Docket 1013-11 Amicus Brief


For others who are submitting briefs for this docket item, I am happy to accept them at [REDACTED 2014-02-22. See below]. (This e-mail address will expire after the Fall Judicial Council Meeting.)

UPDATED 2013-08-09

I am about to leave on a week-long vacation from the internet. I’ve had time to reflect on the above filed brief:

  1. It’s possible that the filed brief could have more of a “church nice” tone. (I am also aware of how unpleasant I sound.)¬† These realities do not vitiate my argument.
  2. Imagine a secular voluntary association sponsored by member donations that experienced (a) a chapter breaking the confidence of an executive session, and (b) a constitutional officer responsible for that chapter ignoring basic procedures. I believe that any argument such as the one presented in my brief would in such a secular context sound positively restrained. I fail to understand how an analogous situation involving a religious association requires a much more strained “church nice” tone.
  3. Res ipsa loquitur has to have some relevance in my characterization of the facts. If I’m wrong — which is possible — it should be trivial for someone to present a characterization of the facts demonstrating the deficiencies in my account. Complaining about me or my tone is not by itself an adequate answer.
  4. I think of The United Methodist Church as essentially a gathering of several different Inner Rings. That’s the biggest reason why I’ve posted this brief “publicly.” I have done nothing to promote this blog beyond allowing this blog to be scanned by search engines. If others wish to promote this blog post, I give full permission for them to do so. I doubt this brief will “go viral” — it is much too long to qualify. I also realize that it does not have to “go viral” to be heard.
  5. Right now for many reasons I am not interested in engaging with the arguments in my brief. I will limit my role to providing “a copy of the brief to all parties and amici curiae” (Rule V. D. of the Current Rules of Practice and Procedure).

UPDATED 2014-02-22

Decision 1244 was the result of Docket 1013-11.

The e-mail address that used to be above (and distributed by the Secretary of the Judicial Council for Docket 0414-3) is still active. It will work for the purpose of sending me briefs.