The following comes from an April 13 LA Times article by Marisa Gerber:
In a victory for Katy Perry, a Los Angeles judge announced Wednesday that she intends to block an effort by nuns to sell a Los Feliz convent to a competing buyer.
The decision marks another major twist in the fierce real estate fight among a pair of nuns, Perry, the Archdiocese of Los Angeles and a well-known restaurateur over the fate of the coveted property.
The judge’s ruling puts the pop star one step closer to buying the contentious Los Feliz convent, said Perry’s attorney, Eric Rowen.
The Sisters of the Immaculate Heart of Mary contend that they have the right to sell the convent, which is among the assets of the order’s nonprofit institute.
The nuns say their deal to sell the property to Hollister for $15.5 million was legal.
The Los Angeles Archdiocese, however, has fought to stop the sale, contending that the church has jurisdiction and that the nuns’ sale was unauthorized.
Statement from the Archdiocese of Los Angeles on Waverly property ruling (from April 13 Angelus article):
We are gratified by Judge Bowick’s decision that invalidates the Hollister transaction. This judgment confirms Judge Chalfant’s previous ruling that the sale of the Institute of the Immaculate Heart of Mary Sisters’ property to Dana Hollister was “improper and invalid.” Today, the court agreed with each of the archdiocese’s arguments. As a result, the court’s decision cancels the Hollister transaction.
The care and well-being of all five sisters has always been our primary concern. The archdiocese was forced to take legal action to protect all the five sisters from being taken advantage of by the Dana Hollister transaction in which Hollister improperly took possession of their property for only $44,000 in cash and a contingent promissory note. The Institute continues to be under contract to sell the property to Katy Perry.
The archdiocese will continue to provide pastoral outreach and care to the sisters. We will take any necessary steps to continue to protect the sisters and ensure that any transaction on the sale of the property will provide them with immediate funding for their care.
Can someone explain why this beautiful property is not being retained as a beautiful and much needed school, retreat house or both?
I have the same question.
Most likely, the remaining 5 sisters need cash money to live and a new downsized place to reside. The beautiful real estate they are in is probably expensive to maintain and most likely un-affordable for the sisters and their Order. (Happening all across the country.) What I want to know is why is — Kate Perry involved? & why does the LA Archdiocese have a say over the needs of the order? (Does the LA Ad. need money?) If Hollister can come up with the 15.5 M, why is everybody else suddenly concerned about the financial business of this Order, the care of the sisters, etc? Sounds fishy.
When the Sisters of the Immaculate Heart of Mary finally imploded in LA in 1969 Cardinal Manning had the archdiocese buy this property at a deep discount from Sir Daniel Donahue as a base of operations for the sisters who remained Catholic.
In other words the IMH Sisters never owned the property — the archdiocese did.
Those lamenting the sale of this property would cringe at just how much was sold off by Roger Mahony to pay the nearly $800M settlement he negotiated in order to stay out of prison.
I am so glad that these poor, weak women are being protected by the Big Strong Men of the Archdiocese of Let’s Make A Deal.
Dana Hollister transaction in which Hollister improperly took possession of their property for only $44,000 in cash and a contingent promissory note”
Unlike jack and his magic bean stalk, trading a fine place for a handful of beans might have improved this ‘bargain’.
Too bad the Church couldn’t ‘re-purpose’ the place to promote good works within its walls and grounds.
Still – in hollyweird money is as plentiful as the ‘stars’ – here on Earth.