THE COURT HEARING OF 19 NOVEMBER
Circuit court judge Edgar Dickson held a hearing today in the Orangeburg county courthouse, in Orangeburg, SC, from 10:00 to 11:30 a.m. This "Motions Hearing" was to give the two sets of lawyers time to make their oral arguments to the judge. They have already presented 22 papers to him, 6 motions/petitions and 16 arguments for and against. Each side has presented 3 motions/petitions to the judge.
DSC:
1-Betterments suit. (Nov. 19, 2017)
2-Complex case designation. (Dec. 27, 2017)
3-Clarification of jurisdiction (Mar. 23, 2018)
TEC/TECSC:
1-Motion to dismiss Betterments suit. (Dec. 15, 2017)
2-For implementation of the SCSC decision, and for a Special Master. (May 8, 16, 2018)
3-For an accounting. (July 11, 2018)
Judge Dickson declared he was considering today only one motion, DSC's motion for clarification of jurisdiction (Mar. 23, 2018). He said he was putting all the other 5 on hold for later. As I read it, DSC's motion for clarification is asking the judge to declare the SCSC decision of August 2, 2017 unenforceable, and to assume jurisdiction over the issues raised in the decision, namely the disposition of the properties of the 29 parishes and Camp St. Christopher. In other words, DSC is asking the judge to ignore the SCSC decision and rule on his own concerning the property settlement.
The first lawyer to speak today was Alan Runyan, for DSC. He talked for 50 minutes. As far as I could tell, he made no new argument other than what he has put in his written statements. He seemed to argue entirely on process, that is, the ways the five justices made their decisions were flawed, the implication being that their final decisions were also flawed. Runyan spent a great deal of time criticizing the opinion written by Chief Justice Beatty. This was an interesting turn since he had spent so much of last year attacking Justice Kaye Hearn demanding that she recuse herself from the case. Hearn was barely mentioned today. The point of Runyan's long monologue was to insist that the circuit court has jurisdiction over the issues in the unresolved supreme court decision.
On the TEC side, Thomas Tisdale and Mary Kostel led the presentations. Their arguments were really simple and straightforward, the SCSC has issued a decision that is the law. The SCSC sent (remitted) their decision down to the circuit court for implementation. The court has no choice but to carry this out. The decision is not ambiguous, conflicted, or unenforceable. It is clear. The SCSC ordered the return to TEC control, the 29 parishes and Camp St. Christopher.
Judge Dickson concluded the session by saying he was considering only the one motion, for clarification, now. He told the lawyers he has more questions for them and would be sending these in emails.
Two other points struck me: 1-The judge encouraged the two sides to keep on with mediation; and 2-The judge did not even hint that there was any question about a SCSC decision being enforceable. The problem was deciding exactly what was to be enforced.
In my view, DSC's assertion that the SCSC decision is too ambiguous is demonstrably false. Read the decision. Find it here . On the last page (77), former Chief Justice Jean Toal spells out explicitly the majority decisions of the court: 1-the 8 church entities that did not accede to the Dennis Canon remain outside of the trust; 2-the 28 church organizations that acceded to the Dennis Canon remain under trust control of TEC; and 3-Camp St. Christopher is held by trustees of the TEC diocese. These three orders could not be any clearer. Since the justices made their decisions explicit, there was no need for further direction on remit to the circuit court. The orders to the court are plainly given at the end of the decision. I do not understand how the judge, or anyone, could think they are unclear.
As for five different opinions, yes there were five individual opinions, but that does not mean five conflicting opinions. There was a 3-2 majority. The three opinions in the majority all agreed on the three essential points given at the end.
Runyan spent practically the whole time talking about how the justices reached their decisions. How they reached their conclusions is irrelevant. The only relevant matter before the circuit court is the decision of the SCSC. It is explicitly made at the end of the text.
In my view, Judge Dickson is trying to be as careful, deliberate, and fair as possible. He is going out of his way to give both sides all the room they need to make their cases. One can admire his careful approach. However, at some point this has to end. There is such a thing as too much of a good thing.
I think some people may be making too much of today's hearing. We should step back and see that there was nothing new here and nothing was decided. It was the same old arguments. The judge himself issued nothing. This does not mean that the judge is ready to discard the SCSC decision. That is not going to happen; and it is cruel of DSC to promote the idea that the parishes are going to remain apart from TEC. Anyone who thinks Judge Dickson is going to throw out the SCSC decision and go try this case again is entertaining a fantasy.
Bottom line: today's hearing changed nothing. We are still waiting, waiting.
The two sides have issued press releases about today's hearing. For the Church side see here . For the DSC summary, see here . Best of all is the analysis of scepiscopalians with which I agree completely. Find it here .
On the TEC side, Thomas Tisdale and Mary Kostel led the presentations. Their arguments were really simple and straightforward, the SCSC has issued a decision that is the law. The SCSC sent (remitted) their decision down to the circuit court for implementation. The court has no choice but to carry this out. The decision is not ambiguous, conflicted, or unenforceable. It is clear. The SCSC ordered the return to TEC control, the 29 parishes and Camp St. Christopher.
Judge Dickson concluded the session by saying he was considering only the one motion, for clarification, now. He told the lawyers he has more questions for them and would be sending these in emails.
Two other points struck me: 1-The judge encouraged the two sides to keep on with mediation; and 2-The judge did not even hint that there was any question about a SCSC decision being enforceable. The problem was deciding exactly what was to be enforced.
In my view, DSC's assertion that the SCSC decision is too ambiguous is demonstrably false. Read the decision. Find it here . On the last page (77), former Chief Justice Jean Toal spells out explicitly the majority decisions of the court: 1-the 8 church entities that did not accede to the Dennis Canon remain outside of the trust; 2-the 28 church organizations that acceded to the Dennis Canon remain under trust control of TEC; and 3-Camp St. Christopher is held by trustees of the TEC diocese. These three orders could not be any clearer. Since the justices made their decisions explicit, there was no need for further direction on remit to the circuit court. The orders to the court are plainly given at the end of the decision. I do not understand how the judge, or anyone, could think they are unclear.
As for five different opinions, yes there were five individual opinions, but that does not mean five conflicting opinions. There was a 3-2 majority. The three opinions in the majority all agreed on the three essential points given at the end.
Runyan spent practically the whole time talking about how the justices reached their decisions. How they reached their conclusions is irrelevant. The only relevant matter before the circuit court is the decision of the SCSC. It is explicitly made at the end of the text.
In my view, Judge Dickson is trying to be as careful, deliberate, and fair as possible. He is going out of his way to give both sides all the room they need to make their cases. One can admire his careful approach. However, at some point this has to end. There is such a thing as too much of a good thing.
I think some people may be making too much of today's hearing. We should step back and see that there was nothing new here and nothing was decided. It was the same old arguments. The judge himself issued nothing. This does not mean that the judge is ready to discard the SCSC decision. That is not going to happen; and it is cruel of DSC to promote the idea that the parishes are going to remain apart from TEC. Anyone who thinks Judge Dickson is going to throw out the SCSC decision and go try this case again is entertaining a fantasy.
Bottom line: today's hearing changed nothing. We are still waiting, waiting.
The two sides have issued press releases about today's hearing. For the Church side see here . For the DSC summary, see here . Best of all is the analysis of scepiscopalians with which I agree completely. Find it here .
