tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post7840181459308314860..comments2024-03-27T08:46:54.369-04:00Comments on BabyBlueOnline: California Supreme Court issues a major correction to their earlier rulingAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17490745238430648958noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-48229702181156839672009-03-01T11:31:00.000-05:002009-03-01T11:31:00.000-05:00"As Obama & co. prove almost constantly, ..."As Obama & co. prove almost constantly, one can be smart and take things seriously and still completely wrong."<BR/><BR/>Well, Anon, we have finally found something we can agree on. ;-)<BR/><BR/>bbAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17490745238430648958noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-21803596835903359992009-03-01T10:00:00.000-05:002009-03-01T10:00:00.000-05:00"Again, thank you for letting us all know tha..."Again, thank you for letting us all know that TEC will seek to deny the California Churches their day in court."<BR/><BR/>Nope. They'll have their "day in court." But I'm speculating it'll be a summary judgment hearing, not a trial.<BR/><BR/>"Judge Bellows ... is well-known nationwide in judicial circles for his brilliant legal mind."<BR/><BR/>Interesting how the judge that agrees with you just has to be the smartest guy around...<BR/><BR/>As Obama & co. prove almost constantly, one can be smart and take things seriously and still completely wrong.<BR/><BR/>There was nothing in my last post or this one that couldn't be said "in polite company."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-1161827392243813312009-03-01T00:54:00.000-05:002009-03-01T00:54:00.000-05:00Again, thank you for letting us all know that TEC ...Again, thank you for letting us all know that TEC will seek to deny the California Churches their day in court. Short term bet, long term loss.<BR/><BR/>Judge Bellows was a prosecutor in the Hannsen Spy case - he is well-known nationwide in judicial circles for his brilliant legal mind. He took the Virginia Churches case very seriously. One hopes that the California courts will show the same respect.<BR/><BR/>It is not clear why one must continue to say things that one might refrain from saying in polite company, especially when one is an Anon Guest. But we do have the David Blue Memorial Pinball Machine available just in case. Trying to do the best I can in what is still a tragic situation.<BR/> <BR/><A HREF="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/oct/26/episcopal-church-losing-members/" REL="nofollow">How do we know that the litigation is having no ill-affect on the growth of The Episcopal Church?</A><BR/><BR/>bbAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17490745238430648958noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-60510399128799222442009-03-01T00:00:00.000-05:002009-03-01T00:00:00.000-05:001. I take it you're suggesting that his participa...1. I take it you're suggesting that his participation in well known cases before he was a judge -- while an assistant US attorney (Hanssen, Lindh) and afterward (Wen Ho Lee) -- somehow makes his church property decisions of greater interest to the California Supreme Court. That's a fitting follow up to your original claim -- heaping an irrelevancy on top of the original irrelevancy that you still haven't responded to.<BR/> <BR/>2. OK, so we're now clear that you're misconstruing things.<BR/> <BR/>3. A civil litigant does not have a right to a trial. They have a right, of sorts, to have judicial procedures followed. One of Virginia's peculiarities is Virginia's procedure regarding motions for summary judgment -- it is different than the federal court system and numerous other states, including California. Outside of Virginia, it is not unusual for civil cases to be resolved by summary judgment motions, and that does not say anything about the litigant who got summary judgment except that they want to minimize costs and have a strong case. I am of the opinion that's what's going to happen in the California parish litigation in question.<BR/> <BR/>4. The question here is not a California court's awareness of Judge Bellows' various opinions. The point is most of his opinions are irrelevant in California. And the part of his opinions that are relevant to California have been thoroughly rejected by the California Supreme Court's opinion (and the modification doesn't change that).<BR/> <BR/> If the fact of litigation has not caused laity to stop supporting their local parish financially, why would TEC winning stop them?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-90599216767694064332009-02-28T09:03:00.000-05:002009-02-28T09:03:00.000-05:001. You think it's ridiculous? Do you know who Judg...1. You think it's ridiculous? Do you know who Judge Bellows is and what he is best known for?<BR/><BR/>2. Yes, that is exactly what I am talking about - the Final Order that came out days after the California ruling.<BR/><BR/>3. One would hope in California that defendants may still have the right to a fair and open trial. Your posting tells us all that it will be The Episcopal Church's intention to block the defendants their right to a trial by pursuing a summary judgment.<BR/><BR/>4. Anon, you are offering your opinion as well and you are welcome to do that. It is naive to think that the California Supreme Court is unaware of the Virginia rulings. What happened in Virginia is that it showed that this case is not the "slam dunk" that The Episcopal Church maintained in California (and attempted to maintain in court in Virginia). That is precisely what the California Supreme Court had to revisit after their initial ruling. They left the impression - which is what TEC would like them to do - that this case is a slam dunk, when it is not, as the Episcopal laity are now figuring out in Pittsburgh so that the Shadow Diocese is having to write letters to defend their own legal strategy as well. The Episcopal laity in the pews appear to be waking up that this is not the legal slam dunk as they have been repeatedly told. And that's what freedom and liberty are all about after all, isn't it?<BR/><BR/>If TEC wins these cases, it will be interesting to see how long the laity in the pews will continue to financially support <I>the local parish.</I> It is such an ill-advised legal and public relations strategy for TEC to pursue, but perhaps the Presiding Bishop and the diocesan bishops in question who are now nearing retirement (Bruno and Lee) figure that they will be long by the time the "you know what" hits the fan.<BR/><BR/>bbAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17490745238430648958noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-58909194046866310322009-02-28T06:17:00.000-05:002009-02-28T06:17:00.000-05:00bb, yet again, you're way off base."(though one do...bb, yet again, you're way off base.<BR/><BR/>"(though one does wonder whether the California judges read Randy Bellows rulings in Virginia - which came out after they ruled - and thought, oops)"<BR/><BR/>1. It is ridiculous to think that the California Supreme Court cares about a Virginia trial judge's decisions about a statute that exists only in Virginia (and is completely irrelevant to California).<BR/><BR/>2. You mislead your readers yet again by saying that Judge Bellows' rulings came after the California Supreme Court ruling. Judge Bellows final decisions and rulings were made December 19, 2008. The California Supreme Court ruled on January 5, 2009.<BR/><BR/>(You are, I suppose, misconstruing entry of the final order in the Virginia cases on January 8, 2009. That is an essentially clerical task among the lawyers, and all it does is sum up the nature and effect of the rulings already made.)<BR/><BR/>"The case hasn't actually been argued at trial yet in California - that is yet to come."<BR/><BR/>There won't be a trial in that California parish litigation. Like federal courts and courts in other states, but unlike Virginia, California courts use summary judgment.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-22841371105716831432009-02-26T18:48:00.000-05:002009-02-26T18:48:00.000-05:00As always, I will remain hopeful, and pray. Wish t...As always, I will remain hopeful, and pray. Wish there had been some decision overturning TEC's deliberately freezing the assets of the churches in question, which denies them the ability to use their resources to defend themselves in court.Mhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00472259138110074965noreply@blogger.com