In Court, Things Drag On

I attended the hearing this morning on the motion by the vestry to dismiss the civil theft case against Fr Kelley based on lack of standing by the Bush group to bring the suit. Judge Murphy's tentative opinion denied the motion:

A motion for judgment on the pleadings may be made on the same grounds as those supporting a general demurrer, i.e., that the complaint fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a legally cognizable claim. (Stoops v. Abbassi (2002) 100 Cal. App. 4th 644, 650.) Defendant Christopher P. Kelley (“Defendant”) moves for a judgment on the pleadings on the grounds that neither Plaintiffs Anglican Church in America (“ACA”) nor Diocese of the West (“DOW”) are real parties in interest as they do not hold title to the property at dispute in this action, and that Plaintiff Rector, Wardens, and Vestrymen of St. Mary of the Angels’ Parish in Hollywood, Los Angeles, California (“Rector”) does not have standing to bring this lawsuit as it is an illegitimate “appointed vestry.” However, Defendant’s motion relies entirely on facts from outside of the pleadings, specifically, an opinion from the Court of Appeal in a related case. While an opinion from the Court of Appeal is judicially noticeable, the Court is not required to judicially notice the truth of the matters stated therein. Furthermore, even if the Court were to judicially notice the Court of appeal opinion, Defendant fails to show how that opinion would have a res judicata or collateral estoppel effect on the case at bar.

The motion is DENIED.

However, Judge Murphy said he would hear a motion for summary judgment based on lack of standing on December 5. I'll have more to say in a subsequent post.