With a good state lawyer the JW's should easily loose this case.
1) At baptism they publicly declare all whom are baptized as ordained ministers.
2) At baptism they offer no written proof that one has been received as an ordained minister. (WT policy in court is that these people are mere parishioners, and has sufficient case law to back that testimony up).
3) When an elder is appointed they offer the elder no proof other than an elder book that the individual is now legally seen as an ordained minister.
4) When an elder wishes to marry someone and needs proof that he is a minister for the state/province, etc. That person is to make a written request, and that request doesn't have to be fulfilled.
5) Ignorance or lack of knowledge that the elder needs such proof is not a defense for the court.
The WT - has also further shown that in some correspondence that they will/could be personally held accountable. If an individual was provided with such written proof, then they would not have needed such information as the WT would be held accountable first.
If the WT wins today, I'd say the state was incompetent.