======== Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,alt.clearing.technology,misc.legal Subject: Re: Beating the cult like a gong From: hkhenson@netcom.com (Keith Henson) Date: Sat, 19 Apr 1997 04:39:43 GMT Last file! The last part of this file was done as two columns. Sorry, but I am not about to reformate it correctly. Keith Henson SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY OF CALIFORNIA, Plaintiff, v. LARRY WOLLERSHEIM, Defendant. ______________________________ ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) _)No. BC074815 REQUEST BY DEFENDANT LARRY WOLLERSHEIM FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO AMEND JUDGMENTS ___________________________ Date: Time: Dept: TO PLAINTIFF AND ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that defendant LARRY WOLLERSHEIM hereby requests the Court take judicial notice pursuant to California Evidence Code Section 452(d)(1) and (2) of the following documentation for purposes of defendant's motion to amend judgments: 1. Los Angeles Superior Court action Larry Wollersheim v. Church of Scientology California, Superior Court Number C332 027 (Wollersheim I). 2. Religious Technology Center; Church of Scientology International v. Larry Wollersheim, et al., United States District Court, Central District, Civil Action Number 85-7197MRP (Wollersheim II). 3. Church of Scientology of California, et al. v. Superior Court; Larry Wollersheim, et al., United States District Court, Central District, Number CV-86 1362ER (Wollersheim III). 4. Religious Technology Center, et al. v. F.A.C.T.Net, Inc.; Lawrence Wollersheim, et al., Civil Action Number 95-K- 2143, United States District Court, District of Colorado (Wollersheim V). 5. Church of Scientology International, etc. v. Gerald Armstrong, etc., California Superior Court for the County of Marin, Civil Action Number 157-680. 6. Julie Christoffersen Titchbourne v. Church of Scientology; Church of Scientology of California, et al., in the Circuit Court, State of Oregon, County of Multnomah, Civil Action Number A7704-05184. 7. Joint Appendix in lieu of Clerk's Transcript on Appeal, California Court of Appeals, Civil Filing Number B084686, Church of Scientology of California v. Lawrence Wollersheim, Volumes 1 through 5. 8. Reporter's Transcript on Appeal, Larry Wollersheim v. Church of Scientology California, California Court of Appeals Number B023193, Volume Numbers 88 through 92. 9. Minute Order of Court entered 9-26-86, Wollersheim v. Church of Scientology California, Los Angeles Superior Court Number C332 027. 10. Vicki Aznaran, et al. v. Church of Scientology California; CST; RTC; CSI, et al., United States District Court Central District, Civil Action Number CV88-1786 WDK. 11. Religious Technology Center v. Robin Scott, United States District Court, Central District, Civil Action Number CV85-711 JMI. 12. Church of Scientology International, et al. v. Steven Fishman, et al., United States District Court, Central District Action Number CV 91 6426 HLH. 13. Supplemental Declaration of Vicki Aznaran, Joint Transcript on Appeal, CSC v. Wollersheim, Court of Appeals Number B084686, Volume 3, pages 781 through 784. 14. Supplemental Declaration of Steven Fishman, Joint Transcript on Appeal, CSC v. Wollersheim, Court of Appeals Number B084686, Volume 4, pages 1269 through 1291. 15. Trial testimony of Lynn Farny contained in Reporters Transcript on Appeal, Wollersheim v. CSC, Court of Appeals Number B023193, Volume 91, page 14,301, line 1 through 14,307; page 14,309 to 14,310. 16. Trial testimony of Lynn Farny, Wollersheim v. CSC, Transcript on Appeal, Appellate Number B023913, Volume 97, page 14,912, line 8 through 14,913, line 27. 17. Church of Spiritual Technology v. United States (1992) 26 Claims Court 713. 18. United States v. Zolin 905 Fed.2d 1344 (Ninth Circuit 1990) cert. denied. 19. Minute Order of the Court entered 9-26-86, the Honorable Ronald Swearinger; Wollersheim v. Church of Scientology, Civil Action Number C332 027. 20. Declaration of Joseph Yanny, Joint Transcript on Appeal, CSC v. Wollersheim, Court of Appeals Number B084686; Volume 1, pages 281 through 290. 21. Declaration of Charles O'Reilly, Joint Transcript on Appeal, Court of Appeals Number BC074815, Volume 1, pages 204 through 209. 22. Declaration of Lawrence Wollersheim, Joint Transcript on Appeal, Court of Appeals Number BC074815, Volume 1, pages 212 through 216. 23. Trial testimony of William Franks, Titchbourne v. Church of Scientology California, et al., Circuit Court of the State of Oregon, County Multnomah, Civil Action Number A7704- 05184, pages 2,041 through 2,045. 24. Declaration of Gerald Armstrong III, dated 2-11-85, filed in the matter of Wollersheim v. Church of Scientology California, Los Angeles Superior Court Number C332 027. 25. Declaration of Dennis Erlich filed in support of opposition to application for preliminary injunction in Philip Hart v. Cult Awareness Network, Los Angeles Superior Court Number BC043 303. 26. The "Go List" (Guardian's Office) list entered into evidence as Trial Exhibit 94 in the LASC action Wollersheim v. CSC, Civil Action Number C332 027. 27. Reporter's Transcript on Appeal in Wollersheim v. CSC, Civil Action Number C332 027, "Chronological Index" and Master Exhibit List. Dated: March 7, 1997 Respectfully submitted, HAGENBAUGH & MURPHY By______________________________ ROBERT F. DONOHUE Attorneys for Defendant, LARRY WOLLERSHEIM SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY OF CALIFORNIA, Plaintiff, v. LARRY WOLLERSHEIM, Defendant. ______________________________ ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) _)No. BC074815 SEPARATE STATEMENT OF FACTS AND EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT WOLLERSHEIM'S MOTION TO AMEND THE JUDGMENTS Date: May 14, 1997 Time: 9:00 a.m. Dept: 14 Defendant Larry Wollersheim submits the following statement of facts and evidence in support of his Motion to Amend the Judgments awarding him costs and attorneys fees in this matter. FACT SUPPORTING EVIDENCE 1.There are five separate cases in the Wollersheim saga. 1. Exhibit "C" (Summary of History of Wollersheim Litigation with Scientology entities), as authenticated by Declaration of Robert F. Donohue, 6. 2. Scientology's policy of Fair Game states: "ENEMY. SP Order. Fair game. May be deprived of property or injured by any means by any Scientologist without any discipline of the Scientologist. May be tricked, sued or lied to or destroyed." 2. Declaration of Dennis Erlich of 10/26/92, filed in opposition to plaintiff's application for preliminary injunction in Hart v. CAN (LASC No. BC043303 6, and Exhibit "B" attached thereto.* 3. Although the Wollersheim v. CSC jury's $30 million award to Mr. Wollersheim was reduced by the appellate court to $2.5 million, that judgment against CSC, with interest, will be worth $5,770,565.25 by April 30, 1997. 3. Declaration of Craig Stein, 11. 4. At the time Mr. Wollersheim filed his lawsuit against CSC on July 29, 1980, and prior to the formation of CSI and RTC in late 1981 and early 1982, CSC ran all the organizations of Scientology. 4. Exhibit "D" (Second Amended Complaint in Wollersheim v. CSC, No. C332 027).* Transcript from 10/82 Mission Holders' Conference, remarks of Lyman Spurlock (p. 4), attached as Exhibit "3" to, and authenticated by, Declaration of Stacy Young, 16, 20. 5. CSC was incorporated in California in 1954 and was Scientology's "mother church" until CSI was formed in late 1981. 5. Exhibit "A" (Excerpts from Deposition of Neil Levin in Wollersheim v. CSC) 9:20- 23, 61:3-18, as authenticated by Declaration of Robert F. Donohue 7; Transcript from 10/82 Mission Holders' Conference, remarks of Lyman Spurlock (p.4), attached as Exhibit "3" to Declaration of Stacy Young. Declaration of Stacy Young, 2. 6. The net worth of CSC in July of 1981 was $340 million. 6. Exhibit "I" (Trial testimony of William Franks in Titchbourne v. Church of Scientology, Mission of Davis (Cir. Ct. Oregon No. A7704- 05184)* 2044:12-2045:12. 7. Starting in December 1981, Scientology underwent a corporate reorganization, called "Mission Corporate Category Sort-Out" (MCCS). Sixty to 70% of CSC was divested at the end of December, 1981. 7. Exhibit "J" (Excerpt from Vol. 91 of Reporter's Transcript on Appeal in Wollersheim v. CSC, testimony of Lynn Farny)*, 14309:24- 14310:11; First Declaration of Gerald Armstrong (filed in Wollersheim v. CSC) (Wollersheim I), dated 2/11/85,* 1-5. Church of Spiritual Technology v. U.S., 26 Cl.Ct. 713, 716 (1992), aff'd. 991 F.2d 812 (Fed. Cir. 1993).* 8. When, in early 1985, it appeared to Scientology's OSA (Office of Special Affairs) unit that Mr. Wollersheim might be winning his lawsuit, the decision was made to strip CSC of what it still had. 8. Declaration of Stacy Young, 7, 11. 9. The remaining 30 to 40% of CSC was gone by May of 1985. 9. Exhibit "J" (Excerpt from Vol. 91 of Reporter's Transcript on Appeal in Wollersheim v. CSC, testimony of Lynn Farny),* 14309:24- 14310:11 10. When CSI, a corporation, was formed in late 1981, it replaced CSC as the "mother church." As of 1995, CSI continues to be the mother church and in this capacity oversees most other Scientology entities, including CSC. 10. Exhibit "A" (Levin deposition) 61:3-18; Exhibit "B" (Attachments to Form 1023 Application for Recognition of Exemption, submitted to IRS by CSI in pursuit of 501(c)(3) tax exempt status; produced by CSI in CSI, et. al. v. Fishman, et. al., USDC Case No. CV916426 HLH(Tx)) (hereinafter, "Tax Records"), p. 150063, as authenticated by Declaration of Graham Berry, 3. Declaration of Stacy Young, 22. Transcript from 10/82 Mission Holders' Conference, remarks of Lyman Spurlock (p.4), and Chart of new corporate structure, attached as Exhibits "3" and "5" to Declaration of Stacy Young.11. According to the hierarchy established by the MCCS reorganization, the only Scientology entity superior to CSI is RTC, a corporation which owns and licenses Scientology trademarks and service marks. 11. Exhibit "P" (RTC Articles of Incorporation);* Exhibit "B" (Tax records) pp. 150004, 150192- 150194; 150227-150235; Transcript from 10/82 Mission Holders' Conference, remarks of Lyman Spurlock (p.5), and Chart of new corporate structure, attached as Exhibits "3" and "5" to Declaration of Stacy Young. 12. Scientology gutted CSC of all its assets to prevent Wollersheim and other litigants against Scientology from collecting judgments. 12. Declaration of Stacy Young, 10-12, 15; 13. In October 1982, Scientology held a "U.S. Missionholders Conference" to explain the MCCS corporate reorganization, at which Scientology officials David Miscavige and Lyman Spurlock, both of whom were founding trustees of RTC in 1981, explained the reorganization had been intended to make Scientology "impregnable." 13. Exhibit "B" (Tax records) pp. 150232-150234, 153890; Exhibit "P" (RTC Articles of Incorporation); Exhibit "L" (Excerpt from deposition of Warren McShane in RTC, et. al. v. Netcom On- Line Communication Services, Inc., et. al. (USDC Case No. C-95-20091)) 220:11-221:3, as authenticated by Declaration of Daniel A. Leipold, 3; Declaration of Stacy Young, 16; Transcript from 10/82 Mission Holders' Conference, remarks of David Miscavige (p.7) and Lyman Spurlock (p.6), attached to as Exhibit "3" to Declaration of Stacy Young. 14. At the 10/82 Missionholders Conference, David Miscavige told attendees that the reorganization had resulted in a "corporate structure [which] assures Scientology being around for eternity." 14. Transcript from 10/82 Mission Holders' Conference, remarks of David Miscavige (p.7), attached as Exhibit "3" to Declaration of Stacy Young. 15. Before the 1981 reorganization, the most prosperous units in Scientology were within CSC, and CSC received regular income from them. 15. Transcript from 10/82 Mission Holders' Conference, remarks Lyman Spurlock (p.4), attached as Exhibit "3" to Declaration of Stacy Young; CSC v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 823 F.2d 1310, 1313-1314 (9th Cir. 1987).* 16. Organizations such as Church of Scientology San Francisco, the Advanced Org of Los Angeles and FOLO Western U.S., all part of CSC until late 1981, paid CSC monthly management fees. 16. Exhibit "A" (Levin deposition) 63:18-64:2; 74:7-9; 137:7-14; Transcript from 10/82 Mission Holders' Conference, remarks of Lyman Spurlock (p.4), attached as Exhibit "3" to Declaration of Stacy Young; CSC v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 823 F.2d 1310, 1313-1314 (9th Cir. 1987). 17. After the reorganization, the payments previously made by Scientology organizations to CSC were to be paid to CSI. CSI receives five to 10 percent of weekly receipts from 98 Scientology organizations. 17. Declaration of Stacy Young, 21; Exhibit "A" (Levin deposition) 137:24-138:6; 139:22-140:4; Exhibit "B" (Tax records) pp. 151414-151415; 151576- 151577. 18. Twenty-five percent of CSI's revenue consists of management payments received from Scientology organizations. 18. Exhibit "B" (Tax records) p. 151414. 19. Flag Service Organization was part of CSC until 1981, when it was incorporated as Church of Scientology Flag Service Organization (CSFSO). 19. Exhibit "A " (Levin deposition) 137:24-138:6; 139:22-140:4. Exhibit "B" (Tax records) p. 150063. 20. After 1981, CSFSO began making management payments to CSI; by 1989, these payments averaged $200,000 per week. 20. Exhibit "B" (Tax records) p. 151577.21. CSC is a "dormant" corporation which has no real activities. 21. Exhibit "A" (Levin deposition) 5:19-22; 40:25- 41:4. Exhibit "B" (Tax records) p. 153800. 22. As of May 1995, CSC had been dormant "for several years." In its 1993 application for tax exempt status, CSI provided information gathered in 1991, responding to an IRS inquiry about why CSI had characterized CSC as "inactive." There, CSI claimed CSC to be among "entities that were once active but are no longer carrying on any activity.... CSC is termed inactive because it is no longer carrying out any activity though it was once an active church corporation." 22. Exhibit "A" (Levin deposition) 41:1-3. Exhibit "B" (Tax records) pp. 150004-150005; 153800. 23. CSC has no employees and transacts no business. 23. Exhibit "A" (Levin deposition) 40:25-41:4; 57:23- 58:2. Exhibit "B" (Tax records) p. 153800. 24. When CSI applied to the IRS for 501(c)(3) tax exempt status in 1993, it did not include CSC among the entities for which it sought protection. 24. Exhibit "B" (Tax records) p. 150004-150005. 25. President Levin of CSC devotes no time to CSC-related duties, nor has he been paid a salary by CSC since 1992. 25. Exhibit "A" (Levin deposition) 46:5-12; 50:6. 26. As of 1995, in addition to his status as president of CSC, Neil Levin is employed by CSI as a tax handling officer in the Office of Special Affairs International (OSA). 26. Exhibit "A" (Levin deposition), 19:23, 55:13-20. 27. Scientology's Office of Special Affairs (OSA) was previously known as the Guardian's Office, a unit affiliated with CSC which handled public relations, intelligence and legal matters for all of Scientology. 27. Declaration of Stacy Young, 6. Exhibit "J" (Excerpt from Vol. 91 of Reporter's Transcript on Appeal in Wollersheim v. CSC, testimony of Lynn Farny)*, pp. 14301, 14303. 28. The former Guardian's Office became known as the Office of Special Affairs in approximately 1983. 28. Declaration of Stacy Young, 6. 29. In approximately 1985, OSA's operations were transferred from CSC to come under CSI's control. 29. Exhibit "A" (Levin deposition) 19:23. Exhibit "B" (Tax records) p. 152248. Declaration of Stacy Young, 11-14; 30. As of April 30, 1986, CSC claimed its net worth was $18,667,947. 30. Exhibit "M" (Balance Sheet dated 4/30/86, prepared by Greenberg & Jackson, marked and received as Exhibit 478 in post-trial matters in Wollersheim v. CSC).* Exhibit "J" (Excerpt from Vol. 91 of Reporter's Transcript on Appeal in Wollersheim v. CSC, testimony of Lynn Farny)*, p. 14305:17- 14306:6. 31. The $18.6 million figure representing CSC's purported net worth as of April 1986 was prepared by the accounting firm of Greenberg & Jackson; among that firm's principals was Marty Greenberg, a staff member within the precursor entity to Scientology's OSA unit, the Guardian's Office. 31. Exhibit "N" (GO List, marked and received as Exhibit 94 in Wollersheim v. CSC trial),* p. 353-A. Exhibit "HH" (Master Index to Reporters' Transcript on Appeal in Wollersheim v. CSC), p. xxxiv.* 32. As of 1994, Lynn Farny is an officer of CSI. 32. Exhibit "O" (Notice of Filing Amendment and Amendment to Bond for Stay of Execution of Judgment, filed 6/24/94 in consolidated actions RTC v. Scott and RTC v. Wollersheim.)* 33. On July 29, 1986, Lynn Farny, in his capacity as a director of CSC, agreed on the record in Wollersheim v. CSC that CSC would not disburse, dispose of, spend, transfer or convey assets of CSC without prior approval of the court except in the ordinary course of business. 33. Exhibit "K" (Excerpt from Vol. 97 of Reporter's Transcript on Appeal in Wollersheim v. CSC, testimony of Lynn Farny)*, p. 14912:22- 14913:27. 34. Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Ronald Swearinger, ruling on a post-trial motion in Wollersheim v. CSC, determined on the basis of evidence before him that CSC had voluntarily depleted all of its assets to sister corporations during the pendency of the case to create the appearance of indigency. 34. Exhibit "Q" (Minute Order of the Court entered 9-26-86 in Wollersheim v. CSC).* 35. In December 1986, ex- Scientologist Gerald Armstrong settled his claims against CSC for $800,000 in an agreement executed by CSI. These claims had been advanced by way of a cross-complaint filed in the matter of CSC v. Armstrong, in which CSC sued Mr. Armstrong for conversion of "confidential" documents. L.A. Superior Court Judge Paul Breckenridge dismissed CSC's complaint in 1984, finding Mr. Armstrong's possession of the documents justified by his fear for the lives of his wife and himself and the belief that he needed the documents as leverage against the threats. The court of appeal affirmed that decision. 35. Exhibit "R" (Mutual Release of All Claims, executed between Gerald Armstrong and CSI in settlement of cross-complaint in Armstrong v. CSC LASC No. C 420153), as authenticated by the Declaration of Ford Greene, 7. Declaration of Ford Greene, 2-6. CSC v. Armstrong (1991) 232 Cal.App.3d 1060. 36. The settlement disposing of Gerald Armstrong's claims against CSC, executed by representatives of CSI, named CSC, RTC and "all Scientology entities" as beneficiaries of the agreement. 36. Exhibit "R" (Armstrong settlement). Declaration of Ford Greene, 6. 37. In March 1996, CSC deposited the contents of its Luxembourg bank account, which by then totalled $38,993.09, with the Court, in response to Mr. Wollersheim's motion for the appointment of a receiver. 37. Declaration of Craig Stein, 6. 38. As of May, 1995, CSC banked at Republic Bank in New York and at Krediet Bank of Luxembourg. The Luxembourg account had $35,000 in it. The New York account had been opened with CSI funds to pay a sanctions award in Wollersheim v. CSC. 38. Exhibit "A" (Levin deposition) 37:22-38:20; 46:19-20; 47:12. Declaration of Craig Stein, 17. 39. As of May, 1995, CSC owns no personal property and no real property anywhere in the world. 39. Exhibit "A" (Levin deposition) 124:4-18. 40. As of May, 1995, the only cases in which CSC was a plaintiff or cross-complainant were the present one and the case of RTC v. Scott, which had been consolidated with RTC v. Wollersheim (Wollersheim II). The Scott and Wollersheim II cases had both been filed in the 1980s. 40. Exhibit "A" (Levin deposition) 52:12-53:15. Exhibit "E" (First Amended Complaint in RTC, et. al. v. Wollersheim, et. al. USDC Case No. 85-7197 MRP)* Exhibit "F" (Caption page from Complaint in RTC, et. al. v. Scott, et. al. (USDC Case No. 85711);* 41. The Sea Org is an unincorporated paramilitary organization whose bank reserves in July of 1981 totalled $150 million. 41. Exhibit "B" (Tax records) p. 150160-150161. Exhibit "I" (Testimony of William Franks in Titchbourne) p. 2041, l. 4-20. 42. Power over all Scientology entities is exercised by the Sea Org irrespective of corporate boundaries. 42. Declaration of Stacy Young, 17; Exhibit "S" (Excerpts from deposition of Vicki Aznaran in Vicki Aznaran, et. al. v. CSC, et. al., USDC Case No. CV 88-1786-WDK), 335:17- 23, as authenticated by Declaration of Daniel A. Leipold, 4. 43. The highest posts within Scientology corporations are occupied by officers of the Sea Org. 43. Exhibit "B" (Tax records) pp. 150159, 153818-153819. 44. Captain David Miscavige of the Sea Org is its highest ranking officer. 44. Exhibit "B" (Tax records) p. 153819.45. A founding trustee of RTC in December 1981, David Miscavige is its current chairman of the board. 45. Exhibit "B" (Tax records) pp. 150232, 150234, 153890; Exhibit "L" (McShane deposition) 220:11-221:3. 46. As the only non-Brevet captain in the Sea Org, Miscavige is the only one whose rank is not dependent upon his continued service in a particular post. 46. Exhibit "B" (Tax records) pp. 153818-153819. 47. Prior to 1987, David Miscavige ruled Scientology from his position as chairman of Author Services, Inc. (ASI), a for-profit corporation ostensibly created as a literary agency for L. Ron Hubbard. 47. Declaration of Stacy Young 18, 25. Exhibit "T" (Excerpts from deposition of Vicki Aznaran in RTC, et. al. v. Wollersheim USDC Case No. CV 85-711) 45:14-46:2, as authenticated by Declaration of Daniel A. Leipold, 5. 48. In 1987, when the IRS began investigating ASI's ties to Scientology's non-profit corporations, Miscavige moved the seat of power to RTC and appointed himself chairman of the board. 48. Declaration of Stacy Young 25. 49. Before moving to RTC, Miscavige managed the defense of the Wollersheim I case from his post at ASI, assisted by other Sea Org officers. 49. Declaration of Stacy Young, 25. Exhibit "S" (Vicki Aznaran deposition in Vicki Aznaran, et. al. v. CSC, et. al.) 332:6-333:22, 366:1-8. 50. Other ASI personnel assisting in the management of CSC's defense in Wollersheim v. CSC were Marty Rathbun and Norman Starkey, both Sea Org officers. Rathbun eventually became a director of RTC and its president, as well as a trustee of CSI. Starkey was one of RTC's founding trustees. 50. Exhibit "S" (Vicki Aznaran deposition in Vicki Aznaran, et. al. v. CSC, et. al.) 366:1-8; Exhibit "B" (Tax records) pp. 150007-150009, 150232, 150234, 151380, 153819. 51. Miscavige attended a portion of the Wollersheim I trial.51. Exhibit "K" (Excerpt from Vol. 97 of Reporter's Transcript on Appeal in Wollersheim v. CSC), p. 14912:22-14913:27. 52. In Scientology, the term "PC file" refers to an adherent's "pre-clear" file and contains information gleaned from a Scientologist's "auditing" sessions. 52. Exhibit "S" (Excerpts from deposition of Vicki Aznaran in Vicki Aznaran, et. al. v. CSC, et. al.), 335:17- 23. 53. Between mid-1983 and early 1986, Vicki Aznaran held command positions at RTC, including the position of president. She was also a Sea Org officer. While an officer of RTC, she received an order to destroy the PC files of Larry Wollersheim and others involved in litigation against Scientology. 53. Exhibit "S" (Excerpts from deposition of Vicki Aznaran in Vicki Aznaran, et. al. v. CSC, et. al.) 214:6-16; 215:1-7; 332:19-333:22; Supplemental Declaration of Vicki Aznaran (filed herein, Joint Appendix on Appeal, Vol. 3, p. 783),* 8. Exhibit "B" (Tax records) p. 150243. 54. In CSC, et. al. v. Superior Court, et. al. (Wollersheim III) (in which Mr. Wollersheim was a defendant), CSC claimed Judge Swearinger's order in Wollersheim I, compelling production of Mr. Wollersheim's PC files, violated plaintiffs' freedom of religion. The case was dismissed in November of 1986. 54. Exhibit "G" (Second Amended Complaint in CSC, et. al. v. Superior Court, Swearinger, Margolis and Wollersheim (USDC Car No. CV- 86 1362 ER).* 55. The directive to Vicki Aznaran to destroy Mr. Wollersheim's PC files was issued by David Miscavige. 55. Exhibit "S" (Vicki Aznaran deposition in Vicki Aznaran, et. al. v. CSC, et. al.) 332:6-333:22, 366:1-8.56. All writings of L. Ron Hubbard are considered "scripture" in Scientology. In or about 1968, L. Ron Hubbard wrote that "The purpose of the suit is to harass and discourage rather than to win. [] The law can be used very easily to harass, and enough harassment on somebody who is simply on the thin edge anyway, well knowing that he is not authorized, will generally be sufficient to cause his professional decease. If possible, of course, ruin him utterly." 56. Exhibit "B" (Tax records) p. 150064. Second Declaration of Gerald Armstrong (dated June 4, 1993 and filed herein in conjunction with defendant's first motion for attorneys fees), 5, and Exhibit "A" attached thereto.* Declaration of Vicki Aznaran in U.S. v. Fishman, p. 4, l. 3-11 (and cover declaration filed in conjunction with defendant's Anti-SLAPP Motion to Strike herein).* 57. RTC and CSI v. Wollersheim (Wollersheim II) was filed on 11/4/85. In it, the plaintiffs claimed the possession and use of certain documents in the prosecution of Wollersheim I by Mr. Wollersheim, his attorneys and experts constituted, inter alia, RICO violations and copyright infringement. 57. Exhibit "E" (First Amended Complaint in RTC and CSI v. Wollersheim, et. al.). 58. The decision to file the Wollersheim II case was made by Sea Org officers David Miscavige, Norman Starkey, Marty Rathbun and Vicki Aznaran, among others. 58. Exhibit "T" (Excerpts from deposition of Vicki Aznaran in RTC/CSI v. Wollersheim) 684:1-685:21. Exhibit "B" (Tax records) p. 153819. 59. Among the attorneys representing RTC and CSI in Wollersheim II was Earle Cooley, who was also representing CSC in Wollersheim I at the time. 59. Exhibit "V" (Notice of Final Judgment filed by Earle C. Cooley and Kendrick L. Moxon on 3/11/94 in Wollersheim v. CSC)*; Exhibit "K" (Excerpt from Vol. 97 of Reporter's Transcript on Appeal in Wollersheim v. CSC), pp. 14912:22-14913:27. RTC v. Wollersheim, 796 F.2d 1076 (9th Cir. 1992).* 60. In Wollersheim II, both RTC and CSI claimed, as elements of damages, the costs and damages award arising out of Mr. Wollersheim's case against CSC. 60. Exhibit "U" (Plaintiffs' Statement in Response to OSC Re Rico Claims, filed 8/21/89 in consolidated actions RTC v. Scott; RTC v. Wollersheim (USDC Case Nos. 85711/ 857197),* Responses to Questions 4, 8 and 17 (pp. 4, 42, 45.) 61. The RICO statement containing RTC's and CSI's damages claims was signed by Attorney Kendrick Moxon (himself a former staff member of Scientology's Guardian's Office), who represented CSC in Wollersheim I post-trial matters, and who represents CSC herein. 61. Exhibit "U" (RICO Statement), p. 45. Exhibit "V" (Notice of Final Judgment in Wollersheim I); Exhibit "N" (GO List), pp. 352-C, 387-B; Exhibit "HH" (Master Index to Reporters' Transcript on Appeal in Wollersheim I) p. xxxiv. 62. Bowles & Moxon was the firm handling the majority of Scientology's legal work. In 1991, the firm was paid $3,199,232.53 by CSI alone. 62. Exhibit "B" (Tax records) pp. 153847-153850. 63. In eventually awarding $2.9 million in attorneys fees to defendants in RTC v. Scott, the action with which Wollersheim II was consolidated, the court adopted the recommendations of Special Master James Kolts, who found plaintiffs had abused the federal court system by using it to destroy their opponents. This decision was affirmed by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. 63. Exhibit "X" (Memorandum of Decision by Special Master James Kolts in RTC v. Scott, dated 1/20/93),* p. 2. Exhibit "Y" (Memorandum Opinion of Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, filed 4/11/96, in RTC v. Scott).* 64. In dismissing the Wollersheim II complaint in May of 1990, the District Court judge adopted the recommendations of Special Master James Kolts, who found the complaint to have been "frivolous and malicious." 64. Exhibit "W" (Order of the Honorable James Ideman Clarifying Prior Order Adopting Conclusions and Recommendations of Special Master RE Rico Claims).* Exhibit "GG" (Excerpt from Evaluation of Order to Show Cause Re: Rico Statements, signed by the Honorable James G. Kolts on 3/7/90),* p. 44. 65. Before Wollersheim II was dismissed, RTC and CSI petitioned the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals for the disqualification of the entire U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, based upon bias and prejudice. The Ninth Circuit denied the petition and ordered it stricken.65. CSC v. Wollersheim (1996) 42 Cal.App.4th 628, 636. 66. The Amended Notice of Appeal, in which the dismissal of the "Greene defendants" (Mr. Wollersheim, his attorneys and expert witnesses) in Wollersheim II was filed on behalf of RTC and CSI, as well as nonparty CSC. 66. Exhibit "Z" (Amended Notice of Appeal filed on 9/11/90 in USDC consolidated actions RTC v. Scott; RTC v. Wollersheim (Nos. 85711/ 857197).* 67. The dismissal of the Wollersheim II complaint was affirmed by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. 67. RTC and CSI v. Wollersheim, et. al., 971 F.2d 364 (9th Cir. 1992).* 68. In April or May of 1987, Sea Org Captain (Brevet) Marty Rathbun discussed a plan to steal the medical records of Attorney Charles O'Reilly with other high-ranking Scientology officials and three private investigators. 68. Declaration of Joseph A. Yanny (originally filed in RTC v. Yanny, LASC No. C6902111 and subsequently filed herein, Joint Appendix on Appeal, Vol. 1, pp. 281-309),* 21(a). 69. Joseph A. Yanny is an attorney who has previously represented CSC, RTC and CSI in cases including Wollersheim II and Wollersheim III. Before he ceased representing Scientology entities in November of 1987, he attended meetings at which David Miscavige, Marty Rathbun and others discussed ways of pressuring Mr. Wollersheim's attorneys into easing off the verdict, and he witnessed Miscavige's and Rathbun's directives regarding the theft of Mr. O'Reilly's medical records. 69. Declaration of Joseph A. Yanny (Joint Appendix pp. 281, 295:10-296:6), 1, 2, 21. Exhibit "E" (First Amended Complaint in RTC v. Wollersheim ("Wollersheim II")); Exhibit "G" (Second Amended Complaint in CSC, et. al. v. Superior Court, et. al. (Wollersheim III). 70. The order to steal Mr. O'Reilly's medical records was implemented on orders from David Miscavige. 70. Declaration of Joseph A. Yanny, (Joint Appendix pp. 295:10-296:6), 21(a). 71. The goal of the plan to steal Mr. O'Reilly's medical records was to obtain information useful to blackmail him into easing off the $30 million verdict. 71. Declaration of Joseph A. Yanny, (Joint Appendix pp. 295:25-296:6), 21(a). 72. CSI paid CSC's defense costs in Wollersheim v. CSC (Wollersheim I).72. Exhibit "A" (Levin deposition) 60:21-24. 73. Scientology maintains a central reserve system to fund activities such as expansion, defense and emergencies.73. Exhibit "B" (Tax records) p. 151572. 74. Among the Scientology entities participating in the central reserve system are CSI and CSC. 74. Exhibit "B" (Tax records) p. 151574. 75. The central reserve fund is administered by a committee consisting entirely of full- time employees of CSI. 75. Exhibit "B" (Tax records) pp. 151578, 151580, 151882. 76. The central reserve committee authorized $12 million annually in 1987 and 1988 for legal fees, court costs and other expenses related to the defense of the activities of Scientology. 76. Exhibit "B" (Tax records) p. 151602. 77. CSC's attorneys fees arising from the present litigation have been paid by CSI. 77. Exhibit "A" (Levin deposition) 59:22-60:9. 78. CSC President Levin recalls no written agreement between CSC and CSI for the repayment of attorneys fees. 78. Exhibit "A" (Levin deposition) 60:14-16. 79. Scientology's vow never to pay Mr. Wollersheim's judgment was captured in the phrase, "Not One Thin Dime for Wollersheim," which became a slogan for the Wollersheim case. This sentiment was echoed by Attorney Earle Cooley, who told the Los Angeles Times: "Larry Wollersheim will never collect a dime." 79. Declaration of Stacy Young, 10. Exhibit "FF" (Los Angeles Times article of 7/23/86). 80. A 1982 bulletin from CSI to Scientology "orgs" proclaimed the "new, totally secure corporate set-up" would ensure no claimant against Scientology would ever be paid "one dime." 80. International Management Bulletin No. 1, dated 11/23/82, attached as Exhibit "2" to, and authenticated by, Declaration of Stacy Young, 16. 81. In its 1993 application for 501(c)(3) tax exempt status, CSI submitted a Consolidated Balance Sheet to the IRS which included as a liability of CSI's the $30 million judgment obtained by Mr. Wollersheim against CSC. 81. Exhibit "B" (Tax records), p. 151594. 82. In August 1995, as a precursor to its filing of the Wollersheim V case, RTC filed an ex parte petition in federal court in Denver, seeking a Writ of Seizure, as authorized under U.S. copyright laws, to enter the home of Lawrence Wollersheim and to search for and seize certain materials apparently authored by L. Ron Hubbard. 82. Exhibit "AA" (Motion for a Writ of Seizure and Impoundment of Infringing Trade Secret Articles filed by RTC in RTC v F.A.C.T.Net, et. al. USDC Civil Action No. 95- K-2143.)* 83. Subsequent to the filing of RTC v. F.A.C.T.Net, et. al. (Wollersheim V), another plaintiff, Bridge Publications Inc. (BPI), has joined in the litigation as a plaintiff. BPI, a Sea Org entity which was formerly a part of CSC, has a board of directors appointed by CSI. 83. Exhibit "H" (First Amended Verified Complaint and its Exhibit "I", filed in RTC v. F.A.C.T.Net, et. al.) Note: because the attachments to the amended complaint are voluminous and largely irrelevant to the instant motion, only Exhibit "I" is provided here; Exhibit "B" (Tax records) pp. 157303, 157307, 157340; Church of Spiritual Technology v. U.S., 26 Cl. Ct. 713 (1992), aff'd., 991 F.2d 812 (Fed. Cir. 1993).* 84. Among the lawyers representing the plaintiffs in RTC et. al. v. F.A.C.T.Net, et. al., was Earle Cooley, who also represented RTC, CSI and CSC in Scientology's previous litigation against Mr. Wollersheim. 84. Exhibit "V" (Notice of Final Judgment in Wollersheim v. CSC)*; Exhibit "K" (Excerpt from Vol. 97 of Reporter's Transcript on Appeal in Wollersheim v. CSC), pp. 14912:22-14913:27. RTC v. Wollersheim, 796 F.2d 1076 (9th Cir. 1992).* Exhibit "H" (Wollersheim V amended complaint). 85.The writ of seizure authorized by the U.S. magistrate pursuant to RTC's application was subsequently vacated, and RTC and BPI failed in their effort to obtain a preliminary injunction when the court determined plaintiffs were unlikely to prevail on the merits, and the balance of hardships weighed in favor of Mr. Wollersheim and the other defendants. 85. Exhibit "BB" (Memorandum Opinion and Order of the Honorable John L. Kane, Jr., filed 9/15/95 in RTC v. F.A.C.T.Net, denying plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction and ordering the return of all seized items),* p. 18. 86. The order granting the petition for a writ of seizure authorized agents of RTC to enter Mr. Wollersheim's home to search for materials apparently authored by L. Ron Hubbard whose RTC-owned copyrights Mr. Wollersheim was alleged to have infringed. 86. Exhibit "CC" (Order to Clerk to Issue Writ for Seizure of Articles Infringing Statutory Copyright and Containing Misappropriated Trade Secrets and Order for Impoundment, filed 8/21/95 in RTC v. F.A.C.T.Net),* pp.2-3. 87. When agents of RTC conducted their search pursuant to the writ of seizure, they ran a search of Mr. Wollersheim's computer, seeking documents by means of a list of keywords; among the keywords employed were "Swearinger," "O'Reilly" and "Leipold." 87. Exhibit "DD" (List of search terms employed by agents of RTC searching Mr. Wollersheim's computer pursuant to order authorizing writ of seizure), as authenticated by Declaration of Daniel A. Leipold, 6. 88. Mr. Wollersheim's counsel in this lawsuit, Daniel A. Leipold of Hagenbaugh & Murphy, substituted into the Wollersheim V matter on behalf of Mr. Wollersheim in 1996, pursuant to an approved application pro hac vice. 88. Exhibit "EE" (Memorandum Opinion and Order filed 11/21/96 in RTC and BPI v. F.A.C.T.Net, et. al., granting application pro hac vice of Daniel A. Leipold),* p. 26. 89. RTC and BPI attached a copy of a "confidentiality agreement" executed solely between CSC and Lawrence Wollersheim to the complaint filed in RTC and BPI v. F.A.C.T.Net (Wollersheim V). 89. Exhibit "H" (First Amended Complaint, 36, 51, and its Exhibit "I," in RTC v. F.A.C.T.Net, et. al.). 90. RTC's current presient, Warren McShane, gave a declaration in RTC and CSI v. Wollersheim (Wollersheim II), when he was secretary of RTC and assisted Scientology counsel in a "paralegal" capacity. There, he acknowledged RTC, CSI and CSC all have the same purpose of advancing Scientology beliefs. 90. Exhibit "L" (McShane deposition) 8:20-21, 11:10-23. Declaration of Warren McShane filed in RTC, et. al. v. Wollersheim, et. al. (Wollersheim II),* 8-10. Dated: April 10, 1997 HAGENBAUGH & MURPHY By____________________________ DANIEL A. LEIPOLD Attorneys Specially appearing for Defendant, LARRY WOLLERSHEIM