St. James Church`s Legal Battle over Its Property Moving to United States Supreme Court: Petition for Writ of Certiorari Will be Filed Today

NEWPORT BEACH, Calif.--(Business Wire)--
St. James Anglican Church, which is at the center of a nationally publicized
church property dispute with The Episcopal Church, today will file a petition
for writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court of the United States. St. James is
asking the Court to overturn a prior decision of the California Supreme Court,
which conferred a special power on certain religious denominations to take
property they do not own simply by passing an internal "rule." The petition asks
the Supreme Court to decide whether, under the U.S. Constitution, certain
religious denominations can disregard the normal rules of property ownership
that apply to everyone else.

Dr. John Eastman, a nationally recognized constitutional law scholar, has joined
the legal team to pursue the appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. A response from
the Court regarding the St. James petition can be expected as early as October
2009. A decision could be reached as early as mid-2010.

"We will be arguing to the U.S. Supreme Court that the California Supreme
Court`s interpretation of state law has violated the First Amendment of the
United States Constitution. The First Amendment says Congress shall pass no law
respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise
thereof. Even though it says Congress, that Amendment has been interpreted as
applicable to the states as well," Eastman said. "The California Supreme Court
has given a preference to certain kinds of churches that claim to be
hierarchical, that other churches and non-religious associations are not
entitled to, and that violates the establishment clause. We will also be arguing
that denying the local church community their ability to organize and hold title
to their own building and conduct their religious services in a manner they see
fit, this California decision violates their right to the free exercise of
religion," Eastman added.

Under longstanding law, no one can unilaterally impose a trust over someone
else`s property without their permission. Yet, in the decision titled Episcopal
Church Cases, the California Supreme Court ruled that certain denominations -
those that claim to be a "superior religious body or general church" - can
unilaterally impose a trust on the property of spiritually affiliated but
separately incorporated local churches, resulting in the local church forfeiting
its property if it ever chooses to leave the denomination. St. James will argue
before the U.S. Supreme Court that this preferential treatment for certain
denominations violates the U.S. Constitution.

The constitutional issues St. James is raising before the U.S. Supreme Court go
far beyond the Episcopal Church. Every local church, temple, synagogue, parish,
spiritual center, congregation or religious group which owns its own property
through a religious corporation, and has some affiliation with a larger
religious group, is at risk of losing its own property under the California
Supreme Court`s ruling. As a result, religious freedom is suppressed, as those
who have sacrificed to build their local religious communities are now at risk
of having their properties taken based on some past, current or future spiritual
affiliation. A United States Supreme Court decision in favor of St. James would
benefit local church property owners throughout the country because it would
allow them the ability to freely exercise their religion without risk of losing
their property.

While petitions for review with the U.S. Supreme Court are never assured, there
are compelling arguments for the Justices to grant this petition, including
these facts:

* Dozens of church property cases are percolating in the court system, lacking
clear constitutional direction.
* States are in conflict regarding the handling of church property cases.
* These issues have garnered widespread national attention and involve important
questions of federal constitutional law.

The people of St. James Church have owned, and sacrificed to build and acquire
their church properties for many decades without any financial support from the
Episcopal Church. St. James Church never agreed to relinquish its property to
the Episcopal Church upon a change of religious affiliation, and has
consistently maintained that it has the right to use and possess its own
property.

Even as St. James seeks a place on the Supreme Court calendar, the church`s
legal battle has returned to the Orange County Superior Court. "While we are
surprised that the California Supreme Court would prefer certain religions over
others when it comes to property ownership, the battle in this case is far from
over," said Eric C. Sohlgren, lead attorney and spokesperson for St. James. "The
case has already returned to the Orange County Superior Court. Because St. James
had an early victory in 2005 by legally attacking the Episcopal allegations, we
now look forward to presenting evidence and additional legal arguments on behalf
of St. James. For example, St. James has brought a complaint against the
Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles based on a 1991 written promise that it would
not claim a trust over the property of St. James on 32nd Street in Newport
Beach. We had hoped Episcopal leaders would abide by this promise, but they sued
St. James and its volunteer directors anyway."

Click here for a copy of the writ of certiorari which will be filed today with
the U.S. Supreme Court:
http://steadfastinfaith.org/content/st-james-ussc-petition

For more information, please visit the website: www.steadfastinfaith.org

A Brief Recap:St. James Anglican Church`s Fight to Keep its Property

In August 2004 St. James Church ended its affiliation with the Episcopal Diocese
of Los Angeles and the Episcopal Church over theological differences involving
the authority of Holy Scripture and the Lordship of Jesus Christ. The Episcopal
Diocese of Los Angeles brought lawsuits against St. James Church, All Saints
Church, Long Beach, CA, and St. David`s Church, No. Hollywood, CA, and their
volunteer board members in September of 2004. Subsequently, the national
Episcopal Church intervened into the lawsuits against the three local church
corporations and their volunteer board members.

In August 2005 the Honorable David C. Velasquez of the Orange County Superior
Court ruled in favor of St. James Church and struck the complaint brought by the
Diocese of Los Angeles. In October 2005 Judge Velasquez issued a similar ruling
in favor of All Saints and St. David`s Churches. These early victories arose
from early challenges to the two complaints filed by the Diocese and the
Episcopal Church, and as a result, no trial ever occurred. The Episcopalians
then appealed to the California Court of Appeal sitting in Orange County on this
very limited court record, arguing that under neutral principles of law they had
a probability of prevailing and had alleged legally viable claims.

In July 2007 the Court of Appeal rejected nearly thirty years of California
church property law by ruling that a secular court must defer to the
determinations of the highest level of the church hierarchy regarding ownership
of local church property, regardless of any agreements between the parties, the
corporate documents, who paid for the property, or who held the deed. The Court
of Appeal reversed the trial court judgment in favor of St. James, and ordered
the case back to the trial court.

In August 2007 St. James filed a petition with the California Supreme Court,
which the Court unanimously and quickly accepted under the name of Episcopal
Church Cases. The Court heard oral argument in the case in October 2008.

In January 2009 the California Supreme Court ruled in Episcopal Church Cases
that church property disputes in California must be resolved by neutral or
non-religious principles of law, not by civil courts merely deferring to the
decrees of church "hierarchies" or larger church bodies. As a result, every
church property dispute in California now will be resolved based on
non-religious factors that are unique to the dispute. While adopting this
non-religious method of resolving property disputes between churches, however,
the Court seemed to defer to the Episcopal Church`s alleged "trust canon," which
purports to create a trust interest in church property owned by local
congregations. The Court made its ruling despite the fact that St. James
purchased and maintained its property with its own funds and has held clear
record title to its property for over fifty years. St. James believes that this
ruling overlooked decades of trust law in California that only allows the owner
of property to create a trust in favor of someone else, and will as a result
have wide impact for local church property owners throughout California that
seek to change their religious affiliation.

In late January 2009 St. James formally asked the California Supreme Court to
modify its January decision.

In February 2009 the California Supreme Court granted the St. James request, and
modified its decision to confirm both that the suit against St. James is not
over and that no decision on the merits of the case has yet been made. Instead,
the Court clarified that its decision was only based on the limited record
before it, which will now be augmented through the normal discovery and trial
process.

In late February 2009, the case against St. James Church corporation, the
volunteer board members, and clergy returned to the trial court in Orange County
where St. James can assert factual and legal arguments that were not addressed
on appeal through discovery, depositions, motions, and trial. Using the legal
standard set forth by the California Supreme Court, the Orange County Superior
Court will eventually decide the merits of this dispute. For example, St. James
has brought a complaint against the Diocese of Los Angeles based on a 1991
written promise that it would not claim a trust over the property of St. James
on 32nd Street in Newport Beach.

On June 24, 2009, St. James filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the
United States Supreme Court. A response from the Court regarding its decision to
hear St. James`s petition can be expected by October 2009. If the Court takes
the case, a decision would be rendered by mid-2010.

St. James:
Karen Bro
Communications Director
[949] 675-0210 x310 - church
[949] 235-4568 - mobile
or
St. James Legal Team
Dr. John Eastman
Lead Attorney in U.S. Supreme Court
[714] 628-2587
or
Eric C. Sohlgren
Lead Attorney in Orange County Superior Court, California Court of Appeal,
California Supreme Court
Payne & Fears LLP
[949] 851-1100 x252 - office
[949] 439-6149 - mobile

Copyright Business Wire 2009