Mosey sues cult for harrassment

Lone Star

Crusader
Interesting post from TX Lawyer on the Bunker that I missed two days ago.....


TX Lawyer2 days ago Litigation Update:
I haven't seen anybody note this before, so apologies if it's already been covered. I took a look at the court of appeals' docket sheet today for the anti-SLAPP appeal, and noticed that Team CSI has added a new law firm to the appeal. The law firm is Vinson & Elkins, which is one of the largest Texas-based law firms, with additional offices in major cities around the country and the world. The V&E attorneys who are now listed on the case are Tom Leatherbury and Marc Fuller. I know Leatherbury a bit, having litigated against him on at least one occasion. He's handled a number of First Amendment/defamation/media rights cases in the past, so the anti-SLAPP stuff should be right up his alley. He was, in my experience, a straight shooter who was pretty methodical in his work.


Also, the trial court's docket sheet indicates that a couple of unspecified motions were filed yesterday by Dave Lubow and Monty Drake. No idea what they might relate to.

TX Lawyer2 days ago It is not surprising or unusual to add new appellate lawyers to the team when a case is taken up on appeal. Leatherbury has plenty of appellate experience, and that is a specialized skill set that I suspect Cedillo et al. may lack. In fact, now that I think about that, I wouldn't be surprised if Leatherbury was brought into the case at the recommendation of Cedillo or someone else on his team. I have no idea if they've worked together previously, but such relationships are frequently how appellate lawyers are brought into a case.

TX Lawyer2 days ago More surprised that Scientology went to V&E, since I don't think Tom or his firm hold any particular sway with the Austin Court of Appeals or the Texas Supreme Court. V&E has an Austin office, but Tom and Marc Fuller are both based in Dallas. As for taking on controversial clients: Enron, anybody?
 

Lone Star

Crusader

Vaquera
TX Lawyer2 days ago In your opinion, has Co$ set aside Jefferson in favor of a new appellate team? How would he react to this infusion of talent?




  • TX Lawyer Vaquera2 days ago No, not at all. Jefferson represents RTC and Miscavige in the mandamus proceeding. V&E represents CSI in the anti-SLAPP appeal. Given their legal strategy of throwing CSI under the bus while trying to protect RTC and Miscavige, it is completely unsurprising that CSI would have separate appellate counsel. You can be certain that both teams are collaborating extensively behind the scenes.
 

Gib

Crusader

Vaquera
TX Lawyer2 days ago In your opinion, has Co$ set aside Jefferson in favor of a new appellate team? How would he react to this infusion of talent?




  • TX Lawyer Vaquera2 days ago No, not at all. Jefferson represents RTC and Miscavige in the mandamus proceeding. V&E represents CSI in the anti-SLAPP appeal. Given their legal strategy of throwing CSI under the bus while trying to protect RTC and Miscavige, it is completely unsurprising that CSI would have separate appellate counsel. You can be certain that both teams are collaborating extensively behind the scenes.

unbelievable legal bullshit, just to stop DM from giving a depo.

If the dude had clean hands, why wouldn't he give a depo?

What is the purpose of him not giving a depo?
 

Lone Star

Crusader
unbelievable legal bullshit, just to stop DM from giving a depo.

If the dude had clean hands, why wouldn't he give a depo?

What is the purpose of him not giving a depo?

Well actually the addition of the new appellate lawyers is for the CSI team, which is not representing DM. The CSI is appealing Dib Waldrip's ruling on the anti-SLAPP motion. Last week the DM team appealed Waldrip's ruling on the deposition.
 

Jump

Operating teatime
Well actually the addition of the new appellate lawyers is for the CSI team, which is not representing DM. The CSI is appealing Dib Waldrip's ruling on the anti-SLAPP motion. Last week the DM team appealed Waldrip's ruling on the deposition.


The last anti-SLAPP ruling (upholding the motion's denial) included an awarding of costs to Mosey, am I right?

I hope this one includes further awarding of costs . . .

:drama:
 

Gib

Crusader
Well actually the addition of the new appellate lawyers is for the CSI team, which is not representing DM. The CSI is appealing Dib Waldrip's ruling on the anti-SLAPP motion. Last week the DM team appealed Waldrip's ruling on the deposition.

I understand. The bottom line for me is, I fully trusted the entire entity called the religion known as Scientology, from a public point of view.

And that means I thought everybody within the organisation by whatever name was ethical and trustworthy because they had all their overts and withholds pulled, so naturally all people in the SO are clean as a whistle, and as such would be willing to tell the truth, and thus money spend on preventing depositions just doesn't make sense to me.
 

TG1

Angelic Poster
I understand. The bottom line for me is, I fully trusted the entire entity called the religion known as Scientology, from a public point of view.

And that means I thought everybody within the organisation by whatever name was ethical and trustworthy because they had all their overts and withholds pulled, so naturally all people in the SO are clean as a whistle, and as such would be willing to tell the truth, and thus money spend on preventing depositions just doesn't make sense to me.

Well, obviously, their hands aren't clean.

I think you've arrived at the Slough of Cynicism. It's a good place to discover. Maybe not to live in forever, but a necessary destination for someone who lives a full life.

TG1
 

TG1

Angelic Poster
Regarding the hiring of V&E ...

Damn! Scientology is spending a shitload of money on lawyers.

These guys are close to $1,000/hour.

TG1
 

dchoiceisalwaysrs

Gold Meritorious Patron
Yes they probably think if they can win this case they can survive. I strongly doubt it.. the whole monster has been rotting from the inside out for decades. It appears to me to be in its final stages of complete delirium.

Regarding the hiring of V&E ...

Damn! Scientology is spending a shitload of money on lawyers.

These guys are close to $1,000/hour.

TG1
 

Miss Ellie

Miss Ellie
They have a LOT of $$$ - they will continue as long at the $$$ holds out.

Unless you can find photos of DM in bed with an underage goat there is not much chance of getting him out of office any time soon.

They will always pull in more people but in smaller numbers. The new stupid-orgs will close for lack of funds... DM will not want "his" money going to support them. We made you build them - now we make you support them will be the motto.

There are a lot of people looking for answers in this world and for some - for a time the Sciobots will be the answer.

Our job is to continue to be there for those that come out the other end of the meat-grinder. To keep the issues in the eye of the media. To support the ones caught in the legal battles.

AND to sit back with an adult beverage & wait for the end of that world.... & be ready to dance a jig when DM fades into the mists of nothingness.

BUT what do I know... I am just a silly survivor.

:eyeroll:
 

Lone Star

Crusader
Do you kids like the TX Lawyer? Yes? Well here ya go....

TX Lawyer3 days ago Earlier this week, CSI requested and received an extension of its briefing deadline in the anti-SLAPP appeal on the Monique Rathbun case. None of the individual appellants (Lubow, Sloat, et al.) filed extension requests, but I would expect them to submit me-too motions sooner or later. CSI's brief will now be due on June 11.


More interesting to me is that that CSI has now added yet another law firm to the case. In addition to (1) their lead appellate attorneys at Vinson & Elkins, (2) Ricardo Cedillo's team in San Antonio, and (3) George Spencer's firm in San Antonio, they have now added (4) Eric M. Lieberman (pro hac vice application allegedly forthcoming) from the firm of Rabinowitz, Boudin, Standard, Krinsky & Lieberman in New York City. Lieberman is a constitutional law/First Amendment specialist whose firm bio indicates he has represented Scientology (and a number of other religious organizations) in the past. And of course, that's all in addition to the legal team representing David Miscavige and RTC, featuring Haynes & Boone (Lamont Jefferson) and the appellate gurus at Alexander Dubose Jefferson Townsend (Wallace Jefferson).


Those are some awfully big bills coming in.


Tony Ortega Mod TX Lawyer3 days ago Lieberman has been in the courtroom during Monique's lawsuit from day one. He's one of the church's big guns going way, way back.


TX Lawyer Tony Ortega3 days ago Thanks, Tony. He is not listed among the attorneys on the trial court's docket sheet, so I assumed he was new to the case. It appears instead they've just been holding him back for the appeal.


Tony Ortega Mod TX Lawyer3 days ago Pretty sure I remember them saying he was filing pro hac vice on the very first day of the first hearing. Must have taken a while or something.


TX Lawyer Tony Ortega3 days ago There doesn't appear to be any pro hac motion on file with the trial court. Technically, he would have to apply for pro hac vice status separately for each court he wanted to appear before as counsel -- trial court, court of appeals, and supreme court. Unless he wanted to do something in front of Judge Waldrip, there probably wouldn't be any need for him to do so in the lower court. But if they want their First Amendment guru to have his name on their appellate briefs, he will have to pro hac his way in.
For the non-lawyers out there, a pro hac vice motion is what you file for an attorney to appear before a court in a jurisdiction where the lawyer is not licensed to practice law. If granted, it only allows the out-of-state lawyer to serve as an attorney in that one particular case, before that one particular court. They are routinely granted once the lawyer has paid the requisite fee to the state bar (I think it's around $250 per application).

All cross posted from The Underground Bunker....www.tonyortega.org
 

Churchill

Gold Meritorious Patron
Scientology does not have the law on their side,

so they can't argue the law.


Scientology does not have the facts on their side,

so they can't argue the facts.


But they can & have paid out millions

to high-priced law firms to

pound the table in mock ecclesiastical outrage.


Trouble is, their game's worn thin.

Real thin.
 

oneonewasaracecar

Gold Meritorious Patron
Scientology does not have the law on their side,

so they can't argue the law.


Scientology does not have the facts on their side,

so they can't argue the facts.


But they can & have paid out millions

to high-priced law firms to

pound the table in mock ecclesiastical outrage.


Trouble is, their game's worn thin.

Real thin.

This made me laugh. When you look at it logically, you are right, there is no reasonable justification for what they are doing.

Why is Davey boy doing it? He has no choice. DM caves in, and there will be an avalanche. So he makes a sandwich:

..Shit..
Lawyers
..Fan..

Mmmm. Shit sandwich Davey. Tastes good. You'll see.
 

JBWriter

Happy Sapien
Re: Mosey sues cult for harrassment - Trial Court Activity - June 2014

Per the Trial Court's online docket, a Motion was filed on/about June 20, 2014.

The site doesn't clearly state who filed it, but in the financial transactions area of the site, there's activity by Defendants CSI & Mr. Sloat for the pertinent time period.

Ummm....

Why is a new Motion being filed in the Trial Court when there are 2 appeals currently pending @ the 3rd Circuit? :confused2:


JB
 

oneonewasaracecar

Gold Meritorious Patron
Re: Mosey sues cult for harrassment - Trial Court Activity - June 2014

Per the Trial Court's online docket, a Motion was filed on/about June 20, 2014.

The site doesn't clearly state who filed it, but in the financial transactions area of the site, there's activity by Defendants CSI & Mr. Sloat for the pertinent time period.

Ummm....

Why is a new Motion being filed in the Trial Court when there are 2 appeals currently pending @ the 3rd Circuit? :confused2:


JB

Bump for legal opinions. Is this a sign there may be a settlement in the works?
 

Knows

Gold Meritorious Patron
Re: Mosey sues cult for harrassment - Trial Court Activity - June 2014

Bump for legal opinions. Is this a sign there may be a settlement in the works?

Marty has been awful quiet for a LONG time....if he takes the hush money - I will be really pissed!:grouch: They need to take this all the way to the end. It is the right thing to do because he helped create this monster.
 

JBWriter

Happy Sapien
Re: Mosey sues cult for harrassment - Trial Court Activity - June 2014

Marty has been awful quiet for a LONG time....if he takes the hush money - I will be really pissed!:grouch: They need to take this all the way to the end. It is the right thing to do because he helped create this monster.

It doesn't seem advantageous (to either side) to settle before the 2 issues currently @ the TX 3rd Circuit Court are resolved.

Let's say, for example, the Plaintiff (Mrs. Rathbun) learns that the 3rd Circuit Court decides to uphold the decision to (narrowly) depose David "I'm A Criminal" Miscavige. Why settle before that wee little man has to answer questions under oath?

Similarly, if the 3rd Circuit decides to uphold the decision to deny the Anti-SLAPP Motions made by TeamCSI&Co, the net effect is that the lawsuit remains in play. Again, why settle if the courts agree with your position(s)?

Mrs. Rathbun is, of course, free to do anything she wants to do, but it seems to be in her best interest to wait until the 3rd Circuit Court makes the rulings on the pending issues.

JB <---musing aloud while the music plays loud & long. #NowPlayingGreenDay #WhatsHerNameRox!
 

JBWriter

Happy Sapien
Re: Texas 3rd Circuit Opinion - Re: Deposition of Miscavige

The Texas 3rd Circuit has just issued their Opinion in the Writ of Mandamus petition filed by TeamRTC+DM.

The Opinion is captioned, "Conditionally Granted In Part, Denied In Part", and one page has been uploaded.
Yes, one page.
Why?
I've no idea, but assume the Docket Clerk will continue to upload the rest of the Opinion this morning.

Here's a link to the Court's docket, the Opinion is in pdf form: http://www.search.txcourts.gov/Case.aspx?cn=03-14-00091-CV

If anyone here is also logged-on to The Underground Bunker at the moment, would you please let the folks over there know?
Maybe Mr. Ortega can get a full copy of the decision so we can all find out what's been granted and what's been denied.

JB
 

Jump

Operating teatime
Re: Texas 3rd Circuit Opinion - Re: Deposition of Miscavige

The Texas 3rd Circuit has just issued their Opinion in the Writ of Mandamus petition filed by TeamRTC+DM.

The Opinion is captioned, "Conditionally Granted In Part, Denied In Part", and one page has been uploaded.
Yes, one page.
Why?
I've no idea, but assume the Docket Clerk will continue to upload the rest of the Opinion this morning.

Here's a link to the Court's docket, the Opinion is in pdf form: http://www.search.txcourts.gov/Case.aspx?cn=03-14-00091-CV

If anyone here is also logged-on to The Underground Bunker at the moment, would you please let the folks over there know?
Maybe Mr. Ortega can get a full copy of the decision so we can all find out what's been granted and what's been denied.

JB

"Relators assert that under the apex-deposition doctrine, real-party-in-interest Monique Rathbun has failed to establish that Miscavige’s deposition is appropriate."

:bigcry:

Oh well. ... next time mwahahaha.

Tick. Tock.
 
Top