The Standing Issue

Based on what I've been told by informed individuals, the elected vestry's attorneys appear to have filed a motion for summary judgment in the retrial of the Rector, Wardens, and Vestry case on December 5. The motion is based on the question of the ACA's standing (as well as, possibly, the question of the Bush vestry's standing). In effect, the claim is that the ACA has no interest in the case, since St Mary of the Angels was not a part of the ACA in April 2012. The evidence for this would probably be along these lines:

• St Mary of the Angels parish voted, in a valid election, to enter the Patrimony of the Primate in January 2011. This election has never been challenged by any party.
• On February 5, 2011 the ACA Chancellors (that is, the lawyers for each ACA diocese) issued a letter stating

  According to our canons, those Bishops, clergy and parishes who leave for another jurisdiction, such as a Roman Catholic Ordinariate or the so-called Patrimony of the Primate, have, at this time abandoned the communion of this church and the ACA.

  With deep regret, the ACA declares that they are no longer a part of the ACA, nor do they have authority of jurisdiction in any ACA diocese or parish, and ordinations and other ecclesiastical actions performed by them are null and void effective as of January 1, 2011.

  It should be stated clearly that there is no provision in the Constitution and Canons of the Anglican Church in America for an entity such as the Patrimony of the Primate. The Patrimony of the Primate is not part of the ACA.

• The ACA canons allow parishes to leave the ACA with their property. "Abandoning communion" in the chancellors' letter is s fancy way of saying they've left the ACA.
• On January 10, 2012, the ACA House of Bishops issued a letter reiterating that parishes that had joined the Patrimony of the Primate had left the ACA, and required any parish not wishing to enter the US Ordinariate and wishing to rejoin the ACA to reapply.
• St Mary of the Angels, however, did not apply to rejoin the ACA, and subsequent to the January letter, voted an additional time to join the US Ordinariate by a required supermajority. This election was never challenged by any party.
• The ACA never acted to seize any other former parish that had joined the Patrimony, whether it had elected to join the Ordinariate or not.
• Nevertheless the ACA acted uniquely to seize St Mary of the Angels in April 2012, notwithstanding it had repeatedly claimed the parish was outside its jurisdiction.
• The ACA designated a new vestry in April 2012, removing members in violation of California corporation law and designating new members who were not eligible to serve on the vestry according to the parish bylaws. This ACA-designated vestry has no standing in the case.
• Once again, the parish voted by required supermajority in August 2012 to leave the ACA.

I've been told that the judge in the new trial has asked for written arguments on this motion by January 9, 2015 and will hear oral arguments on January 16. It seems to me that these facts are extremely persuasive, and in fact both Judge Jones in May-June 2012 and the California appeals court recognized that they were extremely persuasive as well. The ACA's position has consistently been only that a court can't consider them, a view that has been rejected at the appeals level twice. It appears that separately, the Church Mutual Insurance Company has also determined that the Bush vestry has no standing in its case.

It may be that this matter will be resolved more quickly than might be expected.