Conger

Fort Worth cases halted pending appellate review: The Church of England Newspaper, April 8, 2011 p 7. April 8, 2011

Fort Worth Bishop Jack Iker

First published in The Church of England Newspaper.

A Texas trial court has suspended proceedings in the Fort Worth property disputes, until the state’s appeals court rules on issue of whether a diocese may secede from the General Convention of the Episcopal Church.

On April 5 Tarrant County Judge John Chupp granted the motion brought by Bishop Jack Iker and Diocese of Fort Worth to sever and stay all further proceedings in the main lawsuit  “pending a final determination of the severed claims through the appellate process.”

The order follows the judge’s January 21 ruling in favor of the national church, which directed the diocese to turn over all of its property within 60 days.  The diocese subsequently asked Judge Chupp to stay his ruling requiring the diocese’s assets be turned over to the national church.  The diocese argued its 6000 active members, parochial school students and the participants in its social service programmes would be irreparably harmed by turning over the properties to the national church while the issues remained outstanding.

On March 31, the day of the hearing, attorneys for the national church and its supporters in Fort Worth filed an additional 2000 page pleading, asking the court to rule on their “seventh amended original petition and new motion for partial summary judgment before he addressed Fort Worth’s request for a stay.  The judge responded six days later by moving the entire case to the appeals court for review.

In his January decision, Judge Chupp stated the Episcopal Church was a hierarchical church, and as such, the diocese’s property could be claimed by the national church.  At the March 31 hearing the Judge said it would now be up to the appellate court to decide whether the Episcopal Church is a “hierarchical church or not.”

However the legal issue in question lawyers for Fort Worth have argued, is not the theological question of hierarchy, but how the “neutral principles of law” approach adopted by the Texas and US courts should decide the issue.

In a statement released after the January decision Bishop Iker said, “We are obviously disappointed by Judge Chupp’s ruling and see it as fundamentally flawed. We are confident that the Court of Appeals will carefully consider our appeal and will rule in accordance with neutral principles of law as practiced in the State of Texas.”

TEC Texas legal setback: The Church of England Newspaper, Dec 24, 2010, p 7. December 23, 2010

The Rt. Rev. Jack L. Iker, Bishop of Fort Worth

First published in The Church of England Newspaper.

The Episcopal Church suffered a setback this week in its Texas legal battle with the breakaway Diocese of Fort Worth after a US Federal judge stayed all proceedings in the trademark against Bishop Jack Iker, pending the diocese’s motion to intervene in the case.

On Dec 20, Judge Terry R. Means in Fort Worth issued a one-page order that “in the interests of judicial economy and fairness to all parties,” the proceedings in the Episcopal Church’s trademark infringement suit against Bishop Iker would be stayed until the court ruled on the diocese’s request to intervene in the proceedings.

The decision affects only the third of the four lawsuits initiated by the national Episcopal Church and its surrogates against Bishop Iker and the majority faction of the Diocese of Fort Worth.  On Sept 21, lawyers for Bishop C. Wallis Ohl, Jr. and the loyalist faction filed a complaint against Bishop Iker, saying his “unauthorized use of the Service Marks in his provision, advertising, and marketing of religious service and works is likely to cause confusion among the public seeking to participate in, benefit from, or support [the Diocese’s] religious services and works.”

In its press release, the loyalist faction stated unsuspecting members of the public might be duped into attending worship services conducted by clergy from the majority faction under the “mistaken belief” the services they were attending were “provided by, sponsored by, or affiliated” with the minority faction loyal to the Episcopal Church.

Bishop Iker responded the lawsuit was “preposterous” and “vindictive” because the minority faction was “trying to get a different result in federal court from the state court ruling” in favor of the majority faction.

The first lawsuit initiated by the Episcopal Church was filed in Tarrant County, Texas in 2009, sought control of the assets of the Diocese of Fort Worth by claiming the minority faction loyal to the national church was the true Diocese of Forth Worth.  Bishop Iker countered the minority faction had not the authority to bring the suit in the name of the diocese.  The trial court found in favor of Bishop Iker but declined to strike the national church’s lawsuit.

Bishop Iker asked the Fort Worth Court of Appeal to review the trial judge’s decision not to strike the pleadings.  The appeals court backed Bishop Iker and ordered the trial court to strike all the pleadings filed by attorneys for the minority faction who claimed to represent the diocese.

A second lawsuit was then initiated by the national church in Hood County, Texas, seeking control of diocesan assets in that county, and was prosecuted in the name of the Diocese of Fort Worth.  The Hood County court stayed proceedings in that case pending the outcome of the first lawsuit.

On Sept 21, the minority faction filed its third lawsuit against Bishop Iker, and on Oct 18 a fourth lawsuit was brought by a loyalist congregation against the bishop, asserting trademark violations.

Legal commentator Allan Haley, who served as one of the attorneys for the breakaway diocese of San Joaquin in its battle with the national church and its supporters in California, commented the Dec 20 decision by Judge Means showed the judge “grasped what ECUSA and its rump diocese were trying to do.”

The national church’s strategy of doing an “end run around the State courts” has been “rebuffed,” Mr. Haley said.

“The courts have uniformly told ECUSA and its attorneys thus far: ‘Not so fast. You cannot assume the very point at issue by pretending to be what you have not shown yourself to be … you have not demonstrated how you are legitimately in charge of those entities. Until you do so, you cannot come into court pretending to be them from the outset’,” he observed.

Iker responds to latest lawsuit, charging TEC with ‘malicious prosecution’: The Church of England Newspaper, Nov 12, 2010 p 8. November 16, 2010

First published in The Church of England Newspaper.

The Bishop of Fort Worth has asked a Texas court to impose sanctions on attorneys for the Episcopal Church, arguing that a lawsuit brought on behalf of a loyalist parish against him was “malicious prosecution” and an “abuse of process.”

On Oct 29 attorneys for Bishop Jack Iker filed a response to a complaint brought by All Saints Episcopal Church that had accused the bishop of violating the congregation’s trademark.  The parish further alleged the bishop, in his personal capacity, was engaged in a disinformation campaign designed to lure Christians into churches affiliated with his diocese by fostering the false notion these churches were Episcopal Churches.

In its pleading to the Federal District Court, All Saints alleged Bishop Iker had engaged in “unfair competition” and engendered “public confusion and harm” by backing a faction in the congregation loyal to his breakaway diocese.   All Saints asked the court to grant an injunction forbidding the use the name “All Saints” by Iker loyalists, and demanded the bishop disgorge himself of any profits he may have received from the breakaway faction, along with payment of damages.

In his response, Bishop Iker rejected the accusations as baseless and having “no factual or legal foundation.”  He further asked the court to impose sanctions on the attorneys for the parish, noting this fourth lawsuit had been brought by the Episcopal Church’s attorneys to “unreasonably and vexatiously multiply the proceedings in a case.”

On Nov 1, the diocese stated the fourth lawsuit was “intended to harass the Bishop and multiply the cost of litigation,” whose costs are expected to top £3 million.

“In addition, the federal suit multiplies the proceedings on an issue already under consideration in a Texas state court. The plaintiff and counsel are well aware of that suit, which covers the question of who owns certain church properties, including intellectual assets such as trademarks,” the diocese noted.

Fourth time a charm, Episcopal Church hopes with latest Fort Worth lawsuit: The Church of England Newspaper, Oct 22, 2010 p 6. October 24, 2010

The Rt. Rev. Jack Iker of Fort Worth

First published in The Church of England Newspaper.

A fourth lawsuit has been laid at the doorstep of Fort Worth Bishop Jack Iker by the loyalist faction in the diocese, claiming he has violated the trademark of a Fort Worth congregation for his personal enrichment and to deceive the local citizenry.

On Oct 18, the diocese reported that All Saints Episcopal Church, a congregation that had affiliated with the loyalist faction, had filed a lawsuit against Bishop Iker in the US Federal Court for the Northern District of Texas alleging the misappropriation of the parish’s name and reputation for his own personal ends.

Speaking to the Forward in Faith National Assembly on Oct 16, before he had learned of this latest suit, Bishop Iker told the delegates “I stand before you as the most sued Anglican Bishop in all of North America.”

The national Episcopal Church and its surrogates in Fort Worth, as of Oct 16, had launched “three different suits, in three different courts, in two counties” in Texas, “all for the same offence: for standing firm for the historic faith and doctrine of the undivided church and not allowing the Diocese of Fort Worth to compromise itself” by conforming to the “General Convention religion of the Episcopal Church.”

In its pleading, All Saints Church alleges Bishop Iker had engaged in “unfair competition” and “public confusion and harm” through giving his support to a faction of All Saints parish that had withdrawn from the congregation.  All Saints has asked the court to grant an injunction forbidding Bishop Iker from allowing those parishioners from All Saints who remained loyal to the diocese from using the name “All Saints” and has demanded he disgorge himself of any profits he may have received, along with payment of damages.

In a statement released on Oct18, the diocese said the new suit was “frivolous” and “laughable.”

“It is time for this wasteful mockery of Christian doctrine and of the civil court system to stop.

However, if the minority continues to bring trumped-up charges, we will continue to defend ourselves,” the diocese said.

In his remarks to the UK Forward in Faith gathering, Bishop Iker said his diocese had spent over $1 million in attorney’s fees “on the first go round,” and expected to spend a further $3.5 million “before it is over.”

In the other cases underway, the parties are awaiting a hearing date to be set in the Texas 141^st District Court to hear the Oct 8 motion by the Diocese of Fort Worth to strike the loyalist group’s amended pleadings and enforce the appellate court’s ruling in its favor.

In the federal court case brought against Bishop Iker on Sept 21, the diocese has filed its answer denying the allegations, and offered a complaint in intervention to dismiss the suit.

Third lawsuit now filed over Fort Worth secession: The Church of England Newspaper, Oct 8, 2010 p 7. October 12, 2010

First published in The Church of England Newspaper.

The loyalist faction of the Diocese of Fort Worth has filed a third lawsuit against Bishop Iker in the US Federal Court in Fort Worth, accusing him of trademark infringement for using the name and seal of “Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth.”

The latest round of litigation has prompted outrage from Bishop Iker, who denounced the pleadings as “preposterous and vindictive,” while American canon law commentators have questioned the wisdom of the national church’s legal strategy.

On Sept 21, lawyers for Bishop C. Wallis Ohl, Jr. and the loyalist faction in Fort Worth filed a complaint against Bishop Iker, saying his “unauthorized use of the Service Marks in his provision, advertising, and marketing of religious service and works is likely to cause confusion among the public seeking to participate in, benefit from, or support [the Diocese’s] religious services and works.”

In its press release, the loyalist faction stated unsuspecting members of the public might be duped into attending worship services conducted by clergy from the majority faction under the “mistaken belief” the services they were attending were “provided by, sponsored by, or affiliated” with the minority faction loyal to the Episcopal Church.

The loyalist faction said it hoped to “recover damages and to enjoin Iker from ‘using the Service Marks in connection with the performance, advertising, or marketing of any religious services or works’.”

Bishop Iker responded the lawsuit was “preposterous” because the minority faction was “trying to get a different result in federal court from the state court ruling” in favor of the majority faction.

The lawsuit was “vindictive because it is aimed personally at me, as an individual,” Bishop Iker said.

“I do not use the trademarks personally,” he said.  “The diocese uses them,” observed Bishop Iker, adding that the lawsuit was “only one more indication of how angry the minority faction is.”

In the opinion of canon law commentator Allan Haley, the new law suit was “simply crazy.”

“The minority faction of the diocese is suing the majority (via their bishop) for using its signs and trademarks — which the majority by definition should be able to do, since it is the majority,” Mr. Haley said.

But to “avoid this rather obvious conclusion” the minority faction “has to pretend that it is the whole diocesan entity, and so it has to ignore the real diocese in its pleading” and bring the lawsuit against Bishop Iker in his personal capacity.

“To take the complaint at its word, Bishop Jack L. Iker is the sole source of all religious services and works being performed in the name of the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth” by the breakaway majority faction.  “And therein lies the plaintiff’s dilemma,” Mr. Haley concluded.

Episcopal Church in Texas legal loss: The Church of England Newspaper, July 2, 2010 p 7. July 7, 2010

The Rt. Rev. Jack Iker of Fort Worth

First published in The Church of England Newspaper.

A Texas court has rejected the Episcopal Church’s contention that ecclesiastical policy trumps state law, giving the third province movement in the United States a major legal victory.

On June 25 the State Court of Appeals for the Second District of Texas handed down a unanimous decision rejecting the claims of the minority faction loyal to the national church that it was the lawful “Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth” and could prosecute a lawsuit in that name against breakaway Bishop Jack Iker and his supporters.

While the Court of Appeals did not determine who the lawful Bishop of Fort Worth was nor address the question whether a diocese may quit the Episcopal Church, Friday’s decision was a significant procedural victory for the conservatives, as it rejected the notion that the views of the national church hierarchy supplanted state law.

Canon lawyer Mark McCall of the Anglican Communion Institute told The Church of England Newspaper this “decision resembled the one in South Carolina, which said that judicial determinations about change of corporate control are decided under state law without deferring to the self-proclaimed religious hierarchy.”

In the Texas case, the court held that there was only one Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth, and that the attorneys engaged by the loyalist faction could not hold themselves out as representing the diocese in legal proceedings.  “It is “undisputed that there is only one Corporation and only one Fort Worth Diocese, regardless of how those entities are named or characterized,” the court said.

“There is a single Fort Worth Diocese and Corporation, which both a majority [Bishop Iker’s group] and a minority [the loyalists] faction claim to control,” the court noted, adding the attorneys [for the loyalists] whose authority is challenged are either authorized to represent those two entities or they are not.”

The lower court however held that a corporation cannot sue itself.  The trial court had “barred [the loyalist attorneys] from representing only the Corporation and the Fort Worth Diocese associated with the Iker Group. We are aware of no statute or common law rule allowing attorneys to prosecute a suit in the name of a corporation or other entity on behalf of only one faction or part of that corporation or entity against another part or faction,” the court ruled.

The attorneys engaged by the loyalist faction “have not established their authority to represent or appear on behalf of the Fort Worth Diocese and Corporation as required” by Texas law.

The Court of Appeals issued a conditional writ, that would take effect if the lower court did not “strike the pleadings” filed by attorneys for the loyalists in the name of the diocese and barred “them from appearing in the underlying cause as attorneys” for the diocese.

Following the secession of the Diocese of Fort Worth under Bishop Iker in 2008, US Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori gathered the rump group loyal to the Episcopal Church and in the Spring of 2009 called a “special convention” for the diocese to elect new officers.  The special convention proceeded to elect new officers and invited the Bishop of Kentucky, Edwin Gulick to serve as interim bishop.

The loyalist group then initiated suit in the name of the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth seeking to gain control over the assets controlled by Bishop Iker and the majority faction.  Bishop Iker’s group was granted a partial victory last year, but filed a writ of mandamus with the Court of Appeals seeking clarity on the underlying issue of whether the minority could bring suit.

The June 25 decision by the Court of Appeals in favour of Bishop Iker effectively repudiates the legal strategy adopted by the national church and the loyalist faction in Fort Worth that while people may leave the Episcopal Church, dioceses may not.

The Iker group’s attorney, Mr. Shelby Sharpe welcomed the decision saying it “simply follows the plain language of the law,” while Bishop Iker offered his thanks to the court and his attorneys for the decision.

He added that “while we realize that our opponents will continue to pursue litigation against us, this successful first step reinforces the soundness of our legal strategy to protect our identity, our property, and our assets.”

On June 28 the loyalist faction released a statement saying the fight was not over.  The Court emphasized that “[t]he trial court did not determine on the merits which Bishop and which Trustees are the authorized persons within the corporation and the Fort Worth Diocese, nor do we. The question of ‘identity’ remains to be determined in the course of the litigation,” they argued.

Canon lawer Allan Haley observed the effect of the decision was that Bishop Iker’s group had “achieved its objective of requiring the pretenders to prove they had authority” from the diocese to bring suit.  “As both the trial and the appellate courts found, they failed to carry their burden of proof on that point.”

He added that to prevail at this stage, the loyalist faction must now “show that [the Episcopal Church’s] Constitution and canons prohibit dioceses from voting to leave, and this they cannot do.”

A petition for relief from the loyalist faction to the Texas Supreme Court is expected.

US Churches are free to secede, rules judge: CEN 9.17.09 September 17, 2009

First printed in The Church of England Newspaper. There is nothing in the Constitution and Canons of the Episcopal Church that prevents a diocese from seceding from the national church, a Texas judge declared on Sept 16. On Wednesday Judge John Chupp of Texas’ 141st District Court handed the Episcopal Church a major setback in its campaign to seize the assets of breakaway dioceses, stating that of the two entities holding themselves out as the “Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth”—Bishop Jack Iker and his diocese affiliated with the Province of the Southern Cone and Bishop Edwin Gulick and his Episcopal Church-affiliated diocese—Bishop Iker’s diocese was the lawful holder of that name, corporate seal and property.

The court’s actions were not a total victory for Bishop Iker, as it did not dismiss as illegitimate the loyalist’s Feb 2009 convention called by Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori, nor quash their property suit. However, in his comments to the parties Judge Chupp rejected the Episcopal Church’s central legal premise that while people may leave the Episcopal Church, dioceses may not.

The 80 per cent of the delegates who voted to at the 2008 diocesan convention to quit the Episcopal Church for the Province of the Southern Cone “took the diocese with them,” Judge Chupp said.

With the backing of Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori, a loyalist faction within the diocese held a special convention on Feb 7, electing officers and inviting the Bishop Edwin Gulick of Kentucky to serve as interim bishop of Fort Worth. On April 14, the loyalists, styling themselves as the “Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth” brought suit against the secessionists seeking possession of the diocese’s assets.

On Aug 19 the secessionists filed a Rule 12 motion asking the court to require the attorneys for the loyalists to show that they had the legal authority to bring suit in the name of the “Episcopal Diocese of Forth Worth.”

“Those individuals” bringing the lawsuit “claim to hold offices in the Diocese to which they have never been legally elected,” Bishop Iker argued.

The loyalists responded on Sept 3, filing a motion for partial summary judgment arguing that as “Texas authority establishes that a constituent part of a hierarchical church is comprised of those remaining loyal to the hierarchical denomination” it was the true diocese. They then argued the court should resolve the Rule 12 motion by first deciding upon their request for summary judgment.

At the Sept 9 hearing Judge Chupp denied the loyalist’s plea to place their motion ahead of the secessionist’s Rule 12 motion. Arguments were presented to the court and the hearing was continued until Sept 16, with the judge asking each side to present briefs on the question whether a diocese had the legal authority to withdraw from the General Convention of the Episcopal Church.

At the Wednesday hearing, Judge Chupp declined to accept legal precedents offered by the Episcopal Church that held a parish could not withdraw from a diocese and keep its property, saying this argument was not germane to the question of diocesan secession. He also declined to follow the Fresno, California court ruling in favor of the national church in its suit with the breakaway diocese of San Joaquin.

Instead he charged the parties to “find a place” in the Constitution and Canons of the Episcopal Church “where it says the diocese cannot leave.” Unable to point to such language, loyalist attorney Kathleen Wells told the court that just because the prohibition is not explicit it does not mean it is not there.

Judge Chupp was not persuaded and ruled that the loyalist attorneys had “not discharged their burden of proof that they were hired by individuals holding positions” of legal authority within the diocese and ordered they be “barred from appearing in this suit as attorneys for The Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth and The Corporation of the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth that is associated with Bishop Iker.”

In a statement issued after the hearing Bishop Iker said, “we are pleased that Judge Chupp has recognized the legitimacy of the vote of our Diocesan Convention in November 2008 to withdraw from the General Convention of the Episcopal Church and has ruled that we had the legal right to amend our Constitution in order to do so.”

Conservative activists lauded the ruling also. The Rev Phil Ashey of the American Anglican Council said the decision was a “victory of reason and common sense of the constitution and canons over against the over-reaching of Presiding Bishop Katherine Jefferts Schori.”

Canon lawyer Mark McCall of the Anglican Communion Institute told The Church of England Newspaper, “The judge was absolutely correct when he concluded that there is nothing in the Episcopal Church constitution that prohibits a diocese from withdrawing from General Convention. And the law in the United States is clear that members of religious associations have the right to withdraw from membership.”

The “members” of the General Convention “are dioceses since they are the parties that accede to membership. The oft-stated slogan ‘only individuals can leave’ actually has it backwards. It is a diocese that joins; therefore it is a diocese that has a constitutional right to withdraw,” he noted.

However, the communications director of the loyalist diocese Katie Sherrod dismissed the secessionist’s claims of victory, saying they appear to have been “misinformed.”

The “judge did indeed rule that Jonathan Nelson and Kathleen Wells do not represent Bishop Iker and others associated with him,” and he also declined to dismiss the lawsuit, but “made no other rulings,” she said.

“He made some offhand comments in court. He asked some questions. But he made no other rulings. Every other assertion about any such rulings are simply not factual,” Ms Sherrod told CEN.

The parties return to court on Oct 15.

Fort Worth moves to dismiss Church lawsuit: CEN 5.14.09 p 8. May 18, 2009

The Diocese of Fort Worth has filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit brought by the Episcopal Church and its allies seeking control of church property in North Central Texas. On May 8 lawyers for Fort Worth Bishop Jack Iker said the April 14 suit brought against the conservative bishop and diocesan officers should be dismissed as the court lacked “subject-matter” jurisdiction to hear the dispute. Lawyers for Bishop Iker (pictured) asked the court to take “judicial notice” that the Episcopal Church was a voluntary association of dioceses and not a hierarchical church organization with dioceses and bishops subordinate to a metropolitan or national church. The court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to hear the dispute, the motion said, as the underlying petition brought by the national church was seeking to resolve an ecclesial dispute by resorting to secular law — a course of action forbidden under the American principle of separation of church and state Read it all in The Church of England Newspaper.

.

Church files suit againt Bishop Iker: CEN 4.17.09 p 6. April 19, 2009

The Episcopal Church’s headquarters in New York, along with a group of loyalist supporters in North Texas, has filed suit against Fort Worth Bishop Jack Iker and his diocese’s officers, seeking possession of the diocese’s properties. In a statement released on April 14, US Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori said the national church and the loyalist group were asking a Texas court to declare them the “rightful owners of all diocesan property, real and personal, including funds and endowments.” Bishop Jefferts Schori said she had been forced to act and felt “sorrow that the former diocesan leaders took such actions that led us to this time. However, this is a necessary step in order for the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth, comprised of Episcopalians of the full theological spectrum, to continue its gospel work in Texas.” Read it all in The Church of England Newspaper.