An updated list (as of March 1) of all the recent news stories about the South Carolina litigation may be found here.
For the second time in less than a month, South Carolina Circuit Court Judge Diane S. Goodstein rejected arguments by The Episcopal Church and its subsidiary, The Episcopal Church in South Carolina, that the two groups are rightful owners of the churches, symbols and other assets of the Diocese of South Carolina.
In her Order denying the motion for reconsideration she stated, “Large portions of the motion are simply the proposed orders previously submitted to the Court or reiterations of the Defendants’ positions at trial.”
The motion had also argued that because the Diocese had argued legal positions in the All Saints case contrary to those now being presented, that Judicial Estoppel should apply. In response, Judge Goodstein sharply noted… “The court finds that the Judicial Estoppel argument is without merit….If the Defendants’ argument in the instant action was correct, no party previously adjudicated to be wrong would be able to correct their conduct in compliance with a court’s holding. Such a result would be contrary to all sense of justice and order… With regards all other matters presented in Defendants’ Motion for Reconsideration, they are hereby denied.”
According to this press release, TECSC’s arguments were composed of matters which were thoroughly covered by Judge Goodstein’s order and matters which were not raised at trial. ECUSA’s lawyers don’t seem to care about their professional reputations.
I am getting the feeling that the courts are getting a bit tired of TEC’s vexatious litigation.
“AND IT IS SO ORDERED!”
Is it common for judges to use an exclamation point?
Seriously, TEC went for judicial estoppel? Did they read the definition? And that was the best shot they had in their entire 182 pages?
I gather this is the Diocese’s press release? Whatever, it is already out on local media: http://www.counton2.com/story/28181235/sc-judge-reaffirms-ruling-against-the-episcopal-church. There is much in this press release that tells readers about the truth of the gospel – what a wonderful witness!
The judgment is quite scathing of the motion, basically saying that TEC’s lawyers couldn’t put together a cogent argument. Did they really not have any particular factual findings or points of law in the trial that they wanted to challenge?
Since they haven’t done so here, does that mean they could no longer raise such issues on appeal?
TEC does seem to be making a habit of irritating judges…
#3 Not especially unusual.
All, The best parts are the links at the bottom of the page especially the second which links to the response by our Diocese of SC attorneys and which is signed by lead attorney Mr. Alan Runyan. In this response, he details what and how much of the motion has already been decided under Judge Goodstein’s ruling and then mentions in a footnote, the Illinois judge’s decision and sanction against TEC! I certainly hope Judge Goodstein got to read this response.
I think it’s about time for TEC to pull an Obama, and declare that because the courts have not done what it wanted, it is free now to simply go ahead and file deeds in favor of itself declaring all the diocese’s property is TEC’s.