Customize

New Lawsuit David Love v. Narconon Trois-Rivieres

Discussion in 'Leaks & Legal' started by Intelligence, Jun 21, 2017.

  1. Intelligence Member

    In Summary of numerous pages being submitted tomorrow morning to the Montreal Courthouse:

    - I, David Love, am prepared to attend the Montreal Courthouse, Small Claims Division upon the date set by the Court Clerk, to present my case with further Exhibits and Witnesses to be submitted to the Court within the prescribed time limit to do so.


    - I, David Love, acting in good faith, do hereby request that the response by Narconon Trois-Rivieres to reject my claim on far-reaching, frivolous grounds, be rejected by the Court, and this case, File No: 500-32-701750-178, proceed to Trial.
    • Like Like x 4
  2. Quentinanon Member

    Because they want to ruin you utterly, even if they cannot pay for toilet paper in their morgs.
    You may laugh, but this is fact. I have seen scientology morg executive councils approve money to pay for OSA and GO expenses and trash estimated purchase orders for pens and toilet paper. Then, staff are forced to use more expensive extra copies of promotional materials from mimeo that ends up clogging the toilet! Then they have to hire a plumber.
    Between the auditing and study tech, these people have a very adversarial and distorted view of the world.
    • Like Like x 4
  3. Intelligence Member

    Still patiently waiting for reply from Montreal Court Clerk. Could be a GO - Could be a NO? In the meantime, everything is moving forward on my next book with some interesting content about Narconon, the Vancouver ORG, and other Num-Numz...

    Oh, David, oh David... 'Pope of Illusion', how does it feel to have your Canada Narconons in utter ruin.... 'Gone With the Wind' in disgrace, never to raise their evil head again to harm or kill. From nearly $20 million in revenue to gasping for air on COS interest free loans?

    Smiling - Laughing - and Loving Life.:D

    2n7189f.jpg
    • Like Like x 6
  4. TorontosRoot Member

    Mop the floor with them!
    • Like Like x 3
  5. Intelligence Member

    Received legal advice concerning Access to Information (FOI) held by Private Corporations, and Public Bodies
    in the United States, Canada, Quebec, and other places...

    Still waiting for reply from Montreal Court Clerk. If it's a GO, I suggest that the COS and Narconon
    roll up their sleeves and have extra 'Toner' on hand. Even if it's not a GO, well, we'll see?:D
    • Like Like x 6
  6. ThomsAnon Member

    Lawsuit for Love, where will this end?
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Intelligence Member

    Where will this end? Perhaps Montreal? I think the 'When' is the question.

    I've only been at this for 8 years with 9,658 messages on this forum. We'll see where and when in due course... ;)

    153v1fo.jpg
    • Like Like x 5
  8. Intelligence Member

    UPDATE: Today’s court hearing stems from a case I filed and won against Narconon Trois-Riveres – filed on August 25, 2010, and won a Quebec Human Rights decision on January 16, 2014. Tony reported on it here: https://tonyortega.org/2014/04/11/v...ed-human-rights-of-david-love-and-two-others/

    Narconon negotiated a settlement, with a gag order, with the other 2 plaintiffs. I refused to sign and filed a lawsuit on May 30, 2014. Narconon/Scientology filed a Motion to dismiss based on expiration in reference to Statutes of Limitations. The court disagreed and the case proceeded. On November 25 – 2016, I lost the case to ‘lift the corporate veil’ in an attempt to win against NN executives and COS Montreal.

    The presiding Judge ruled: [86] THEREFORE, THE COURT: [87] RESERVES for a period of 90 days following the date of the judgment all of David Love’s rights and recourse to file a new application against Narconon Trois-Rivières. I filed another lawsuit within 90 days.

    Several Motions were filed by Narconon Trois-Rivieres to quash the case, including today’s hearing in Montreal. Knowing that today’s hearing would be less than 30 minutes, I filed a request to appear by teleconference – the costs of flying to Montreal on short notice were prohibitive. The court accepted my request, and the case today was only 15 minutes.

    The Judge adjourned the case so that 2 translators could appear for the next hearing – when scheduled. I can’t speak French, nor can the defendant(s) understand or speak English.

    I can’t, at this time, reveal what position I will take at the next hearing, nor can I speculate in public, what we think Narconon will submit at the next court hearing. All I can say is, we have about 3,000 pages of documents, and God only knows how many their ‘COS Shill’ will present next time.


    If the Judge dismisses their recent Motion to quash, there will be a Trial date sent. The last Trial took an entire day, and we have no idea how long the next one will be. I will appear in person for the Trial. If I/We lose this one, we’re not done yet.

    w7xvkx.jpg
    • Like Like x 7
  9. Intelligence Member

    New court date set in the Montreal Courthouse:


    Court Clerk,

    I confirm the above court appearance date, December 19th, 2017 at 2:00 pm.
    • Like Like x 2
  10. TorontosRoot Member

    Too bad it's not Thursday at 2pm. ;)
    • Like Like x 1
  11. Intelligence Member

    November 20 - 2017 Court hearing and Judgement dox.

    Next Hearing this Tuesday, December 19 - 2017 at 2 pm.

    OSA minion, Jean Lariviere appeared with defendant, M. Bernier (Narconon Trois-Riviers).

    Anon and Montreal news reporter in court room on November 20 - 2017.

    Court appointed translators will be in court next week.

    1pvst0.jpg
    wulati.jpg

    Tuesday's Hearing should be an interesting one.
    • Like Like x 4
  12. TorontosRoot Member

    Hearings are always quite interesting when you're there in person. ;)
    • Like Like x 1
  13. Intelligence Member

    Today, Narconon Trois-Rivieres' motion to reject and dismiss the lawsuit against them was rejected by the presiding Judge.

    Now, there will be Trial Hearing date set. I informed the Judge that additional Exhibits will be submitted in due course to help prove my case.

    The Judge informed me that if there is a Judgement against the Defendant at the Trial, there may be no recourse to satisfy the Judgement due to NN TR's claim that they are not involved in any business operations are are insolvent.

    It's going to be a tough and complex case - not giving up until the Judge rules.

    The Love v. Narconon continues...
    • Like Like x 4
  14. Quentinanon Member

    • Like Like x 4
  15. Intelligence Member

    The piercing the corporate veil case in Montreal is over - we lost that one... for now. We'll see if we can file a case in Quebec Superior Court for defamation/libel.

    The issue I faced today was Quebec's Civil Law statutes versus Canada's Common Law. Quebec governs itself differently than any other Province. There is no Bankruptcy law in Quebec that forces companies to declare bankruptcy and file with a Trustee. In Quebec, the company only has to prove it is dissolved - not doing business or being registered with the Quebec Business Registry. However, their can be exceptions.

    Narconon Trois-Rivieres board member in court today, insisted NN TR and himself do not exist. My question to the Judge was, 'If neither exists, why is the board member in court today, and why is NN TR still doing business on the Internet and elsewhere?'

    The Defendant responded with (paraphrased), 'There is Narconons all over the world, that doesn't mean it's Narconon Trois-Rivieres.'

    I replied to the Judge with: 'Your Honour, there is only one NN TR, and there is only one NN with the address and phone number of NN TR in Trois-Rivieres. This entity is still, today, promoting Narconon on their websites with phone numbers for people to call when in need of a Narconon service.'

    With their websites still up doing business and my recent recorded phone calls, we may have a chance at the Trial. We'll see? ;)

    And, if they really don't exist, I suppose there is no entity or board member to file any lawsuit against me? If this turns out to be the case, I won't be sued when I finally release countless, sauce documents that I have been reluctant to do thus far.

    .
    • Like Like x 5
  16. loriisfree Member

    Good Job hon!!
    • Like Like x 3
  17. Intelligence Member

    • Like Like x 6
  18. loriisfree Member

  19. peterstorm Member

    For Great Justice!


    20uv4na.jpg
    • Like Like x 5
  20. peterstorm Member

    All is not lost. Defendant and poor shmock Laurent Bernier complained to the judge that he had to pay 180$ for the hearing today. He said it was not NN who paid. He won't be getting his money back.

    That's money that won't be going to the cult.
    • Like Like x 7
  21. Intelligence Member

    I must review the Hearing transcript again, and if he did say 'Narconon didn't pay' - Bernier is expressing or implying the court that NN TR does exist, contradicting his claim that NN TR does not exist? Just a minor detail for the Trial.

    PeterStorm, my learned friend, thank you so much for appearing in court today. The video conference link worked perfect. It was like I was right in the courtroom facing and talking to the Judge. And thanks for standing up in court today to advise the Judge that the Hearing was being conducted via me appearing by Video Conference - I'm sure OSA minion, Jean Lariviere, who was sitting across from you, was pissed - another Flap for OSA to try and handle.

    Don't forget to send me the files the Judge handed you. Anonymous delivers again! :D
    • Like Like x 5
  22. peterstorm Member

    Yeah. The hearing actually started without Dave and anonymous had to interrupt the judge from the back of the room to tell him something was wrong. He was annoyed at first but he finally realized there was a mistake. A fair judge, once again.

    Always expect the unexpected when it comes to scientology.
    • Like Like x 7
  23. loriisfree Member

    I'd like to thank you too Peterstorm for being there for David yesterday!! I wish I could see the look on the OSA Bots face!! Bet it was priceless :D
    • Like Like x 5
  24. peterstorm Member

    Let's just say I didn't expect to have to breach courtroom procedure. It's the small claims court, so there are no lawyers to interact with the judge about logistics. If I had stayed silent, the scienos would have maybe won by default?

    OSA bot had his usual poker face, but he was still enturbulated in the end.
    • Like Like x 6
  25. loriisfree Member

    Ahhh....That's called having your TR's in! Wonder if he kept them in and maintained that poker face once he realized he had to report his counter intention and thus a fail in stopping my husband's quest to the evil little dwarf...... ;)
    • Like Like x 5
  26. peterstorm Member

    Funny how scientology and Laurent Bernier spent money and got the wrong legal advice from this lawyer:

    4ibfyu.png

    $$$$$$$$!!!!!!!!!!!!
    • Like Like x 5
  27. Intelligence Member

    And they're spending more before the upcoming Trial and at the Trial. At the hearing in December, Laurent Bernie
    seemed very unprepared... fumbling for words. Perhaps they were not ready for what I said to the Judge and my insistence that their motion be denied and a Trial date set for litigation.

    We'll see all in due course. ;)
    • Like Like x 5
  28. Quentinanon Member

    I wonder if that expense has lead to another austerity period where the bathrooms lack toilet paper.
    Time to raid mimeo for some promo paper which then clogs the toilets and costs plumber fees!
    Hubbard did say that scientology is whatever works.
  29. peterstorm Member

    Or the staff is put in sea org-like pay?
  30. pink-beans-and-rice1.jpg?quality=80.jpg

    • Like Like x 3

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors

Close

Choose a color via Color picker or click the predefined style names!

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins