Scientology claim victory in Claire Headley Wage case

[skydog]

The clams have been clucking about this on their natter boards.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/29341259/Claire-Headley-Wage-and-Labor-Claim-Dismissal-Order

The decision on the motion for summary judgment relates only to the labor claim. I know she has made several other claims that are not affected by this order.

 

[scooter]

Let 'em cluck - this is just the "first cause" being denied.

It's not (afaik) the totality of the case she's brought against the cult.

Plenty more to come and it's getting exponentially bigger from our side - dead cult is dead, no matter which way you look at it.

 

[byte301]

See Sneak's thread about fake emails from Marc.

I think this may be one of those.

 

[New Guy]

See Sneak's thread about fake emails from Marc.

I think this may be one of those.

Yes that seems to be one of those.
If you click the up link proxy up.

 

[AnonyMary]

That document is just what the cult submitted to the court for the judge to consider and then sign if he agrees.

That is what lawyers do. They submit their motion and proposed decisions and the judge decides by signing otr not, or editing it, and then signing it or not. That was not signed.This posting of it is a cult tactic to confuse the readers and force their intentions onto the critics. FAIL

 

[Arthur Dent]

This is true...lawyers present their version of a "csw" basically, for the judge to sign off on. Even if it is true, and it could be, given that Claire was an auditor and those duties may well be governed by her "ministerial" position and not fall under labor. But Marc has a similar labor claim, I believe, no? Or some others do? It will be interesting to see how they come out as their duties were not ministerial.
I hope the cofs loses big time on the labor charges.

 

[thetanic]

Actually, this ruling seems to be at odds with the circuit, so it'll be interesting to see if it's appealed.

 

[Feral]

The summary judgment was also denied to Marc's case some time ago.

It simply means that the magistrate wants to have the case tried and won't award it prior to a hearing, it isn't bad news at all, it was expected.

Factually it would have been a bloody miracle should it had been awarded out of hand without a trial.

But it was worth a try.

 

[Dulloldfart]

The clams have been clucking about this on their natter boards.
<snip>

What boards? They have message boards where they actually discuss things like lawsuits? Really?

Link please. .

Paul

 

[skydog]

What boards? They have message boards where they actually discuss things like lawsuits? Really?

Link please. .

Paul

Check this one that was in the Sneakster's phony email from the Headley's: http://www.markrathbunisasquirrel.com/ They really are amusing and appear to be the genuine rantings of brain washed cultists. The link to the lawsuit appears genuine as well. I think the Headleys and their attorneys are still in Germany and would love to hear their take on it.

Unfortunately, the case is in the 9th circuit which has a history of questionable legal rulings. The precedent relied upon by the court (a recent 9th circuit case) may be one of them. Even if it is not, the decision appears to be wrong anyway. The Headly's may not be allowed to litigate the religious status of scientology, but their status as "volunteers" of this religion is clearly a question of fact.

It ain't over.

 

[AnonLover]

related thread here:
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?t=17269

 

[Ladybird]

Please change your header (Title of your post) skydog. It is misleading. Many people only read headlines and not the story, thread or facts. All many are going to see is "Headly case is bad news". I am sure that it was not your intention to assist the cult in black PRing Marc Headly.

 

[AnonyMary]

Kevin, are you saying that this report is accurate? Have you gotten confirmation from Van Sickle or Marc? The document wasn't even signed.

The summary judgment was also denied to Marc's case some time ago.

It simply means that the magistrate wants to have the case tried and won't award it prior to a hearing, it isn't bad news at all, it was expected.

Factually it would have been a bloody miracle should it had been awarded out of hand without a trial.

But it was worth a try.

 

[GreyWolf]

If you actually read the judgement, Clare has not really lost. The action has been dismissed, but could actually be brought again. Scn has only won a stay. The executioner will have his day in the near future.

 

[byte301]

I'll wait for Marc's word on this.

If the document isn't even signed then I don't see how it has any validity at all.

And I agree with LB about the title.

 

[skydog]

Please change your header (Title of your post) skydog. It is misleading. Many people only read headlines and not the story, thread or facts. All many are going to see is "Headly case is bad news". I am sure that it was not your intention to assist the cult in black PRing Marc Headly.

I am sorry Ladybird that was certainly not my intention. I just tried to edit the title but don't know how. If anyone can tell me I would appreciate it.

 

[Type4_PTS]

I am sorry Ladybird that was certainly not my intention. I just tried to edit the title but don't know how. If anyone can tell me I would appreciate it.

skydog,
Hit the "Edit" button on the post you want to edit, and then hit the button that says "Go Advanced", which will allow you to edit the title of the thread. It is located at the bottom right section of the post (between the "Save" and "Cancel" buttons)

 

[Feral]

Kevin, are you saying that this report is accurate? Have you gotten confirmation from Van Sickle or Marc? The document wasn't even signed.

No but I was told this in the previous instance.

 

[skydog]

That document is just what the cult submitted to the court for the judge to consider and then sign if he agrees.

That is what lawyers do. They submit their motion and proposed decisions and the judge decides by signing otr not, or editing it, and then signing it or not. That was not signed.This posting of it is a cult tactic to confuse the readers and force their intentions onto the critics. FAIL

I don't know for a fact that this document is accurate. However, I do not think that this is a document submitted by the cult for a judge's signature. The beginning of the document relates that it was heard in chambers of Judge Fischer and decisions of this type of motion(motion for summary judgment) are usually written by the judge or clerk and not simply signee 'proposed decisions' of the party.

The church does a lot of stupid things but I cannot imagine that they would have published this if it were as you stated. Maybe I am wrong, but I just don't think they are that stupid. I am happy to wait for the official word from the actual lawyers and will be as happy as anyone if I am wrong about this.

 

[Ackerland]

This is a well known tactic that has been used in many lawsuits, called FUD:
Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt.

Don't fall for it.