Although the reporter's speculation about the questions of the justices is no more than that, I did seem that the questions suggested a favorable result for the Episcopal Church. Here is the article from one of the leading legal newspapers:

Court Appears to Favor Overarching Church
Mike McKee
The Recorder and www.callaw.com
10-09-2008
PALM DESERT — Local parishes wanting to disaffiliate from the over-arching church organization should proceed cautiously.
The California Supreme Court indicated strongly during oral arguments Wednesday that parishes don't keep their property once they leave. That stays with the greater church based on canons that place all parish property in trust when the local parish originally joins the overall church.
"When St. James Parish was founded, didn't [it] agree to be bound by the canons and constitution of the higher church?" Justice Ming Chin asked a lawyer representing a Newport Beach parish that left the Episcopal Church in 2004. "And don't those canons make clear that if the lesser church leaves the greater church, the property stays with the greater church?"
Eric Sohlgren, an attorney with Irvine's Payne & Fears who argued the case for St. James Parish, disagreed. But it appeared the entire panel of justices disagreed.
The dispute began in 2003 when the national Episcopal Church made the controversial decision to ordain V. Gene Robinson, who is openly gay, as a bishop in New Hampshire. The ordination caused a huge schism within the Episcopal Church and led parishioners at St. James Parish, founded in 1949, to vote to disaffiliate and join the Anglican Church of Uganda.
St. James claimed to have held title to its property since 1950, but the national church insisted that Episcopal canons require local parishes to be "forever held" to the authority and rules of the greater church. One of those canons puts the property of local parishes in trust for the overall church and the local diocese, in this case the Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles.
The national debate centers on whether so-called hierarchical churches — such as the Episcopal Church — can unilaterally appropriate for themselves property purchased by their affiliates, under what is known as the hierarchical standard of ownership. Alternatively, churches can abide by the "neutral-principles-of-law" standard that requires an examination of the deeds, articles of incorporation and other documentary evidence to determine ownership. Church canons could be cited under either standard.
The U.S. Supreme Court entered the national fray in 1979 when it issued Jones v. Wolf, 443 U.S. 595, which permits, but doesn't require, state courts to use neutral principles of law when deciding church property disputes.
Justice Chin noted that almost all other states' courts have adopted the neutral-principles-of-law standard. "Haven't most, if not all, those cases gone against you?" Chin asked Sohlgren, who responded by saying there has been a "mix of decisions."
Undaunted, Chin later pointed out the same thing to Los Angeles lawyer John Shiner, a partner at Holme Roberts & Owen, who represented the Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles, and then asked him how persuasive those rulings are for the California Supreme Court