While our motion to expedite the appeal was formally denied, we could not have received a more favorable outcome. A few words about what this means.
First, this means that the Court will hear our case, without fail, on the date assigned. No further delaying tactics by TEC will prevent that. This will bless everyone in that it eliminates needless and expensive legal maneuvering, brings a speedy conclusion to legal issues that have clouded parish property titles for too long (with consequent inconveniences) and settles what has been a source of anxiety that hinders parish ministry. For all these reasons and more, we are grateful for these actions by the Court.
Second, we are prayerfully optimistic that the Supreme Court will uphold its earlier precedent, established by the All Saints case in 2009. It was on the basis of that case that Judge Goodstein ruled on Feb. 3 that:
1. We, the Diocese of South Carolina, are the owners of our real, personal and intellectual property.
2. TEC and TECSC have no legal, beneficial or equitable interest in any of these.
It was also on the basis of the logic of the All Saints case that Judge Goodstein ruled that TEC and TECSC are permanently "enjoined from using, assuming or adopting in any way" the marks of this Diocese, which they were actively doing when we asked for a declaratory judgment in the first place.
If affirmed by the South Carolina Supreme Court, all these issues will continue to be the settled law in South Carolina.
Two further matters also deserve brief attention.
One concerns a case filed by TEC in Federal Court as part of its effort to avoid trial in the state court. In vonRosenberg vs. Lawrence, TEC argued that the Bishop Lawrence violated Federal trademark law because he claimed to be the Bishop of the Diocese. That case was dismissed by U.S. District Judge C. Weston Houck on Aug. 23, 2013. TEC appealed Judge Houck’s decision to the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, which ruled on March 31, that the judge had used the wrong standard in his decision to dismiss the case. The 4th Circuit was explicit to say in its ruling, this was a procedural question that had nothing to do with the merits of the case. The consequence of this ruling might be that the judge must reconsider his decision, using this different standard, and still reach the same conclusion. Before that happens, however, our legal counsel has filed for the reconsideration of the 4th Circuit decision. Our counsel believes there are good arguments to support Judge Houck's original ruling that should be heard by the entire 4th Circuit Court of Appeals (not just a three judge panel of that court) and, until this issue is settled, the case will not proceed.
Finally, TEC press releases have included, with some frequency, statements by legal counsel for TECSC claiming its willingness to discuss “settlement options”. This is disingenuous nonsense. We should remember the following at a minimum:
It is clear that God has remarkably blessed us throughout this litigation process. We have been the beneficiaries of God's providence repeatedly in countless ways that have brought us to this day and yet another positive legal decision. I hope you will give thanks for these blessings in your personal prayers and continue to lift up our cause as this case moves to its conclusion.
• We were in the middle of what we hoped could be “settlement” discussions when TEC attempted to remove Bp. Lawrence in 2012.
• In the 90+ instances of litigation that TEC has instigated around the country, none has concluded with a settlement -- just the opposite. When parishes in the Diocese of Virginia wishing to leave TEC actually reached an agreement with their bishop, that deal was scuttled by the Presiding Bishop’s Chancellor, who announced there was “a new sheriff in town”. Offers of settlement in other places have been likewise rejected. And even when the case has been definitively settled by the local courts, as in Illinois, TEC has refused to cease litigation, to the point of sanctions being imposed by the courts there.
• The fact is that TEC’s legal counsel was told as far back as 2013 that the Diocese would consider any proposals submitted to our counsel in writing. There have been none.
• Conclusion: TEC has demonstrated repeatedly and consistently, both locally and nationally, it has NO interest in settlement. These are words out of a spokesperson’s mouth for the sake of public relations. Nothing more or less.
Also, if you should be moved to help contribute to the legal defense fund, or join the 1785 Society, you may do so here.
