The sting of this ruling, however, is in its tail:
As indicated during oral argument, this court finds some of these allegations troubling. Good Shepherd's own counsel intima[ted] that parish members may have removed personal property to displeasure at this Court's former Decision & Order. Additionally, a there is an obvious lack of income flowing into Good Shepherd after April 2008. In other words, since April 2008, Good Shepherd was meeting but no pledge or plate revenue is identified during that time. Rather, the Diocese alleges that Good Shepherd was spending down an endowment fund to pay for daily operations, and diverting income elsewhere....On its face, it appears that the parish was doing everything it could to spend down the assets, divert new income, and perhaps actively interfere with the diocese's right of ownershipId. at 13.
The Court ordered depositions of CGS's officials, beginning with Fr. Kennedy.