UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMP A DIVISION LUIS GARCIA SAZ, and wife, MARIA DEL 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
/
PLAINTIFFS' OBJECTION TO THE UNOPPOSED VERIFIED MOTION OF THE SCIENTOLOGY DEFENDANTS FOR LEAVE TO TAKE THE DEPOSITION OF NON-PARTY BRIAN CULKIN
Plaintiffs, Luis
A
Garcia Saz and Maria Del Rocio Burgos Garcia, hereby respond and move to strike the Unopposed Verified Motion
o
the Church
o
Scientology Defendants for leave to depose non-party witness Brian Culkin (the Verified Motion ) [D.E. 53]. The Verified Motion erroneously represents an agreement
o
the parties on the purpose and scope
o
the deposition
o
a non-party witness and improperly presents alleged facts that are false and wholly unrelated to the agreed-upon deposition. Defendants' counsel contacted Plaintiffs' counsel for the
sole
purpose
o
determining whether Plaintiffs objected to a deposition
o
Brian Culkin, a non-party witness whose affidavit is attached in support
o
Defendants' Motion to Disqualify Plaintiffs' counsel from this case. Plaintiffs confirmed they have no objection to Mr. Culkin's deposition, as previously represented to this Court.
See
Joint Motion
for Continuance
of
Hearing on Defendants' Motion
to
Disqualify Plaintiffs' Counsel,
t~
4 [D.E. 51].) Despite that limited agreement, the Scientology Defendants filed the Verified Motion stating that Mr. Culkin's deposition (i) must take place in Boston, (ii) under the supervision
of
a Special Magistrate, and (iii) be limited
to
the Scientology Defendants' scope
of
questioning. Plaintiffs never agreed
to
these conditions for the deposition and believe them
to
be unnecessary. Even more compelling, however, are the alleged grounds for these conditions.
In
yet another state
of
baseless over-reaching, the Scientology Defendants brazenly misrepresent that Mr. Culkin, his family and his business have become the subject
of
a
substantial campaign
of
intimidation and harassment.
(See
Verified Motion at pp. 3-6). The Church
of
Scientology Defendants further claim that Mr. Culkin is unwilling to appear voluntarily at the evidentiary hearing as a result of withering threats, intimidation and condemnation.
( d.
at
p.
6.) Nothing could be further from the truth. On July
12
2013, Plaintiffs' counsel received a letter from counsel for Mr. Culkin, Ray
B
Jeffrey, which demonstrates the falsehoods contained in the Verified Motion and clarifies the record on Mr. Culkin's willingness to submit to courtroom and/or deposition testimony. (A true and correct copy
of
Mr. Jeffrey's July
12
, 2013 Letter is attached as Exhibit
A. )
Significantly, Mr. Culkin's lawyer makes clear the following: • The Scientology defendants have dragged him against his will into the above-referenced litigation. (Ex. A at
p.
1.)
•.
They have misused a declaration he signed as part
of
a confidential exit interview, being assured prior to signing same that it was for the Church's 'internal use only'.
( d.)
2
•.
If
he had been informed that his declaration might be used against plaintiffs in this case, or in some other adversarial way,
he
would have refused
to
sign it.
(Id.)
•.
The Scientology defendants violated his rights
of
confidentiality by filing this declaration in this suit without his informed consent. As the Scientology defendants know all too well, Mr. Culkin wants no part in controversies, disputes, or proceedings with the Church.
( d.
at pp. 1 -2.)
•·
They have publicly given the appearance that Mr. Culkin supports them in their attack on plaintiffs' legal team in this case.
Nothing could be further
from
the truth.
Mr. Culkin respects those individuals and is unaware
of
any wrongdoing on their part.
( d.
at
p
2, emphasis added.)
•·
By their deceptive actions in connection with this suit, the Scientology defendants have caused Mr. Culkin considerable mental anguish. He feels betrayed by their public violation
of
trust and by their use
of
factual distortions
in
their pleadings.
( d.)
•·
The Scientology defendants' motion to take Mr. Culkin's deposition is designed
to
give the impression that
he
is unwilling
to
testify because
of
intimidation by plaintiffs, their legal team, and their sympathizers.
This is false.
( d.,
emphasis added)
•·
As the Scientology defendants know, Mr. Culkin's distress
nd
anger was with the Scientology defendants.
He complained to them in the strongest possible terms about
th ir
outrageous, inexcusable behavior. The public outcry
3
