Robert Morris asks court to dismiss lawsuit over tithes

By Leonardo Blair, Senior Reporter Monday, March 10, 2025

Disgraced Gateway Church founder Robert Morris joined with other leaders and public interest law firm First Liberty Institute in asking a federal court to dismiss a class action lawsuit filed by four church members accusing the Southlake, Texas-based megachurch of misallocating their tithes and failing to honor a money-back guarantee.

The lawsuit was filed in October 2024 by Gateway Church members Katherine Leach, Garry K. Leach, Mark Browder and Terri Browder. In addition to Morris and Gateway Church, it also names as defendants Tom Lane, a former executive pastor of Gateway Church; founding elder Steve Dulin; and Kevin Grove, who previously served as an executive global pastor and elder at Gateway Church and a trustee of The King’s University.

The lawsuit stems primarily from allegations that Gateway Church refused to be transparent about the ministry’s finances as it has generated over $100 million in annual revenue in past years.

Get Our Latest News for FREE

Subscribe to get daily/weekly email with the top stories (plus special offers!) from The Christian Post. Be the first to know.

They focus specifically on the church’s Global Ministries fund, to which its leaders promised to allocate 15% of tithes collected. They also contend that despite repeated promises from Morris and other leaders that congregants would get a refund of their tithes if they weren’t happy with the results of their donations, Gateway Church leaders refused to honor that promise.

In a motion asking the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas to dismiss the lawsuit filed on Feb. 18, Morris’ attorneys raised similar arguments raised by the other defendants asking the court to dismiss the lawsuit.

The attorneys, William B. Mateja, Elisha J. Kobre, and Jason C. Hoggan of Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP argue that the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction because of the “home state exception” in the Class Action Fairness Act. The exception allows a federal court to decline jurisdiction over a class action lawsuit if most of the plaintiffs are residents of the same state where the lawsuit was filed.

They also argue that the court lacks jurisdiction over the lawsuit because the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine bars consideration of the claims because it would “require the Court to tread upon matters of religious doctrine and internal church governance.”

Morris’s attorneys asked the court to dismiss the lawsuit because it failed the exacting pleading standards of Rule 9(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The motion states church members could not state a viable claim under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The lawyers claim the complaint “(1) fails to allege any material misstatement upon which Plaintiffs reasonably relied; and (2) alleges conduct outside the statute of limitations.”

Allegations of contract breach and conspiracy to breach contract should also be dismissed, Morris’ attorneys argue, because the church members’ complaint fails to allege an enforceable contract. They note that conspiracy to breach a contract is not a viable claim under Texas law, and the alleged conduct occurred outside the statute of limitations.

“Furthermore, Mr. Morris joins Defendant Lane’ [sic] motion to dismiss this claim because (4) Plaintiffs have failed to allege any privity of contract between themselves and Mr. Morris,” the attorneys argue.

Morris, who founded Gateway Church in 2000, resigned in June 2024 amid an allegation he sexually abused a child for years in the 1980s, beginning when she was 12 years old. 

Morris’ announcement of a money-back guarantee came during a sermon at Willow Creek Community Church in the suburban Chicago area about “The Principle of First” to help boost falling revenues that the church had been experiencing amid the COVID-19 pandemic.

“I don’t want to exaggerate, but I’m sure thousands and thousands of people, and I’m sure it’s multiplied, that have told me some way over the years through email, letters, whatever, ‘this changed my life,'” Morris said, as seen in a YouTube clip from his message on tithing the first 10% of one’s income.

“When I started giving the first 10% to God, it changed everything. And here’s what I’d like to do. I’d like to just challenge you. I’ve done this with our church. I’ve told our church on multiple occasions, I’ve said to them, if you’ll try it for one year, if you are not fully satisfied, at the end of that year, I’ll give you your money back,” Morris said. “With 22 years in the church, no one’s ever asked for their money back.”

According to the plaintiffs, many Gateway Church members have asked for a refund of their tithes, but the church leaders have ignored their requests.

“This statement was repeated by Tom Lane, and the other defendants knew that the representation was false and made with the intention of inducing congregants to give money. Many people, have requested refund of their tithes only to be stonewalled and ignored by the defendants,” the lawsuit alleges.

“In fact, Plaintiff Katherine Leach has publicly and directly delivered a demand letter to Gateway for the return of her tithes pursuant to Gateway’s ‘money back guarantee.’ Gateway has not responded. This offer by Robert Morris and Tom Lane, made with the full knowledge and consent of the other defendants, created a contract under Texas law where a promise was made for consideration and that promise was not fulfilled,” it argues.

Attorneys for the plaintiffs have requested and were granted earlier this month an extension of time to file a response to Morris’ motion to dismiss the church members’ lawsuit until March 25, according to court documents reviewed by The Christian Post.

In response to a motion filed by Lane to dismiss the lawsuit, attorneys for the church members argued in January that the First Amendment’s Ecclesiastical Abstention Doctrine does not bar their claims for relief as argued by the defendants.

“The ecclesiastical abstention doctrine does not bar Plaintiffs’ claims against Defendant or the Church because the claims raise no issue as to theological doctrine, religious or moral teaching, or internal church governance,” they note.

“Rather, Plaintiffs take issue with misrepresentations by the Church and its elders in their solicitation of tithing funds, an issue for civil and secular analysis that happened to be committed by church officials. … The ecclesiastical abstention doctrine does not shield church pastors and leaders from committing fraud and other torts. Plaintiffs’ claims allow for the Court to distinguish between the religious teachings behind tithing and the Church’s fraudulent misrepresentations to induce donations from congregants.”

The church members conceded, however, that they did not enter into a contract with Lane or Grove but would “continue to pursue this claim, in addition to the others, against Defendants Gateway Church and Robert Morris and will continue to pursue their fraud and conspiracy claims against Defendants Lane and Grove.”

In an amicus curiae in support of Gateway Church’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit, attorneys for the First Liberty Institute, which provides pro bono legal representation to individuals and institutions of all faiths on religious freedom matters, argue that if the case is not dismissed and is allowed to proceed, religious freedom would suffer.

“First Liberty … has a strong interest in the outcome of this litigation, because it will have an important precedential effect on the religious exercise of houses of worship. If courts are free to parse sermons to determine whether the pastor may have used language creating an implied contract, pastors will be unable to share their religious convictions freely without risking legal reprisal,” the law firm wrote.

“Such an outcome would chill core religious exercise and would be devastating to many of First Liberty’s clients and to religious freedom in general.”