TEXAS JUDGE DENIES SCIENTOLOGY’S ‘ANTI-SLAPP’ MOTION IN RATHBUN SUIT

[koki]

someone earlier mentioned ,that new Martys lawyer Leslie Hyman.... she is mentioned in new TOs thread....
great girl.

http://tonyortega.org/2014/03/18/do...scientology-to-stop-the-miscavige-deposition/

 

[degraded being]

Agreed! Bravo!

Now, I'm going to add something that is not very theta, lol.

A question. Maybe an answer too.

What causes the doubt?

This is where I get really entheta, lol.

I think it is the point in time when the Scientologist realizes that their beloved tech is being used against them personally.

For example: Mission holders had no problem coercing hundreds of millions of dollars by hard-regging public. But when church leaders, likewise, used strong-arm tech to take their money, they got really upset.

I could give many more recent examples, but what is the point of making EVERYONE hate me?

Beeerli intarlesting!

 

[Jump]

someone earlier mentioned ,that new Martys lawyer Leslie Hyman.... she is mentioned in new TOs thread....
great girl.

http://tonyortega.org/2014/03/18/do...scientology-to-stop-the-miscavige-deposition/

That TonyO article ^^^ is a must read

Counsillor Leslie Hyman is rocking this case!

Exerpt:

Hyman quoted in the article:
The fact that Miscavige and RTC may have acted through intermediaries in hiring, directing, instructing, and communicating with the operatives is jurisdictionally irrelevant. Mrs. Rathbun presented the trial court with evidence that Mr. Miscavige is the absolute, unquestioned authority in Scientology’s activities, and that he, and only he, decides who is an enemy to be attacked.

Hyman also handles Scientology’s religious freedom arguments, pointing out that Miscavige shouldn’t escape a deposition on religious grounds when the dispute itself — Monique’s harassment — is not a religious matter.

(It’s also fascinating to see Hyman refer to numerous past Scientology legal conflicts, and actually quote from the court’s findings in Wollersheim.)

At the end, Hyman lets loose with this humdinger…
. . .

yep, ya gotta read it

 

[TG1]

someone earlier mentioned ,that new Martys lawyer Leslie Hyman.... she is mentioned in new TOs thread....
great girl.

http://tonyortega.org/2014/03/18/do...scientology-to-stop-the-miscavige-deposition/

I get your meaning, koki.

But with respect, Ms. Hyman is not a girl. She's a mature professional woman and a partner in the law firm of Pulman, Cappuccio.

http://www.pulmanlaw.com/attorneys/leslie-hyman.php

She's very smart, very well educated, and highly experienced, and she's schooling the Jefferson brothers down in the Texas 433rd Judicial District Court.

TG1

 

[koki]

I get your meaning, koki.

But with respect, Ms. Hyman is not a girl. She's a mature professional woman and a partner in the law firm of Pulman, Cappuccio.

http://www.pulmanlaw.com/attorneys/leslie-hyman.php

She's very smart, very well educated, and highly experienced, and she's schooling the Jefferson brothers down in the Texas 433rd Judicial District Court.

TG1

that was ,with respect.... here in Bulgravia... when we meet nice lady who knows how to do a job.... we say : " what a girl!!"

 

[Knows]

Just to get things straight up. Now when Miscavige is going to be deposed. Does it mean that he will be brought to the courthouse by force? I mean, he wouldn't come over there just by him self.

I don't think he would ever show up - can you imagine the "restimulation" he would feel? Oh - that is right - he doesn't feel! Non the less - he will never show up - they will have to force him and this could be the most exciting thing for us to watch!

 

[Wants2Talk]

Just to get things straight up. Now when Miscavige is going to be deposed. Does it mean that he will be brought to the courthouse by force? I mean, he wouldn't come over there just by him self.

A subpoena is enforceable (en-FORCE-able). If he is summoned by the court, and fails to appear, then the judge may issue a warrant for his arrest. If he does not surrender to the court, he will be a fugitive. I believe Ron went a fugitive route. Correct me if I am mistaken.

 

[Free to shine]

Comments from the Bunker:
http://tonyortega.org/2014/03/18/do...scientology-to-stop-the-miscavige-deposition/

TX Lawyer

Random observations on first skim-through of the brief . . .

Nice job of refocusing the case on the actual issue at hand: Whether the trial court abused its discretion by permitting the deposition of a specially appearing defendant on the jurisdictional issues raised by that special appearance. Unless there was no possible way that Judge Waldrip could have legally ordered that deposition, Miscavige loses.

Good strategy to place this in the context of Scientology’s history of abusing the judicial process. It won’t be outcome-determinative here, but you’ve got to lay the groundwork for knocking aside future abuses of the system when they occur.

It may be a bit of a tactical error to speak so confidently that the evidence shows Miscavige was behind all of the harassment. If the evidence on that point is already clear, then why would they need Miscavige’s deposition? I would have pitched it by saying that Monique’s independently-collected evidence shows Miscavige is in charge of these types of operations, but his affidavit and his no-personal-knowledge flunkies deny it, so the depo is therefore necessary to discover the actual facts. (Note: Although discovery on a special appearance is limited to jurisdictional facts, those facts frequently overlap with the merits of the case, as they do here. If DM directed this campaign in Texas from wherever else he may have been, that is a jurisdictional fact.)

Good work on the “unique or superior knowledge” point. That’s what gets you an apex deposition, and Team Monique’s evidence easily met that threshold. I also like the way the brief casts aside all that nonsensical veil-piercing/alter ego stuff raised in the mandamus petition – that’s all irrelevant nonsense.

I love that the brief makes the point I argued in my analysis of the petition a few weeks back: That the defendants should have raised all their ecclesiastical abstention arguments in a motion to dismiss/plea to the jurisdiction. This is a dispute over personal jurisdiction (whether Miscavige and RTC have sufficient contacts with Texas to haul them into court here), not subject matter jurisdiction (whether this is the type of religious dispute that courts are forbidden from interfering with). If they wanted to raise those issues, this isn’t the vehicle to do it. But don’t be surprised if a plea to the jurisdiction turns out to be their next gambit in the trial court . . .

Overall, very nicely done. Clear, succinct, and persuasive, particularly compared to all the muck thrown
at the wall in Miscavige’s brief. Team Monique should feel good going into the April 9 oral argument. Miscavige and RTC can now file a reply brief of up to 7,500 words between now and the oral argument. I would fully expect them to do so, although there is no firm deadline by which they have to file it.

Derek TX Lawyer

May I summarize their 7,500 page response:

"religion, ecclesiastic, pope-like, dispute, ethics, dogma, marty, marty, marty, marty, mike, marty, marty, religion, squirrel, trademarks, marty, freedom of speech, first amendment, marty"

TX Lawyer

But it's not up to Miscavige. He can't force Monique R. to settle. She's entitled to take her case all the way to trial. If Miscavige refuses to appear for his deposition, the court can and eventually will grant "death penalty" sanctions against him, which would eliminate his ability to defend himself in the case. And even then, Miscavige is still a key fact witness in the case. If he refuses a deposition subpoena, he can be arrested so he can provide his testimony while in custody. Unless and until the defendants make a settlement offer that Monique is willing to accept, David Miscavige is eventually going to testify under oath.

 

[Jump]

that was ,with respect.... here in Bulgravia... when we meet nice lady who knows how to do a job.... we say : " what a girl!!"

We have a saying too. It goes: "stop digging, you're deep enough already".

 

[ThetanExterior]

I'm looking forward to His Holiness Pope David appearing in court.

I wonder if he'll swear on the Bible or a copy of Dianetics?

 

[koki]

We have a saying too. It goes: "stop digging, you're deep enough already".

that is another....
we say : " Lady, NOW Iam full..."

 

[secretiveoldfag]

TX Lawyer

But it's not up to Miscavige. He can't force Monique R. to settle. She's entitled to take her case all the way to trial. If Miscavige refuses to appear for his deposition, the court can and eventually will grant "death penalty" sanctions against him, which would eliminate his ability to defend himself in the case. And even then, Miscavige is still a key fact witness in the case. If he refuses a deposition subpoena, he can be arrested so he can provide his testimony while in custody. Unless and until the defendants make a settlement offer that Monique is willing to accept, David Miscavige is eventually going to testify under oath.

I like it.

 

[suspiciousperson]

What are scientology's liquid - or indeed shortly realisiable - assets?

I see no reason that they shouldn't go for 25% of that. Miscavige being a sociopath (it would seem) he's perfectly prepared to throw the COS under a bus to save himself. While it is objectively ridiculous, out of proportion, and almost silly, I say put the absolute line at $100 million. They would never, ever get anything like that at court (at least after the appeal against the US jury - why exactly is it you chaps have them for civil cases again? At the very best they can do almost as well as a judge) but I really just don't think that's the mindset you need to approach this with. You need to treat it like something completely different to a court case.

Explicitly put, the Rathbuns need to be very, very, VERY - frankly unrealistically - greedy imo.

As for the idea of starting a trust for other victims, fuck that. Callously speaking, said victims could have sued too, heck they could sue now and take on some of the risk but they don't seem to be.

And the Rathbuns have a child now, and for all I know more to come. That changes perspective. They would be entirely justified in taking as much moolah as they can get. Remember, it's a payment to shut up and go away, not a compensation award. Surely you wouldn't argue that the starbucks in clearwater owes every ex scientologist thousands of dollars just cause it's taken "church" cash?

 

[Magoo]

when you warn a kid : "do not do that ,or you will broke that window...", and he just keep doing it, and finally brake that window... usually you tell him " did I told you so...?"
wonder, is there someone brave enough to ask DM : "did I told you so...?"

I've posted for years:
"Dave"...Tick Tock, Tick Tock: Time is on *our* side!
((And don't say I didn't warn ya))"



T

 

[Thrak]

I'm looking forward to His Holiness Pope David appearing in court.

I wonder if he'll swear on the Bible or a copy of Dianetics?

But what should he wear?

 

[Udarnik]

But what should he wear?

The Emperor's New Clothes.

 

[secretiveoldfag]

Explicitly put, the Rathbuns need to be very, very, VERY - frankly unrealistically - greedy imo.

{snipped]

I am not an admirer of Marty R and would have nothing to say to him if we happened to be seated side by side on a transatlantic flight but my impression is that this case is not about money, it is about DM. Mosey is entitled to sue but she obviously would not do this without the approval and support of her husband.

It is even possible that Marty has been planning this case for a very long time. He has not exactly kept a low profile. How could DM resist this target?

I don't think [strike]Marty[/strike] Mosey will settle as long as there is a chance that the Dwarf can be destroyed. By perfectly legal means, of course. MR has probably been chortling for years (very quietly, in private).

 

[Type4_PTS]

But what should he wear?

 

[Rene Descartes]

It will go like this.

Chairman of the Lou will be seated. His lawyer Jefferson will be seated.

Jeffrey will be standing.

Chairman of the Lou will be sworn in.

The questioning will begin

Jeffrey: Will you please state...

Jefferson: OBJECTION!

Jeffrey: I haven't even finished the question yet.

Judge: Overuled

Jeffrey: Will you please state your name?

Jefferson: Objection!

Jeffrey: Now what?

Jefferson: Your honor, my client is the head of a Church with millions of members and Mr. Jeffrey has the audacity to ask him for his name like he is just anybody off the street.

Judge: Overruled

Jeffrey: May we continue? Your name please.

Chairman of the Lou: Da...

Jefferson: Objection!

Jeffrey: Again?

Jefferson: My client's name is on Google and Google is hearsay.

Judge: Overuled

Jeffrey: Thank you. continue please.

Jefferson: Objection!

Judge: We will have a short recess while I take up a discussion with Mr Jeffrey and Mr Jefferson in my office.

Chairman of the Lou: (whispers to Jefferson as he passes him by) Nice job. Keep up the great work.

Rd00

 

[NoName]

I am not an admirer of Marty R and would have nothing to say to him if we happened to be seated side by side on a transatlantic flight but my impression is that this case is not about money, it is about DM. Mosey is entitled to sue but she obviously would not do this without the approval and support of her husband.

It is even possible that Marty has been planning this case for a very long time. He has not exactly kept a low profile. How could DM resist this target?

I don't think [strike]Marty[/strike] Mosey will settle as long as there is a chance that the Dwarf can be destroyed. By perfectly legal means, of course. He has probably been chortling for years (very quietly, in private).

IMO, this case is exactly 0% about the money and 100% about destroying DM.