RSS | Twitter | Mailing List
Appellate Court 2010 Decision
From here: http://stjamesnb.org/content/appellate-court-2010-decision
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
News from St. James Anglican Church
Contact: Karen Bro
Communications Director, St. James
[949] 235-4568 – mobile
Eric C. Sohlgren, Lead Attorney
Payne & Fears LLP
[949] 851-1100 ext. 252 – office
[949] 439-6149 – mobile
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
In a “Revolutionary” Decision,
California Court of Appeal Robs St. James Church of
Constitutional Right to Defend its Property in Court
California Court of Appeal Robs St. James Church of
Constitutional Right to Defend its Property in Court
NEWPORT BEACH, Calif. – March 29, 2010 – Late Friday, March 26, 2010, the California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, Third Division – in a 2 to 1 split – issued a decision granting a petition brought by the Episcopal Church seeking to deprive St. James Anglican Church of any opportunity to submit its evidence to the trial court to defend its property.
Since the appellate decision does not become final for at least 30 days, St. James is now considering a possible appeal to the California Supreme Court as suggested by Justice Fybel in his stinging dissent.
At the start of the case, the Orange County Superior Court ruled in 2005 (see case summary, below) that the Episcopal Church’s allegations were legally defective. After the trial court dismissed the Episcopal complaints, the appellate courts took years to decide what law should apply to the dispute, eventually ruling that the Episcopal complaints could go forward. In early 2009, the California Supreme Court sent the case back to the Orange County Superior Court, where St. James for the first time answered the Episcopal complaints, raised affirmative defenses, began discovery, and looked forward to defending the property that its members bought, paid for and maintained since its founding six decades ago. Friday’s decision rules that St. James may not defend itself, and that the Episcopal Church is entitled to judgment in their favor based on their allegations alone.
Justice Fybel asked the California Supreme Court to step in and set straight the majority’s unprecedented ruling (emphasis below is in the original opinion):
Since the appellate decision does not become final for at least 30 days, St. James is now considering a possible appeal to the California Supreme Court as suggested by Justice Fybel in his stinging dissent.
At the start of the case, the Orange County Superior Court ruled in 2005 (see case summary, below) that the Episcopal Church’s allegations were legally defective. After the trial court dismissed the Episcopal complaints, the appellate courts took years to decide what law should apply to the dispute, eventually ruling that the Episcopal complaints could go forward. In early 2009, the California Supreme Court sent the case back to the Orange County Superior Court, where St. James for the first time answered the Episcopal complaints, raised affirmative defenses, began discovery, and looked forward to defending the property that its members bought, paid for and maintained since its founding six decades ago. Friday’s decision rules that St. James may not defend itself, and that the Episcopal Church is entitled to judgment in their favor based on their allegations alone.
Justice Fybel asked the California Supreme Court to step in and set straight the majority’s unprecedented ruling (emphasis below is in the original opinion):
“The majority by its opinion grants relief to [the Episcopal] plaintiffs that would enter judgment in favor of plaintiffs after the overruling of defendants’ demurrer and denial of defendant’s motion to strike under the anti-SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation) statute (Code Civ. Proc. § 425.16). This result is unprecedented and without any basis in law. As aptly described by defendants’ return in this proceeding, entry of judgment for plaintiffs at this procedural stage is “revolutionary.” I can write with certainty that this is the only case in the history of California where entry of judgment has been ordered upon overruling a demurrer and denial of an anti-SLAPP motion. Any case or statutory authority supporting the majority’s order to enter judgment for a plaintiff after the overruling of a demurrer and denial of an anti-SLAPP motion is conspicuous by its absence from the majority opinion.
I respectfully suggest that these differences can best be resolved by a grant of review with an order from the Supreme Court setting forth the procedures to be followed by the trial court.”
St. James’s lead attorney, Eric Sohlgren, said, “This decision is not only stunning and overreaching, but it commits a grave injustice. Here, the Episcopal Church simply filed a lawsuit, which St. James challenged on the ground that even assuming – for the sake of argument – the allegations were true, there was nothing unlawful about what St. James did. After the California appellate courts defined what law should apply to the case, St. James looked forward to defending itself in the trial court on the facts. But St. James has been robbed of that constitutional right. Anyone with a fair sense of justice should be deeply troubled by what the Episcopal Church and two justices have done here. Due process and our Constitution require that people’s property should not be confiscated by religious leaders just because they say so.”
The Episcopal lawsuits against St. James stemmed from a decision by the members of St. James Church in August 2004 to align themselves with another branch of the worldwide Anglican Communion, and end the church’s affiliation with the Episcopal Church over core theological differences involving the authority of Holy Scripture and the Lordship of Jesus Christ. The Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles sued St. James Church, All Saints Church, Long Beach, CA, and St. David’s Church, No. Hollywood, CA, and over two dozen volunteer board members in September 2004. Subsequently, TEC intervened into the lawsuits against the three local church corporations. Since that time, the case has progressed from the Orange County Superior Court to the California Supreme Court, which decided how such church property disputes would be resolved in California. After a lengthy appeal from an early victory attacking the Episcopal complaints, the case was recently returned to the Orange County Superior Court for discovery and trial, but before that could happen the Episcopal Church filed this petition with the Court of Appeal.
Eric Sohlgren added, “St. James has followed a steady course since this lawsuit was first filed against them and its church volunteers. The reason is that the principles at stake go to the very heart of what Americans hold dear – the right to own property without outside interference and the right to freely exercise one’s religion regardless of belief or faith group. The Episcopal Church hasn’t contributed a dime toward the purchase or maintenance of St. James’ properties or buildings, and they’ve stood on the sidelines while watching the people of St. James carry all of the burdens and benefits of property ownership for decades. In our diverse and freedom-loving land, no one should have their property confiscated over religious belief.”
A link to the Appellate Court decision is here: http://stjamesnb.org/content/appellate-court-2010-decision
Latest Site Announcements
-
Wed, 06/09/2010 - 5:17pm
-
Sat, 03/13/2010 - 11:58am
-
Mon, 10/05/2009 - 8:13am
-
Thu, 07/16/2009 - 8:24pm
-
Wed, 07/15/2009 - 1:47pm
