Case 8:13-cv-00220-JDW-TBM Document 213 Filed 07/21/16 Page 1 of 4 PageID 4170

UNITED STATES DISTRIST COURT

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TAMPA DIVISION
LUIS A. GARCIA SAZ, and wife, MARIA
DEL ROCIO BURGOS GARCIA,
Plaintiffs,
CASE NO. 8:13-CV-220-T27 TBM

Vs.

CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY RELIGIOUS

TRUST; CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY FLAG
SERVICE ORGANIZATION, INC.; CHURCH
OF SCIENTOLOGY FLAG SHIP SERVICE
ORGANIZATION, INC. d/b/a MAJESTIC
CRUISE LINES; IAS ADMINISTRATIONS, INC.;
U.S. IAS MEMBERS TRUST.
Defendants.

DEFENDANTS' UNOPPOSED MOTION AND MEMORANDUM OF LAW TO STRIKE

LETTERS OF MARCEL WENGER AND CINDY PLAHUTA
Defendants, pursuant to Local Rules 3.01(c) and (f), jointly move to strike the letters
mailed to the court by Marcel Wenger and Cindy Plahuta, and filed by the court on July 12,
2016.
1.

The grounds for the motion are that the court rules prohibit the filing of a request

for relief or the presentation of argument by letter to the court, and prohibit the filing of any
matter on behalf of a party with respect to a pending motion other that the original motion and
memorandum and the opposition thereto.
Neither Wenger nor Plahuta are parties to this case. For that reason alone, their
While Wenger and Plahuta were previously

letters are improper and should be stricken.

represented by attorney Theodore Babbitt, attorney for the Plaintiffs, he states he does not
1

Case 8:13-cv-00220-JDW-TBM Document 213 Filed 07/21/16 Page 2 of 4 PageID 4171

currently represent them, did not know they were planning to file the letters, and had nothing to
do with the filing of the letters.,
Defendants have no knowledge to the contrary.
No matter the circumstances, the attempt to submit written materials to this court
in a clear effort to support the positions of the Plaintiffs in this action and with respect to the
pending motion is improper and in violation of the local rules, which further require the letters be
stricken from the file and the record.
5.

Rule 3.01(c) provides that after a party files a motion of whatever kind (pursuant

to Rule 3 01(a)) and the opposing party files an opposition (pursuant to Rule 3.01(b)), "No party
shall file any reply or further memorandum directed to the motion or response allowed in (a) and
(b) unless the Court grants leave." Pleadings filed in violation of the Local Rules should be
ordered stricken or returned. Grant v Rotolante, 2013 WL 2155076, at *4 (M.D. Fla., May 17,
2013; citing, Olsen v Lane, 1994 WL 151046, at *3 (M.D.Fla. Apr.l 1, 1994) (striking letters
filed in violation of Local Rule 3.01(f)); Lync Sales Co. v. Hudson's Furniture Showroom, Inc.,
2009 WL 2495976, at *1 (M.D.Fla. Aug.l 1, 2009) (striking a letter motion in violation of Rule
3.01(f) and for failure to include the proper caption).
6.

While neither Wenger nor Plahuta are parties to the case, they clearly have

attempted to file, in letter form, further memoranda in support of the Plaintiffs position, without
seeking leave of court. Certainly, if a party may not file a further memorandum, a stranger to the
lawsuit may not unilaterally file such a memorandum, lest the Rule, and the orderly
administration of the case, be undermined.
7.

Rule 3.01(f) provides in part:

"All applications to the Court (i) requesting relief in any form, or (ii) citing
authorities or presenting argument with respect to any matter awaiting decision,
2

Case 8:13-cv-00220-JDW-TBM Document 213 Filed 07/21/16 Page 3 of 4 PageID 4172

shall be made in writing ... in accordance with this rule and in appropriate form
pursuant to Rule 1.05; and, unless invited or directed by the presiding judge, shall
not be addressed or presented to the Court in the form of a letter or the like. All
pleadings and papers to be filed shall be filed with the Clerk of the Court and not
with the judge thereof, except as provided by Rule 1.03(c) of these Rules."
The letters of Wenger and Plahuta clearly request relief in favor of the Plaintiffs,
and clearly present argument with respect to the very matters awaiting decision. They clearly are
not presented in appropriate form pursuant to Rule 1.05, but rather are "presented to the Court in
the form of a letter or the like." And they were mailed directly to the Judge, and not to the clerk.
WHEREFORE, Defendants respectfully request the entry of an order striking the letters
of Wenger and Plahuta from the file and record of this case.

CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 3.01

Moving counsel hereby certifies that he has consulted with Theodore Babbitt, counsel for
Plaintiffs,

to determine whether plaintiffs oppose this motion. Mr. Babbitt has authorized the

undersigned to represent the motion is not opposed.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on July 21, 2016,1 electronically filed the foregoing with the
Clerk of the Court by using the CM/ECF system which will send a notice of electronic filing to the
following: RONALD P. WEIL, ESQUIRE, rpw@weillaw.net. and THEODORE BABBITT,
ESQUIRE, tedbabbitt@,babbitt-iohnson.com. Attorneys for Plaintiffs.

Case 8:13-cv-00220-JDW-TBM Document 213 Filed 07/21/16 Page 4 of 4 PageID 4173

JOHNSON, POPE, BOKOR,

RUPPEL & BURNS, LLP

Of Counsel:
Eric M. Lieberman
Rabinowitz, Boudin, Standard,
Krinsky & Lieberman, P.C.
45 Broadway, Suite 1700
New York, NY 10006
elieberman@,rbskl.com

Is/ F. Wallace Pope, Jr.

F. Wallace Pope, Jr.
Florida Bar No. 124449
wallvp@,i pfirm.com
Robert V. Potter
Florida Bar No 363006
bob p i piirm.coin
Post Office Box 1368
Clearwater, Florida 33757
(727) 461-1818; (727) 462-0365-fax
Attorneys for Flag Church & Ship Church

3609412