April 24, 2012

Seven bishops of The Episcopal Church, along with the Anglican Communion Institute, have submitted a brief to the Texas Supreme Court on a matter of significance to the appeal of the Diocese and Corporation. The bishops include five active and two retired episcopal leaders. They are the Rt. Rev. Maurice M. Benitez, retired Bishop of Texas; the Rt. Rev. John W. Howe, retired Bishop of Central Florida; the Rt. Rev. Paul E. Lambert, suffragan Bishop of Dallas, the Rt. Rev. William H. Love, Bishop of Albany; the Rt. Rev. D. Bruce MacPherson, Bishop of Western Louisiana, the Rt. Rev. Daniel H. Martins, Bishop of Springfield; and the Rt. Rev. James M. Stanton, Bishop of Dallas. The leaders of the ACI are the Rev. Christopher R. Seitz, the Rev. Philip W. Turner, and the Rev. Ephraim Radner.

The 29-page brief, filed Monday, April 23, seeks to clarify TEC polity, which the ACI and the seven bishops believe was misunderstood by the Fort Worth trial court when it issued its summary judgment ruling. Specifically, the brief states that attorneys for The Episcopal Church parties sought “to establish an alternative authority to that of the diocesan bishop” in their pleadings, which is contrary to TEC’s structure, as expressed in its Constitution and Canons. A correct understanding will necessitate the reversal of the summary judgment against the Diocese and Corporation, the brief argues, since TEC is hierarchical at the level of the diocese.

Read the Amicus Brief (PDF).

Read the ACI statement.

Attorneys for the Diocese, Corporation, and congregations filed a reply brief with the state Supreme Court on Friday, March 23. This is the conclusion of a process set by the Court when it accepted our case on direct appeal from the 141st District Court. The latest brief answers issues presented by the TEC parties in their response (filed March 8) to our original Feb. 6 brief [see the article below].

An opportunity for oral argument has been requested. Currently the Court has not set any future hearing dates.

In a 49-page brief filed today with the Texas State Supreme Court, attorneys for the Diocese, Corporation, and congregations asked the Court to uphold several previous Appellate Court decisions and establish Neutral Principles as the method for resolving church property disputes in the state.

Members of the Texas State Supreme Court

Neutral Principles, accepted in 36 states and approved by the U.S. Supreme Court since 1979, is a method of settling questions of church property ownership using the same rules that govern ownership of other types of private property, and it removes courts from wading into doctrinal disputes.

The brief also asked the Court to reverse the Fort Worth trial court's February 2011 decision in favor of the Episcopal parties' claims to diocesan property, and instead to uphold well-established state codes on trust instruments and non-profit corporations. The brief asks the Court to grant the Diocese's summary judgment claims and prevent a hostile takeover of diocesan property by outside parties.

The brief concludes:

If given a chance, this case might have been settled amicably with five or six churches leaving
the Diocese with their church buildings intact and the vast majority continuing in it. But that opportunity was lost when TEC demanded everything held by anybody, even if that included
local churches where TEC had not a single adherent. Based on the deeds, the church
constitutions and canons, and Neutral Principles of Texas law, the Plaintiffs are not entitled to
any of this.

This case is not a contest about which bishop or group TEC can claim as its own; it is about
what property TEC can claim as its own. The only way it can take property it has never
owned or paid for is if Texas courts defer to whatever TEC says — even if that is contrary to
its own church rules. Under Neutral Principles of Texas law, the Defendants are entitled
to summary judgment against the Plaintiffs’ claims.

Following today's filing, the TEC parties have until Feb. 27 to submit a reply; a response from the Diocese is due by March 13. Oral argument has been requested; a date has not yet been set by the Court.

The elected officers of the Diocese and Diocesan Corporation were extremely pleased today to learn that the Texas State Supreme Court has granted our motion for direct appeal. The Court has agreed to reconsider the February 2011 decision by the 141st District Court, which would result in the surrender of all property to representatives of the New York-based Episcopal Church.

The Diocese's written brief is due to be filed with the Court by Feb. 6. The opposing parties may respond by Feb. 27, after which the Diocese will have about two weeks to reply. A hearing date has not been set.

Commenting on the news, Bishop Jack L. Iker said, “We are delighted with the decision of the Texas Supreme Court to grant our request for a direct appeal in the lawsuit brought against us by The Episcopal Church. It is very rare for a direct appeal to be filed in the first place, and it is even rarer for the Supreme Court to grant one. It is clear that the Court understands that key questions of the constitutionality of Texas statutes, trust codes, and property laws are at issue in this litigation.

“It is our hope and expectation that the Supreme Court, using neutral principles of law, will rule in our favor.”

With one Episcopal church property appeal from the Church of the Good Shepherd in San Angelo already before the Court, it is even more significant that the court has moved so swiftly to take up our case. This announcement encourages us to believe that the Court finds merit in our case, and it renews our hope of an early conclusion to litigation that has already consumed almost three years and millions of dollars in legal expenses.

“It is gratifying,” said Fort Worth attorney J. Shelby Sharpe, who heads the diocesan legal team,“ that the court has granted the petition for direct appeal in this critical religious freedom case. We look forward to the court's ultimate decision, which should be helpful to other courts facing similar issues.”