterated from Hebrew, means "Salvation of Israel." 

In 1903, Shearith Israel sought to amend the lease with Congregation Jeshuat Israel to include "personal property," specifically referring to items necessary for worship. This amendment was requested by trustee L. Napoleon Levy, who communicated specific conditions before handing over the synagogue keys. The inclusion of "paraphernalia" in the lease did not affect the Rimonim, as Shearith Israel did not own them. The 1903 and 1908 leases are referred to by Shearith Israel as "Indentures with Lease." 

The Rivera Will is noted as a significant document in Touro Synagogue’s history, indicating the existence of a trust that was not a surprise to Shearith Israel, as it had been acknowledged in various later documents. Legal title reflects apparent ownership, while equitable title denotes beneficial interest in property. Trustees de son tort, who meddle in trust affairs, are considered constructive trustees by law. Shearith Israel, as trustee, was obligated to make the Synagogue available for worship, with the nominal lease price of $1 symbolizing the lessee's equitable right to worship there.

Services related to the charitable trust must align with the practices of the Congregation, but this is not mandated by the trust itself. Jeshuat Israel's meeting minutes indicate that changes made to an earlier draft of the agreement, including language from Rivera’s will and substituting "trustees" for "ownership," were deliberate and accepted by the Congregation Shearith Israel. The minutes also confirm that Shearith Israel's Trustees and Clerk signed the agreement, holding the property in trust.

Under Rhode Island common law and statutory law, dedicating property for charitable religious purposes is recognized and permissible. Such purposes would have been valid at the time the trust was formed in colonial Rhode Island. Historical context shows that religious charities existed before the Statute of Elizabeth in 1601, which liberalized charitable trust law.

Despite Shearith Israel's claims of ownership supported by 1894 deeds, these deeds only indicated ownership "in trust" and did not confirm equitable ownership of the Synagogue. Furthermore, Shearith Israel failed to provide evidence of signatures from all of Moses Levy’s descendants, undermining their claim to equitable ownership. The court case David v. Levy dismissed the plaintiffs' claims for four procedural reasons not addressing the merits, including the lack of Jewish identity among the plaintiffs and insufficient facts for equitable interest, suggesting that an amended complaint could have rectified these issues.

The doctrine of unclean hands does not affect the merits or result in claim preclusion, as established in Keystone Driller Co. v. Nw. Eng’g Corp. and Aptix Corp. v. Quicktum Design Sys. Inc. Additionally, the grounds for the demurrer in David v. Levy are too ambiguous to prevent current litigation, supported by the precedent in Corp. of Presiding Bishop of Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v. Hodel, which refused to apply res judicata due to ambiguity. 

Mr. Rivera is described as a highly respected figure in the Newport Jewish community before the American Revolution, known for his integrity and benevolence. An anecdote illustrates his character; after declaring bankruptcy, he repaid his creditors with interest at a banquet upon regaining his wealth. 

The Rimonim's maker's mark indicates their date of creation, and there were active silversmiths in Newport and Boston at the time. Shearith Israel acknowledged Yeshuat Israel as the original possessor of the Rimonim in its initial pleadings. Although Shearith Israel sought to amend its complaint, this acknowledgment remains unchanged in the New York action. Rabbi Marc D. Angel has served as the congregation's rabbi since 1969, and the court overruled objections to his testimony. 

Dr. Mann, an expert for Shearith Israel, suggested a distinction between original possession (possibly with Yeshuat Israel) and ownership (with Shearith Israel), but the court found this assertion speculative and unsupported. Ultimately, the court determined that Yeshuat Israel was the original owner and possessor of the Rimonim, which they actively used in their services and for which they invested in restoration in 2001.

Jesh-uat Israel paid insurance premiums for the Rimonim and conducted appraisals to ensure adequate coverage. The Rimonim were displayed in various museums, consistently attributed to Touro Synagogue or Congregation Jeshuat Israel, with specific catalog references noted from institutions like the Boston Museum of Fine Arts and the Rhode Island School of Design. Currently, the Rimonim are on loan at the Boston Museum of Fine Arts and stored in a safety deposit box when not on display. Shearith Israel's expert witnesses included Dr. Vivian Mann, a Jewish Art professor, and Dr. Linford Fisher, a religious history professor. Shearith Israel initially believed Jeshuat Israel was the original possessor of the Rimonim before extensive evidence gathering began. The financial records included a payment to Jacob Franks, a former president, with historical context provided regarding terms like "Sedakah." The court expressed skepticism about Dr. Mann's objectivity as an expert witness, citing inconsistencies in her testimony and a perceived bias in interpreting evidence, including selective quotation of primary documents and speculation regarding historical actions.

The Court found Dr. Mann's testimony lacking in credibility due to her admission of not being an accounting expert and her uncertainty regarding the typical placement of debits and credits on ledgers. A significant payment to the president of Shearith Israel prior to Myer Myers' presidency was not labeled as "late parnas," which Dr. Mann attempted to explain away as not being a reimbursement; this reasoning was deemed unconvincing by the Court. The term "Sepharim," referring to Torah books, was discussed in relation to an 1833 entry about the return of Sifrei Torah. Dr. Mann cited another document from that period, which supposedly recorded Shearith Israel receiving silver back from Newport, but she was the only person who recalled it, and it is now missing. 

The inventory document in question notes items as the property of Kahal (Congregation) and their safekeeping by the sexton, leading to conflicting interpretations by Shearith Israel and Jeshuat Israel regarding ownership of the Rimonim. The Court found that the document did not support either party's claims definitively. Shearith Israel pointed out that the last three Rimonim had specific ownership notations, while Dr. Mann argued the absence of such notations for Myers' Rimonim indicated they belonged to Shearith Israel. This argument was undermined by the fact that Yeshuat Israel had disbanded, complicating attribution, and that even marked items had notations tying them back to the Congregation. Ultimately, the Court concluded that the document only indicated Rabbi Lyons' belief in 1869 that the Rimonim belonged to Shearith Israel and did not establish their original ownership by Myers. Dr. Mann also argued that a mismatched Rimonim pair sent to Touro Synagogue suggested a view of all four as Shearith Israel's property, but this was not substantiated.

The argument presented lacks support and is deemed speculative. Shearith Israel claims there are nine deeds executed by 57 heirs of Jacob R. Rivera, Isaac Hart, and Moses Levy; however, it does not assert that all descendants executed deeds. Notably, three deeds signed by 22 heirs indicate the property was conveyed in trust, with only one deed mentioning "appurtenances of worship." Shearith Israel may have assumed ownership of property previously belonging to Yeshuat Israel at the time of the 1903 lease, as evidenced by a 1893 letter identifying Shearith Israel as trustees of the Touro Synagogue. This assumption neglects its responsibilities as bailee and trustee for Newport's Jewish community. Jeshuat Israel claims to be the legal successor of Yeshuat Israel, but the Court finds it unnecessary to address this claim.

The Rhode Island Attorney General intervened as amicus curiae, asserting that Touro Synagogue is part of a charitable trust and that Shearith Israel is the current trustee. The Attorney General did not express opinions on the removal of the trustee or ownership of the Rimonim. The Court recognized the Attorney General's role, emphasizing that requiring the Attorney General to be a plaintiff in such matters would render the statute superfluous. Jeshuat Israel is the only congregation currently praying at Touro Synagogue, with some members' families attending for four generations. Jeshuat Israel has expanded its presence by purchasing adjacent land and establishing a visitor center. Among the 1,000 Jews in the surrounding towns, approximately 100 families belong to Touro Synagogue. Rhode Island law acknowledges that charitable trust conduits hold similar rights to private trust beneficiaries and can terminate a charitable trust with the beneficiaries' consent. The Court found both David Bazarsky and Ms. Ross to be credible witnesses, with their testimonies deemed compelling.