personal gain. The defendants’ primary argument is that plaintiffs have no standing to bring this claim, because the Attorney General has exclusive jurisdiction, with narrow exceptions, over management of charitable assets. Weaver v. Wood, 425 Mass. 270, 275-277 (1997). We need not address the issue of standing here. The conversion claim is premised on the fact that the General Convention is the rightful owner of the church’s assets. Since we have rejected the General Convention’s claim of ownership, the conversion claim fails on substantive grounds. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the Superior Court as to counts I and II. Judgment affirmed. 3 The parenthetical “Swedenborgian” is part of the official name o ted Methodist Church, Inc. v. Culver, 243 Wis. 2d 394, 407-409 (2001) (<HOLDING>). 7 We thus do not consider allegations in the
holding that disaffiliated church had dissolved within meaning of state law when statute provided assets shall revert to methodist denomination whenever any local methodist church or society shall become defunct or dissolved holding that denial of tax exemption for part of church property that was not necessary for occupancy and enjoyment of church did not violate first amendment holding as a general rule of contract law if no other meaning is reasonable the court shall rule as a matter of law that the meaning is established holding church services constitute property within meaning of  548 holding that requiring church to make contributions to workers compensation fund opposed by such church did not violate first amendment