**********The City of Angels is Everywhere*********

Tuesday, July 10, 2007

Rozo Rincon cases jury trial slips to Oct. 29 due to 11th hour defense motion; Church tries to slip up SOL; did Mahony slip past Interrogatories 1-8?

*****
Church Attorney Potts: Reinstate old SOL "for the general mankind, to promote repose and give humans a sense of security."

By Kay Ebeling
The motion for summary judgment in the Rozo Rincon Cases filed by one of the archdiocese’s 15-plus law firms is not in the public documents. The only way one can know about the motion for summary judgment is by reading the plaintiffs’ objections to it and the judge’s order to continue the Rozo-Rincon cases jury trial from September 10th to October 29th because of it.

LA Superior Court website is at lasuperiorcourt.org/civil/ Type in JCCP4286 as the case number and you will find an alarming number of motions over the next months scheduled for pretrial hearings. There are 23 pretrial hearings from July 10th to 31st, plus the Hagenbach cases jury trial is as of now on calendar for July 16th.

With all this activity, about the only documents filed for the archdiocese that are available in the public databank are motions to strike, motions to quash, and motions for summary judgment. One Church Attorney in particular, Lee Potts from the Hennigan firm, swings at one plaintiff’s pitched case after another, sometimes hitting them out of the park.

In the Rozo-Rincon cases jury trial that had to be delayed from September 10 to October 29, the archdiocese is pulling more strings to prevent the story of this Colombian priest’s two-year multi-victim visit to America in the 1960s from reaching the public.

The motion for summary judgment in BC308395 came so late and at such a surprise to plaintiffs and the judge that the jury trial had to be delayed six weeks.

Here is how defendant answers the complaint in BC308395. (I couldn't find motion for summary judgment but did find this.)

“Defendant denies each and every allegation in said complaint. Defendant further denies that plaintiff has been injured or damaged. Plaintiff fails to state a cause of action, fails to state cause of action, fails to state cause of action. . . .”

Wait a minute. Where are the specifics here? In almost every plaintiff’s complaint are details, dates, proof of supervisors being notified, proof of supervisors ignoring reports.

Where are the specifics? Once again there is never a logical or clear argument in an LA Archdiocese defense document. This is boilerplate, it could apply to any case. In fact the same phrases do come up in several motions for summary judgment, and motions to quash.

BOILERPLATE DEFENSE ARGUMENTS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT:

“Defendant denies each and every allegation in said complaint. Defendant further denies that plaintiff has been injured or damaged. Plaintiff fails to state a cause of action, fails to state cause of action, fails to state cause of action. . . .”

I know I’ve seen those same boilerplate paragraphs in several other motions filed by Lee Potts.

IN FACT POTTS TRIES TO ARGUE THE ENTIRE LAW SB1733 THAT OPENED THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS WAS A MISTAKE.

Hearing July 24th, details After this:

*****COMMERCIAL BREAK
I hope you enjoy reading this blog. It’s time for me to pass the Internet Hat. Please put a high five or more on my Pay-Pal Account. The more I make from the blog, the less hours I have to spend on my wage-slave job. So for More Coverage of Clergy Cases 2007 hit the Donate button in the top left column.
THANK YOU
END COMMERCIAL BREAK*****


Hearing July 24 on
Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings
Case CIV 224 635

Here Church Law Firm Hennigan, et al, through garrulous Church Attorney Lee Potts is attacking a case filed by one plaintiff but Potts appears to be arguing against the entire SB1773 opening of the statute of limitations.

First Potts tries to get the case thrown out arguing that 17 times plaintiff “fails to state a cause of action” and besides this “court doesn't have jurisdiction.” He accuses plaintiff’s attorney of using boilerplate wording which is particularly ironic because Potts then uses his own boilerplate wording to argue as he has in many cases that plaintiffs did not properly identify defendants in certificates filed early on in the clergy cases.

POTTS TRIES TO GET SB 1773 OVERTURNED

But Potts here goes from garrulous to raucous trying to argue for the Court to close back up the window which SB1773 opened in 2003 that allowed the filing of these 550-plus cases. Potts says in this motion set for hearing July 24th:

“The general experience of mankind is that valid claims are not neglected, which has the legal consequence that the lapse of years without enforcement of a demand creates a ‘presumption against its original validity.’”

Potts writes that SOL laws “Promote repose by giving security and stability to human affairs.”

That's what I call Waxing Garrulous.


Can’t wait to see him rattle these arguments out loud in court.


Potts goes on that the court should grant the demurrer because plaintiff was raped in the family home and not on archdiocese grounds, and because (at age ? at time of abuse) there was a “lack of any connection between Plaintiff and the archdiocese.”

At age ??? plaintiff didn't know there was an archdiocese?

Also, since plaintiff here admits he told no one about his sacrilegous abuse at the hands of a pedophile priest, the entire statute of limitations exception of SB1773 is invalid.

I will give a jump by jump description of how Potts argues this motion on July 24 if it gets that far.

Did Mahony Avoid Answering Interrogatories 1 through 8? Read more after this:

*****COMMERCIAL BREAK
I hope you enjoy reading this blog. It’s time for me to pass the Internet Hat. Please put a high five or more on my Pay-Pal Account. The more I make from the blog, the less hours I have to spend on my wage-slave job. So for More Coverage of Clergy Cases 2007 hit the Donate button in the top left column.
THANK YOU
END COMMERCIAL BREAK*****


Weird Things happening re Mahony’s answers to Interrogatories 1 through 8, hearing July 17th on Motion for Order Sealing Documents.

I found this ruling from July 3rd for case BC307225

This is the case where Katherine Freberg has been pursuing answers to Interrogatories from Cardinal Roger Mahony since August 2006. This was the hearing that went off the calendar and on again and off again and often ended up in the judge ordering both sides to meet and confer in the jury room, from which they would later emerge red-faced and angry. (See May 30 post and others.)

This is the motion that went off the calendar and back on and off again more times than I could keep track of. Then this particularly sneaky law firm led by Sean Kneafsey showed up and started doing something nasty behind the scenes. City of Angels Lady isn’t sure what they pulled off.

But this is the ruling that came down July 2 on Interrogatories 1-8 from Judge Haley Fromholz:

“The Court has reviewed the Declaration of Monsignor Gabriel Gonzales in Opposition to Plaintiffs’ motion to Compel Special Interrogatories 1 through 8 (plus exhibits re Gonzales declaration) all of which were filed June 29

Motion is denied as to the remaining issues.

DOES THIS MEAN INTERROGATORIES 1 THROUGH 8 ARE SHELVED?????
Did Mahony just earn his nickname "Teflon Man"?
So far no one from Freberg’s office has returned my emails to answer. . . but I found this on the LA Superior Court website.

07/17/2007 at 08:31 am in department 20 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012. Motion for Order (SEALING DOCUMENTS(PAPERS FILED ON 6/08)RE: BC307225)

THE LOBSTER QUADRILLE

You can have no idea what a delightful thing a Lobster Quadrille is!

No, indeed, said Alice. What sort of a dance is it?
Why, said the Gryphon, you first form into a line along the sea-shore--

Two lines! cried the Mock Turtle. Seals, turtles, salmon, and so on; then, when you've cleared all the jelly-fish out of the way--

THAT generally takes some time, interrupted the Gryphon.

==========
More on a TV series on predator pedophile priests in development, after this:

*****COMMERCIAL BREAK
I hope you enjoy reading this blog. It’s time for me to pass the Internet Hat. Please put a high five or more on my Pay-Pal Account. The more I make from the blog, the less hours I have to spend on my wage-slave job. So for More Coverage of Clergy Cases 2007 hit the Donate button in the top left column.
THANK YOU
END COMMERCIAL BREAK*****


Kay Ebeling Productions is now official:

In an email to Paris Arrow, blogger on the East Coast I just decided as I wrote:

I can tell you that if there are settlements it's sure not the last you are going to hear of this story. Not from me and not from my production company.

You heard it here first. I'm starting a production company to put together a package of two or three long form shows and a TV series for a cable network, based on pedophile priests and their crimes in America in the last 50-100 years.

There are hundreds of stories out there, not just I LA but all over the country. Once these stories get into the media, the patterns of criminal activity, the network of organized crime, will become apparent. If we can’t do a TV series, we'll start with a video blog.


But we've only just begun.

More to Come. . .

1 comment:

Cleanwater said...

Could you please tell me if it is possible to put together a list of the Pedophile protecting Law firms, and the dirt bag attorneys who are responsible for abusing the legal system, and the victims? I want the world to know who they are, and which firms not to employ, based on their less than honorable behavior in these cases. It's my wish that their children have to hire lawyers at some point and they have to suffer just as the victims of childhood sexual abuse have in these court proceedings.