An eight-year fight to decide if a Fayette County man could host concerts on his 148-acre property ended yesterday on the eve of trial.

Instead of letting a federal jury decide if William Pritts really was operating a church, or if his Church of Universal Love and Music was really just a ruse to host large, outdoor concerts, both sides yesterday reached a settlement.

The details of the agreement weren't yet available, though a consent order is expected this week.

Attorney Greg Koerner, who represents Mr. Pritts, said the settlement is "mutually satisfactory," to both parties. He also said his client will be able to continue with his venture, though he couldn't explain further, citing a confidentiality agreement.

Mr. Pritts filed a federal lawsuit against Fayette County and the zoning hearing board in June 2006, claiming that the county's failure to issue him a special exception permit violated his First Amendment right to freedom of religion.

He alleged in his claim that the Church of Universal Love and Music advanced religious inspiration and community through the celebration of live music.

The county refused to approve Mr. Pritts' application, claiming that he used the land for daylong concerts and illicit drugs.

The Fayette County zoning board found that the church "failed to meet the burden of proof to establish approval of the request," and "did not meet the threshold for the proposed use in accordance with the definitions and words contained in the religious use statute 'in accordance with their customary meanings.'"

The battle between Mr. Pritts and the county began in May 2001, when he received a cease-and-desist order from having a commercial event on his property.

What followed was a series of applications and denials for special exceptions over several years. Originally, Mr. Pritts asked for a building permit to construct a stage on his property. That was followed by a request to host public festivals where bands would play. In 2001, Mr. Pritts said he hoped to sell 4,000 tickets per event and would allow both camping and alcoholic beverages, court documents say.

At a number of public hearings, neighbors and community leaders raised concerns about traffic, congestion and safety because of the potential number of participants.

All of Mr. Pritts' requests were denied. According to one court filing made by Fayette County, Mr. Pritts, who incorporated the Church of Universal Love and Music as a nonprofit in September 2002, didn't raise the specter of religious considerations until Sept. 2, 2004. That was his third request for consideration but the first time that he raised religion as a basis, Fayette County's attorney said.

During his deposition, Mr. Pritts described his church's religious beliefs. He called it a nondenominational group designed to welcome everyone.

"[There are] members in our church from different religions and backgrounds. There's atheists. There's agnostics, Muslims and all of the religions, basically, because we are drawing from a broad spectrum and trying to put the larger picture: 'We live on one Earth. We are going to have to share it,'" he said.

The trial in the federal civil case was to begin yesterday, but Chief U.S. District Judge Donetta W. Ambrose delayed it a day for last-minute settlement negotiations.

One aspect of the case that might have worked in Mr. Pritts' favor was that Gretchen Mundorff, solicitor for the zoning hearing board, at one time recommended that Mr. Pritts' application for a special exception be granted, as long as there were "conditions to protect the health, safety and welfare of the residents of the adjacent community."

The defendants requested that the information not be permitted in the trial because it represented attorney-client privilege, but Judge Ambrose denied their request, saying that the defendants did not treat the letter as confidential and therefore they waived privilege.

On the county's part, attorneys wanted to use video footage of Mr. Pritts doing an interview with "The Daily Show" on Comedy Central, in which he said that "God never says you can't party on," and that it's rude not to share marijuana.

Judge Ambrose denied the request, saying that the footage was both "heavily edited to suit the show's agenda," and was not relevant to the claims in the case.