On Friday, May 16, Kirk applied for more time to file their Sur-Reply to briefs filed by EOP and PCUSA, it is unopposed by the other side. From other suits I have followed, it is wise to not oppose your opponents request for more time, as it may weight heavy against you, if you need more time in the future. (What goes around, comes around).
I can't blame Kirk, it was EOP and PCUSA that was long winded. Do they get paid by the word? ;)
UPDATE: According to the Official Court Site: Kirk has filed their Sur-Reply!UPDATE 2x: Sur-Reply POSTED here added to Kirk's Legal page - Thanks
I am impressed with Kirk's openness, as opposed to EOP's and PCUSA's secrecy. They used secrecy, from the day of the fillings of affidavits on every EOP church's property title.
QUESTION: Has any other Presbytery filled of affidavits? Has anybody checked?UPDATED 3x: Table of Contents added to my Kirk's Legal Page as well as below.
Interesting Quote: Ecclesiastical jurisdiction requires consent of the governed.
[Ed: My original analysis stands: Kirk Rules, EOP Drools!]
- Summary: The very simple key to resolving the entire case is disaffiliation.
- Administrative Commission Had No Jurisdiction
- Disaffiliation by Kirk Terminated PCUSA Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction.
- Kirk Had the [ed: US] Constitutional Right to Disaffiliate from PCUSA
- Book of Order Does Not Prohibit Corporations or Congregations From Unilaterally Disaffiliating from PCUSA.
- Kirk's Corporation's Amendment of its Corporate Articles and Bylaws was Lawful
- There is No Trust Agreement Between Kirk Corporation and EOP/PCUSA.
- Conclusion: Grant Kirk's Summary Judgment; Deny EOP/PCUSA (disputed facts)