News and Commentary [2nd Half, 1996]



Re: If CAN dies, is the world better off? [Steve A, 10 Jul 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

Cult Fighters' Future in Doubt [Anonymous, 10 Jul 1996]


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

CAN Bankruptcy: Privacy Rights, Non-Profits, & the Law [Jon Ruth, 01 Aug 1996]

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


CAN Records Now Under Illinois State Court Protective Order [seaorg, 07 Sep 1996]


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

Re: KIM BAKER [Stuart P. Derby, 30 Sep 1996]

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


fwd: Illinois Supreme Court grants CAN petition [Tilman Hausherr, 03 Oct 1996]

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


Re: CAN LOGO AND SERVICE MARK SOLD [Tilman Hausherr, 25 Oct 1996]

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


Cult Awareness Network files objection to sale of assets [Marina Chong, 06 Nov 1996]

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

Re: Cult Awareness Network files objection to sale of assets [Maureen Garde, 07 Nov 1996]

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

fwd: Bankruptcy Court finalizes sale of Cult Awareness Network Name [Tilman Hausherr, 22 Nov 1996]

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

CAN Sale Front Page News in Silicon Valley, California [P Suster, 03 Dec 1996]

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

Moxon Dumped [seaorg, 04 Dec 1996]

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: Jason Scott fires Kendrick Moxon; Graham Berry to represent Scott pro-bono [04 Dec 1996]

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

Re: Moxon Dumped (Statement by Graham Berry) [Rod Keller, 04 Dec 1996]

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

Re: Moxon Dumped [Rod Keller, 04 Dec 1996]

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

MTV's Kurt Loder Mentions Scientology/CAN [Hud Nordin, 10 Dec 1996]

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

Co$/CAN Makes Front Page of Le Monde [Baba ROM DOS, 10 Dec 1996]

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

CAN: Notice of Appeal from Order of a Bankruptcy Court [16 Dec 1996]

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

CAN: Amended Notice of Appeal from Order of a Bankruptcy Court [16 Dec 1996]

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

Moxon attempt to recoup Scott as client, a document [Maureen Garde, 20 Dec 1996]

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