Search for: "Defendant Doe 1 Diocese"
Results 1 - 20
of 122
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Dec 2014, 4:00 am
, (7th Cir., Dec. 1, 2014), the 7th Circuit rejected on procedural grounds defendant's appeal from denial of its summary judgment motion seeking dismissal of the employment discrimination suit against it. [read post]
21 Apr 2016, 8:06 am
Let me deal with them one-by-one, beginning in this initial post with:1. [read post]
23 Jan 2013, 5:57 pm
The Diocese of South Carolina has been using these registered names and mark in the ordinary course of its business as the Diocese of South Carolina, both before and after its association with the Defendant. [read post]
11 Aug 2007, 3:37 pm
But some foundation or other entity that is not part of the Diocese is also on the hook because what, it does Catholic stuff? [read post]
19 May 2021, 4:00 am
Seitz admitted that Olivas does not and cannot perform any ministerial duties for the Diocese due to Olivas’ suspension of faculties. [read post]
2 Mar 2011, 3:17 pm
Doe v. [read post]
14 Apr 2013, 6:32 am
Does the constitution of ECUSA represent, in your opinion, a form of agreement among its member dioceses? [read post]
24 Aug 2010, 9:17 am
When it comes to litigation strategy, that which the Presiding Bishop is following is simple, and consists of two principles:1. [read post]
10 Jun 2013, 5:46 pm
But the remark is irrelevant, because (1) Dixon v. [read post]
1 Feb 2013, 4:46 pm
Judge Goodstein forced the remnant group into a mold it does not like, and recognized Bishop Lawrence's Diocese as having certain legal rights, when she should have denied it any legitimacy altogether. [read post]
19 Jun 2020, 1:38 pm
But this time, things will be different:1. [read post]
19 Jun 2020, 1:38 pm
But this time, things will be different:1. [read post]
3 Mar 2012, 9:38 am
" But that does not mean that non-Episcopalians were not authorized to write parish checks to pay parish expenses -- so long as the parishes themselves remained a part of ECUSA, as Judge Bellows held that they were.)The occupying parishioners, as Judge Bellows recognized, were free to keep their pledges from going to ECUSA or the Diocese from and after that date, and so neither ECUSA or the Diocese has any claim on moneys contributed by the parishioners from and… [read post]
5 Jan 2011, 2:12 am
" Court filings claim, in contrast, that the Milwaukee Archdiocese "does not hold title to any of the property" of parishes within its region. [read post]
5 Jan 2011, 2:11 am
" Court filings claim, in contrast, that the Milwaukee Archdiocese "does not hold title to any of the property" of parishes within its region. [read post]
11 Nov 2018, 1:57 pm
(Note that Resolution B012's mandate does not take effect Churchwide until December 1.) [read post]
11 Nov 2018, 1:57 pm
(Note that Resolution B012's mandate does not take effect Churchwide until December 1.) [read post]
11 Nov 2018, 1:57 pm
(Note that Resolution B012's mandate does not take effect Churchwide until December 1.) [read post]
17 Jul 2014, 7:34 am
The defendants say that the Diocese and its parishes all forfeited their property when the Diocese voted to amend its governing documents so as to make it no longer a constituent member of ECUSA.According to the official line promulgated by ECUSA, "people may leave, but dioceses may not. [read post]
9 Dec 2021, 10:09 am
[T]he defendants [also] asked the Diocese to produce "[a] list of all canonical proceedings or matters in which de Laire was involved, in any capacity, for the period January 1, 2011 through today. [read post]
