Tuesday, September 05, 2006

More to the dropping of the lawsuit?

Read the following and discern what you can from the BOD minutes found here: Minutes

A motion was introduced “that the four members who are requesting to intervene in the Anderson litigation be excluded from discussions of the Board’s response to their legal action.” Board members Edward Balfour, Elizabeth Fluegel, David Hawk, and Christian Preus requested that the minutes reflect their conviction that the motion “is improper, out of order, and therefore illegal.” After discussion, the question was called and the motion was carried (Yes: 9; No: 6).
Discussion continued regarding the purpose of the meeting and the extent to which the four members who filed the Motion to Intervene should participate. After conflict of interest issues were further identified, it was concluded that personal conflict of interest issues of the four would be discussed while they were present to participate and that conflict of interest issues pertaining to their legal counsel, along with the Synod’s response to the Motion to Intervene, would be addressed in their absence. During the discussion of the personal conflict of interest issues that followed, repeated reference was made to paragraph (1) of Bylaw 1.5.12.1 (b), “Activities shall not be entered into which may be detrimental to the interests of the Synod and its agencies,” and to the concern that the filing of the Motion to Intervene would be detrimental to the Synod. The four members who filed the motion spoke in defense of their action, while other members of the Board continued to express concern that the legal action wouldnot only be detrimental to the Synod but also to the work of the Resolution 7-02A Committee. A motion
was introduced and carried “to recess to allow opportunity for the four to conference via telephone” to discuss whether they would be willing to withdraw the Motion to Intervene. The remaining members of the Board paused to spend time in personal prayer, after which a motion was introduced and carried “to move into executive session” for further discussion of matters pertaining to the Motion to Intervene.

After the Board exited executive session, the following resolution was introduced, discussed, and adopted by unanimous vote:

Resolved, That the Synod’s legal counsel send a letter to the Bryan Cave Law Firm on
behalf of the Synod advising of its conflict of interest in representing the four Board
members; and be it further

Resolved, That if Bryan Cave declines to remove its firm from representation of the four
Board members, that corporate Synod’s legal counsel proceed with a complaint to the
appropriate Missouri authority and that Synod counsel be instructed to file a motion to
disqualify Bryan Cave from representation of the Board members and their Motion to
Intervene.

The following resolution was also introduced, discussed, and adopted by unanimous vote:

Resolved, That in keeping with the exhortation to always proceed decently and in good
order, the Board of Directors entreats the four individuals who have filed the Motion to
Intervene in the Anderson lawsuit to reconsider that motion and withdraw it.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home