Discussion in 'Narconon' started by sallysock, May 18, 2014.
Request to disqualify judge in NAFC case is denied
By Tony Ortega, October 15, 2016
Last week we told you about the disturbing recent developments in the National Association of Forensic Counselors’ trademark lawsuit against Scientology’s drug rehab network, Narconon. NAFC’s CEO, Karla Taylor, was ordered to turn over the entire contents of her personal hard drive to Narconon’s attorneys by Magistrate Judge Steven Shreder, even though the drive contained intensely personal information about Taylor that has nothing to do with the lawsuit.
And then Taylor’s attorneys learned that Shreder not only used to work for one of the law firms representing some of the lawsuit’s defendants, but that his wife, Sandy Shreder, currently works at that law firm as a legal assistant.
But District Judge Ronald White dismissed the motion filed by Taylor asking that Shreder be disqualified because of his connection to his former law firm, saying that he wasn’t troubled by those connections.
“At a rough estimate, probably 25 to 30 percent of that magistrate’s household income comes from the law firm representing the defendant in a case he’s making critical rulings on. I just don’t see how that’s anything other than an appearance of impropriety,” said Texas Lawyer, one of our legal experts.
But that appearance of impropriety was apparently not enough to convince Judge White that Shreder shouldn’t be making decisions about who gets to see Karla Taylor’s most intimate information.
We expect to have another important update on the case for you early next week.
That is such utter bullshit.
You make a quarter of your money off something and that's just the "appearance" of impropriety when you rule in favor of the entity that gives you a quarter of your money.
The judges who made these rulings need to go back to law school and review everything they ever learned about conflict of interest.
Even the appearance of impropriety and the potential for conflict of interest is to be avoided.
Under the federal judicial recusal rules, judges and justices who directly own
stock in companies must recuse themselves in cases involving those companies.
sauce - http://georgetownlawjournal.org/files/2015/06/zt100515001163.pdf
Only a tiny fraction of people who own stock make more than a quarter of their income from a single company's stock profits & dividends, and yet, owning any stock in a company at all, regardless of what tiny percentage of your income it generates, is supposed to cause federal judges to recuse themselves from a case involving that company.
I realize now that the comment about 25-30% of income was from Texas Lawyer, an ally who wants this case to be successful as much as the rest of us, but this stockholder recusal rule seems to require recusal regardless of what tiny percentage of one's income one might derive from holding stock in a company. How does the wife working at a law firm (which guards its reputation for winning court cases, to both the wife's and husband's benefit) and generating a significant percentage of the household's income not rise above the level of a guy who might own a few shares of stock in Coke (or Koch) and make only a few dollars a year off those holdings having to recuse himself from a case involving Coke/Koch?
I would not have done it and dealt with the contempt ruling. Looks like widespread judicial corruption:
Both Steven Shreder and Ronald White are clearly in collusion with the cult. Unbelievable? Well, believe it. Typical scientology Fair Game tactics.
SHREDER, STEVEN P who was 31 (born ABT 1957) married 12 AUG 1988 in BEXAR COUNTY, TEXAS, U.S.A. a bride named SANDRA J INGRAM who was 38 (born ABT 1950).
Pictures of Shreder.
And Judge Ronald A. White is by no means "lily white":
Here is a list of cases before "his honour":
Trademark lawsuit against Scientology’s drug rehab network settles weeks before trial
By Tony Ortega, October 18, 2016
What started out as a major lawsuit against 82 defendants connected with Scientology — including its leader, David Miscavige — has ended suddenly and will not be going to trial.
According to a document filed by its attorneys, the National Association of Forensic Counselors has reached a settlement with the parties it has been suing for trademark violations at Scientology’s drug rehab network, Narconon.
The document, filed by NAFC attorney Paul DeMuro last week, claimed to be a “joint” request for a stay in the case as details of the settlement are finalized in the next few days. Oklahoma Federal District Judge Ronald A. White issued an order asking the defendants’ attorneys to confirm by noon yesterday that it was, in fact, a joint decision by both sides. We decided to hold off on reporting the news of the settlement until we, like Judge White, received that confirmation from the Narconon side yesterday afternoon.
Narconon’s attorneys did notify the judge that the case was indeed settling, and just seven weeks before the lawsuit was scheduled to go to trial.
The settlement also comes after Judge White had refused to disqualify his magistrate judge, Steven Shreder, after Judge Shreder had ordered that the contents of NAFC CEO Karla Taylor’s personal hard drive be turned over to Narconon’s attorneys in a stunning ruling. It was not only surprisingly harsh, but then it turned out that Shreder’s wife works for one of the defendant law firms, as did Shreder in the past. Despite those connections, Judge White let Shreder’s ruling stand and did not disqualify him, which did not bode well for NAFC as trial approached.
We made multiple attempts to reach Karla Taylor and her attorneys and received no response. So we’ve turned to our federal court expert, Texas Lawyer, who has handled district and appellate federal cases.
After three years of the NAFC’s research and litigation, this looks to us like a plaintiff taking what they can get before things get worse. Is that a bad assumption?
“Lots of cases end up settling on the eve of trial, so that fact alone probably doesn’t tell us much about the the size of the settlement payment, if any,” Texas Lawyer says. “It’s probably a lot more telling that the judge and the magistrate have been ruling against the plaintiffs on a number of recent motions, including the disqualification and the hard drive turnover order. It’s not a good feeling to be going to trial when the judge seems to be dead set against your client’s position. It would not be at all surprising if this is a matter of the plaintiffs and their attorneys getting out with whatever they can salvage.”
Who the fuck isn't paying attention to all this?
I mean really?
I guess some judges can sleep very soundly atop their mattresses stuffed with money?
Scientology hired stills to force a settlement?
I guess... it's sad they were forced to settle. Nasty cult seems to get what it wants.
WTF happened there??
My guess is, Oklahoma.
Oklahoma health care scammers bought a bunch of politicians to make Laetrile seem like a good idea back in the day. Then those scammers became the Cancer Treatment Centers of America. And they teamed up with the billionaire Koch brother scammers. So what is true for an Oklahoma politician is true. Cracking down on stuff not based on facts is bad for everybody there so they avoid doing that.
Oklahoma Senator James Inhofe explains that Republicans can ignore rules because they can. This might shed light on why Oklahoma politics are so fail.
Choose a color via Color picker or click the predefined style names!