News and Commentary [2nd Half, 1996]
Path: szdc!zdc!zdc-e!szdc-e!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!castlsys.demon.co.uk!news
From: stevea@castlsys.demon.co.uk (Steve A)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,alt.support.ex-cult
Subject: Re: If CAN dies, is the world better off?
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 1996 06:26:29 GMT
Organization: Castle Systems Ltd.
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <31d56b9c.37631863@192.0.2.1>
References: <4qp7ol$6bi@nnrp1.news.primenet.com>
Reply-To: stevea@castlsys.demon.co.uk
NNTP-Posting-Host: steveatp.demon.co.uk
Keywords: XENU, alt.religion.scientology.xenu
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: castlsys.demon.co.uk
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/16.227
Xref: szdc alt.religion.scientology:95061 alt.support.ex-cult:4997
Jeff Jacobsen wrote:
[good stuff on CAN snipped]
> well, actually, CAN knew some about them. But CAN was kinda busy with
>about 50 lawsuits filed by Scientologists. Now CAN appears to be in its
>last breath. Is the world better off if CAN disappears? I think not.
>I'm not saying CAN would have saved the day against AUM, I'm just using
>this as an example. Isn't it a good idea for someone to be keeping an
>eye on wacky religious groups that may one day decide to blow up the
>White House, or gas your subway? If something like this happens in your
>neighborhood, will you be the first to say "Why didn't someone warn us
>about this group?"
Well, actually, I strongly suspect that organisations like CAN aren't
popular with the authorities because they put them in the position of
having to contemplate difficult problems that don't have pat
vote-winning "solutions".
I have a feeling that the US government (not to blame them entirely -
I am sure that the UK government is similarly indisposed to nettle-
grasping) is probably quietly pleased that CAN is nearly no more: at
least there won't be any of those nasty revelations about cults doing
things they don't want to lift a finger to do anything about. Who
cares if a few people die - hell, even Jonestown wasn't that many, and
let's face it, these people were all obviously too stupid and gullible
to sort themselves out, if they weren't actually insane, right?
Nah, let 'em sort it out themselves. We'll call it "market forces".
[for the sarcasm-impaired, the latter part of the penultimate para,
and that last line, are my sarcastic impressions of the likely thought
processes of government, not my opinion. Clueless flamage to
/dev/null, if you'd be so kind.]
-------------------------------------------------------------------
____ ! stevea@castlsys.demon.co.uk
(\__/) .~ ~. )) !
/ oo ./ .' ! My opinions may not be those of Castle
{__, \ { ! Systems, especially where remuneration
/ . . ) \ ! is concerned.
|MUTT-| \ } !-----------------------------------------
.( _( )_.' ! Remember, cultists: The secret word for
'---.~_ _ _& ! the CCRD is 'I mock up my reactive mind';
A Mayett's Mutt ! try it at your next auditing session!
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Scientology: the Windows 95 of religions.
Back to CAN Mirror Page Index
Path: szdc!zdc!zdc-e!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!surfnet.nl!news.unisource.nl!xs4all!basement.replay.com!not-for-mail
From: nobody@REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Cult Fighters' Future in Doubt
Date: 10 Jul 1996 01:27:36 +0200
Organization: Replay and Company UnLimited
Lines: 86
Sender: replay@basement.replay.com
Message-ID: <4rupt8$7b9@basement.replay.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: basement.replay.com
X-XS4ALL-Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 01:27:39 MET DST
XComm: Replay may or may not approve of the content of this posting
XComm: Report misuse of this automated service to
Cult Fighters' Future in Doubt
LOS ANGELES TIMES
07-01-96
Plagued by numerous lawsuits from religious groups and fighting a
$1.1-million judgment against it, the Cult Awareness Network has filed
for bankruptcy under Chapter 7 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code.
"How we will operate or if we will continue to operate in the short
term, I don't know," said Cynthia Kisser, executive director of the
12-year-old organization, known for its aggressive campaigns against
groups it considers to be harmful cults.
Critics have questioned the network's tactics, particularly its
relationship to professional "deprogrammers" who use forceful methods
to persuade individuals to leave cults or religious groups.
The network does no deprogramming itself, but offers information to
people seeking to retrieve friends or family members, links them to
deprogrammers and operates support groups for former cult members.
The Cult Awareness Network has frequently locked horns with such
groups as the Unification Church and the Church of Scientology.
Scientologists have sued the network about 50 times since 1991.
Kisser said the Cult Awareness Network's financial difficulties are
the result of a September 1995 verdict in which the organization was
ordered to pay $1.1 million to a man who claimed that the network
helped his mother wrest him from his church.
A jury awarded Jason Scott of Bellevue, Wash., more than $4 million in
damages after finding that there was a conspiracy to deprive him of
his civil rights when his mother sought to have him deprogrammed of
his religious beliefs. Scott was a member of a conservative
Pentecostal church that his mother believed was manipulative and
abusive.
Defendants in the case included the Cult Awareness Network,
deprogrammer Rick Ross of Tucson and his two assistants.
"The Scott case virtually brought deprogramming to a halt in this
country," said religion scholar J. Gordon Melton, head of the
Institute for the Study of American Religion at UC Santa Barbara.
"What this judgment does . . . is cut the communication lines that
allow deprogramming to go forward."
*
The Cult Awareness Network's appeal in that case is pending in the
U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, but organization officials say a
ruling on the appeal will probably not come in time to keep the group
from shutting down.
The group had originally filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, asking for
time to reorganize its finances without the threat of lawsuits from
creditors.
But Kendrick Moxon, a Los Angeles lawyer who represented Scott in the
Washington state case, filed a motion in Bankruptcy Court seeking the
dismissal of the group's Chapter 11 reorganization plan, and that
motion was granted last week.
"They had a Chapter 11 plan that they were trying to push through that
was going to basically result in Mr. Scott getting less than 1% of his
judgment," said attorney Laurie Bartilson, who worked with Moxon in
the Scott case.
Bartilson said she expects the group to be forced to close.
Moxon, who has represented the Church of Scientology in numerous
cases, said in a statement released by the church that he considers
the Cult Awareness Network "a hate group that promoted religious
intolerance."
The Cult Awareness Network's Kisser said the group is trying to
protect its assets by filing for bankruptcy.
"We are privy to confidential information about thousands of people,"
she said. "In order to make sure that we were properly representing
the constitutional rights of our members, our donors and the families
that have called us . . . we felt that we needed to go under the
protection of Chapter 7."
Back to CAN Mirror Page Index
Path: szdc!zdc!news.sorosis.ro!nntp.uio.no!Norway.EU.net!EU.net!enews.sgi.com!news.uoregon.edu!news-feed.iguide.com!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: Jon Ruth <ruthj@delphi.com>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: CAN Bankruptcy: Privacy Rights, Non-Profits, & the Law
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 96 19:43:15 -0500
Organization: Delphi (info@delphi.com email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 370
Message-ID: <hhEwwoL.ruthj@delphi.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1b.delphi.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
% %
% The attached is a public document. %
% %
% It can printed without reformatting. A page is 66 lines long and %
% the text is 72 columns wide. Allowance should be made for a %
% suitable left margin. %
% %
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
<*>-<*>-<*>-<*>-<*>-<*>-< BEGIN ATTACHMENT >-<*>-<*>-<*>-<*>-<*>-<*>
NATIONAL BANKRUPTCY REVIEW COMMISSION
1 Columbus Circle, N.E., Suite G-350, Washington, D.C. 20544
Open Forum, July 18, 1996
Submission of David J. Bardin, Arent Fox Kintner Plotkin & Kahn
Fax: 202-857-6395 -- Email: bardind@arentfox.com
Washington Counsel for Cult Awareness Network
Mr. Chairman and Commissioners:
I appreciate this chance to raise issues concerning impacts of the bank-
ruptcy laws on non-profit corporations, namely, issues as to associa-
tional rights of individuals in relation to the bankruptcy estate and
potential chilling effects on advocacy. Such issues can arise
(a) in administration of Chapter 7 and
(b) in considering likely availability (or unavailability) of Chap-
ter 11 bankruptcy protection in the period leading up to the bank-
ruptcy.
The pending bankruptcy of my _pro_bono_ client, an advocacy group,[1] as
described in the attachment, illustrates issues of legislative import,
for this Commission to consider, regarding interfaces between bankruptcy
law and basic liberties under the Constitution of the United States --
including First Amendment rights of people who chose to associate with
my client and whose privacy would be invaded by sale of certain files.
Some of these issues will be raised by the non-profit's bankruptcy coun-
sel, Benjamin Hyink, in moving for a protective order. The ACLU of
Illinois is reviewing the possibility of intervening in the matter on
behalf of one or more persons whose identity would be revealed if the
files were to be sold. Progress of that case may illuminate policy
issues likely to affect other non-profits.
Issues that are likely to recur include:
1) Should the Bankruptcy Code deal expressly with non-profit cor-
porations (perhaps as it now does with municipal corporations or with
certain sectors of the economy)? Non-profits' principal purposes for
existence (_e.g._, advocacy) differ from those of for-profit corpora-
tions. Some of the most important assets of non-profits are, therefore,
valuable only to issues-oriented people (_e.g._, fellow-advocates of the
non-profit's cause *or* *its* *adversaries*). Such assets (_e.g._,
lists of members and donors) enjoy Constitutional protection.[2]
- --------------------
1 Cult Awareness Network, Inc. ("CAN"), No. 95-B-22133 U.S. Bankruptcy
Ct. N.D. Ill. Eastern Div., converted to Chapter 7 on June 20, 1996
(Judge Ronald Barliant).
2 The _NAACP_ cases and progeny establish associational rights and
standing to assert them in non-bankruptcy contexts. _See_, _e.g._,
_Brown_v._Socialist_Workers_'74_Campaign_Committee_, 459 U.S. 87, 91
(1992); Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1, 64 (1976); _NAACP_v._Alabama_, 377
U.S. 288 (1964); _NAACP_v._Button_, 371 U.S. 415 (1963); _Louisiana_v._
_NAACP_et_al._, 366 U.S. 293, 296 (1961) ("It is clear from our deci-
sions that NAACP has standing to assert the constitutional rights of its
members. _N.A.A.C.P._v._Alabama_, 357 U.S. 441, 459."); _Shelton_v._
_Tucker_, 364 U.S.479 (1960); _Bates_v._Little_Rock_, 361 U.S. 516
(1960).
2) How should the Chapter 7 Trustee, the Bankruptcy Court in Chap-
ter 7 or Chapter 11 and the District Court, assure protection of asso-
ciational rights of non-debtor individuals who chose to associate with
the debtor? For example, how should they protect membership and donor
lists of a bankrupt non-profit corporation?
a) Under Chapter 7, how does the representative of the
estate carry out fiduciary obligations of the bankrupt non-
profit corporation to those who associated with it in order
to safeguard their rights? When issues of Constitutional
privacy and associational rights are raised, how should a
trustee respond procedurally and substantively? Should the
trustee be expected to present to the Bankruptcy Court a pro-
gram for vindicating such rights? Should the Bankruptcy Code
offer guidance as to these Constitutional dimensions?
b) Should the trustee address issues of on-going physical
access to files of non- profits by representatives of the
debtor differently from access to files of for-profit debt-
ors?
c) Should the trustee allow adversaries of the non-profit
debtor to acquire privileged attorney-client and work product
documents needed by the debtor for on-going, non-bankruptcy
litigation?
d) When is it "necessary" under 11 U.S.C. Sc 321(c) that an
employee of the Office of U.S. Trustee serve as trustee in
Chapter 7 in order to vindicate First Amendment rights of
non-debtors to whom the bankruptcy estate of a non-profit
corporation owes a fiduciary obligation? Since the bank-
ruptcy estates of non- profits may have limited commercial
value, it may be often be unfair or unrealistic to expect a
private trustees to incur the time and cost of qualified,
impartial and Constitutionally-sensitive administration of
such estates.
Should the Bankruptcy Code specifically address the foregoing issues?
3) Should the Bankruptcy Code be amended to extend the stay under
Chapter 11 automatically (or, at least, presumptively) to officers and
directors of non-profit debtor corporations as individuals when sued
jointly with the debtor? If so, should the law distinguish between vol-
unteer and paid individuals?
4) In what ways do a non-profit's characteristics call for differ-
ences in the administration of Chapter 11 and should the Bankruptcy Code
be extended to address such characteristics?
I will be happy to try to provide further information that may help the
Commission.
Attachment
Background
CAN is a non-profit organization recognized by the Internal Revenue Ser-
vice under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.[3] CAN has
worked in a controversial area. It advocates for families, friends and
former members of groups that are widely regarded as destructive cults.
It facilitates support groups for such individuals. It is a source of
information for individuals, the press and public officials. Its hot-
line receives up to 20,000 calls and letters a year. CAN's adversaries,
in the courts as well as in the struggles to influence public opinion,
include the Scientology movement and Landmark Education Corporation
("Landmark").[4]
Two circumstances brought about CAN's bankruptcy: First, individual
Scientologists sued CAN in 50 proceedings in numerous jurisdictions and
venues. In a pending case, CAN charges the Scientology movement with
planning, stimulating and financing these lawsuits in a deliberate
effort to bankrupt CAN.[5] These suits exhausted CAN's insurance cover-
age under two policies and left it indebted to its own lawyers, who were
patient, for about $300,000. Scientology litigation tactics are noto-
rious.[6]
- --------------------
3 CAN is a national organization, incorporated in California and head-
quartered in Illinois. It is governed by a board of directors selected
by regional affiliates, themselves commonly incorporated in states in
which they serve (e.g., CAN Northern California; CAN New York / New
Jersey; CAN North Texas; CAN Houston Texas; Free Minds [Minnesota]).
4 Landmark, a for-profit company, is a successor to Werner Erhard &
Associates, which owned and ran est and the FORUM. The Scientology
movement is comprised of several churches and several other corpo-
rations, some being not-for-profit and some for-profit corporations.
5 Second Amended Complaint (Oct. 24, 1994) in _CAN_v._Church_of_Scien-
tology_International_, _Bowles_&_Moxon_and_Church_of_Scientology_Illi-
nois_, No. 94 L 00804 / Call C, Circuit Court, Cook County. The court
dismissed without reaching the merits for want of subject matter juris-
diction, appeal denied in No. 1-95-1842, App.Ct.Ill. 1st Jud.Dist. 3d
Div., petition for leave to appeal pending, Supreme Court of Illinois,
No. 80868. Mayer, Brown & Platt are representing CAN _pro_bono_ in the
appeal. Defendant Bowles & Moxon was the Los Angeles, CA, law firm that
brought many of the cases and Kendrick L. Moxon, Esquire, was attorney
of record in many of those matters.
6 Most recently, _see_, _Religious_Technology_Center_et_al._v._Scott_
_et_al._, No. 94-55920 9th Cir. 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 8954 (filed April
11, 1996; amended July 5, 1996), _rehearing_den._ 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS
16398 (July 5, 1996) ("there is little doubt that RTC [a Scientology
company] is playing 'fast and loose' with the judicial system" [unpub-
lished slip op. at 29] and its "8 years of noncompliance" with lawful
discovery "has consisted of evasions, misrepresentations, broken prom-
ises and lies" including "a massive campaign of filing every conceivable
motion (and some inconceivable) to disguise the true issue in these pre-
trial proceedings. Apparently viewing litigation as war, plaintiffs by
this tactic have had the effect of massively increasing the costs to the
other parties, and, for a while, to the Court" [at 7-8]).
Second, CAN lost a Seattle jury verdict exceeding $1 million almost all
(over 90 percent) for punitive damages, now on appeal but not stayed.
Plaintiff is a young man whose lawyer also represents many of the Scien-
tologists in the 50 lawsuits against CAN.[7]
Morever, CAN's resources were but a fraction of those of its adver-
saries. CAN's annual budget fluctuated between $300,000 and $400,000 a
year, providing for only a handful of paid staff members. CAN's adver-
sary, the Scientology movement is reputed to enjoy annual revenues
exceeding half a billion dollars. CAN depended on volunteers at its
national office and around the country. Although CAN's elected, unpaid
President, William R. Rehling, Esquire, is a trial lawyer, a former
Assistant Cook County States Attorney, and a law teacher, CAN (like many
non-profits) is not a sophisticated consumer of legal services and oper-
ated without general counsel. Creditors claim many times the commercial
value of CAN's assets.[8]
How to Reconcile Chapter 7 and Human Rights
Important battles to come will involve CAN property of no market value
_except_ to a cult awareness organization *or* to an adversary bent on
destroying the materials or using them to harass individuals for exer-
cising their associational rights. These include:
* Membership and donor lists;
* Identification of individuals who specifically sought anonymity to
protect their privacy and avoid hostility, reprisals, harassment
and surveillance: _e.g._, donors, relatives of current cult mem-
bers, persons sharing information about alleged law violations
which they hoped CAN could bring to law enforcement authorities
without involving the informant (at least initially);
* Questionnaire responses of former cultists (often providing confi-
dential details);
* Archives: _e.g._, books, articles, videotapes, memoranda and other
documents about many groups (some supplied confidentially by indi-
viduals who requested protection of privacy).
* CAN's service-marked logo and stylized name, which could be used
misleadingly by an adversary;
- --------------------
7 _CAN_v._Jason_Scott_, No. 96-35050 9th Cir. an appeal from the ver-
dict and judgment in _Scott_v._Ross_et_al._, No. C94-0079C U.S.D.Ct. for
W.D. Wash. Preston, Gates & Ellis is representing CAN _pro_bono_ on the
appeal. Mr. Moxon, of the Bowles & Moxon firm sued by CAN (_see_ note
4, above), represents plaintiff Jason Scott in the litigation and, _pro_
_haec_vice_, as creditor in the bankruptcy. _Landmark_v._CAN_, No.
94L11478, pending in Circuit Court, Cook County, Illinois, claims, but
has not established, millions against CAN. Walter P. Maksym, Esquire,
is Illinois bankruptcy counsel for Landmark.
8 CAN's tangible assets are minimal (about $45,000 in the bank and
office furniture and equipment worth less than $20,000). Other assets
include judgements against Scientologists for costs and attorneys fees
of about $45,000 as well as unresolved claims against Scientology mem-
bers, counsel and corporations.
* CAN's pending claims against Scientology and Bowles & Moxon; as
well as
* Lawyer-client documents: _e.g._, documents needed for or disclosing
strategy about pending appeals against Scientology, Bowles & Moxon,
and CAN's principal creditor, Jason Scott, in addition to other
cases at the trial or appellate levels.
Adequacy of Protection under Chapter 11 to Non-Profit Advocacy Groups
CAN did not turn to Chapter 11 protection until October, 1995, after the
Seattle jury reached its verdict, U.S. District Judge Coughenour denied
a stay pending appeal and plaintiff registered the Seattle judgement in
Illinois, as a prelude to levying execution. CAN did not earlier select
Chapter 11 to help manage the flood of Scientologist law suits against
CAN because plaintiffs named officers and/or directors of CAN (almost
all unpaid volunteers) as co-defendants and CAN felt uncertain whether
Chapter 11 protection would cover these individuals or leave them
exposed. CAN felt an obligation to defend the individuals.
After the Chapter 11 filing, the bankruptcy court ruled that the stay of
Landmark's multi-million- dollar suit would protect only CAN, but not
its executive director. So instead of concentrating on surviving Chap-
ter 11, she was drawn into a continuing discovery process with CAN
adversary Landmark. Discovery involved, of course, her role and per-
formance on behalf of CAN.
Extending Chapter 11 protection to officers and directors of such non-
profits as a matter of course (or, alternatively, at least creating a
rebuttable presumption) might enable an organization such as CAN to
weather the storm. Such legislated protection is appropriate to shield
against misuse of litigation by those who would chill free speech and
advocacy by floods of litigation.[9]
- --------------------
9 _See_ "Scientology at Law" in Atack, _A_Piece_of_Blue_Sky:_Scientol-
ogy_,_Dianetics_and_L._Ron_Hubbard_Exposed_ (Lyle Stuart 1990), pp. 327
_ff._, quoting Scientology's founder: "The law can be used very easily
to harass, and enough harassment on somebody who is simply on the thin
edge anyway ... will generally be sufficient to cause his professional
decease. If possible, of course, ruin him utterly." _Id._
<*>-<*>-<*>-<*>-<*>-<*>-< END ATTACHMENT >-<*>-<*>-<*>-<*>-<*>-<*>
- --
Jon Ruth
<ruthj@delphi.com> <http://people.delphi.com/ruthj>
** PGP 2.6.2 Fingerprint: **
** 14 BF 01 F9 AD 0C 27 BF 19 BB C4 01 7E DB B5 D0 **
**
"For here we are not afraid to follow truth wherever it may lead, nor
to tolerate any error so long as reason is left free to combat it."
- Thomas Jefferson
**
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQCVAwUBMgE3ko/7FZCeP3XVAQHRqAP/RMN8cmjyCmjGuVQwvWdh4DjjtKUoWPft
Hq4duTwSYYNOWQ6LR6Eknn+OI5GwAqKJY7/IBcarO6Xs/vB7wZZvhmZsWR5gJSSF
GhOV9eVJ+kv9JvFn4L+52NZUTNs9aXL1/OB5W4bKf2/uWIRP2dM9qnNbkDTDv5w3
Zep56V/rYjY=
=TxAJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Back to CAN Mirror Page Index
Path: szdc!szdc-e!news
From: seaorg@super.zippo.com
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: CAN files under protective order
Date: 7 Sep 1996 20:03:28 GMT
Organization: Zippo
Lines: 40
Message-ID: <50skeg$q7j@krypto.zippo.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.8 (beta 2)
CAN Records Now Under Illinois State Court Protective Order
On September 4, Judge Michael J. Hogan issued a protective order
concerning files and records of the Cult Awareness Network. This order
prevents the files and records from being sold or destroyed while CAN
remains a defendant in a civil case before Judge Hogan's court.
CAN, its president, William R. Rehling, and its executive
director, Cynthia Kisser, were named by Landmark Education Corporation
in a civil suit brought by in the Circuit Court of Cook County,
Illinois (Case 94 L 11478). The suit seeks $40 million dollars in
damages for "acts" it alleges harmed the reputation of Landmark
Education Corporation and caused it financial harm.
In late June, CAN filed for Chapter 7 Bankruptcy in the United States
Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Illinois (Case 95 B
22133), and all of its assets (including its files and records) are
currently under the control of a trustee. The trustee, Philip
Martino of the Chicago law firm of Rudnick & Wolfe, was elected in
late July by CAN's largest creditor, Jason Scott, despite objections
by other creditors of CAN. In late August the Bankruptcy Court,
having reviewed the objections, appointed Martino the trustee.
Scott's attorney, Kendrick Moxon, a member of and attorney for the Church
of Scientology, filed a motion recently asking the court to sell all
of CAN's files. Moxon claims to represent an "unidentified purchaser"
willing to pay untold thousands of dollars for CAN's records and files.
Judge Hogan's order states, "Furthermore, any and all documents, including
but not limited to, all papers, electronic media, computer hardware and
software, in the possession or control of Defendant Cult Awareness
Network, Inc., its attorneys, agents and successors, which have been the
subject of discovery requests in this case or may otherwise become the
subject of a future discovery request in this case, shall not be transferred,
sold or destroyed without prior order of this court."
It is likely that the sale or disposal of CAN's files will become
an issue of controversy in the Bankruptcy Court should Moxon or
"other parties" continue to press to acquire CAN files. This in spite
of restrictions placed on such a sale because of Judge Hogan's order.
Back to CAN Mirror Page Index
Path: szdc!super.zippo.com!zdc!enews.sgi.com!news.sgi.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!uuneo.neosoft.com!news.blkbox.COM!sderby
From: sderby@blkbox.com (Stuart P. Derby)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: KIM BAKER
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1996 03:15:22 -0500
Organization: ARSCC - Houston
Lines: 56
Message-ID: <sderby-ya023080003009960315220001@news.blkbox.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: s81.max0.houston.box.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Newsreader: Yet Another NewsWatcher 2.3.0
In article <52ms9d$gdn@newsbf02.news.aol.com>,
gemmamp1@aol.com (GEMMAMP1) wrote:
: Diane Richardson wrote:
:
: >Bernie, it is my understanding (and I may be wrong) that Jason Scott's
: >mother contacted CAN and received the referrals by requesting the
: >names of counselors who might assist her two minor sons (NOT Jason
: >Scott) to reintegrate into society after their cult experience. [snip]
:
: Yes, you have understood correctly. The two sons she inquired about were
: minors and I agree, she had a legal and a moral right to do this.
All I know is what CAN is claiming in the appeal brief that was posted
recently, but even saying "Jason Scott's mother contacted CAN" is a big
stretch if the facts in the brief are accurate.
They say that the mother, Kathy Tonkin, called the "Seattle Community
Service" hotline. The hotline referred her to Shirley Landa, who in turn
recommended the deprogrammer Rick Ross, who first worked with the minors.
After that, Ms. Tonkin asked Mr. Ross to deprogram Jason Scott, and the
illegal acts occured.
(the following from the appeal brief)
Shirley Landa is CAN's contact person in the state of Washington. She was
one of the founders of CAN's predecessor, the Citizen's Freedom Network, in
the early 1980s. (RT 3/140-41). In the mid to late 1980s, Ms. Landa served
as a CAN Board member. (RT 3/162). However, CAN was but one of several
organizations in which Ms. Landa was actively involved.
In 1991, the year in which the events relevant to this case occurred, Ms.
Landa was active in two organizations interested in cults in addition to
CAN. (RT 3/163). She had written papers and delivered speeches on cult
education issues at non-CAN conferences. (RT 3/164). Persons were referred
to Ms. Landa from various groups and individuals with whom she was involved
at that time. (RT 3/145). Ms. Landa considered that she acted as Shirley
Landa when engaging in cult-related activities, not on the behalf of any of
the organizations in which she was affiliated. (RT 3/148).
In 1991, Ms. Landa was volunteering for a crisis hotline operated by
Seattle Community Services through an organization called Parent Awareness.
(RT 3/148). People who called the hotline about family members involved in
potentially extreme or destructive groups or religions were referred to Ms.
Landa. There was no testimony that Parent Awareness was related to CAN.
There was no testimony that the Crisis Hotline referenced in any way Ms.
Landa's association with CAN when referring people to her. Ms. Tonkin, Mr.
Scott's mother, obtained Ms. Landa's telephone number from the Community
Services crisis hotline. (RT 5/64).
--- end quote ---
-Stu
--
"Madman! Wouldst attempt the impossible?! For no being made of matter
can ever enter a system that is naught but the flux and swirl of
alphanumerical elements, discontinuous integer configurations,
the abstract stuff of digits!" - from the Cyberiad, by Stanislaw Lem
Back to CAN Mirror Page Index
Path: szdc!super.zippo.com!zdc!enews.sgi.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.texas.net!news.kei.com!news.mathworks.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!fu-berlin.de!cs.tu-berlin.de!unlisys!usenet
From: tilman@berlin.snafu.de (Tilman Hausherr)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,alt.religion.unification,misc.legal
Subject: fwd: Illinois Supreme Court grants CAN petition
Date: Thu, 03 Oct 1996 17:39:41 GMT
Organization: Xenu's Ranch
Lines: 69
Approved: xenu@galactic.org
Message-ID: <3255ed39.1181766@news.snafu.de>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pppx57.berlin.snafu.de
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Keywords: Travolta Caberta Marcellus Carto Hartwig Kobrin Grady Henson Ingram Bast Mrs. BloodyButt Fishman Geertz Alley Wollersheim O'Reilly Flynn Xenu Erlich Jentzsch Hubbard Cluster Bill Gates Craig Jensen Body Thetan OT8 Miscavige PoodleBoy Interpol Noriega RVY Milne Spaink 'ho of babble-on Rosa Lopez Tenyaka Memorial
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99f/16.299
Xref: szdc alt.religion.scientology:128739 alt.religion.unification:5037 misc.legal:38245
I just received this. It is not related to the Jason Scott case, but to
CAN's countersuit against scientology because of the huge amount of
frivolous lawsuits filed. It is an "intermediate win", so I'd say.
======
The Supreme Court of the State of Illinois has granted a petition filed
by the Cult Awareness Network (CAN) for leave to have the court review
an adverse decision by an appellate court in a lawsuit brought by CAN
against the Church of Scientology International, the Scientology-linked
law firm of Bowles & Moxon, and the Church of Scientology of Illinois.
CAN is a Chicago-based non-profit that provided educational information
on the issue of destructive cults for approximately two decades and
ceased operations June 22, 1996.
CAN's appeal brief will be due in early November, and the reply brief by
the Scientology defendants will be due the following month. CAN will
have 14 days to respond to that reply brief, and then the case will be
set for review by the court at a later date.
Because CAN is in Chapter 7 Bankruptcy proceedings, it may need the
approval of the trustee appointed by the Bankruptcy Court, Philip
Martino of the Chicago law firm of Rudnick & Wolfe, to proceed with the
appeal. If the appeal goes forward and the Illinois Supreme Court
reverses the lower court decisions, the case may be able to proceed for
trial on its merits in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois.
The case was originally brought in the Circuit Court and alleged a
conspiracy to engage in malicious prosecution against CAN by the Church
of Scientology International, its law firm of Bowles & Moxon, and the
Church of Scientology of Illinois.
Before the case could be tried on its merits, it was dismissed by the
trial court. CAN maintained the trial court erred in not finding that
24 lawsuits brought against CAN by Scientologists met the requirements
necessary for a malicious prosecution claim to be brought under Illinois
law. CAN asserted that, though each of the 24 lawsuits were brought by a
different Scientologist, the true party in interest behind each of the
suits was Scientology. The trial court did not agree.
Additionally, when no more than one lawsuit is brought by a single
plaintiff against the same defendant, the defendant must prove special
damages to proceed with a malicious prosecution claim. CAN's damages
for defending itself against the two dozen lawsuits were not considered
special damages by the trial court.
Finally, CAN also claimed that the trial court erred in finding CAN must
prove that at least one of the 24 cases against it by the Scientologists
met a strict construction of a "favorable termination requirement."
CAN filed an appeal before the First District, Third Division in the
Appellate Court of Illinois concerning the conclusions of the trial
court. The case was argued earlier this year and the appellate court
upheld the trial court decisions.
CAN immediately filed its petition with the Illinois Supreme Court for
leave to appeal the lower court decisions. The Supreme Court of the
State of Illinois generally grants only about 5% of the petitions filed
for leave to appeal.
CAN is represented by James C. Schroeder, Craig Woods and Robert M. Dow,
Jr. of Mayer, Brown & Platt of Chicago in the Illinois Supreme Court
appeal.
Case No. 80868 in the Supreme Court of the State of Illinois.
Case No. 1-95-1842 from the Appellate Court of Illinois, First Judicial
District, Third Division.
Case No. 94 L 804 from the Circuit Court of Cook County.
Back to CAN Mirror Page Index
From: tilman@berlin.snafu.de (Tilman Hausherr)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.unification,alt.religion.scientology,alt.support.ex-cult,talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: CAN LOGO AND SERVICE MARK SOLD
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 21:09:27 GMT
Organization: Xenu's Ranch
Lines: 64
Approved: xenu@galactic.org
Message-ID: <32752228.3323143@news.snafu.de>
References: <3273c212.76787944@news.snafu.de>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pppx43.berlin.snafu.de
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Keywords: Travolta Caberta Marcellus Carto Hartwig Kobrin Grady Henson Ingram Bast Mrs. BloodyButt Fishman Geertz Alley Wollersheim O'Reilly Flynn Xenu Erlich Jentzsch Hubbard Cluster Bill Gates Craig Jensen Body Thetan OT8 Miscavige PoodleBoy Interpol Noriega RVY Milne Spaink 'ho of babble-on Rosa Lopez Tenyaka Memorial
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99f/32.299
Xref: szdc alt.religion.unification:5720 alt.religion.scientology:133553 alt.support.ex-cult:6648 talk.religion.misc:66916
(this version is longer than the previous one)
URGENT MESSAGE
CAN LOGO AND SERVICE MARK SOLD
AFFILIATES SHOULD DISCONTINUE USE OF CAN LOGO AND NAME
On October 23, 1996 the Cult Awareness Network, Inc.'s service mark and
trademark rights, including rights to the use of the CAN stylized logo,
were sold as part of a $20,000.00 purchase of CAN assets in the federal
bankruptcy court. Steven Hayes, of the law firm of Bowles & Hayes,
bought the assets.
The purchase becomes final in seven days. Mr. Hayes will control the
service mark and trademark rights at that time. It not clear yet
whether Mr. Hayes, or others associated with him, could take action
against organizations using the words "Cult Awareness Network" in their
name without his permission, or merely for the stylized CAN/Cult
Awareness Network logo that appeared in the past on CAN's literature.
Because of the uncertainty in this area, and to avoid any possibility of
liability on the part of organizations that have used the CAN name and
logo in the past, the following recommendation is being made by Ben
Hyink, the Cult Awareness Network, Inc.'s bankruptcy attorney.
Any organization which has been using the name Cult Awareness Network
should change its name immediately. Such organizations should cease
distributing literature bearing the words "Cult Awareness Network" or
the CAN logo. The organizations should not answer the phone or have a
recorded answering machine message bearing the words "Cult Awareness
Network." No financial business should be conducted under the name
"Cult Awareness Network" or the CAN logo.
Hayes also purchased any service mark license agreements which the Cult
Awareness Network, Inc. held with its affiliates, although certain
portions of the agreement were stricken by order of Judge Ronald
Barliant of the United States Bankruptcy Court. The portions of the
service mark agreement that were not part of the purchase were Paragraph
3 and the first sentence in Paragraph 4. These sections read as
follows:
Paragraph 3: "Licensee will permit duly authorized representatives of
the Licensor to inspect its books and records and its premises at all
reasonable times, for the purpose of ascertaining or determining
compliance with paragraphs 1 and 2 above."
Paragraph 4, First sentence: "Licensee will immediately upon request
provide Licensor with samples of all letterheads, literature, brochures,
signs, advertising material, and solicitation materials prepared by the
Licensee, and the Licensee shall obtain the approval of Licensor with
respect to all such material bearing the Service Mark prior to the use
thereof."
The other assets which were purchased by Mr. Hayes included CAN's office
furniture and equipment (excluding the hard drives from its computers
and any computer software or electronic data), and final judgements
which CAN held against Scientologists in past legal cases which CAN had
won.
Not sold by the trustee were any documents from CAN's files, including
any correspondence, archives of articles, membership lists, or books.
Nor were any legal claims sold in which CAN is the plaintiff.
Back to CAN Mirror Page Index
Path: szdc!news
From: marina@super.zippo.com (Marina Chong)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,alt.religion.scientology.xenu
Subject: Cult Awareness Network files objection to sale of assets
Date: Wed, 06 Nov 1996 23:12:24 GMT
Organization: The Knights of Xenu
Lines: 83
Message-ID: <32811a4f.3896049@snews.zippo.com>
Reply-To: marina@super.zippo.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/16.227
Xref: szdc alt.religion.scientology:136755 alt.religion.scientology.xenu:1420
[forwarded to a.r.s. on the behalf of an anonymous poster]
CAN files objection to sale of assets
=====================================
Ben Hyink, attorney for the Cult Awareness Network, Inc. (CAN), appeared in
Federal Bankruptcy Court in Chicago today to protest a sale of CAN assets
that occurred last week. The sale does not become final until the Federal
Court issues an order approving the transaction.
The day before CAN filed "Debtor's Objection to Trustee's Motion for Entry
of an Order Authorizing Sale of Debtor's Property". CAN went into a Chapter
7 Bankruptcy in late June.
Philip Martino, the court appointed trustee for CAN, had begun the process
of liquidating CAN's assets by selling CAN's physical assets, including
office furniture, and intangible assets such as certain intellectual
property rights. Some of these intangible assets included service mark and
trade mark rights to the "Cult Awareness Network" name and logo, licensing
agreements between CAN and its affiliate chapters concerning these rights,
and certain final judgements that CAN held against Scientologists for legal
cases the Scientologists had lost against CAN in the past.
Appearing before Bankruptcy Judge Ronald Barliant, Martino asserted that
CAN did not have any standing in the bankruptcy case because CAN did not
have sufficient assets to cover its debts. He confirmed he had sold certain
assets at an auction to Steven Hayes, who he identified as a member of the
Church of Scientology, which he identified as a cult. He conceded there had
been disagreement between Hyink and Hayes as to what actually had been
purchased at the sale, but nevertheless felt the sale should be finalized by
the court.
Hyink maintained that CAN, as a non-profit, has a constituency which
deserves to be represented in the bankruptcy proceedings, and that the sale
of the intangible assets was contrary to public policy and would have a
chilling effect on freedom of association and free speech in this country.
"The First Amendment," said Hyink, "should not be entitled to be purchased
though the bankruptcy court."
Hyink outlined discrepancies between what a proposed order prepared by
Martino in conjunction with Hayes identified as the assets which were sold
at the auction and what he understood to have been sold. He also voiced
objections to the procedure by which the sale had occurred, including the
manner in which the notice was given to creditors of the impending sale.
Hyink raised concerns that the sale of judgements held by CAN against
Scientologists in prior litigation could make it impossible for CAN's legal
case against the Church of Scientology International and the law firm of
Bowles and Moxon to proceed even if the Illinois Supreme Court rules that
the case can proceed. CAN filed a petition some time ago asking that lower
court decisions dismissing the case be overturned, and the Illinois Supreme
Court has agreed to hear CAN's appeal.
Kendrick Moxon, a long-term Scientologist and the attorney for CAN creditor
Jason Scott, objected to Hyink's remarks concerning the sale of service mark
or trade mark rights involving the name "Cult Awareness Network," claiming
that the court had already heard objections raised by Cynthia Kisser, CAN's
former Executive Director, at a prior court proceeding, and that the
objections should not be raised again.
Judge Barliant decided to take CAN's motion under advisement. He has given
all parties until November 12 to file any additional pleadings concerning
the motion, and has set a final ruling on the matter for November 21.
=====
--
Marina Chong SP4(*), KoX, GGBC#13, KBM#5, Joker/Degrader
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scientology is an abusive cult that responds to criticism with harassment,
barratrous lawsuits, home invasions, intimidation and conspiracy to murder.
Usenet: alt.religion.scientology
World Wide Web: http://www.cybercom.net/~rnewman/home.html
Marina's Manor: http://home.pacific.net.sg/~marina/index.html
IN MEMORIAM: Noah Lottick Richard Collins Albert Jaquier John Buchanan
Patrice Vic anon.penet.fi utopia.hacktic.nl
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
marina@singnet.com.sg marina@pacific.net.sg marina@super.zippo.com
Back to CAN Mirror Page Index
From: mgarde@superlink.net (Maureen Garde)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,alt.religion.scientology.xenu
Subject: Re: Cult Awareness Network files objection to sale of assets
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 1996 02:48:13 GMT
Organization: SuperNet Inc. (908) 828-8988
Lines: 107
Message-ID: <32834ce5.8290159@news>
References: <32811a4f.3896049@snews.zippo.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: md1.superlink.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99f/16.299
Xref: szdc alt.religion.scientology:136800 alt.religion.scientology.xenu:1424
If I was a member of CAN (I'm not) I would immediately file an
objection to the sale of the CAN assets, raising my first amendment
rights and privacy rights concerning the sale of any CAN
assets other than the physical assets. One might want to seek
out the IRC chat log concerning the IAS announcement to its membership
of how it intends to use the CAN logo and trademarks to discredit
past CAN actions. I don't have it, but someone else might be willing
to post it.
If I were a member, I wouldn't waste time trying to file a formal
objection. A letter to the judge, accompanied by an affidavit
of relevant facts, might be sufficient.
That's what I would do.
On Wed, 06 Nov 1996 23:12:24 GMT, marina@super.zippo.com (Marina Chong)
wrote:
>[forwarded to a.r.s. on the behalf of an anonymous poster]
>
>
>CAN files objection to sale of assets
>=====================================
>
>Ben Hyink, attorney for the Cult Awareness Network, Inc. (CAN), appeared in
>Federal Bankruptcy Court in Chicago today to protest a sale of CAN assets
>that occurred last week. The sale does not become final until the Federal
>Court issues an order approving the transaction.
>
>The day before CAN filed "Debtor's Objection to Trustee's Motion for Entry
>of an Order Authorizing Sale of Debtor's Property". CAN went into a Chapter
>7 Bankruptcy in late June.
>
>Philip Martino, the court appointed trustee for CAN, had begun the process
>of liquidating CAN's assets by selling CAN's physical assets, including
>office furniture, and intangible assets such as certain intellectual
>property rights. Some of these intangible assets included service mark and
>trade mark rights to the "Cult Awareness Network" name and logo, licensing
>agreements between CAN and its affiliate chapters concerning these rights,
>and certain final judgements that CAN held against Scientologists for legal
>cases the Scientologists had lost against CAN in the past.
>
>Appearing before Bankruptcy Judge Ronald Barliant, Martino asserted that
>CAN did not have any standing in the bankruptcy case because CAN did not
>have sufficient assets to cover its debts. He confirmed he had sold certain
>assets at an auction to Steven Hayes, who he identified as a member of the
>Church of Scientology, which he identified as a cult. He conceded there had
>been disagreement between Hyink and Hayes as to what actually had been
>purchased at the sale, but nevertheless felt the sale should be finalized by
>the court.
>
>Hyink maintained that CAN, as a non-profit, has a constituency which
>deserves to be represented in the bankruptcy proceedings, and that the sale
>of the intangible assets was contrary to public policy and would have a
>chilling effect on freedom of association and free speech in this country.
>"The First Amendment," said Hyink, "should not be entitled to be purchased
>though the bankruptcy court."
>
>Hyink outlined discrepancies between what a proposed order prepared by
>Martino in conjunction with Hayes identified as the assets which were sold
>at the auction and what he understood to have been sold. He also voiced
>objections to the procedure by which the sale had occurred, including the
>manner in which the notice was given to creditors of the impending sale.
>
>Hyink raised concerns that the sale of judgements held by CAN against
>Scientologists in prior litigation could make it impossible for CAN's legal
>case against the Church of Scientology International and the law firm of
>Bowles and Moxon to proceed even if the Illinois Supreme Court rules that
>the case can proceed. CAN filed a petition some time ago asking that lower
>court decisions dismissing the case be overturned, and the Illinois Supreme
>Court has agreed to hear CAN's appeal.
>
>Kendrick Moxon, a long-term Scientologist and the attorney for CAN creditor
>Jason Scott, objected to Hyink's remarks concerning the sale of service mark
>or trade mark rights involving the name "Cult Awareness Network," claiming
>that the court had already heard objections raised by Cynthia Kisser, CAN's
>former Executive Director, at a prior court proceeding, and that the
>objections should not be raised again.
>
>Judge Barliant decided to take CAN's motion under advisement. He has given
>all parties until November 12 to file any additional pleadings concerning
>the motion, and has set a final ruling on the matter for November 21.
>
>
>
>
>=====
>
>
>--
>Marina Chong SP4(*), KoX, GGBC#13, KBM#5, Joker/Degrader
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Scientology is an abusive cult that responds to criticism with harassment,
>barratrous lawsuits, home invasions, intimidation and conspiracy to murder.
>Usenet: alt.religion.scientology
>World Wide Web: http://www.cybercom.net/~rnewman/home.html
>Marina's Manor: http://home.pacific.net.sg/~marina/index.html
>IN MEMORIAM: Noah Lottick Richard Collins Albert Jaquier John Buchanan
> Patrice Vic anon.penet.fi utopia.hacktic.nl
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>marina@singnet.com.sg marina@pacific.net.sg marina@super.zippo.com
--------------------------------------------------------------
See "The Church of Scientology and the Courts,"
court opinions & other legal documents concerning scientology
at http://mars.superlink.net/user/mgarde/intro.html.
Back to CAN Mirror Page Index
From: tilman@berlin.snafu.de (Tilman Hausherr)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,alt.religion.unification,talk.religion.misc
Subject: fwd: Bankruptcy Court finalizes sale of Cult Awareness Network Name
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 1996 19:40:30 GMT
Organization: Xenu's Ranch
Lines: 66
Approved: xenu@galactic.org
Message-ID: <32cd01ac.14074186@news.snafu.de>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pppx151.berlin.snafu.de
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99f/32.299
Xref: szdc alt.religion.scientology:140893 alt.religion.unification:6854 talk.religion.misc:72970
Bankruptcy Court finalizes sale of Cult Awareness Network Name
A federal bankruptcy court in Chicago determined on November 21 that the
Cult Awareness Network, Inc.(CAN) is not entitled to have legal
representation in the Chapter 7 Bankruptcy in which CAN is a debtor. In an
order issued in United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of
Illinois (Case No. 95 B 22133), Judge Ronald Barliant issued an order which
also finalized the sale of certain CAN assets, including "any and all rights
of any kind in and to the name Cult Awareness Network of CAN, any trade
name(s), trademark(s), service mark(s) and registration(s)" of CAN. The
purchaser is Steven L. Hayes, acknowledged in court to be affiliated with
the Church of Scientology.
Also included in the sale finalized by the court order was miscellaneous
office furniture, rights to the telephone number(s) of CAN, and
approximately 15 liquidated judgements the trustee of the debtor, Philip
Martino of the Chicago firm of Rudnick & Wolfe, claims that CAN holds. The
trustee retained the right of CAN to rely on the 15 cases to prove the cause
of action for a malicious prosecution case currently pending before the
Supreme Court of Illinois and to recover certain damages should they be
awarded CAN in that case.
CAN's attorney, Benjamin J. Hyink of Chicago, protested to the judge that
CAN still has an obligation to represent the rights of the organization as
the non-profit corporation has not yet been dissolved and could receive
funds in the future if the malicious prosecution case, which is against the
Church of Scientology International, is successful.
Judge Barliant, however, felt that CAN has an insufficient pecuniary
interest to permit the corporation to have standing on behalf of its
constituency.
As to CAN's concern that the sale of the name to Mr. Hayes could result in
fraudulent behavior in the future by the misuse of the CAN name or logo,
Judge Barliant stated that appropriate legal remedies are available outside
the bankruptcy court for recompense because of any such fraud.
Without the right of CAN to have standing in the case in the future,
important decisions could be made affecting CAN's members about which CAN
will not be able to voice concern.
For example, the trustee now has under his control hundreds of boxes of
documents that once belonged to CAN, some of which contain confidential
records. Mr. Martino can sell them without the right of CAN to object in
the Bankruptcy Court. Scientologist Kendrick Moxon has already begun steps
to purchase these records, which include communications from former
Scientologists or the relatives of current Scientologists.
Mr. Moxon has also made inquiry to the trustee about the right to purchase
the malicious prosecution case CAN has against the Church of Scientology and
Mr. Moxon's own law firm, as well as the legal appeal which CAN has pending
in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in a civil case which CAN lost against
plaintiff Jason Scott. Moxon was the attorney for Scott, and represents him
in the Bankruptcy case.
Mr. Hyink asked the court for leave to permit CAN to appeal the November 21
order, requesting that a requirement that bond be posted in connection with
the appeal process be waived. The judge granted CAN five days in which to
file an appeal, but is requiring a $30,000 bond be posted in conjunction
with the appeal. If the bond is not posted, the appeal cannot be filed.
--- Tilman Hausherr [KoX, SP4]
tilman@berlin.snafu.de http://www.snafu.de/~tilman/#cos
Resistance is futile. You will be enturbulated. Xenu always prevails.
Back to CAN Mirror Page Index
Path: szdc-e!super.zippo.com!zdc!enews.sgi.com!news.sgi.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.inreach.com!usenet
From: zounds@don't.send.spam.inreach.com (P Suster)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: CAN Sale Front Page News in Silicon Valley, California
Date: Tue, 03 Dec 1996 14:42:36 GMT
Organization: Internet News Server
Lines: 67
Message-ID: <32a43ba1.872107@news.inreach.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp2130.inreach.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.1/32.230
Kudos for the _San_Jose_Mercury_News_!
The front page of the December 2nd, 1996 issue features Washington
Post writer Laurie Goodstein's article "Scientologist buys anti-cult
network".
Ms. Goodstein's article handles the sad ironies adroitly. She notes
that a CAN telephone log documents that only Satanic groups instigated
more calls than the hypocritical cult of $cientology.
Key quotes from the article.
"It kind of boggles the mind. . . People will still pick the CAN name
in a library book and call saying 'My daughter has joined the Church
of Scientology' And your friendly CAN receptionist is someone who
works for Scientology."
-David Hardin, attorney who has represented CAN
Will Ma and Pa go right on the list of SPs and PTS? ARSCC
International Convention Committee take note. You will have to crank
out more membership cards and get a bigger venue for next year.
With regard to two hundred seventy boxes of files containing
confidential testimonials of "anguish and abuse."
"Scientology will pay anything to get their hands on those files. . .
So the idea of getting the files is similar to the KGB being able to
buy the files of the CIA."
-Robert Vaughan Young, former Scientologist "church" spokesman of
twenty years who left and became a critic.
and how much more barratry, dead-agenting, and harassment will we see
then. How upstat!
Regarding CAN
"I just don't think a hate organization has the right to operate in
America with impunity and obviously the courts feel the same way."
-"Rev" Heber Jentzsch, Pres. of Church of Scientology(tm) Intl.
Well, maybe he's got a point That's probably why Heber's org has such
a wretched legal track record. Their lawsuit against Time Magazine
was thrown out. And just how much does Heber and company owe Larry
Wollersheim today? Will they ever be man enough to pay up? Don't
they realize that every lawsuit they pursue shows their true colors to
more and more people worldwide.
Who cares about those ludicrous beliefs regarding Xenu, spotting
spots, and L Ron Hubbard being God? In my book, harassment and
viciousness is pretty hateful for an organization that calls itself a
church. Why does Jentzsch and company insist on validating the
practise of their belief system as one of the most intolerant and
vengeful of the millenium?
And what does lawyer Steven L Hayes (a Scientologist who isn't working
for Scientology?) _really_ mean when he says the secretive group who
bought the CAN name and logo will restructure it so it "disseminates
the truth about all religions."
-----------------------------^^^^^
Will they be honest enough to tell Catholics and Adventists about
those now-public "scriptures" which purport to reveal Jesus' sexual
habits? Will they truly tell Buddhists those L Ron quotes about
Asians? Will they tell Islamics they should actually be facing
Clearwater, FL five times a day?
P Suster "ubi dubium, ibi libertas"
[KoX] SP1,Pending
Back to CAN Mirror Page Index
Path: szdc-e!news
From: seaorg@super.zippo.com (seaorg)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Moxon Dumped
Date: 4 Dec 1996 00:03:05 GMT
Organization: Zip News
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <582f3p$ka1@krypto.zippo.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.8 (beta 2)
Jason Scott has fired Kendrick Moxon as his attorney and has hired instead
California attorney Graham Berry to represent him in the Scott v. Ross et al
appeal and as a creditor of CAN in the bankruptcy case.
Additionally, Scott has reached a settlement with Rick Ross to satisfy the
judgment against Ross Scott holds. Ross has agreed to pay Scott $5,000 as
part of the settlement.
Ross has also agreed to provide Scott with up to 200 hours of his services
as an expert consultant and intervention specialist.
The settlement was signed December 2.
Back to CAN Mirror Page Index
PRESS RELEASE
MUSICK, PEELER & GARRETT LLP
attorneys at law
one Wilshire Boulevard
Los angeles, California
90017-3383
TELEPHONE (213) 629-7600
Fascimile 213 624 1376
Writers Direct Dial Number
(213) 629-7854
December 3, 1996
PRESS RELEASE
On Tuesday December 3, ]996, Jason Scott, the plaintiff
who successfully sued the Cult Awareness Network, Rick Ross and
others, and was awarded more than $4,000,000.00 in damages,
dismissed his lawyer Kendrick L. Moxon. Mr. Moxon, who generally
represents the Church of Scientology, was extensively quoted in a
December 1, 1996 Washington Post article by Laurie Goodstein
("Lawyer Buys Rights to Anti-Cult Organization").
Mr. Moxon's replacement, as attorney for Jason Scott,
is Graham E. Berry of the Los Angeles law firm of Musick, Peeler
& Garrett. Mr. Berry has successfully represented a number of
defendants against the Church of Scientology and its related
entities. Recently, he replaced Faegre & Benson of Minneapolis
as FACTNet, Inc.'s lead lawyer in Scientology's internet related
litigation against FACTNet, Lawrence Wollersheim, and Robert
Penny, now pending in Federal District court, Denver, Colorado.
In replacing Kendrick Moxon, Jason Scott said that he
had not seen a penny of his judgment against the Cult Awareness
Network and that he was now retaining Graham Berry to try and
negotiate a settlement that would both put a reasonable sum of
money in his pocket and perhaps enable the Cult Awareness Network
to emerge from the bankruptcy it filed as a result of his
judgment against it.
In addition, Mr. Scott said that he was tired of being
a Scientology poster-boy, and that he felt Kendrick Moxon had
discarded him after he had obtained the judgment against the Cult
Awareness Network. Now, said Mr. scott, he merely wants to
settle his claims against CAN, obtain some money, reunite with
his wife and family and put this whole saga behind him.
Because Mr. Scott cannot currently afford to hire a new
lawyer, Graham Berry and the Los Angeles law firm of Musick,
Peeler & Garrett have agreed to represent Jason Scott on a
pro-bono basis.
Press Release
December 3, 1996
Page 2
Requests for further information and comment should be
directed to:
Graham E. Berry, Esq.
Musick, Peeler & Garrett LLP
One Wilshire Boulevard
suite 2100
Los Angeles, California 90017-3383
Telephone: (213) 629-7854
Facsimile: (213) 624-1376
GEB: etk
053019&
------------------
End of Fax as recieved
Back to CAN Mirror Page Index
From: rkeller@netaxs.com (Rod Keller)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,alt.religion.scientology.xenu
Subject: Re: Moxon Dumped
Followup-To: alt.religion.scientology,alt.religion.scientology.xenu
Date: 4 Dec 1996 12:27:11 GMT
Organization: Philadelphia's Complete Internet Provider
Lines: 51
Message-ID: <583qmv$dam@netaxs.com>
References: <582f3p$ka1@krypto.zippo.com> <32a4eef6.3863314@snews2.zippo.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: unix1.netaxs.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [UNIX 1.3 950824BETA PL0]
Xref: szdc alt.religion.scientology:143907 alt.religion.scientology.xenu:1670
I got this statement from Graham Berry about this. It sounds like very
good news.
----begin----
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 1996
As Jason's Scott's attorney, I can say the following. What happened to him
was terrible. Once his former attorney won the judgment that was rendered
his obligation to Jason was to either satisfy the judgment or settle it in
some manner. Scientology may have had an interest in CAN being bankrupted.
Jason did not. Jason's interest was to reach a settlement with and to see
it stay in business so that the settlement could be paid in instalments.
Jason also had an interest in CAN succeeding in its' malicous prosecution
action against his then attorney Moxon and the other defendants in that
action so that a that a larger settlement could be funded. Instead Moxon
forced CAN into a chapter 7 bankruptcy. The trustee sold the assets to the
current partner of Moxons former law partner (Tim Bowles) for a sum of
money that probably will not even pay the trustees fees and the other
expenses of the bankruptcy such as the legal fees charged by the trustees
own law firm. Jason has received nothing. Our intention is to structure a
settlement that will put a reasonable sum of money in Jason's pocket. That
may permit CAN to emerge from bankruptcy.
However, a major and immediate fund raising campaign on CAN'S behalf will
be required. We will also be investigating whether Jason's former
representives,and the trustee, engaged in conduct,errors or omissions that
may render them potentially liable to Jason and therefore an additional
potential scource of recovery. Of course, that investigation may reveal
matters that require referral to the U.S. Department of Justice, the IRS,
the US Attorneys Office and other Federal and State Agencies. In the
meantime I have requested the Trustee to halt all asset sales and
transfers, including the name, logo, telephone # etc until the creditors
can meet and decide what is really in their best interests, I welcome
anyone with relevant information or suggestions to communicate with me at
my office.
Graham E. Berry
Musick, Peeler & Garrett
One Wilshire Boulevard
21st floor
Los Angeles, CA 90017
PH: 213 629 7854
FX: 213 624 1376
---end---
--
Rod Keller / rkeller@voicenet.com / Irresponsible Publisher
Black Hat #1 / Expert of the Toilet / Golden Gate Bridge Club
The Lerma Apologist / Merchant of Chaos / Kha Khan countdown: 9 to go
Killer Rod / OSA Patsy / Quasi-Scieno / Mental Bully
Back to CAN Mirror Page Index
Path: szdc!szdc-e!super.zippo.com!zdc!enews.sgi.com!news.sgi.com!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!netaxs.com!not-for-mail
From: rkeller@netaxs.com (Rod Keller)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: Moxon Dumped
Date: 4 Dec 1996 20:26:11 GMT
Organization: Philadelphia's Complete Internet Provider
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <584mp3$og4@netaxs.com>
References: <32A5C6FD.34C@worldnet.att.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: unix1.netaxs.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [UNIX 1.3 950824BETA PL0]
Pamela Fitzpatrick (p.fitz@worldnet.att.net) wrote:
: The question I have is were the assests _actually_ sold? The name and
: logo if I recall were reported by the national media as purchased by a
: Scientologist representing private entities. The CONFIDENTIAL files are
: still up in the air from all reports. So, the second question is in
: regards to the "fund raising". Just where is this money going and who
: actually benefits? Scientology _owns_ the CAN trademark, name and all
: that, right? So, how can you be having a "fundraiser" for CAN and not
: have it be associated with the Scientologist fronted purchase? With all
: the national publicity that has been generated about this story, why
: hasn't this change of events regarding the dumping of Mr. Scott's lawyer
: hit the national media? I request that the anticipated reply be only
: posted in public. Any private email sent to me in regards to this matter
: will be subject to public posting.
The previous post was quoting a statemeny by attorney Graham Berry. This
reply is just based on my own opinions. I don't think the transfer is a
done deal. The judge can probably re-assign the trademarks, etc. to
whomever s/he chooses. Will CAN rise like Phoenix from the ashes under the
same name? Or will it now be the Cult Information Exchange Network, or
Families Against Cults? I don't know, I'm hoping the CAN name survives.
But I think if they avoid having the files and mailing lists fall into
cult hands, it will be a major victory. The loss of a logo is a small
battle compared with damaging information about all sorts of victims going
to the Scientologists <spit>.
I can't imagine under any circumstances that people would raise money for
Scientology thinking it was the real CAN.
--
Rod Keller / rkeller@voicenet.com / Irresponsible Publisher
Black Hat #1 / Expert of the Toilet / Golden Gate Bridge Club
The Lerma Apologist / Merchant of Chaos / Kha Khan countdown: 9 to go
Killer Rod / OSA Patsy / Quasi-Scieno / Mental Bully
Back to CAN Mirror Page Index
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
From: hud@netcom.com (Hud Nordin)
Subject: MTV's Kurt Loder Mentions Scientology/CAN
Message-ID: <hudE22opx.Arr@netcom.com>
Organization: Cybernetic Arts
Date: Sun, 8 Dec 1996 02:10:45 GMT
Lines: 13
Sender: hud@netcom2.netcom.com
In a news report heard on MTV 12/7/96, evening, Kurt Loder told about
how scientology, "using vast, tax-free resources," had finally won a
suit against CAN, the Cult Awareness Network, forcing CAN's resources
to be sold to a scientologist.
He did a good job of explaining what CAN was and was clear that CAN
would probably NOT be a good place to turn to for help for cult victims.
The message is getting out.
--
Viva Martin Hunt!
--
Hud Nordin <hud@nordin.com> Silicon Valley / The City of Sunnyvale / California
Back to CAN Mirror Page Index
From: baba@jones.neu.sgi.com (Baba ROM DOS)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Co$/CAN Makes Front Page of Le Monde
Date: 8 Dec 1996 14:59:35 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc. Mountain View, CA
Lines: 53
Message-ID: $lt;58el4n$7ve@murrow.corp.sgi.com$gt;
NNTP-Posting-Host: jones.neu.sgi.com
X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 #2 (NOV)
Further evidence that the "Church" of Scientology[tm] has stimulated
the immune system of French society. The following appeared on the
front page of Le Monde on Friday, 6 December:
When the Church of Scientology Buys-out the Archives of it's Enemies
by Laurent Zecchini
(Translation by BRD)
The name, the logo, the post office box, the telephone number, the archives,
and the computers of the the Cult Awareness Network (CAN) have been sold
in an auction last week for $20,000. The buyer is a Los Angeles lawyer,
Steven Hayes. He is henceforth the sole proprietor of CAN. This is
convenient: Mr. Hayes is a scientologist.
For more than 20 years, the Cult Awareness Network has put up an exemplary
fight against the influence of cults and sects, starting with the powerful
Church of Scientology. Since 1991, report the Washington Post and the
Chicago Tribune, a merciless struggle has been engaged. From their offices
in Chicago, CAN's volunteers advised parents whose children had been
pulled a cult and put their archives at the disposition of the press,
the police, and some members of Congress. This gold mine of knowledge,
the fruit of two decades of research into the doctrines and activities
of some 1200 cults and pseudo-religious groups, has now been dispersed
and destroyed.
The scientologists used the weapon of financial asphyxia to put an end
to CAN, in filing innumerable lawsuits. The association succeeded in
deflecting the majority of these assaults, but they punctured its budget.
CAN wanted to counter-attack in 1994, going after the Church of Scientology
for "malicious harassment". That was its swan song. A series of setbacks
in the courts has led to the appointment of a liquidator, who judged
his duty to be the sale of CAN to the highest bidder. Some say that
CAN bears some responsibility for its own demise. CAN provided parents
with the references of "deprogrammers", specialists in breaking the psychic
dependence binding an adolescent to a cult, even though, for some of them,
it involves the same excesses that they denounce.
Jason Scott, ex-member of the Life Tabernacle Church, testified to have
been sequestered for five days and subjected to brainwashing by
"deprogrammers" recommended to his mother by CAN. His lawyer, Kendrick
Moxon, long associated with the Church of Scientology, succeeded in
convincing the court that CAN "persecuted" scientologists in the name
of an "antireligious crusade", of the sort directed in the past against
Mormons, Jews, Methodists, and Baptists. Ordered to pay 1.8 million
dollars in damages in the judgement pronounced in favor of Jason Scott,
CAN was forced to seek protection under the bankruptcy laws.
The Church of Scientology claims to have had no role in the strangulation
of CAN. But with the acquisition of CAN by attorney Steven Hayes, the
scientologists will henceforth be the owners of the archives of their
fiercest enemy. "It's a bit like the KGB buying the archives of the CIA",
commented one ex-member of the cult, now fighting it, to the Washington Post.
Back to CAN Mirror Page Index
NOTICE OF APPEAL UNDER 28 U.S.C. ~158(a)
FROM ORDER OF A BANKRUPTCY COURT
In Re Cult Awareness Network, Inc., Debtor
Case No. 95 B 22133
Chapter 7 (converted from Chapter 11)
NOTICE OF APPEAL
Creditors/Appellants appeal under 28. U.S.C. ~158(a) from the orders of the
bankruptcy court for the Northern District of Illinois (Eastern Division) entered
in this proceeding on November 21, 1996, and November 26, 1996 (docketed December
5, 1996) on the Trustee's Motion to Enter an Order Approving Sale of Property of
Debtor's Estate.
The parties to the order appealed from and their respective attorneys are as
follows:
U.S. Trustee Stephen G. Wolfe, Esq.
Roman L. Sukley, Esq.
Office of the U.S. Trustee
227 West Monroe Street * Suite 3350
Chicago, Illinois 60606
Trustee, Philip V. Martino Philip V. Martino, Esq.
Elizabeth A. Graber, Esq.
Rudnick & Wolfe
203 North LaSalle Street * Suite 1800
Chicago, Illinois 60601-1293
Cult Awareness Network, Inc., Benjamin P. Hyink, Esq.
Debtor Hyink & Scannicchio, Chtd
140 South Dearborn Street * Suite 800
Chicago, Illinois 60603
Jason Scott, Graham E. Berry, Esq.
Disputed Creditor Musick Peeler & Garrett, UP
One Wilshire Boulevard
Los Angeles, California 90017-5585
and
John T. Moran, Jr., Esq.
Law Offices of John T. Moran, Jr.
36 West Randolph Street * Suite 800
Chicago, Illinois 60601
[local counsel (discharged, but not
substituted]
Davis Wright Tremaine, Mary E. Steele, Esq.
Creditor Davis Wright Tremaine
2600 Century Square
1501 Forth Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98101
Landmark Education Corp., Waiter P. Maksym, Esq.
Disputed Creditor Waiter P. Maksym & Associates
720 Enterprise Drive
Oak Brook, Illinois 60521-1390
[local counsel]
Robert Lippman, Kendrick L. Moxon, Esq.
Disputed Creditor Moron & Bartilson
6 255 Sunset Boulevard * Suite 2000
Hollywood, California 90028
Marcello M. Di Mauro, Esq.
3844 Inglis Drive
Los Angeles, California 90065
John Doe, David W. Wirt, Esq.
Cult Awareness Network Sidley & Austin
Member One First National Plaza
Chicago, Illinois 60603
Steven L. Hayes, Steven L. Hayes, Esq.
A Law Corporation Bowles & Hayes
Purchaser 1015 Oneonta Drive
Los Angeles, CA 90065
This is an appeal from orders dated November 21, 1996 and November 26, 1996
approving a sale of assets by the Trustee on October 23, 1996.
Creditors/Appellants did not receive notice ofthe sale as conducted on October 23,
1996, as numerous alterations in the notice of sale occurred in open court on
October 23, 1996, and no revised notice of sale was sent to Creditors/Appellants,
and no notice of Trustee's Motion to Approve Sale was given to
Creditors/Appellants.
Dated: December 16, 1996
Signed:
John M. BEAL
for Creditors/Appellants
John M. Beal, Esq.,
Hagenbaugh & Murphy, and
Davis Wright Tremaine
Address:
John M. Beal, Esq.
321 South Plymouth Court * Suite 800
Chicago, Illinois 60604
Telephone: (312) 408-2766
Telefax: (312)408-2760
Back to CAN Mirror Page Index
NOTICE OF APPEAL UNDER 28 U.S.C. 9 158(a)
FROM ORDER OF A BANKRUPTCY COURT
In re Cult Awareness Network, Inc.. Debtor
Case No. 95 B 22133
Chapter 7 (converted from Chapter 11)
AMENDED NOTICE OF APPEAL
Cult Awareness Network, Inc., the debtor, appeals under 28 U.S.C. O 158(a)
from the orders of the bankruptcy court for the Northern District of Illinois
(Eastern Division) entered in this proceeding on November 21, 1996, and November
26, 1996 (docketed December 5, 1996) on the Trustee's Motion to Enter an Order
Approving Sale of Property of Debtor's Estate.
The parties to the order appealed from and their respective attorneys are as
follows:
U.S. Trustee Stephen G. Wolfe, Esq.
Roman L. Sukley, Esq.
gqice of the U.S. Trustee Suite 3350
227 West Monroe Street
Chicago, IL 60606
Trustee, Philip V. Martino Philip V. Martino, Esq.
Elizabeth A. Graber, Esq.
Rudnick & Wolfe
203 North LaSalle Street Suite 1800
Chicago, IL 60601-1293
Jason Scott, Disputed Creditor Graham E. Berry, Esq.
Musick, Peeler & Garrett LLP
One Wilshire Boulevard
Los Angeles, CA 90017-5585
John T. Moran, Jr., Esq.
Law Offices of John T Moran
36 West Randolph Street Suite 800
Chicago, IL 60601
[local counsel (discharged, but not substituted ]
John M. Beal, Esq., Creditor John M. Beal, Esq.
321 South Plymouth Court Suite 800
Chicago, IL 60603
Hagenbaugh & Murphy, Creditor Daniel A. Leipold, Esq.
Hagenbaugh & Murphy
701 South Parker St. Suite 8200
Orange, CA 92668
Davis Wright Tremaine, Creditor Mary E. Steele, Esq.
Davis Wright Tremaine
2600 Century Square
1501 Fourth Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
Landmark Education Corporation, Waiter P. Maksym, Esq.
Disputed Creditor Waiter P. Maksym & Associates
720 Enterprise Drive
Oak Brook, n, 60521-1390
[local counsel]
Robert Lippmann, Disputed Creditor Kendrick L. Moron, Esq.
Moron & Bartilson
6255 Sunset Boulevard Suite 2000
Hollywood, CA 90028
Marcello M. Di Mauro, Esq.
3844 Inglis Drive
Los Angeles, CA 90065
John Doe, CAN Member David W. Wirt, Esq.
Sidlev & Austin
One First National Plaza
Chicago, n, 60603
Steven L. Hayes, A Law Corporation, Steven L. Hayes, Esq.
Purchaser Bowles & Hayes
1015 Oneonta Drive
Los Angeles, CA 90065
It appears that the bankruptcy court has entered a final order holding that
Debtor, Cult Awareness Network, Inc., a California not-for-profit corporation
recognized under Internal Revenue Code 501(c)(3), lacks standing to participate in
the Chapter 7 proceeding, at least for purposes of contesting sales of assets.
Furthermore, portions of the sale approved by the bankruptcy court orders of
November 21 and November 26, 1996, approving the sale of debtor’s "servicemark"
(without specifying which of the two marks, Reg. No. 1,737,224 filed 3-25-1992 and
registered 12-1-1992 or Peg. No. 1,817,168 filed 4-10-1992 and registered 1-18-
1994, the trustee proposed to sell or had sold), debtor's non-existent
"trademark," and all "rights" related thereto, are or may be void or voidable
because of inadequacies of notice, inadequacies of description of assets
purportedly sold, non-existence of the trademark, exclusion of debtor's goodwill
from the sale, and the bankruptcy court's refusal to take into account non-legal
public policy considerations.
In light of information now available, Debtor-Appellant may revise the
Statement of the Issues to Be Presented on Appeal, previously filed and served on
December 11, 1996.
The undersigned, a member of the bar of the highest courts of the District of
Columbia and the State of New York, the U.S. District Court for the District of
Columbia and other federal courts. is not admitted to the bar of any federal or
state court in the State of Illinois.
Dated: December 16, 1996
Signed:
David J. Bardin
Special appellate counsel
Attorney for Appellant
Address: Arent Fox Kintner Plotkin & Kahn
1050 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20036-5339
Phone: (202) 857-6089
Fax: (202) 857-6395
Benjamin P. Hyink
Hyink & Scannicchio, Chtd.
140 South Dearborn Street Suite 800
Chicago, IL 60603-5205
[designated local counsel
in U.S. District Court]
Phone: (312) 782-8274
Fax: (312) 782-1595
Back to CAN Mirror Page Index
From: mgarde@superlink.net (Maureen Garde)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Moxon attempt to recoup Scott as client, a document
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 1996 04:07:38 GMT
Organization: SuperNet Inc. (908) 828-8988
Lines: 60
Message-ID: <32ba0f95.528927@news>
NNTP-Posting-Host: md9.superlink.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99f/16.299
This very short document was sent to me anonymously,
I assume because of my web site on Scientology and
the Courts.
Apparently Kendrick Moxon sought some sort of order
from the District court in Washington, which is where
the original verdict in the Jason Scott case was
rendered, thus the case is so captioned.
This brief order doesn't say just what sort or order
he was seeking from the Court. It's hard to figure
what kind of order it would be. In addition, I assume
that the Court held it lacked jurisdiction because
the case is on appeal to the Ninth Circuit. (The
District Court automatically loses jurisdiction upon
the proper filing of an appeal in the Circuit Court.)
Wonder if he's tried to get any sort of order from
the Circuit Court. Anybody know??
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE
CASE NO. C94-0079C
MINUTE ORDER
Jason Scott,
Plaintiff
v.
Rick Ross, et al.,
Defendants
The following Minute Order is made by direction of the Court,
the Honorable John C. Coughenour, United States District Judge:
This matter comes before the Court on counsel Kendrick Moxon's
Emergency Motion Regarding Representation of Plaintiff. Having
considered the submissions of Mr. Moxon, the Court concludes that
its exercise of jurisdiction would be improper. Accordingly, the
Emergency Motion Regarding Representation of Plaintiff is DENIED.
DATED this 5 day of December, 1996.
BRUCE RIFKIN, Clerk
Deputy Clerk
(signed)
--------------------------------------------------------------
See "The Church of Scientology and the Courts,"
court opinions & other legal documents concerning scientology
at http://mars.superlink.net/user/mgarde/intro.html.
Back to CAN Mirror Page Index
Back to Marina's Manor