This isn't Church law, it is corporate law. The property transfer was between to corporations, and will be treated as such.
I have seen the headaches this causes on a local parish/congregation level. And this was in a place with sane non profit corporation laws. Would hate to see what happens in a place like San Fran.
But I do wonder --- if these daughter corporations were incorporated under Non Profit Corporate Religious, then would not the property be exempt from property tax generally, as are Corporate Sole?
On the other hand;
Why the change from Corp. Sole, anyway? Why divest control and responsibility to other ecclesiastic bodies? To indemnify the Corporate Sole?
Still owned by "the Church" it is argued? What Church? Where?
The LEGAL owner is whoever or whatever corporation's name IS ON THE DEED OF TITLE. Any doubting this need brush up on their Blackstone, enough to dig out the full how and why Corp. Sole was recognized in the first place.
That being said, why would a Non Profit Corporate Religious (if that is what the daughter corps were incorporated as) need pay ANY tax on transfer of property? They most certainly are not taxed on monetary donations.
I do hope the City's case craters. Totally, irrevocably, and end up in the published citations, in such a way to create a yet stronger bulwark of protection for ecclesiastical orgs., in general.
Please pray with me that this be so.