tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post6956528209766752525..comments2024-03-27T08:46:54.369-04:00Comments on BabyBlueOnline: Anglican Congregations Ask Virginia Supreme Court to Reconsider a Portion of Its Church Property RulingAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17490745238430648958noreply@blogger.comBlogger19125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-20940657322347925312010-07-15T16:28:00.072-04:002010-07-15T16:28:00.072-04:00I apologize for just now reading these contrasting...I apologize for just now reading these contrasting views to my own.<br /><br />Episcopal Cafe <a href="http://www.episcopalcafe.com/lead/dioceses/the_adv_motion_for_rehearing_h.html" rel="nofollow">on the motion</a>.John B. Chiltonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18208312356775869565noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-29504934380425335982010-07-12T09:31:07.102-04:002010-07-12T09:31:07.102-04:00The Supreme Court of Virginia brought this filing ...The Supreme Court of Virginia brought this filing upon itself by its incoherent analysis of what constitutes a branch.<br /><br />As to the odds of it succeeding, I have no idea. However, in our legal system you can always predict the outcome by the odds, right? That is why we have so few lawyers in this country.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-22856498567289433122010-07-12T08:22:40.228-04:002010-07-12T08:22:40.228-04:00that's an interesting link, Anon. I had read ...that's an interesting link, Anon. I had read T19's blurb on the decision, but not the language itself. The Georgia court is quite clear about principles that I have thought to be controlling ever since this secession fervor started roiling around Northern Virginia. The historic background of Christ Church, the Savannah church at the center of that litigation, and those of churches like Truro and the Falls Church must be very similar. The Court relies heavily on the accession of the church to Episcopal canons and discipline in the early 19th century as controlling the ownership issue. Quite aside from the merits of these disputes, the courts are providing us with a great history lesson about the Church of England in America and its transition from established governmental status to an independent existence. <br /><br />BTW, I see that I incorrectly, in my early comment above in this thread, identified this as the "Georgia Supreme Court." Your link makes clear that it is the Georgia Court of Appeals. Apologies to all.<br /><br />ScoutAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-11796313463946602602010-07-12T07:56:10.486-04:002010-07-12T07:56:10.486-04:00CANA better win on 57-9,or there my be no hope. T...CANA better win on 57-9,or there my be no hope. Two courts in Georga have just clearly ruled in favor of TEC. See below for a clear ruling on what will be the remaining issues.<br /><br />http://www.lexisone.com/lx1/caselaw/freecaselaw?action=FCLRetrieveCaseDetail&caseID=2&format=FULL&resultHandle=d7187411652ee7c3f643c1e19d999d59&pageLimit=10&xmlgTotalCount=2&combinedSearchTerm=Rector%2C+Wardens&juriName=Georgia&sourceFile=STATES;GACTSAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-67787320176891603692010-07-12T06:52:18.916-04:002010-07-12T06:52:18.916-04:00The problem with a "win" on 57-9 is that...The problem with a "win" on 57-9 is that it re-opens the constitutional issues, RWK. The court ruled in a way that enabled it not to address the constitutionality of the statute, because it found that the statute did not apply to the facts presented in this dispute. This rather deftly saved everyone from constitutional determinations that would have almost certainly borne the case to the United States Supreme Court. So a "win" from the CANA perspective on 57-9 would not "effectively end the case." It would make it much more complicated than it appears to be at the moment. <br /><br />ScoutAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-53170703167960297162010-07-11T23:26:42.401-04:002010-07-11T23:26:42.401-04:00I am not a lawyer and I don't play one on TV. ...I am not a lawyer and I don't play one on TV. I do have a lot of friends who are lawyers with whom I have been able to discuss these issues a bit more dispassionately. They all counsel that if you have an option that can end the case, you take it. If it fails, you soldier on with your other arguments. It would be irresponsible for them not to take the option. They counsel that exhausting a low odds appeal earlier is not a sign of desperation, but a sign of thoroughness, nothing more. <br /><br />A win on 57-9 appeal would effectively end the case. Assuming there is no SCOTUS intervention.RWKnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-24144427908341529862010-07-11T21:20:03.526-04:002010-07-11T21:20:03.526-04:00Sorry, David H. Mistake caused either by the thir...Sorry, David H. Mistake caused either by the third poster at T19 assuming that you were Fr Handy, or by my mistakenly assuming that this is what he intended to say.Lapinbizarrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07686990585795363001noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-2008449171398564332010-07-11T19:14:11.405-04:002010-07-11T19:14:11.405-04:00FWIW, it was me who posted the figures. I don'...FWIW, it was me who posted the figures. I don't need credit, but I think David Handy+ probably doesn't need to be confused with me.<br /><br />It is, of course, correct to say that the figures mean nothing if you're one of the ones that's granted. What the figures clearly show, however, is that there isn't much chance of that. But the CANA folks want to stall, and they're desperate to win on 57-9. So asking for rehearing is perfectly understandable, from their perspective.<br /><br />An Anxious Anglican, there was no factual mistake by the Supreme Court of Virginia. The opinion was not as clear as it could have been, but they understood all the facts just fine. And I think your lawyers know it -- they're just hoping that the lack of clarity gives them an opening to try to persuade the Court to change its mind.DavidHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03254619654216747524noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-27291905325553128742010-07-11T18:58:04.556-04:002010-07-11T18:58:04.556-04:00Dear Anon:
If you have not read the Va. Supreme C...Dear Anon:<br /><br />If you have not read the Va. Supreme Court's opinion, you might not know that it interprets the word "branch" such that a group that splits off of a church can be a "branch" of it. You are quite right that the congregations' intention was to NOT stay connected to TEC. But this is consistent with claiming to be a "branch" of it, for purposes of the statute.<br /><br />--Other AnonAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-64194844735212646252010-07-11T18:22:56.790-04:002010-07-11T18:22:56.790-04:00Memory tricking me?.... If that's true as to y...Memory tricking me?.... If that's true as to your recollection of the ballot?, your version also states they chose to "SEVER" their relationship with the Episcopal Church and DOV, not join a branch of it. The Pulpit message, and the clear intent was to join the Nigerian's, as you version of the ballot states, in order to stay connected to the Communion, not the Episcopal Church.Like it isnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-20909575419956718992010-07-11T16:05:53.791-04:002010-07-11T16:05:53.791-04:00Lapinbizarre: the numbers cited by Fr. Handy are r...Lapinbizarre: the numbers cited by Fr. Handy are really irrelevant if this petition is one of the petitions to be granted. In this case, the Supreme Court engaged in finding facts that were not supported by the record, which is (1) a mistake by any court, and (2) a really big mistake when done by an appellate court of last resort. If the court did not agree with the facts found by the trial judge, then the proper response was to remand the case for more fact-finding, not find its own facts. If the court has any self-awareness at all, it will realize it let its unseemly haste to resolve this case on a non-constitutional basis clouded its judgment (or caused them to unquestioningly take the word of the law clerk who wrote this dog's breakfast of an opinion).An Anxious Anglicanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16630532668798784975noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-88451954216357490702010-07-11T15:44:57.296-04:002010-07-11T15:44:57.296-04:00Anonymous:
Your memory may be tricking you about ...Anonymous:<br /><br />Your memory may be tricking you about what the "CANA congregations" voted on. The pertinent resolution on the congregational ballot mentioned ADV first and foremost. It read as follows:<br /><br />"Resolved, ... that The Falls Church shall sever its denominational ties with The Episcopal Church and the Diocese of Virginia and affiliate with the Anglican District of Virginia, an association of churches under the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the<br />Convocation of Anglicans in North America, a branch of the Anglican Communion ...."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-37511153891691303442010-07-11T10:08:30.086-04:002010-07-11T10:08:30.086-04:00Fr David Handy has pointed out at T19 that "I...Fr David Handy has pointed out at T19 that <i>"In 2007, the Court decided 358 petitions for rehearing and granted 13. In 2008, it decided 367 petitions for rehearing and granted 23".</i>Lapinbizarrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07686990585795363001noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-45433419018299862010-07-11T09:32:37.116-04:002010-07-11T09:32:37.116-04:00The question was whether one thought this was the ...The question was whether one thought this was the diocesan's view - I have not offered yet my own thoughts.<br /><br />bbAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17490745238430648958noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-9153720180649995012010-07-11T08:49:55.908-04:002010-07-11T08:49:55.908-04:00Bb, given that the rehearing document asks for a r...Bb, given that the rehearing document asks for a remand, which would effectively add another year and a half of litigation on the things that have already been fully litigated, I think you're delusional if you think this isn't a stalling tactic. Of course, it's also a last desperate attempt to win on 57-9.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-67976472394989592282010-07-11T07:46:47.993-04:002010-07-11T07:46:47.993-04:00I have no idea, BB. Their view will be expressed ...I have no idea, BB. Their view will be expressed in their responsive filings and we'll find out. But I can't imagine they won't oppose the petition. I also would think that, given how rarely these kinds of petitions are granted, not just by this court, but by most appellate courts, that the general view is that this filing by CANA is just another layer of process. If the irreplaceable asset of time were all that it was being burned up, that would be sad enough. But these things cost money, too. <br /><br />In addition to padding out the time line a bit, I have to think that the way the departing groups planned their withdrawal was so dependent on grabbing property pursuant to the Virginia Division Statute, that, in the internal councils of CANA, taking a long shot at a petition for reconsideration has to reflect some very genuine concern that the analysis of the deeds and trust instruments will not be provide favorable ground on which to continue the litigation. <br /><br /><br />On other fronts, TitusOneNIne reports a ruling by the Georgia Supreme Court in favor of retaining Episcopalian property against seizure and claims of ownership by a departing faction. While there are significant differences from one state jurisdiction to another in these kinds of disputes, one has to believe that one or more of them will end up at the level of the Supreme Court of the United States in the fullness of time.<br /><br />ScoutAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-6897064681706320012010-07-11T00:44:50.540-04:002010-07-11T00:44:50.540-04:00An interesting point of view, Scout. Is this the ...An interesting point of view, Scout. Is this the diocesan view as well?<br /><br />bbAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17490745238430648958noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-70208728219415747412010-07-11T00:38:01.323-04:002010-07-11T00:38:01.323-04:00I guess this has some tactical value in terms of b...I guess this has some tactical value in terms of buying time for the CANA folks. It will take a few weeks to get this denied. <br /><br />ScoutAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-6633378976852326422010-07-10T18:41:15.279-04:002010-07-10T18:41:15.279-04:00All the threads on this blog re this subject refer...All the threads on this blog re this subject refer to the departing as identifying themselves as having joined CANA, to affiliate with the Nigerians as a member of the Communion; look back and ADV is rarely mentioned,if at all. I was present prior to and at the vote and there was no mention that we were voting to join ADV, never heard of it until much later after the vote.<br /><br />CANA, nice try. However, don't blame you for trying a "Hail Mary" given the importance of 57.9 to your claim for the property.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com