Showing posts with label Hutterite. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hutterite. Show all posts

Thursday, January 15, 2015

8th Circuit Dismisses Factional Dispute Over Control of Hutterite Colony

In Hutterville Hutterian Brethren, Inc. v. Sveen, (8th Cir., Jan. 13, 2015), the U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed a lawsuit growing out of the long dispute between two factions over control of a South Dakota Hutterite colony. State courts refused to resolve the issue of control, finding that to do so would require civil courts to decide issue of religious doctrine.  A federal court action was then filed on behalf of the colony (a non-profit corporation) by the Waldner faction. The suit was brought against the attorneys representing the colony charging, among other things, breach of fiduciary and ethical duties in creating a sham legal dispute that allowed them to side with the competing Wipf faction. The 8th Circuit held that since the Waldners in the state court proceedings convinced the courts that they should not decide the case because it involved issues of religious doctrine, they are now estopped from claiming that the religious questions involved are a sham.

Tuesday, August 26, 2014

Court Dismisses Lease Dispute That Involves Hutterite Competing Factions

According to the Aberdeen News, a South Dakota trial court Monday dismissed a lawsuit over the right to farm leased land that in reality was part of the ongoing battle between two Hutterite factions over who controls the Hutterville Colony in South Dakota.  Red Acre LLC sued claiming that it entered a lease to allow it to farm 9800 acres in the Colony and that Hutterville Hutterian Brethren and four colony residents, including George Waldner, tried to plant crops and interfere with Red Acre.  Waldner, who leads one of the competing factions, responded that Red Acre is merely a shell for his rival Johnny Wipf Sr., and asked for the lease be declared void.  The court, relying on prior decisions of the South Dakota Supreme Court (see prior posting), held that civil courts have no jurisdiction of the internal dispute of the religious colony.