Scientology appeal in Danny Masterson civil suit attacks harassment claims

Even before Danny Masterson was formally charged in 2020 with the criminal allegations that would eventually send him to prison for 30 years to life, his victims had already filed a civil lawsuit against the That ‘70s Show actor and the Church of Scientology, alleging that the church and the actor were behind a campaign of stalking and harassing the women for coming forward.

That 2019 lawsuit was put on hold while Masterson’s two trials were underway, but after he was convicted in 2023, the case got going again. Each side made important moves at that point: Scientology filed anti-SLAPP motions attempting to gut the lawsuit, which were denied by Judge Upinder Kalra. And the women attempted to bolster the lawsuit by adding another victim and also civil racketeering allegations. But before Judge Upinder Kalra could decide whether to allow in those changes to the lawsuit, Scientology appealed the judge’s denial of its anti-SLAPP motions.

That was almost a full year ago. Now, a few weeks past their deadline, Scientology has filed its 71-page opening appeal brief with the court, and we obtained a copy.

Once again, Scientology is arguing that some examples of harassment in the lawsuit, such as Danny Masterson’s assistant Jenni Weinman allegedly trying to convince two of the victims not to pursue criminal charges, had nothing to do with the Church of Scientology itself. And also, that the examples of alleged harassment, such as online postings trying to discourage the women from pursuing charges against Masterson, were “protected speech.”

In other words, those online postings and private communications were part of a public debate about a matter of public interest (whether or not a well-known celebrity had committed criminal acts).

Judge Kalra, however, had ruled that Scientology failed to make its case that this was merely a matter of a public debate. From his March 25, 2024 ruling…

[Weinman's] private efforts to prevent damaging information about her client from entering or remaining in the public arena does not contribute to a public discussion of that issue...the conduct ascribed to Weinman and the Institutional [Church of Scientology] Defendants in these paragraphs was designed to keep speech from entering the public conversation and to remain private.

In other words, the kind of harassment the women were complaining about was designed to keep them quiet, not to advance a public debate, Judge Kalra ruled.

So now, in its appeal brief, Scientology is trying to convince the 2nd Appellate District of the California Court of Appeals that Judge Kalra was wrong about that, but also that he overstepped his bounds and made arguments for the plaintiffs that the plaintiffs themselves didn’t bring up.

Besides arguing again that the statements allegedly made by Weinman and others were protected speech and part of a public debate, Scientology is complaining that Judge Kalra also denied their motions by ruling that the victims had provided enough information to allege a conspiracy between the defendants and their agents.

The Judge is making an argument that the victims themselves didn’t advance, the appeal argues.

But plaintiffs never once argued that the Church could be vicariously liable because it conspired with the third-parties. Plaintiffs did not assert that argument in any of their four oppositions to the anti-SLAPP motions (even though they included conspiracy allegations in their complaint and therefore knew about potential conspiracy arguments). Plaintiffs did not assert that argument in any of their declarations in support of their oppositions. And plaintiffs did not independently assert that argument at the hearings on the anti-SLAPP motions.

Instead, the conspiracy argument was first raised by the trial court. At a hearing on the anti-SLAPP motions, the court described the conspiracy allegation as “the most intriguing part” of the inquiry, even though it was not raised anywhere in plaintiffs’ papers. Defendants pushed back on the trial court’s reasoning, noting that, in their opposition to the anti-SLAPP motions, plaintiffs “are not saying it’s a conspiracy. They are saying these people are our agents. That’s what they’re saying.” But the trial court was not deterred: it immediately reiterated the conspiracy argument, and at the next hearing, it once again independently raised the conspiracy argument before any party raised it, and noted that conspiracy is “much easier” to establish than agency. And ultimately, the trial court wrote an extensive analysis of a conspiracy argument that plaintiffs never raised, and ruled that the Church could be vicariously liable based on a conspiracy.

Scientology complains (again) that the victims have provided no evidence that the Church of Scientology had any contact with the seven “agents” who made public postings or private communications with the victims after they came forward to the LAPD in 2016, and that Judge Kalra erred when he ruled that the victims had at least alleged a conspiracy sufficiently to keep that material in the lawsuit.

There is much more harassment and stalking and intimidation alleged in the lawsuit by the women which Scientology didn’t even address in its anti-SLAPP motions. But Scientology is focusing here on just some of the allegations, denying that people like Jenni Weinman were its “agents” in a conspiracy of harassment.

Whew. There’s a lot here, and most of it is legal argument. It will be interesting to see how the victims respond in the coming weeks.

Here’s the whole enchilada for you document hounds…

Bixler040725 Aob Churchofscientology

15.7MB ∙ PDF file

Download

Download

---

Chris Shelton is going Straight Up and Vertical

---

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. Find us at Threads: tony.ortega.1044 and Bluesky: @tonyortega.bsky.social

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 a special podcast series…

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