UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION LUIS GARCIA, and wife, ROCIO GARCIA Plaintiffs, vs. CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY RELIGIOUS TRUST; U.S. lAS MEMBERS TRUST; CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY FLAG SERVICE ORGANIZATION, INC.; CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY FLAG SHIP SERVICE ORGANIZATION, INC. d/b/a Majestic Cruise Lines; and DAVID MISCA VIGE, Defendants. Case No. 8:13-CV-220-T27 TBM

JOINT MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE OF HEARING ON DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISQUALIFY PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL COME NOW,

Plaintif

fs

, Luis Garcia and Rocio Garcia, and Defendants, Church

of

Scientology, Church

of

Scientology Flag Ship Service Organization, Inc., lAS Administrations and the Church

of

Scientology Religious Trust, pursuant to Local Rule 3.09, and respectfully move this Court for entry

of

an Order granting a continuance

of

the hearing on Defendants Motion to Disqualify Plaintiffs Counsel currently scheduled for July 24, 2013, and in support hereof states as follows:

1

Currently pending before this Court is a Motion to Disqualify Plaintiffs Counsel filed on May 10, 2013, by Defendants Church

of

Scientology and the Church

of

Scientology Flag Ship Service Organization, Inc.

ee

D.E. 36. Defendants lAS Administrations, Inc. and the Church

of

Scientology Religious Trust subsequently joined and adopted said Motion.

ee

D.E. 37.

1

Case 8:13-cv-00220-JDW-TBM Document 51 Filed 07/03/13 Page 1 of 5 PageID 1308

 

/ Plaintif

fs

filed their Memorandum in Opposition to Defendants Motion on May

28

, 2013.

S

 

D.E. 38.

2

Subsequent to the filing

o

Defendants Motion and Plaintiffs Opposition thereto, on June

25

, 2013, this Court issued an Order Setting Evidentiary Hearing, scheduling a hearing regarding same for July 24, 2013.

See

D.E. 50

3

The parties now respectfully seek a continuance

o

said hearing due to the following:

a

De

po

sition

o

rian Culkin

Defendants Motion is supported by testimony m the form

o

an affidavit from Defendants key witness, Brian Culkin. Defendants have now requested the opportunity to depose Mr. Culkin prior to this Court s hearing on the pending Motion, regarding which Plaintiffs have no objection. Mr. Culkin, however, currently resides in Boston, which requires all parties to coordinate schedules and make travel arrangements in order to complete his deposition -a process which cannot be completed prior to July 24, 2013 due to counsels unavailability as discussed below.

b.

Unavailability

o

Counsel and Key Witness

Both Mr. Weil and the undersigned are leading counsels for Plaintiffs, and both are signatories to supporting affidavits filed in opposition to Defendants Motion. Mr. Weil is unavailable on July 24, 2013 and the surrounding dates, as is scheduled to be out

o

town during that time. Subsequent to the hearing date, Mr. Weil s schedule is further complicated by a trial in another matter. Likewise, the undersigned counsel will be in transit on that date, returning from New York to Florida. The undersigned is currently engaged in an ongoing rigorous deposition schedule on a federal case pending in New York, which severely restricts counsel s availability

Case 8:13-cv-00220-JDW-TBM Document 51 Filed 07/03/13 Page 2 of 5 PageID 1309

 

to attend a hearing set in this matter. Coverage by another attorney versed in Plaintiffs case and the issues surrounding Defendants Motion, is also, regrettably, not possible, as Mr. Leclainche, who is the undersigned s law partner, is and will continue to be, engaged in trial practice in a specially set trial for the time period surrounding the scheduled hearing. Finally, not only are Plaintiffs counsels unavailable for the scheduled hearing and at any mutually agreeable times prior to the dates below, but Robert Johnson, a key witness in this matter, is also unavailable on the hearing date and surrounding dates as he is scheduled to be out

o

state during that time.

4

All parties have conferred with each other and agree to the relief requested herein. Should this Court grant this Motion, the parties note the following dates

o

availability to attend said hearing, given the extent

o

scheduling conflicts amongst the parties that currently exists:

September

26,

2013 October 1

2, 3, 8,

10 15 16 17

5

Pursuant to Local Rule 3.09, this Court may grant a continuance

o

the currently scheduled hearing based upon good cause shown. Based on the foregoing, specifically noting the extensive scheduling conflicts

o

counsels, both parties argue that this standard is not only met, but exceeded.

WH R OR

the parties respectfully request that this Joint Motion for Continuance

o

Hearing on Defendants Motion to Disqualify Plaintiffs Counsel be granted, and that this Court grant any and all relief deemed just and appropriate.

3

Case 8:13-cv-00220-JDW-TBM Document 51 Filed 07/03/13 Page 3 of 5 PageID 1310