Church Attorneys try to get Report to People of God thrown out as well as quash Mahony’s testimony. “Motion is denied” -- quotes from Judge's order

*****
That his testimony might be inflammatory appears to be unavoidable. -- Judge Fromholz

By City of Angels Lady

Here are quotes from Judge Haley Fromholz’ order denying the church’s “Motion of Defendant Does 1 and 2 for an Order Quashing Civil Subpoena” dated June 6. . . issued to Cardinal Roger Michael Mahony.

“Plaintiff has issued a Civil Subpoena (Duces Tecum) for the personal appearance and production of documents and things to Cardinal Mahony. Defendants argue that good cause exists to quash the subpoena”

"Motion is denied"

"Defendants first argue that the subpoena is oppressive because Plaintiff has not conducted Cardinal Mahony’s deposition and there is therefore “no way of knowing what areas of inquiry or line of questioning Plaintiff’s counsel will delve into in order to determine whether it is admissible.” [Motion 2:12-14]. Defendants predict that it will consequently be necessary to object to every question that is asked, and that this will prejudice defense counsel in the eyes of the jury. [Id. 2:13-16]. . . . .

That his testimony might be “inflammatory” appears to be “unavoidable.”

“Inconceivable that notice of abuse could be relevant” argue Church Attorneys - denied.

“Defendant argues that it is inconceivable that notice of abuse by other individuals to other entities could be relevant to show that Defendant exhibited conscious disregard in this case. . . .

“Defendant argues that Weeks demonstrates that notice must be to the same defendant that received notice in the other instances.

“The Defendant in this case is the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Los Angeles, the same Defendant may have received notice in other cases.”

The Court finds that the risk of prejudice from Defense counsel’s objections is not high enough, and the prejudice not severe enough, to warrant exclusion of evidence under §352. To the extent that Defendant is arguing that the testimony might be “inflammatory,” [see Motion 2:24] this would appear to be unavoidable, to some extent, given the nature of the case.


*****Commercial Break*****
KAY: (In NPR Fund Raiser Voice) Just about the only place to find an honest and free press in America today is in blogs.

So in that spirit, help keep the City of Angels Blog alive by putting a high five on the Pay-Pal Account. Just click the “Make Donation” button in the top left corner and pay whatever you want to support reporting on LA Clergy Cases 2007. The money goes directly to the writer of this blog who reports it as freelance income to the IRS, so everything is legal and above board.

You'll be keeping alive an American tradition: passing the hat. If 350 people send me five dollars each month I can cover my rent and bills and work full time on this reporting.

Otherwise I’ll have to get a real job. And we’ll all have to rely on mainstream media. . .

END COMMERCIAL BREAK
**********

“Indeed, Cardinal Mahony appears to be the head of the defendant corporation sole,” writes Fromholz

Mahony Not a percipient Witness -- Denied

“Defendant also argues that Cardinal Mahony is not a percipient witness to any of the allegations or facts in this action because he did not become affiliated with the Los Angeles Archdiocese until the mid-1980s. [Id. 2:18-21].

"However, Plaintiff argues that Cardinal Mahony’s testimony may be relevant in interpreting the Report to the People of God, discussed below, and may also be relevant with respect to corporate practices.

“Indeed, Cardinal Mahony appears to be the head of the defendant corporation sole.

“The Court finds insufficient good cause to quash the subpoena."

Church Attorneys Can’t Get The Report to the People of God ordered “irrelevant” as evidence.

“Defendant argues that the Report to the People of God (“Report”) is irrelevant.

“The evidence might also be relevant to a determination of whether punitive damages are warranted, since it could go to show conscious disregard under Civil Code §3294(b).

More on Report to People of God as Church tries to say it’s “inadmissible”

Plaintiff also argues that the Report is admissible under Evidence Code §1105, which states that “[a]ny otherwise admissible evidence of habit or custom is admissible to prove conduct on a specified occasion in conformity with the habit or custom.”

“Custom,” meaning the routine practice or behavior on the part of a group or organization that is equivalent to the habit of an individual, is often established by evidence of repeated instances of similar conduct. People v. Memro (1985) 38 Cal.3d 658.

*****Commercial Break*****
KAY: (In NPR Fund Raiser Voice) Just about the only place to find an honest and free press in America today is in blogs.

So in that spirit, help keep the City of Angels Blog alive by putting a high five on the Pay-Pal Account. Just click the “Make Donation” button in the top left corner and pay whatever you want to support reporting on LA Clergy Cases 2007. The money goes directly to the writer of this blog who reports it as freelance income to the IRS, so everything is legal and above board.

You'll be keeping alive an American tradition: passing the hat. If 350 people send me five dollars each month I can cover my rent and bills and work full time on this reporting.

Otherwise I’ll have to get a real job. And we’ll all have to rely on mainstream media. . .

END COMMERCIAL BREAK

“Report to People of God” is “hearsay” per Church Attorneys

Fromholz Order re Mahony testimony Continued:

“Defendant next argues that the Report is hearsay. . . .

“Plaintiff states that the Report was signed by Cardinal Mahony and posted on the Archdiocese’s official website. [Opp. 1:28-2:2].

Transfering Perps could be relevant information

“If Plaintiff is able to establish that Defendant had a pattern or practice of concealing abuse and moving perpetrators from school to school, this information could be relevant. . . .”

Defendant appears to concede the point that there is evidence of conduct showing “that a person committed a crime, civil wrong, or other act.”
. . .

“Evidence of concealment and reassignment in other cases could well be relevant”

“Evidence of concealment and reassignment in other cases could well be relevant to show that Defendant followed a similar course of conduct, or plan, in the instant case. This evidence could be relevant, for example, to show that Defendant did not ‘take reasonable steps . . . to implement reasonable safeguards to avoid acts of unlawful sexual conduct.’. . . .

"Even if Defendant’s arguments were persuasive,
the Court finds that questions as to relevance and admissibility are better reserved for trial."

Dated: June 6, 2007
HALEY J. FROMHOLZ
JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT”

So my job today is easy. Just run the order as signed by the judge. Good day to lie in the sun. . . .

Four Hearings Wednesday June 13th

As posted at LA Superior Court Website under Case Summaries for #JCCP4286

All at 08:31 am in department 20 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012

Motion to Compel (- FOR ADMISSIONS- FOR DOCUMENTS- FOR DOCUMENTS, SET TWO- STANDARDIZED INTERROGATORIES**CONT FROM 5/30**RE: BC308294)

DEMURRER (TO COMPLAINT(PAPERS FILED ON 5/03)RE: BC307672)

Motion for Reconsideration (OF RULINGS(PAPERS FILED ON 5/03)RE: BC308621)

MOTION - COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES ((PAPERS FILED ON 6/06))

And City of Angels Lady will be there, even if no one clicks my button and puts money on the Pay-Pal account. But it’d be easier if I wasn’t worrying about July rent. The transcription work I was doing is still disappeared.

More to Come. . .