Scientology Defendants Appeal -- Denial of Anti-SLAPP Motions to Dismiss

tetloj

Silver Meritorious Patron
My tummy just turned over!

Texas Lawyer at the Bunker thought the Jefferson appeal was pretty good.

But Hyman has proven to be well up to this challenge so I remain hopeful.

Bring it on.

:dancer:
 

freethinker

Sponsor
I recall earlier on that Texas Lawyer said the longer it stays at the Appeals level the better it is for Mosey.

Deposing a CEO named as a defendant is new territory. They won't decide on this off hand as it affects future litigation.
My tummy just turned over!

Texas Lawyer at the Bunker thought the Jefferson appeal was pretty good.

But Hyman has proven to be well up to this challenge so I remain hopeful.

Bring it on.

:dancer:
 

tetloj

Silver Meritorious Patron
I recall earlier on that Texas Lawyer said the longer it stays at the Appeals level the better it is for Mosey.

Deposing a CEO named as a defendant is new territory. They won't decide on this off hand as it affects future litigation.

There's the appeal on deposing DM and the appeal on the anti-SLAPP (and the deposition is kinda dependent on the anti-SLAPP)

It was TX Lawyer's opinion on the Anti-SLAPP where he said Jefferson's brief was very strong.

ETA: link to post with TX Lawyer's opinion at the Bunker

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthre...s-their-spying&p=939342&viewfull=1#post939342
 
Last edited:

JBWriter

Happy Sapien
Quick update...

Per the TAMES website, TeamRathbun must submit their Response Brief on/before July 3, 2014*.
No hint (yet) whether or not the Court will schedule a Hearing.

JB

*After that submission, TeamCSI&Co may submit a Reply Brief to the Court.

Per the TAMES online docket, TeamRathbun's Response Brief is now due to be submitted on/before July 31, 2014.


JB <---I'll update the ESMB calendar in just a moment.
 

freethinker

Sponsor
Yes he did but there is an issue here with conflating Constitutional law with Commercial law which don't mix. Their basis for antiSlapp is first Amendment rights but not to be deposed is Corporate CEO can't pierce the veil footwork. As Lesley Hyman pointed out, you can't have it both ways or have your cake and eat it too.

They have been doing this for a long time; jumping from one type of law to another, going from corporate copyright to Constitutional rights. You can't do that and Leslie Hyman will be the first to call them on it that I know of and she is one sharp cookie as she caught it right from the get go.

There's the appeal on deposing DM and the appeal on the anti-SLAPP (and the deposition is kinda dependent on the anti-SLAPP)

It was TX Lawyer's opinion on the Anti-SLAPP where he said Jefferson's brief was very strong.

ETA: link to post with TX Lawyer's opinion at the Bunker

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthre...s-their-spying&p=939342&viewfull=1#post939342
 
Last edited:

JBWriter

Happy Sapien
:bump2: ... because TeamRathbun's brief is due to be submitted to the Texas 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals tomorrow.

July 31 -- Texas - Appellee* (*TeamRathbun) Response Brief Due to TX 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals re: Interlocutory Appeal of Anti-SLAPP denial in Rathbun v Scientology/Miscavige. See: TAMES Appellate-level docket search: http://www.search.txcourts.gov/CaseS...aspx?coa=coa03

Direct link to the case on TAMES site here: http://www.search.txcourts.gov/Case.aspx?cn=03-14-00199-CV

JB
 

JBWriter

Happy Sapien
:bump2: ... because TeamRathbun's brief is due to be submitted to the Texas 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals tomorrow.



Direct link to the case on TAMES site here: http://www.search.txcourts.gov/Case.aspx?cn=03-14-00199-CV

JB

A one-week extension has been given to TeamRathbun to file their brief, owing to very sad circumstances.

An attorney working on behalf of Mrs. Rathbun, A. Danette Mitchell, has passed away.
Link to her LinkedIn page: http://www.linkedin.com/pub/a-dannette-mitchell/6/972/ab4

JB
 

Dulloldfart

Squirrel Extraordinaire
It's very telling, although I'm not sure of what, that I immediately checked for the circumstances of her death to see if there was anything suspicious about it.

(Cancer, so I assume not.)

Paul
 

AnonyMary

Formerly Fooled - Finally Free
Sorry to hear she passed away... here is her obituary.
http://herald-zeitung.com/obituaries/article_96e866e0-1a07-11e4-9c03-001a4bcf887a.html

Dannette's struggle with breast cancer was mentioned on ESMB back in March 2014. I know she had been out of work on medical leave for some time before she passed away.
Save Dannette
https://savedannette.org/

Tony Ortega:

We’re rooting for Dannette

San Antonio attorney Ray Jeffrey has been on a roll. He represented Debbie Cook when she was sued by the Church of Scientology and it’s our belief that the church ended up paying her to end the lawsuit it brought against her. Jeffrey then represented Paul Marrick and Greg Arnold, the two Scientology super-spies who followed one man for 24 years and then sued the church when it suddenly ended their jobs. That too ended up in a settlement — but not before some amazing and embarrassing information about the church was made public. And now, Ray Jeffrey is representing Monique Rathbun in the most bruising court battle we’ve seen in a long time. And while Jeffrey has held up under the pressure, we know that he’s been rocked by some personal difficulties.

His law partner, Dannette Mitchell, is fighting breast cancer, and she’s raising money for the next phase in that battle. There are more details at a web site that describes her ordeal. We thought you’d want to know about it.
http://tonyortega.org/2014/03/03/john-travoltas-fun-night-at-the-oscars/#more-13541

She was a a partner with Ray Jeffrey

Shareholder/Owner
Jeffrey & Mitchell, P.C.
April 2010 – Present (4 years 5 months)
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/a-dannette-mitchell/6/972/ab4

I guess cancer treatment really is expensive these days if she, as an attorney, shareholder and owner needed a $ fundraiser.
 

Free to shine

Shiny & Free
Monique Rathbun’s response to Scientology’s appeal

Here's the dox. Brilliant.

http://tonyortega.org/2014/08/08/do...scientologys-appeal-of-its-anti-slapp-defeat/

Appellants concede that Mrs. Rathbun was never a member of the Church of Scientology. Nevertheless, she was subjected to Scientology’s notorious “Fair Game” tactics. She was harassed, intimidated, and humiliated by Scientology agents in accordance with Scientology’s written policy to destroy an enemy – Mr. Rathbun – by threatening what he holds most dear and seeks to protect – Mrs. Rathbun. Appellants now, as they did before the trial court, attempt to redefine Mrs. Rathbun’s allegations so as to shoehorn themselves into the parameters of the Act. They would have this Court disregard its own finding in favor of pretending that the case only pertains to what they claim is a three-month period in 2011. They want the Court to focus only on the isolated acts of the Squirrel Busters – a front group Appellant Church of Scientology International (“CSI”) funded to harass the Rathbuns in order to manufacture a “controversy” they could then use as the basis to claim they were a documentary company engaged in news gathering. That claim is made even though one of their own paid operatives has testified that when he was hired as a videographer for the Squirrel Busters campaign, he was told that the purpose of the group was “‘to make the Rathbuns life a living hell’, and to ‘turn their neighbors against them’ so that they would be forced to move.”…Mrs. Rathbun’s live petition expressly explains that the Squirrel Busters’ particular brand of harassment had ended nearly two years before this suit was filed. But the harassment had not ended. The campaign to silence and destroy the Rathbuns, which had begun two years before the Squirrel Busters, continued on in other forms for another two years
 

Free to shine

Shiny & Free
I love this bit:

A lawsuit seeking redress for stalking and harassment designed to “take down” Mr. Rathbun, “‘make the Rathbuns life a living hell,’ and to ‘turn their neighbors against them’ so that they would be forced to move,” 23CR2818; 31CR3755; 40CR4678, is not a lawsuit that is based on or in response to the exercise of First Amendment rights

I recommend reading this document!

Comment:

Still_On_Your_Side • 5 hours ago

Ms. Hyman hits a homerun with this brief. The appellate court will have an almost impossible task if it tries to grant the church's appeal. For one thing, the case is very fact heavy and the appellate court is not supposed to question the veracity of the facts that were before Judge Waldrip. That leaves the question of whether Waldrip erred on the law by denying the Anti-SLAPP motion. If the appellate court grants the appeal, it will, as Attorney Hyman correctly argued, be re-writing Texas law and, in part, its own opinion in Miscavige's appeal where it identified the period of time at issue as "three years," not three months as the church now argues.

The concise and clear reporting of: the harrassment campaign against Monique Rathbun, the tax "deal" with the IRS, the church's anti-SLAPP attempts in the Wolersheim case, the 1977 spy bust, and the church's history as a vexatious litigant, all should greatly embarrass and disturb the defendants and their lawyers. As a result of the Internet, briefs like this are easily and inexpensively available to the media, the public, and litigants. In short, the ill thought out litigation tactics of the 25 lawyers is backfiring and will continue to backfire. Every statement concerning the church's argument that it was "protecting" its intellectual property from a competing business will live on long after this case. Every attempt to hide disgusting harrassment tactics behind so-called "First Amendment" privileges will blow back on Miscavige.

Judge Waldrip's ruling was correct, and I think the court will affirm his ruling. If, however, the appellate court rules for Miscavige et al, it will be a ridiculous, unsupportable ruling that will embarrass the court for years to come. http://tonyortega.org/2014/08/08/do...-of-its-anti-slapp-defeat/#comment-1533958224
 

Lone Star

Crusader
I've read almost half of Leslie Hyman's argument and it is absolutely brilliant! It is spot on. There should be no doubt as to its ability to get the appeal's justices to deny the CSI's ridiculous appeal.

However, this is the Texas 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals unfortunately. I am therefore still not hopeful that the right thing will be done. This is a terrible court. As TX Lawyer has said, "several 'hacks' sit on the 3rd Court".

This was the court that overturned an airtight conviction of that crook Tom Delay a few years ago. Google it if you want details. It still makes me sick to think about it.

Then we have this very court granting DM's appeal earlier this summer.

I don't mean to be a "wet blanket", but don't get your hopes up.

But, again, Ms. Hyman knocked it outta da park. No doubt about that.
 

JBWriter

Happy Sapien
Monique Rathbun’s response to Scientology’s appeal

Here's the dox. Brilliant.

http://tonyortega.org/2014/08/08/do...scientologys-appeal-of-its-anti-slapp-defeat/

Thanks for posting this, FreeToShine! :thumbsup:

Per the Texas 3rd Circuit's online docket, a tentative date for a Hearing on this Appeal is scheduled for September 8, 2014.
It's on the ESMB calendar thread here: http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthre...January-3-2014&p=953588&viewfull=1#post953588

I think Ms. Hyman and her staff did a superb job with this brief. :clap::clap::clap:
Even the footnotes are brilliant!

Re: Upcoming Hearing -- Using the other Appeal appearance as a guide, I think we should pay very close attention to the questions coming from the bench, since the questions-as-asked formed much of the prior panel's Opinion.


Consider...

David Miscavige sells a product called "Scientology" with a capital "S".
Mr. Rathbun sold a product called "scientology" with a lower-case "s".

^^^^What the Texas 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals panel needs to understand: it's a business dispute. :yes:

JB
 

JBWriter

Happy Sapien
Per the TAMES online docket, TeamCSI&Co must now submit their Reply Brief on/before September 16, 2014.
This new submission date means the Hearing (oral argument) will likely occur sometime after that.

JB
 

JBWriter

Happy Sapien
Per the TAMES online docket, TeamCSI&Co must now submit their Reply Brief on/before September 16, 2014.
This new submission date means the Hearing (oral argument) will likely occur sometime after that.

JB

Confirmed: Hearing (oral argument) scheduled for September 24, 2014 @ 1:30 p.m.

Each side is allotted 20 minutes to speak.

Appellate Panel: Justices Puryear, Pemberton, and Field.

JB
 

JBWriter

Happy Sapien
Confirmed: Hearing (oral argument) scheduled for September 24, 2014 @ 1:30 p.m.

Each side is allotted 20 minutes to speak.

Appellate Panel: Justices Puryear, Pemberton, and Field.

JB

From the Texas Courts website.... (main link here: http://www.courts.state.tx.us/ )

Justice David Puryear is the senior justice on the Court. Justice Puryear was first elected to the court in 2000. He has been re-elected twice to his position, in 2006 and 2012. In his years on the Court, Puryear has authored well over 1800 opinions.

Puryear previously served as Deputy Director of the Special Crimes Division under Texas Attorney General John Cornyn, where he supervised lawyers in the prosecution of various felony offenses.
He also served as Judge of Travis County Court at Law #6 from 1991- 1998. Additional judicial experience includes a period of service as Justice of the Peace, Pct. 3 for Travis County in 1988.
Puryear received his undergraduate degree from Southwestern University, and his law degree from Texas Tech University School of Law.

Justice Pemberton, a Bell County native, graduated with honors from Harvard Law School.

After serving as a briefing attorney to Chief Justice Tom Phillips of the Texas Supreme Court, Justice Pemberton practiced appellate and trial law with Baker Botts and later Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld.
He also served as Deputy General Counsel to the Governor and Rules Attorney to the Texas Supreme Court.
Justice Pemberton was appointed to The Third Court of Appeals in 2003, filling the vacancy created by Justice Lee Yeakel's elevation to the federal bench. He was unanimously confirmed by the Texas Senate and, in 2004, won election to continue serving the remainder of Justice Yeakel's unexpired term. Justice Pemberton was subsequently re-elected to full six-year terms in 2006 and 2012.

Justice Field was elected to the Third Court of Appeals in November 2012 for a six-year term.

Justice Field began his career by serving as a law clerk on the Texas Supreme Court, for Hon. Raul Gonzalez. He then began private practice at Baker Botts, L.L.P., where he practiced in the trial and appellate departments until 2001. He then co-founded York, Keller & Field, L.L.P., before forming The Field Law Firm, PLLC, in 2007.
A native Texan, Justice Field was born in Houston and grew up outside of College Station. As an undergraduate, Justice Field earned a B.A. in Political Science from Texas A&M University, where he graduated summa cum laude. He received his law degree from the University of Texas School of Law, where he graduated with honors and was named to the Order of the Coif.

Btw, it was Justice Scott Field who wrote the recent Opinion on TeamRTC+DM's appeal re: Miscavige deposition.

JB
 

RogerB

Crusader
This has probably been posted before . . . but I have no hope of finding it . . .

This I got by email this morning . . . good timing for these guys to be putting this out to the world. Hope the Appellate Judges get it :biggrin:

BrasscheckTV Report
===================

Free speech vs. Scientology

It was a big battle 20 years ago and the outcome was uncertain.

Now, the "trade secrets" of a religious group (how they are defined by law) aren't
secrets any more.

Video:

http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/27060.html

- Brasscheck TV
 

tetloj

Silver Meritorious Patron
Top