B307452

I

N

T

HE

C

OURT

O

F

 A 

PPEAL OF THE

S

TATE OF

C

 ALIFORNIA 

 SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION FIVE

 V 

 ALERIE

H

 ANEY

,

 Plaintiff and Petitioner,

v.

S

UPERIOR

C

OURT FOR THE

S

TATE OF

C

 ALIFORNIA 

,

 

C

OUNTY OF

L

OS

 A 

NGELES

,

Respondent,

C

HURCH OF

S

CIENTOLOGY

I

NTERNATIONAL AND

R

ELIGIOUS

T

ECHNOLOGY

C

ENTER

,

 Defendants and Real Parties in Interest

L

OS

 A 

NGELES

C

OUNTY

S

UPERIOR

C

OURT

C

 ASE

N

O

.

 

19STCV21210 H

ONORABLE

R

ICHARD

J.

 

B

URDGE

,

 

D

EPARTMENT

37

RESPONSE TO AMICUS BRIEF OF NATIONAL CENTER ON SEXUAL EXPLOITATION

SCHEPER KIM & HARRIS LLP

*WILLIAM H. FORMAN (B

 AR

N

O

. 150477) DAVID C. SCHEPER (B

 AR

N

O

. 120174) MARGARET E. DAYTON (B

 AR

N

O

. 274353) 800

 

W

EST

S

IXTH

S

TREET

,

 

18

TH

 

F

LOOR

 L

OS

 A 

NGELES

,

 

CA 

 

90017-2701 (213)

 

613-4655

 

• FAX:

(213)

 

613-4656 wforman@scheperkim.com

 A

TTORNEYS FOR

 D

EFENDANT AND

R

EAL

 P 

 ARTY IN

I 

NTEREST 

 

CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY INTERNATIONAL

 

JEFFER MANGELS BUTLER & MITCHELL LLP

ROBERT E. MANGELS (B

 AR

N

O

. 48291) *MATTHEW D. HINKS (B

 AR

N

O

. 200750) 1900

 

 A 

 VENUE OF THE

S

TARS

,

 

7

TH

F

LOOR

 L

OS

 A 

NGELES

,

 

C

 ALIFORNIA

90067-4308 (310) 203-8080

 

• FAX

:

 

(310) 203-0567 mhinks@jmbm.com

 A

TTORNEYS FOR

 D

EFENDANT AND

R

EAL

 P 

 ARTY IN

I 

NTEREST 

 

 RELIGIOUS TECHNOLOGY CENTER

 

   D  o  c  u  m  e  n   t  r  e  c  e   i  v  e   d   b  y   t   h  e   C   A   2  n   d   D   i  s   t  r   i  c   t   C  o  u  r   t  o   f   A  p  p  e  a   l .

 

 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page

I. INTRODUCTION

 ...................................................................5

 

II. RESPONSE TO AMICUS BRIEF OF NATIONAL CENTER ON SEXUAL EXPLOITATION

 .............................9

 

 A.

 

 Amicus Curiae Are Limited to the Issues and Evidence Presented by the Parties to the  Appellate Proceedings

 ..................................................9

 

B.

 

Petitioner Seeks No Relief in This Lawsuit on  Account of Alleged Abuse Purportedly Suffered as a Minor

 ................................................................... 10

 

C.

 

The Arguments of the Amicus Brief Are Based on Materials Not Part of the Record in These Proceedings; NCOSE Undertakes No Effort to Have Them Added to the Record .............................. 12

 

D.

 

NCOSE’S Misguided and Bigoted Contentions

 About Who May Serve as an Arbitrator Should Be Rejected ................................................................. 17

 

III. CONCLUSION ..................................................................... 19

 

   D  o  c  u  m  e  n   t  r  e  c  e   i  v  e   d   b  y   t   h  e   C   A   2  n   d   D   i  s   t  r   i  c   t   C  o  u  r   t  o   f   A  p  p  e  a   l .

 

 3

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page s) Cases

California Bldg. Indus. Ass’n v. State Water Res.

Control Bd.

, 4 Cal. 5th 1032 (2018) ..................................................................9

Conference of Evangelical Methodist Church v. Evangelical Methodist Church 

, 807 F. Supp. 2d 1291 (N.D. Ga. 2011) ..................................... 18

Easterly v. Heritage Christian Sch 

., 2009 WL 2750099 (S.D. Ind. 2009) .......................................... 18

Eggert v. Pac. States Sav. & Loan Co.

, 57 Cal. App. 2d 239 (1943) ..........................................................9

In re Zeth S.

, 31 Cal. 4th 396 (2003) ............................................................... 14

Jenkins v. Trinity Evangelical Lutheran Church 

, 356 Ill. App. 3d 504, 825 N.E.2d 1206 (Ill. Ct.  App., 2005)................................................................................. 18

Lopez v. Bartlett Care Cntr., LLC 

, 39 Cal. App. 5th 311 (2019) ...................................................... 16

Medical Bd. of Calif. v. Superior Court 

, 227 Cal. App. 3d 1458 (1991) ................................................... 13

Mercury Cas. Co. v. Hertz Corp.

, 59 Cal. App. 4th 414 (1997) ...................................................... 10

Parsons v. Superior Court 

, 149 Cal. App. 4th Supp. 1 (2007) ............................................. 13

Philippine Export & Foreign Loan Guar. Corp. v. Chuidian 

, 218 Cal. App. 3d 1058 (1990) ................................................... 14

   D  o  c  u  m  e  n   t  r  e  c  e   i  v  e   d   b  y   t   h  e   C   A   2  n   d   D   i  s   t  r   i  c   t   C  o  u  r   t  o   f   A  p  p  e  a   l .