[CT 9786]
| Andrew H. Wilson, SBN 063209 WILSON, RYAN & CAMPILONGO 115 Sansome Street Fourth Floor San Francisco, California 94104 (415) 391-3900 Telefax: (415) 954-0938 Laurie J. Bartilson, SBN 139220 MOXON & BARTILSON 6255 Sunset Boulevard, Suite 2000 Hollywood, CA 90028 (213)960-1936 Telefax: (213) 953-3351 Attorneys for Plaintiff |
[Stamp] FILED Oct 17 1995 HOWARD HANSON MARIN COUNTY CLERK by J. Steele, Deputy |
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF MARIN
| CHURCH of SCIENTOLOGY INTERNATIONAL, a California not-for-profit religious corporation, Plaintiff, vs. GERALD ARMSTRONG; DOES 1 through 25, inclusive, Defendants. |
) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) |
CASE NO. BC 157680 [initialed] GWT 10/17/95 ORDER OF PERMANENT INJUNCTION DATE: October 6, 1995 TIME: 9:00 a.m. DEPT: 1 TRIAL DATE: Vacated |
This matter came on for hearing on October 6, 1995, on motion of plaintiff Church of Scientology international ("the Church") for Summary Adjudication of the Twentieth Cause of Action of the Second Amended Complaint. Plaintiff Church of Scientology International appeared by its attorneys, Andrew H. Wilson of Wilson, Ryan & Campilongo and Laurie J. Bartilson of Bowies & Moxon,
1
defendant Armstrong appeared by his attorney, Ford Greene. Having read and considered the moving and opposing papers, and the evidence and arguments presented therein and at the hearing, and good cause appearing:IT IS ORDERED:
The Church's motion for summary adjudication of the twentieth cause of action of the Second Amended Complaint is GRANTED. The Court finds that there is no triable issue of material fact as to any of the following:
1. Plaintiff and defendant freely and voluntarily entered into a Mutual Release of All Claims and Settlement Agreement ("Agreement") in December, 1986.
2. Plaintiff performed all of its obligations pursuant to the Agreement.
3. Defendant Armstrong received substantial consideration for the promises which he made in the Agreement.
4. Since 1990, defendant Armstrong has repeatedly breached paragraphs 7(D), 7(E), 7(H), 7(G), 10 , 18(D) and 20 of the Agreement.
5. Between 1991 and the present, Armstrong breached paragraphs 7(G), 7(H) and 10 of the Agreement by providing voluntary assistance, exclusive of testimony made pursuant to a valid subpoena, to the following private individuals, each of whom was pressing a claim or engaged in litigation with plaintiff and/or one or more of the designated beneficiaries of the Agreement:
* Vicki and Richard Aznaran, anti-Scientology litigants in the case of Vicki Aznaran, et al. v. Church of Scientology International, United States District Court for the Central District of California, Case No. CV 88-1786 (JMI) [Sep.St.Nos. 11-16];
* Joseph A. Yanny, anti-Scientology litigant in the case of Religious Technology Center, et al. v. Joseph Yanny, et al., Los Angeles Superior Court No. C 690211 and Religious Technology Center, et al. v. Joseph Yanny et al., Los Angeles Superior Court No. BC 033035 [Sep.St.Nos. 17-
2
20];* Malcolm Nothling, anti-Scientology litigant in the matter between Malcolm Nothling and the Church of Scientology in South Africa, Adi Codd, Diane Kemp, Glen Rollins; Supreme Court of South Africa (Witwatzbsrand Local Division) Case No. 19221/88. [Sep.St.Nos. 21-241;
* Reader's Digest Corporation, anti-Scientology litigant in the case of Church of Scientology of Lausanne vs. Kiosk AG, Basel, Switzerland [Sep.St.Nos. 25-26];
* Richard Behar, anti-Scientology litigant in the case of Church of Scientology International v Time Warner, Inc.; Time Inc. Magazine Company and Richard Behar, United States District Court, Southern District of New York, Case No. 92 Civ, 3024 PKL [Sep.St.Nos. 27-28];
* Steven Hunziker, anti-Scientology litigant in the case of Hunziker v. Applied Materials, Inc., Santa Clara Superior Court Case No. 692629 [Sep.St.Nos. 29-33];
* David Mayo, anti-Scientology litigant in the case of Religious Technology Center v. Robin Scott, et al., United States District Court for the Central District of California, Case No, 85-711 [Sep.St.Nos. 34-35];
* Cult Awareness Network, anti-Scientology litigant in the case of Cult Awareness Network v. Church of Scientology International, et al., Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, No. 94L804 [Sep.St.Nos. 38-39]:
* Lawrence Wollersheim, anti-Scientology litigant in the cases of Lawrence Wollersheim v. Church of Scientology of California, Los Angeles Superior Court Number C332027 and Church of Scientology of California v. Lawrence Wollersheim, Los Angeles Superior Court Number BC074815 [Sep.St.Nos. 40-42];
* Ronald Lawley, anti-Scientology litigant in the cases of Religious Technology Center, et al. vs. Robin Scott, et al., U.S. District Court, Central
3
District of California, Case No. 85-711 MRP(Bx); Matter Between Church of Scientology Advanced Organization Saint Hill Europe and Africa, and Robin Scott, Ron Lawley, Morag Bellmaine, Stephen Bisbey in the High Court of Justice Queen's Bench Division, Case 1984 S No. 1675; and Matter Between Church of Scientology Religious Education College, Inc., and Nancy Carter, Ron Lawley, Steven Bisbey, in the High Court of Justice Queen's Bench Division, Case 1986 C No. 12230 [Sep.St.Nos. 43-44];* Uwe Geertz and Steven Fishman, anti-Scientology litigants in the case of Church of Scientology International v. Steven Fishman, et al., United States District Court for the Central District of California Number 91-6426 HLH(Tx) [Sep.St.Nos. 45-46];
* Tilly Good, a claimant against the Church of Scientology, Mission of Sacramento Valley [Sep.St.Nos. 36-37];
* Denise Cantin, a claimant against the Church of Scientology of Orange County; Church of Scientology of Boston; and Church of Scientology, Flag Service Organization [Sep.St.Nos. 36-37]; and
* Ed Roberts, a claimant against the Church of Scientology of Stevens Creek [Sep.St.Nos. 36-37].
6. Between 1992 and the present, Armstrong breached paragraph 7(D) of the Agreement by contacting media representatives, granting interviews and attempting to assist media representatives in the preparation for publication or broadcast magazine articles, newspaper articles, books, radio and television programs, about or concerning the Church and/or other persons and entities referred to in paragraph 1 of the Agreement. These media representatives included:
* Cable Network News: reporter Don Knapp, in March, 1992 [Sep.St.Nos. 47-48];
* American Lawyer Magazine: reporter Bill Horne, In March, 1992
4
[Sep.St.No. 49];* Los Angeles Times: reporter Bob Welkos, in May, 1992; and reporter Joel Sappell, in June, 1993 [Sep.St.Nos. 50-51];
* CAN Video Interview, with anti- Scientologists " Spanky" Taylor and Jerry Whitfield, in November, 1992 [Sep.St.No. 52];
* KFAX Radio: interview planned but prevented in April, 1993 [Sep.St.No. 53];
* Newsweek Magazine: reporter Charles Fleming, In June, 1993 and August, 1993 [Sep.St.No.54-56];
* Daily Journal: reporter Mike Tipping, in June, 1993 [Sep.St.No. 57];
* Time Magazine: reporter Richard Behar, in March, 1992 and in June, 1993 [Sep.St.Nos. 58-59];
* San Francisco Recorder: reporter Jennifer Cohen, in August, 1993 [Sep.St.No. 60];
* E! Entertainment Network: reporter Greg Agnew, in August, 1993 [Sep.St.No. 61];
* WORD Radio: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, interviewed in the fall of 1993 [Sep.St.No. 62];
* St. Petersburg Times: St. Petersburg, Florida, reporter Wayne Garcia, in the fall of 1993 [Sep.St.No. 63];
* Premiere Magazine: letter to the editor, in October, 1993 [Sep.St.No. 64];
* Mirror-Group Newspapers: United Kingdom, in May, 1994 [Sep.St.No. 65];
* Gauntlet Magazine: New York, New York, reporter Rick Cusick in une, 1994 [Sep.St.No. 66];
* Pacific Sun Newspaper: reporter Rick Sine, in June and July, 1994 [Sep.St.No. 67];
5
* Disney Cable: reporter Marsha Nix, in August, 1994 [Sep.St.No. 68];and
* Tom Voltz: Swiss author writing a book about Scientology, in October, 1994 [Sep.St.No. 69].
7. Between 1992 and the present, Armstrong breached paragraph 7(D) of the Agreement by preparing and distributing at least three manuscripts concerning his claimed experiences in and with Scientology, including a treatment for a screenplay which he intends to turn into a film [Sep.St.Nos. 70-71].
8. Between 1991 and the present, Armstrong further breached paragraph 7(D) of the Agreement by disclosing his claimed experiences in or with Scientology to each of the following persons or groups, not previously identified: Robert Lobsinger [Sep.St.No. 72]; the New York Times [Sep.St.No. 73]; Toby Plevin, Stuart Culter, Anthony Laing, Kent Burtner and Margaret Singer [Sep.St.No. 74]; Priscilla Coates [Sep.St.No. 75]; Omar Garrison [Sep.St.No. 76); Vaughn and Stacy Young [Sep.St.No. 77]; a Stanford University psychology class [Sep.St.No. 78]; attendees at the 1992 Cult Awareness Network Convention [Sep.St.No. 79]; and Hana Whitfield [Sep.St.No. 80].
9. Defendant Armstrong has reiterated numerous times that he intends to continuing breaching the Agreement unless he is ordered by the Court to cease and desist [Sep.St.Nos. 87-97].
10. Plaintiff's legal remedies are inadequate insofar as the scope of the relief ordered below is concerned. Tamarind Lithography Workshop, Inc. v. Sanders (1983) 143 Cal.App.3d 571, 577-578, 193 Cal.Rptr. 409, 413.
Accordingly, the Court finds that entry of a permanent injunction in this action is necessary in this action because pecuniary compensation could not afford the Church adequate relief, and the restraint is necessary in order to prevent a multiplicity of actions for breach of contract. Civil Code § 3422(1),(3). A ORDER of injunction is therefore entered as follows:
6
Defendant Gerald Armstrong, his agents, employees, and persons acting in concert or conspiracy with him are restrained and enjoined from doing directly or indirectly any of the following:1. Voluntarily assisting any person (not a governmental organ or entity) intending to make, intending to press, intending to arbitrate, or intending to litigate a claim, regarding such claim or regarding pressing, arbitrating, or litigating it, against any of the following persons or entities:
The Church of Scientology International, its officers, directors, agents, representatives, employees, volunteers, successors, assigns and legal counsel;
* The Church of Scientology of California, its officers, directors, agents, representatives, employees, volunteers, successors, assigns and legal counsel;
* Religious Technology Center, its officers, directors, agents, representatives, employees, volunteers, successors, assigns and legal counsel;
* The Church of Spiritual Technology, its officers, directors, agents, representatives, employees, volunteers, successors, assigns and legal counsel;
* All Scientology and Scientology affiliated Churches, organizations and entities, and their officers, directors, agents, representatives, employees, volunteers, successors, assigns and legal counsel;
* Author Services, Inc., its officers, directors, agents, representatives, employees, volunteers, successors, assigns and legal counsel;
* The Estate of L. Ron Hubbard, its executor, beneficiaries, heirs, representatives, and legal counsel; and/or
* Mary Sue Hubbard;
(Hereinafter referred to collectively as "the Beneficiaries");
7
2. Voluntarily assisting any person (not a governmental organ or entity) defending a claim, intending to defend a claim, intending to defend an arbitration, or intending to defend any claim being pressed, made, arbitrated or litigated by any of the Beneficiaries, regarding such claim or regarding defending, arbitrating, or litigating against it;
3. Voluntarily assisting any person (not a governmental organ or entity) arbitrating or litigating adversely to any of the Beneficiaries;
4. Facilitating in any manner the creation, publication, broadcast, writing, filming audio recording, video recording, electronic recording or reproduction of any kind of any book, article, film, television program, radio program, treatment, declaration, screenplay or other literary, artistic or documentary work of any kind which discusses, refers to or mentions Scientology, the Church, and/or any of the Beneficiaries;
5. Discussing with anyone, not a member of Armstrong's immediate family or his attorney, Scientology, the Church, and/or any of the Beneficiaries;
In addition, it is ORDERED that, within 20 days of the issuance of this Order, Armstrong shall:
1. Return to the Church any documents which he now has in his possession, custody or control which discuss or concern Scientology, the Church and/or any person or entity referred to in paragraph 1 of the "Mutual Release of All Claims end Settlement Agreement" of December, 1986, other than documents which have been filed in this litigation.
It is further ORDERED that during the pendency of this litigation, documents which have been filed in this litigation may be retained by Armstrong's counsel.
Those documents are to remain sealed, in the possession of Mr. Greene or any successor counsel, and may not be distributed to third parties. At the conclusion of the instant litigation, it is ORDERED that all documents from this case in
8
counsel's possession which do not comprise counsel's work product will be delivered to counsel for plaintiff. Counsel's work product may be retained by Armstrong's counsel.| DATED: [stamp] OCT 17, 1995 | [Stamp] GARY W. THOMAS THE HONORABLE GARY W. THOMAS SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE |
