i. General Principles of DiscoveryCounsel and pro se litigants should be guided by courtesy, candor andcommon sense, and should conform to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, theLocal Rules and applicable orders in conducting discovery. In particular, counseland pro se litigants should have in mind the restrictions on the scope of discoverystated in Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b) and the good faith obligations implicit in Rule 26(g).Direct and informal communication between counsel is encouraged to facilitatediscovery and resolve disputes. In this regard, the Court refers counsel and partiesto the guidance offered by the district court for the Central District of California inO’Connor v. Boeing North American, Inc., 185 F.R.D. 272, 284 (C.D. Cal. 1999):The Court would like to take this opportunity to address the partiesand their counsel, to stress that “[t]he discovery system dependsabsolutely on good faith and common sense from counsel. The courts,sorely pressed by demands to try cases promptly and to rulethoughtfully on potentially case dispositive motions, simply do nothave the resources to police closely the operation of the discoveryprocess. The whole system of [c]ivil adjudication would be ground toa virtual halt if the courts were forced to intervene in even a modestpercentage of discovery transactions. That fact should impose oncounsel an acute sense of responsibility about how they handlediscovery matters. They should strive to be cooperative, practical andsensible, and should turn to the courts (or take positions that forceothers to turn to the courts) only in extraordinary situations thatimplicate truly significant interests.”(Citations omitted).
Narconon execs are not above the law like they are trained to believe.
We can think of many reasons for why Miscavige is worried.Just this morning, for example, we have a document to share with you that should be sending alarm bells at the RTC building.It shows that Western World Insurance Company wants out of the Narconon Georgia lawsuit.We’ve written several times about the Narconon Georgia mess. The 2008 death of a man named Patrick Desmond who had been a patient at the Scientology drug rehab center in the Atlanta area has given rise to a wrongful death lawsuit.As a result of that lawsuit, the Desmond family attorney, Jeff Harris, has uncovered shocking examples of deceit and wrongdoing by the people who operate the Narconon facility.Narconon Georgia’s executive director, Mary Rieser, has been caught telling so many lies and holding back so much information, the judge in the case sanctioned the defense so harshly, its answer to the original complaint won’t even be considered in court. It’s a kind of death penalty for the defense that should make things very difficult for Narconon to proceed.And it turns out Narconon’s insurance company wants no part of the case, leaving Narconon vulnerable to having to pay the full amount if it loses millions in the case.
The Court order striking Narconon of Georgia's answer occurred as a result of Narconon of Georgia's failure to cooperate in the defense of the Underlying Action.183.Cooperation in the defense of the Underlying Action is a condition toWestern World providing coverage and a defense to the claims, counts and causes of action set forth in the Underlying Action.184.Due to Narconon of Georgia's failure to cooperate in the defense of theUnderlying Action, Western World is not obligated to provide coverage or adefense to Narconon of Georgia.-
Author
Topic: Western World Insurance Company v. Narconon of Georgia, Narconon International (Read 12759 times)