Fishman Motion Re Venue

 STEVEN FISHMAN
 Dismas House, Room 324
 141 N.W. 1st Avenue
 Dania, Florida 33004
 Defendant Pro Se
 GRAHAM E. BERRY
 JUDITH M. TISHKOFF
 LEWIS, DIAMATO, BRISBOIS BISGAARD
 221 North Ficlueroa Street, Suite 1200
 Los Angeles, California 90012
 (213) 250-1800
 Attorneys for Defendant,
 UWE GEERTZ, Ph.D-
 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
 CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY CASE NO. 91-6426 HLH (Tx)
 INTERNATIONAL,
 VERIFIED JOINT PRELIMINARY
 Plaintiff, NOTICE OF MOTION BY DEFENDANTS
 STEVEN FISHMAN AND UWE GEERTZ
 FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THIS
 COURT'S MARCH 22, 1993 ORDER
 TRANSFERRING THE VENUE OF THIS
 VS. CASE TO U.S.D.C., SOUTHERN
 DISTRICT OF FLORIDA AND MOTION
 FOR RELIEF FROM THAT SAME ORDER
 PURSUANT TO F.R.CIV.P. 60
 STEVEN FISHMAN and UWE GEERTZ, Date: April 26, 1993
 Time: 10:00 a.m.
 Defendants. Place: Courtroom 7
 PRELIMINARY NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that defendants Steven
Fishman and Uwe Geertz will shortly be filing a joint notice of
notion and motion for reconsideration of this court's March 22, 1993
order to transfer the venue of this case to the United States
 (0134)
 District Court for the Southern District of Florida (pursuant t
 Local Rule 7.16) and a motion for relief from that same order
 pursuant to Rule 60 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
 THE PURPOSE OF THIS PRELIMINARY NOTICE OF MOTIONS IS TO AVOID
 ANY FURTHER INCONVENIENCE OR EXPENSE ON THE COURTS PART WITS REGARD
 TO THE TRANSFER OF THE FILE PENDING THE FILING AND REARING OF SAID
 MOTIONS FOR RECONSIDERATION AND F.R.CIV.P. RULE 60 RELIEF.
 DEFENDANTS GEERTZ AND PIS EXPECT TO FILE THEIR JOINT MOTION BY
 MONDAY, APRIL S. 1993. THIS DELAY IS OCCASIONED BY FISHMAN, 
GEERTZ
 AND GEERTZ'S COUNSEL GRAHM E. BERRY, BEING ENGAGED FROM MARCH 15 TO
 APPROXIMATELY MARCH26 IN VARIOUS DEPOSITIONS, FROM DAY TO DAY, IN
 FORT LAUDERDALE, FLORIDA, INCLUDING THE DEPOSITIONS OF DR. GEERTZ
 AND MR. FISHMAN.
 This motion will be made, inter alia, on the following grounds:
 A. AS TO DEFENDANT FISHMAN:
 Prior to the March 22, 1993 hearing on his motion for change of
 venue:
 1. Mr. Fishman mistakenly thought that IRS officials,
 (Messrs. Tronscoso and Kroggel) from Tampa, Florida could be
 compelled to attend the trial of this matter in Miami, Florida and
 that they could be compelled to testify about ongoing government
 investigations;
 2. Mr. Fishman mistakenly thought that Detective Angelo could
 be compelled to attend trial in Miami, give testimony about an
 ongoing police investigation and Mr. Fishman also did not realize
 that statements by Detective Angelo regarding what Fishman told
 Detective Angelo about Scientology would be hearsay;
 3. With regard to "certain hostile witnesses who are staff
 (0135)
 members of the Church of Scientology":
 (a) Mr. Fishman had not realized that these persons would
 have to be subpoenaed for depositions, deposed, subpoenaed for trial
 and paid witness fees, all at an impossible expense to himself;
 (b) Mr. Fishman had inadvertently forgotten that these
 witnesses would have been subjected to Scientology's TR-L (training
 routine-lying) , witness training program ("hatting the witness") and
 security procedures - all to subvert the truth and so render their
 testimony futile to the standpoint of Mr Fishman's defense;
 4. Mr. Fishman had mistakenly and inadvertently failed to
 realize that the witnesses he really needs in this case are largely
 ex-Scientologists -- most of whom are more readily available to
 testify at trial in Los Angeles;
 5. Fishman had mistakenly filed his motion for change of
 venue after reviewing his file and noticing that defendant Geertz
 once had filed the same motion, and without knowing that defendant
 Geertz had subsequently made a determination that the case was
 better venued in Los Angeles for an assortment of different reasons.
 6. Mr. Fishman had mistakenly and inadvertently failed to
 consider the logistical problems he faced in trying his case in
 Miami without the support services of Lewis, D'Amato, Brisbois &
 Bisgaard being available with regard to the dozens of boxes of
 documents that will be introduced into evidence in his case.
 7. Mr. Fishman had not received Lewis, D'Amato's offers to:
 (a) provide him with law library, support and office
 services during the trial in Los Angeles;
 (b) provide him with accommodations, air transportation
 and a per them for food costs during trial in Los Angeles and to the
 (0136)
 extent plaintiff Scientology failed to do so;
 (c) pay for the travel and accommodation of Marjorie
 Wakefield to testify at trial in Los Angeles;
 (d) take videotaped depositions of so many of the so-
 called "Scientology hostile witnesses" in Fort Lauderdale and Miami
 who could be subpoenad for deposition;
 (e) use their best efforts to find Mr. Fishman a pro bono
 trial counsel for a trial in Los Angeles;
 (f) file a motion for summary judgment in Los Angeles, in
 which Mr. Fishman would join; and
 (g) transport his over 50 boxes of evidence to Los
 Angeles and store it for him there pending trial and for six months
 thereafter.
 8. Mr. Fishman had not developed the close working
 relationship he now has with Graham E. Berry of Lewis D'Amato as a
 result of the Steven Fishman, Jack Fishman, Jamie Lee Nuryev, Keith
 Nosetta and Dr. Geertz depositions now being conducted in Fort
 Lauderdale, Florida.
 9. Mr. Fishman had not realized that the granting of his
 motion for change of venue may adversely affect Dr. Geertz's
 representation by the Lewis D'Amato firm and threaten the informal
 assistance now being received by him from the Lewis, D'Amato firm
 including but not limited to receiving copies of all deposition
 transcripts, discovery propounded and received that he had not
 hitherto been able to afford himself and that plaintiff had been
 unwilling to provide him.
 (0137)
 B. AS TO DEFENDANT GEERTZ:
 10. The defense of defendant Dr. Geertz was "stayed" by his
 bankruptcy petition until only days before the February 22, 1993
 hearing on Fishman's motions. [Scientology has since moved to
 reconsider the bankruptcy court's exemption of Dr. Geertz from
 personal liability when it partially lifted the stay.)
 11. Mark Augustine was originally responsible for handling
 this matter on behalf of Lewis, D'Amato. During the pendency of the
 automatic stay Mark Augustine resigned from the Lewis D'Amato firm
 and was replaced on this matter by Graham Berry.
 12. Only hours after the February 22, 1993 continuance of
 Fishman's motion, and this court orders that Fishman submit
 declarations as to the change of venue, Graham Berry was admitted to
 Cedar Sinai Hospital on an emergency basis. During his
 hospitalization and recuperation, Mr. Fishman served a new motion
 for change of venue (by Federal Express and not first class mail on
 Lewis, D'Amato). Due to either mistake or inadvertence, either
 Judith Tishkoff, Esq. or her paralegal, failed to ensure that Graham
 Berry saw the new motion and failed to ensure that the date for new
 opposition papers was properly calendared. Accordingly, at the
 March 22, 1993 hearing on Fishman's motion for change of venue,
 Graham Berry was not aware that Mr. Fishman had filed new motion
 papers now supported by the declaration the court had previously
 ordered.
 13. Defendant Geertz selected the Lewis, D'Amato law firm as
 his counsel partly because of its considerable experience in
 handling Scientology litigation. Over 100,000ドル has been expended on
 this defense to date. Transfer of the case to Florida would mean
 (0138)
 either:
 (a) the appointment of replacement counsel at enormous cost
 and expense and the loss of Lewis, D'Amato's general expertise and
 acquired knowledge in this case, or
 (b) the appointment of unnecessarily expensive and duplicative
 Miami co-counsel.
 14. If defendant Geertz's counsel (Lewis, D'Amato) has to try
 this case in Miami instead of Los Angeles:
 (a) over 80 boxes of documents in this case will have to be
 transported and accommodated in Miami;
 (b) selected boxes of documents from over 200 boxes of
 documents acquired from other Scientology cases will have to be
 transported and accommodated in Miami;
 (c) document handling and logistical support services would
 have to be specially hired in Miami;
 (d) The cost of trying this case will vastly exceed the
 300,000ドル already projected because of the travel and accommodation
 costs that will be incurred by the attorneys and staff in contrast
 to merely transporting and accommodating Messrs. Fishman, Geertz and
 certain witnesses in Los Angeles.
 C. PLAINTIFF CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY INTERNATIONAL
 As to plaintiff Church of Scientology International, it would
 be argued that it opposed Fishman's motion for change of venue now
 sought to be set aside. 
 (0139)
 Dated: March 26, 1993 LEWIS, D'AMATO BRISBOIS & BISGAARD
 By: (bears signature of)
 Graham E. Berry
 Attorneys for Defendant
 UWE GEERTZ, Ph.
 Dated: March 26 1993 (bears siganture of)
 Steven @shman
 Dated March 26 1993 (bears signature of)
 Dr Uwe Geertz
 VERJOINT.MOT
 (0140)
 VERIFICATION
 I, STEVEN FISHMAN, hereby declare and state as follows:
 I have read the foregoing verified Joint Preliminary Notice
of Motion, etc., and know its contents.
 I am a party to this action. The matters stated in the
foregoing document are true of my own knowledge except as to
those matters which are stated on information and belief, and as
to those matters I believe them to be true.
 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the
State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.
 Executed this 26 day of March, 1993 at Ft. Lauderdale,
Florida.
 (bears signature of)STEVE FISHMAN
 (0141)
 VERIFICATION
 I, UWE GEERTZ, hereby declare and state as follows:
 I have read the foregoing Verified Joint Preliminary Notice
 of Motion, etc., and know its contents.
 I am a party to this action. The matters stated in the
 foregoing document are true of my own knowledge except as to
 those matters which are stated on information and belief, and as
 to those matters I believe them to be true.
 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the
 State of California that,the foregoing is true and correct.
 Executed this 26th day of March, 1993 at Ft. Lauderdale,
 Florida.
 (Bears siganture of) UWE GEERTZ
 (0142)
 VERIFICATION
 I, GRAHAM E. BERRY, hereby declare and state as follows:
 I have read the foregoing Verified Joint Preliminary Notice
 of Motion, etc., and know its contents.
 I am a one of the attorneys for defendant Uwe Geertz, a
 party to this action. The matters stated in the foregoing
 document are true of my own knowledge except as to those matters
 which are stated on information and belief, and as to those
 matters I believe them to be true.
 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the
 State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.
 Executed this 26th day of March, 1993 at Ft. Lauderdale,
 Florida.
 (bears signature of)GRAHAM 
E.BERRY
 (0143)

AltStyle によって変換されたページ (->オリジナル) /