St Mary Of The Angels Litigation Update

Last Decemher I covered what I knew of a new round of litigation surrounding the St Mary of the Angels Hollywood parish. Recall that as of 1976-77, this then-Episcopalian parish was the epicenter of the dissent from developments at the 1976 Episcopalian General Convention that led to the formation, first, of the Pastoral Provision, and eventually of Anglicanorum coetibus.

Its then-rector, Fr Jack Barker, was seen as so central to this process that he was asked to keynote last November's Anglicanorum Coetibus Society conference in Toronto that celebrated the tenth anniversary of Anglicanorum coetibus. (He did not actually attend due to health reasons.)

My own view, after exposure to the parish's history from the start of the 1977 crisis, has been that leaving The Episcopal Church fully four years before any personal prelature or other structure was established to receive the parish into the Roman Catholic Church was reckless and led inevitably to litigation, the end of which we'll not foreseeably encounter after more than 40 yeas, a Biblical span.

Thanks to a former vestry member, I've been provided with court documents that give more detail on the litigation, which is Los Angeles Superior Court case 18STCV04171. The case goes to trial on March 16, 2020. I'm still deciding whether I should attend.

The story involves two competing vestries and parish factions, which are identified in court documents as the "Bush group", which was appointed to a non-canonical vestry in mid-2012 by the ACA, and the "Kelley group", which was elected in a 2012 parish meeting by a parish majority that wished to enter the North American ordinariate.

One outcome of a prior round of litigation was that, following an appeal, the California state appeals court ruled in 2014 that the "Kelley group" was the legitimate vestry and ordered a new trial on other issues. The verdict of the new trial in December 2015 returned control of the parish and its property to the "Kelley group". However, in 2014, while still in control of the property, the "Bush group" borrowed $575,000 from lenders identified as the Kirkpatricks, The "Bush group" also pursued an appeal of the 2015 trial verdict.

While in control of the parish after 2015, the "Kelley group" was forced to continue payments on the Kirkpatrick loan. By 2018, circumstances, which aren't clear from court documents but may have involved a balloon payment, required the parish under control of the "Kelley group" to refinance the Kirkpatrick loan. The "Kelley group" took out a new loan, for $2.7 million, which was financed by Richard and Terrie Sommers. This was to cover the amount still owed on the Kirkpatrick loan, as well as payments to attorneys and other unspecified purposes.

However, in early 2018, the "Bush group", which had appealed the 2015 trial verdict that awarded the "Kelley group" control of the parish, succeeded in its appeal, and in July 2018, the "Bush group" regained control of the parish. The "Bush group" as of November 2018 had ceased payments on the Sommers loan, even though the loan was taken out by the then-legitimate vestry, in the name of the corporation, and using the corporation's commercial property as security. As a result, Richard and Terrie Sommers began legal action in November 2018 to foreclose on the commercial property.

According to the Sommers's pleading, although the $2.7 million was to provide for legitimate corporate expenses, including taxes, mortgage and insurance payments, and other legitimate purposes, the "Bush group" is refusing to pay any of the $2.7 million amount because it disputes $360,000 of the expenses.

The current dispute centers on the Sommers's December 2019 attempt to seize the commercial property of the parish at foreclosure. The court awarded the "Bush group" a temporary restraining order against this attempt. It appears that the Sommerses will argue at trial that

• The Sommers's loans were valid transactions for valid corporate purposes, undertaken in the name of the corporation
• The "Bush group" was fully aware of the loan transactions at the time they were made and did not try to stop them
• The "Bush group" benefited from the loans, which were taken out for the benefit of the corporation and its property and continues to benefit from them
• The "Bush group" has not objected to innumerable other transactions undertaken by the "Kelley group" while it controlled the parish, such as utilities, maintenance, mortgage, and so forth
• The canonical status of Fr Kelley has no bearing on the issue, since the property in dispute is the secular, taxable rental property only.

The "Bush group" has argued principally that Fr Kelley had been deposed as an ACA priest, and any actions by the vestry with him as rector were invalid. They also contend that the "Kelley group" vestry had "forged" the loan application. The Sommerses reply that the court under the US First Amendment cannot involve itself with canonical issues and must address only the legal questions around the loan, something the courts have consistently maintained in all the litigation surrounding the parish. When the "Kelley group" vestry secured the $2.7 million loan, it had the legal authority to do so and was not committing any fraud.

Neither Fr Kelley nor anyone else on the "Kelley group" vestry is a party to the suit, the dispute is only between the lenders of the 2018 $2.7 million loan and the "Bush group" that is in default on those loan payments.

However, if the Sommerses prevail, they would seize the commercial property which has been paying the overwhelming majority of the parish's expenses. The parish itself has a membership I would estimate in the low to mid double digits, and the history has been that, with the rental income paying the bills, nobody sees a need to pledge more than token amounts.

The loss of the commercial property would inevitably force the sale of the adjoining parish building and presumably the practical dissolution of the Anglican parish.