ST. GEORGE, SC, JULY 17, 2014 ”“A normally unflappable South Carolina Circuit Court judge stopped the trial initiated by the Diocese of SC to prevent the seizure of local diocesan and parish property, to scold the defendants for their intentional disregard of three court orders dealing with disclosure of expert witnesses. The defendants, the Episcopal Church (TEC) and The Episcopal Church in South Carolina (TECSC) tried to present an expert witness, Robert Klein, into the trial without having followed court’s orders.
After reminding TEC attorneys that she had bent over backwards to provide them ample opportunity to identify expert witnesses, Judge Diane S. Goodstein said, “You have violated this court three times with regard to experts and now you think you’re going to bring in his (Klein’s) testimony through the back door? This is not a game! Court’s orders are to be followed! You are an officer of the court. I trust we will not have any more discussion about this witness.”
Just speculation on my part, but could it be that TEC wants to delay a decision in South Carolina, one they probably assess to be a loss, in order to prevent a clear and direct ruling in the state undermining their case in Texas, where they may feel they still have a chance. I understand that these are both state cases under state law, but both states follow the neutral principals doctrine and a definitive ruling in South Carolina would likely not go unnoticed or uncited by ACNA attorneys in Texas.
Is it possible that TECSC is purposefully attempting to antagonize the judge in order to provoke her? If they are already resigned to a loss at this level, causing her to overreact might better position themselves for an appeal.
I don’t claim to understand the trial process, but it seems unlikely that an attorney like Tisdale would be so inept as to do some of the things that have been done.
I am not licensed in SC, but Jeff Walton, I agree with you. I think TECSC is setting itself up to file an appeal. Not that TECSC thinks it will ultimately win, but that it wants to waste as much money and energy of Dio SC as it possibly can. Shameful!
Having had their own witness concede the case on cross-examination, perhaps they were trying to recover, or perhaps they were simply trying to provoke this judge into an outburst they could use on appeal. It’s not admirable behavior.
While the outcome of one case may well be noted by attorneys in other states, such rulings do not have the value of setting a precedent in other states. At least… that is what attorney friends tell me. SO even if there was a decision for the diocese of SC, it should not have any effect on the outcome of the Ft. Worth case.
It does seem that ECSC’s attorneys are missing some really easy things that should have been done but were not. They may very well be doing it as a way to antagonize the judge. However, she has made it clear that she is not fond of their tactics so far…. that should make them think about pushing her too hard. We can hope……
If Judge Goodstein has looked anywhere near the Quincy case, TEo is doomed. The Quincy case demolished TEo’s hierarchical pretending.
#6–The South Carolina Supreme Court has already held TEC is not a heirarchical church and the Denis Canon is unenforceable in SC. This is strictly a case about corporate and property law, which is why Martin McWilliams’ testimony sank them.
agree with #7, David Keller. The first real damaging blow to TEC’s “hierarchical church” argument was dealt by the South Carolina Supreme Court in the All Saints Waccamaw decision.
What I’m saying is if she wants to study a case dealing with if they are hierarchical, the Quincy case spelled it out in spades. It was an amazing thing to read. That is what AS Haley is alluding to when speaking of Their star witness who won’t and can’t save them…Mullin.