The South Carolina Supreme Court has intervened in a lawsuit and granted the Diocese of South Carolina’s Motion to Transfer jurisdiction from the Court of Appeals to the Supreme Court. This may effectively prevent The Episcopal Church (TEC) and its local subsidiary, The Episcopal Church in South Carolina (TECSC), from using serial appeals to further delay a trial to prevent the two groups from seizing Diocese of South Carolina property.
The Supreme Court decision comes days after TEC and TECSC filed new appeals apparently aimed at delaying the discovery process in advance of the trial that is scheduled to start on July 7. While the Supreme Court ruling does not prevent the denomination from filing appeals, it eliminates the time-consuming step of first going to the South Carolina Court of Appeals.
Good. Praying the SC Supreme Court will grant the Dio SC its costs and attorneys’ fees incurred because of TEC’s harassment.
Good decision indeed. However, this decision by the SC Supreme Court comes after TECinSC has decided for a re-hearing on the interlocutory motion that was first denied by the judge and then by the court of appeals. I wonder if the filing of the re-hearing on the motion caused the SC Supreme Court to act ? Good decision whatever the reasoning.
All, Please keep these dates (July 7th-18th) handy as prayers will be desired before, during, and after the trial. TIA.
Need to make the Episcopal Church pay back all attorneys fees and judge needs to tell the yankees to go home. We don’t sue and try to take what it not ours down south.
Sophy0075,
As I understand it, Judge Diane Goodstein as the judge for this trial is the person who could impose fees for every time the injunction has been violated by TECinSC, as well as the diocese’s attorney fees,etc. It would be wonderful if TEC nationally would have to do the same for all cases they have lost.
Now that the SC Supreme Court will be handling appeals, I cannot help wondering whether one of the justices will recuse herself from the case. She is an active member of a TEC mission in the Episcopal Church in South Carolina.
Re. Justice who is member of TEC, I see no reason to worry. I’m sure the diocesan legal team thought of this long before I did, and from what I have heard of the lady, she would not take an inappropriate position. Anyway, the presence of Episcopalians in the legal profession makes this case even more interesting than it is already.
Does the “jurisdiction of appeals” apply to all appeals that TEC might file in relation to the trial in Judge Goodstein’s court, or only to the ones that TEC has already filed? If they follow true to form, the appeals currently on file are only the tip of an iceberg.
Would S Carolina be under any obligation to delay the trial if the outcome of the current appeals were to be appealed in turn to a federal court?
TJ, I am not a lawyer so I can’t answer from any legal knowledge but from what I understand any future appeals from TECin SC would go directly to the Supreme Court. Remember it was the Supreme Court that decided the All Saints case and it is highly unlikely they would receive any delays in a positive light. I think this (having the Supreme Court take jurisdiction of any more appeals) is a step to avoid further delays in the upcoming trial. I know that is the reason the diocese went ahead and took this step. TECinSC has already to tried to take the case to the federal courts and the case was remanded back to state court. The best course of action for both sides is to prepare for the trial. TECin SC just needs to get over that the delay tactic is not working in the SC courts and get on with the trial.
There are several lawyers on both sides who are Episcopalians. However remember this is a civil suit over the names and trademarks of the diocese and who has the right to them. So their religious affiliation is secondary.
” Sue Ella” Schori needs to read this…..
As Christ’s followers, we are called to live in unity. God wants us to be at peace with one another (Rom. 12:18). A suing Christian is usually enticed to take on the adversarial spirit manifested in the legal system. The predacious nature of our culture, the retention of attorneys, and the courtroom arena combine to form an atmosphere not conducive to reconciling relationships. A Christian who sues can become “caught up” in the system to the extent that he takes on a bitter, self-righteous, and disingenuous mindset.
This, in turn, can lead him to overlook the blessing hidden in conflict, an opportunity to demonstrate godly character in the face of adversity. It also minimizes God’s concern about the “weightier matters of the law”—justice, mercy, and faithfulness (Matt. 23:23).
#9 not to be difficult, but in this case it was Lawrence who brought the law suit over the property, not the Episcopal Church; and technically Lawrence is a Yankee, if you are using that term in its traditional sense, i.e. a person who was not born and reared in a state that joined the Confederacy in the Civil War; and vonRosenberg the Bishop for those who elected to remain in the Episcopal Church is not a Yankee. Not that any of that matters, but your posts were nonsensical and I thought that you might want to know that.
#10. Bishop Lawrence has not sued anyone over property… nor has the Diocese of SC- so let us get the facts correct. Name one parish that decided to stay with TEC who has been sued for their property…….. *silence*…. That is what I thought because it has not happened. Ummm….. Technically and factually, +Lawrence is from California….. how does that make him a Yankee?? (Perhaps he is a Yankees fan?… I don’t know?)
However, the Diocese of SC did indeed decide to sue TEC after the remnant TEC group used the name and seal of diocese wrongly posing as the real Diocese of South Carolina. Previous TEC lawsuits against dioceses that leave have always started with the TEC remnant claiming to be the diocese that disaffiliated even when the majority went with the diocese. SO the diocese decided to make an offensive move to stop TEC from going any further. That is what the injunction is all about. The trial is about the name and seal of the diocese. I am afraid you don’t understand the actual lawsuit. Even the Federal Courts have agreed this case properly belongs in the courts of SC which is where it is. However, TEC and TECinSc have done everything to expand the numbers of people sued (an avenue that has been fruitful in other trials but not here) or delay this trial. I even know of bloggers who are confused if the trial is actually scheduled. Yes it is….. better be prepared.