Erdman v. Chapel Hill Presbyterian Church (Concurrence)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Erdman v. Chapel Hill Presbyterian Church Concurrence in Result by Alexander, J.P.T. No. 84998-6 ALEXANDER, J.* (concurrence in result reached by lead opinion) The lead opinion and concurrence/dissent each agree that because Angela Erdman submitted her claims involving matters of discipline, faith, and ecclesiastical law to the Presbytery of Olympia and did not appeal the decision of that body, we must accept that decision as final and binding. That conclusion, in my judgment, resolves the case, and we should not, as the lead opinion and concurrence/dissent do, speculate about what this court should do in factually dissimilar cases that may come before the court in the future. *Justice Gerry L. Alexander is serving as a justice pro tempore of the Supreme Court pursuant to Washington Constitution article IV, section 2(a). 84998-6 AUTHOR: Gerry L. Alexander, Justice Pro Tem. WE CONCUR: Justice Mary E. Fairhurst 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
