Lionel Deimel has the story. (Updated: ENS does, too. And now, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.)
The Hon. Joseph M. James, judge of the Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas, wrote in his opinion:
The plaintiffs and intervenor have always disputed whether a diocese may validly withdraw from the Episcopal Church. For the purposes of this proceeding, the court assumed that the withdrawal was valid and now will determine whether defendants are in violation of the October 14, 2005 Stipulation. Quite simply, they are in violation and cannot be allowed to continue to hold or administer the property referenced in Paragraph One [see footnote * below for paragraph 1] of the October 14, 2005 Stipulation.
Many pages of the parties’ briefs have been used to explain what Paragraph One means. However, I find that the language is clear and unambiguous and, therefore, requires no further explanation. The property is to be held or administered by the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh of the Episcopal Church of the United States of America. Regardless of what name defendants now call themselves, they are not the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh of the Episcopal Church of the United States of America.
Credible evidence establishes that the entity now represented by Attorney Andrew Roman has been recognized as the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh of the Episcopal Church of the United States of America. Defendants contend that this designation is invalid and that they are entitled to continue to hold and administer the subject property. There is no basis in law or fact for their position. The Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh of the Episcopal Church of the United States of America did not cease to exist when the defendants chose to withdraw. The defendants could not extinguish an entity that was created and recognized by the intervenors. The action to designate a subsequent board of governance and appoint a successor to Bishop Duncan is further evidence that the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh of the Episcopal Church of the United States of America never ceased to exist.
Emphasis added. (With a certain glee, I must confess.)
The Order of the Court
AND NOW, this 6th day of October, 2009, in accordance with the foregoing Opinion, it is ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that:
1. The authorized representatives of the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh of the Episcopal Church of the United States of America (led by Bishop Robert H Johnson) shall hold and administer the real and personal property that is subject to Paragraph One of the Stipulation of October 14, 2005, subject to the terms of that Stipulation.
2. Counsel for all parties shall meet with the Special Master (Stanley E. Levine, Esquire) within 30 days of this Order.
3. The Special Master will report to the court within 20 days of that meeting and said report shall identify the real and personal property that is subject to Paragraph One of the Stipulation.
4. The court will review the report and enter an appropriate order for the orderly transition of possession, custody, and control over said property.
5. This court retains jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter to enforce the Stipulation and Order of October 14, 2005 and the provisions of this Order.
The diocesan press release is here.
_____
* Paragraph One of October 14, 2005 Stipulation:
Property,.whether real or personal (hereinafter “Property”), held or administered by the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh of the Episcopal Church of the United States of America hereinafter “Diocese”) for the beneficial use of the parishes and institutions of the Diocese, shall continue to be so held or administered by the Diocese regardless of whether some or even a majority of the parishes in the Diocese might decide not to remain in the Episcopal Church of the United States of America. For purposes of this paragraph, Property as to which title is legitimately held in the name of a parish of the Diocese shall not be deemed Property held or administered by the Diocese.