Quantcast

FLORIDA RECORD

Friday, April 26, 2024

Tampa court backs Scientology in legal battle with estranged members

Lawsuits
Courtroom

Luis and Maria Garcia brought their case before a federal court in Florida, alleging claims of misconduct by the Church of Scientology's Flag Service Organization and Flag Ship Service Organization.

TAMPA — A federal judge denied a husband and wife's request to overturn a religious arbitration ruling that allegedly cost them nearly $1 million.

Luis and Maria Garcia brought their case before Judge James Whittemore of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, alleging claims of misconduct by the Church of Scientology's Flag Service Organization and Flag Ship Service Organization.

The Garcias claimed they had donated $850,000 to the church and paid another $119,269 for "services" from the church. The couple later accused the church of fraud, breach of contract and violations of the Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act. 


A couple lost a bid to reverse an arbitration decision by Scientology. | DoorFrame via Wikicommons

They moved to reclaim their money by appearing before a panel of three Scientologist arbiters. In October 2017, the arbiters awarded just under $18,500. 

The Garcias subsequently accused the arbitration panel of favoring International Justice Chief Mike Ellis who represents the views of the church and decides on all arbitration procedures. The Garcias claim the arbiters refused to consider their fraud claims, barred their attorney from attending the proceedings and refused to hear evidence or witnesses who are "critical of the church."

In his decision, Whittmore wrote he accepted that the panel of arbiters may have demonstrated some level of partiality to Ellis. However, for a judge to vacate an arbitration decision there must be "evident partiality," he wrote. 

"In their enrollment agreement [with the church], the Garcias expressly agreed to arbitrate in accordance with Scientology principles and procedures and that the arbitrators selected would be in good standing with the Church," Whittemore wrote in the 8-page opinion. "To the extent, therefore, they challenge the partiality of the arbitrators because of their standing with the Church; they agreed to inherent partiality."

Whittmore said the couple's claims the church had violated due process are "secular notions" that would not apply to Scientology arbitration policies. In addition, Whittemore cited the First Amendment, which prohibits any court from resolving disputes concerning the interpretation of the Scientology doctrine.

Whittemore also described the Garcias claims about the church barring their attorney as "disingenuous". He wrote the attorney had permission to be present at the proceedings but - as previously agreed - was not permitted to represent the couple.

More News