Jane Doe, like Leah Remini, asks for judge in Danny Masterson lawsuit after Miscavige stunt

We did our best this week to explain how Scientology leader David Miscavige managed to get the judges he didn’t like in two lawsuits removed, even though both cases had been filed months earlier.

Miscavige cynically capitalized on the evasion of process servers that the courts had let him get away with for months and then waited to make his first appearances in those cases after the judges had made rulings he didn’t like. Then he made his first official appearances in each case so he could file peremptory challenges to remove the judges, claiming that for him the lawsuits had just begun. In both cases, the judges had no choice but to step down.

We pointed out how unfair this was to Leah Remini and Jane Doe 1, the plaintiffs in those two lawsuits, but neither of them are taking it lying down.

There’s a third lawsuit against Scientology at Los Angeles Superior Court, the one filed by Danny Masterson’s victims in 2019 (known as Bixler v. Scientology). After a lengthy delay while Masterson was going through two criminal trials, the lawsuit is active again and is in the courtroom of Judge Upinder Kalra, who recently knocked down an attempt by Scientology to gut the lawsuit.

After Leah lost the judge in her case, she filed a “notice of related case,” pointing out how similar her lawsuit is to the Bixler case, with both of them alleging that Scientology targeted them with elaborate campaigns of harassment, stalking, and intimidation.

Instead of giving her case to a random new judge (which turned out to be Judge Holly Fujie), Leah’s lawyers argued that her lawsuit should, like the Bixler case, be handled by Judge Kalra. This would save the court time and resources, and help to avoid contradictory rulings.

We don’t know if the court is going to go for that, but now Jane Doe is following suit.

In her case, Judge Robert Broadbelt on Monday evening posted a stunning tentative ruling calling Scientology’s brand of arbitration “unconscionable.” But before he could make that ruling final at a hearing Tuesday, Miscavige sent his attorney Jeffrey Riffer that morning to notify Judge Broadbelt that Miscavige was making his first appearance and immediately filed a peremptory challenge to remove the judge. Broadbelt stepped down and his tentative ruling was wiped out.

Jane Doe’s case has now been assigned to Judge Michael Small, but she too has now filed a “notice of related case” and, like Leah, is asking that her lawsuit be reassigned to Judge Upinder Kalra.

We figured you’d want to see the specific arguments her attorneys made in their filing…

1. Plaintiff Jane Doe in 22STCV40862 (Case #1) is Plaintiff Jane Doe #1 in 19STCV29458 (Case #2).
2. Religious Technology Center and Church of Scientology International are defendants in both Case #1 and Case #2.
3. Defense counsel overlap in Cases #1 and #2. Plaintiff’s Counsel (Edwards Henderson) overlap in Cases #1 and #2.
4. On April 16, 2024, Plaintiff Jane Doe in Case #1 was informed by the Court at the hearing on the Motion to Compel Arbitration that Defendant David Miscavige exercised his Rule 170.6 peremptory challenge to exclude the Honorable Robert Broadbelt.
5. The two cases share substantially identical questions of law and fact and issues, including but not limited to the validity of an arbitration provision Defendants have sought to impose in both cases. The agreement with the arbitration provision at issue in Case #2 is identical to the agreement with the arbitration provision at issue in Case #1.
6. The Court in Case #2 previously ruled the arbitration provision was not binding as to Jane Doe #1. Judge Robert Broadbelt issued a Tentative Ruling in Case #1 finding that the same arbitration provision was not binding. The like findings in the two cases demonstrate that Case #1 and Case #2 are related and provide the requisite knowledge that triggered the filing of this Notice at this stage.
7. The issue of the enforceability of the arbitration provision, which if enforced would force Jane Doe into Scientology arbitration, is common in both cases. A disparate ruling among cases involving the same Plaintiff and the same agreement will confuse issues and create split decisions versus final rulings.
8. The cases also share substantially similar discovery issues including Scientology policies prohibiting the reporting of crimes, the management of individuals who disregard Scientology rules, and the treatment of Jane Doe by each Defendant. Witnesses and expected motions are also substantially similar.
9. Any award or judgment in either Case #1 or #2 would be paid by the same Defendant entity.
10. Consolidation of discovery in Cases #1 and #2 will achieve judicial expediency and will serve to prevent the substantial duplication of judicial resources that will occur if heard by different judges.
11. Notably, Plaintiffs previously filed a Notice of Related Cases for Case #1 and #2 that was denied and deferred jurisdiction to Judge Broadbelt. Considering the new circumstances in this matter given that Judge Broadbelt no longer has jurisdiction, the matter should be reconsidered and the cases related. Both judges and courts have already expended significant judicial resources delving into complicated fact issues in these similar cases, and relating the cases under Judge Kalra will provide judicial efficiency.

We’ll say it again: The Los Angeles Superior Court just allowed David Miscavige to sandbag them, and they have rewarded him for evading service and making a mockery of the court.

They have a chance to make up for that by granting Leah Remini and Jane Doe 1 the requests they have made, which not only make sense for conserving judicial resources, but also to prevent conflicting rulings.

Why don’t you surprise us and do the right thing, LA Superior Court?

---

Bonus items from our tipsters

---

A special treat for our subscribers

Today our subscribers will receive the episode 63 of our special podcast series, “Group Therapy.”

We discuss the week’s revelations with our gang of jokers and degraders, and once again we’re joined this week by Alex Barnes-Ross in London and the Wise Beard Man Mark Bunker in Clearwater, Florida.

It’s all the enturbulation you could want!

We’re offering this series as thanks to our subscribers for helping to support the work we do here at the Underground Bunker!

---

Want to help?

Please consider joining the Underground Bunker as a paid subscriber. Your $7 a month will go a long way to helping this news project stay independent, and you’ll get access to our special material for subscribers. Or, you can support the Underground Bunker with a Paypal contribution to bunkerfund@tonyortega.org, an account administered by the Bunker’s attorney, Scott Pilutik. And by request, this is our Venmo link, and for Zelle, please use (tonyo94 AT gmail). E-mail tips to tonyo94@gmail.com.

---

Thank you for reading today’s story here at Substack. For the full picture of what’s happening today in the world of Scientology, please join the conversation at tonyortega.org, where we’ve been reporting daily on David Miscavige’s cabal since 2012. There you’ll find additional stories, and our popular regular daily features:

Source Code: Actual things founder L. Ron Hubbard said on this date in history

Avast, Ye Mateys: Snapshots from Scientology’s years at sea

Overheard in the Freezone: Indie Hubbardism, one thought at a time

Past is Prologue: From this week in history at alt.religion.scientology

Random Howdy: Your daily dose of the Captain

Here’s the link for today’s post at tonyortega.org

And whatever you do, subscribe to this Substack so you get our breaking stories and daily features right to your email inbox every morning.

Paid subscribers get access to two special podcast series…

Up the Bridge: A journey through Scientology’s actual “technology”

Group Therapy: Our round table of rowdy regulars on the week’s news