Is Scientology breaking the law? |
Excerpted from http://www.scientology-lies.com/re.cgi?http://www.primenet.com/~cultxpt/freeman.htm . Please see that page for the full text. Emphasis added in red . Editorial comments, when added, are in purple .
Wilma Freeman's lawsuit against Scientology in Arizona alleges breach of contract and lack of good faith in dealings IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA Wilma Freeman, personally, and as Personal Representative for the Estate of John Barrow, Plaintiff, vs. THE CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY, For her complaint, Plaintiff alleges as follows: 3. Plaintiff and John Barrow were married in May of 1990. In June of 1991, John Barrow became involved with the Defendant Church of Scientology. Plaintiff incorporates all foregoing allegations and further alleges: 4. In connection with his relationship with the Church of Scientology, John Barrow entered into certain contracts with the Church, wherein Barrow paid money to the church, in exchange for which the Church agreed to perform certain services. Said contracts were contracts of adhesion, in which Barrow had no input or opportunity to negotiate. 5. The Church failed to perform the services, or, in the alternative, breached the contracts by failing to properly perform the services which were promised. 6. As a result of the breach on the part of the church, Plaintiff is entitled to a refund of all monies paid. 7. Plaintiff is entitled to recover her costs and attorney fees. 10. The Church breached its duties, including the covenant of good faith and fair dealing. 11. The nature of the contractual relationship between the Church and Barrow was such that Barrow is entitled to recover tort damages for the Church's breach. 12. As a result of the Church's breach, Barrow suffered the following damages, including, but not limited to: a. Barrow developed psychosomatic congestive heart failure symptoms, b. Barrow had a violent physical confrontation with his wife (Plaintiff herein) c. Barrow filed to divorce Plaintiff (the divorce petition was subsequently withdrawn.) d. Barrow became paranoid about his personal safety, following rumors about Scientology being a cult, from which he might be kidnapped and "deprogrammed" e. Barrow found it increasingly difficult to perform in his job with Arizone Public Service, f. Barrow was given the company's Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Index (MMPI) test, for nuclear plant security, which he failed. He was then put on psychological probabtion and his clearance to enter site security areas was revoked, pending paritipation in the company's psychological counseling program. 13. As a result of the Church's breach, Plaintiff Wilma Freeman also suffered intense emotional distress, including, but not limited to Defendant's interference with her marital relationship with her husband, for which she is entitled to damages. 14. The Church's policy, as set forth in its literature, is that persons seeking a return of "donations" is expressly prohibited from seeking the assistance of an attorney. 15. The Church actively sought to induce Plaintiff to forego litigation by leading Plaintiff to believe that settlement of her claim would be effected without the necessity of bringing suit, and in fact the Church expressly discouraged Plaintiff from seeking legal assistance by telling her that there would be no settlement if she sought such assistance. 16. The Church further acted by induce Plaintiff to forego litigation by refunding portions of Plaintiff's claims, while continually indicating that additional payments would be forthcoming. 17. In the course of his relationship with the Church, Barrow purchased, and received certain "courses" from the Church, including, but not limited to the following: "New OT Preps"; "New OT Audited NOTs"; "Single Intensive Full Rate"; "Hubbard SOLO course"; "Level II"; "Level III"; "Class IV INT"; "Ministerial Crs". 18. The person or persons who administered or participated in such courses on behalf of the Church were negligent in their methods and procedures, causing emotional distress and psychological injury to Barrow, including, but not limited to the injuries detailed above. 19. As a result of the Church's breach, Plaintiff Wilma Freeman also suffered intense emotional distress, including, but not limited to interference with her marital relationship with her husband, for which she is entitled to damages. DATED this 3 day of February, 1997.
This page was last updated on May 8, 1999. |