Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
The Plaintiffs, LUIS A. GARCIA SAZ and MARIA DEL ROCIO BURGOS GARCIA, under
M.D. Fla. Rule 3.01(d), file this Motion for Leave to File Reply to the Church’s1 Opposition to
Motion to Vacate Arbitration Award (DE 275), and Notice of Filing Properly Marked Exhibits (DE
276). Both of these documents include an exhibit, A(3), that the Plaintiffs have never seen before
titled, “Religious Arbitration Instructions,” and dated October 23, 2017, the day before the arbitration
began (DE 275-4 at 1-2; DE 276-4 at 1-2). Fundamental fairness requires that the Plaintiffs be
1. The Church claims that exhibit A(3) is the instructions the International Justice Chief
(“IJC”) Mike Ellis gave to the arbitration panel orally and in writing (DE 275 at 11-12 & DE 275-1
at 2). The IJC’s declaration asserts, “These instructions include the requirement that the arbitrators
1
The Defendants, the CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY FLAG SERVICE ORGANIZATION,
INC. and the CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY FLAG SHIP SERVICE ORGANIZATION, INC., will
be referred to collectively as “the Church.” All emphasis is supplied unless otherwise indicated.
1
Case 8:13-cv-00220-JDW-TBM Document 278 Filed 02/28/18 Page 2 of 3 PageID 4947
are to apply Scientology principles to the Garcias’ claims in a neutral and fair manner.” (DE 276-1
at 2).
2. The Plaintiffs never saw these instructions. The IJC did not allow the Plaintiffs to be
present when he “hatted,” or trained, the arbitration panel by giving them extensive documents and
policies to review (DE 272 at 6, 8, 10, 21). The only instruction the IJC gave the arbitrators in the
Plaintiffs’ presence was that the only issue for the panel was whether the Plaintiffs filled out a CVB
3. Before the arbitration, the Church assured this Court that whether the Plaintiffs requested
a refund by filling out a form with the Church’s Claims Verification Board (CVB) would not be
dispositive of the issues in this suit (Id. at 3, 14). In direct contradiction to the Church’s
representation to this Court, the written instructions tell the arbitration panel that the only issue to be
decided is whether the Plaintiffs followed the CVB procedure to request a refund (DE 276-4 at 1).
4. Far from instructing the arbitration panel to be fair and neutral, the instructions use
obscure jargon to hide that Suppressive Persons cannot get a fair arbitration (DE 276-4 at 1-2). At a
minimum, an evidentiary hearing is required to determine their meaning and impact on the
arbitration panel.
Theodore Babbitt, counsel for the Plaintiffs, certifies that he has conferred with opposing
counsel, F. Wallace Pope, Jr., and the parties cannot agree on the resolution of this motion.
2
Case 8:13-cv-00220-JDW-TBM Document 278 Filed 02/28/18 Page 3 of 3 PageID 4948
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that, on February 28, 2018, we electronically filed the foregoing document
with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. We also certify that the foregoing document is being
served this day on all counsel or pro se parties identified below in the manner specified, either via
manner for those counsel or parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of
Electronic Filings.