Church of Scientology Flag Services Org., Inc. v. City of Clearwater
| Decision Date | 04 February 1991 |
| Docket Number | No. 84-719-CIV-T-17.,84-719-CIV-T-17. |
| Parties | CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY FLAG SERVICES ORG., INC., Plaintiff, v. CITY OF CLEARWATER, et al., Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Middle District of Florida |
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
Paul B. Johnson, Johnson, Paniello & Hayes, Tampa, Fla. (Eric Lieberman, Katherine Stone, Rabinowitz, Boudin, Standard, Krinsky & Lieberman, New York City, of counsel) Lawrence E. Heller, Lenske, Lenske & Heller, Woodland Hills, Cal., for plaintiff.
Lawrence R. Velvel, Nashua, N.H., Alan S. Zimmet, Sargent, Repka and Covert, M.A. Galbraith, Jr., City Atty., City of Clearwater, Clearwater, Fla., for defendants.
ORDER ON MOTIONS
This cause is before the Court on the following:
Dkt. 80 Motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of standing by Plaintiff and request for oral argument on this motion by Plaintiff, filed July 23, 1987.
Dkt. 81 Memorandum of law in support of motion for partial summary judgment by Plaintiff, filed July 23, 1987.
Dkt. 82, 83, 84 Affidavits of Professor Lonnie D. Kliever, Frank K. Flinn, and Reverend James Sydejko, filed July 23, 1987.
Dkt. 105 Motion for partial summary judgment by Plaintiff, filed January 15, 1988.
Dkt. 106 Motion for summary judgment by Defendants Clearwater, Goudeau, and Galbraith, filed January 15, 1988.
Dkt. 108 Memorandum of law in support of Defendants' motion for summary judgment with exhibits, filed January 15, 1988.
Dkt. 109 Memorandum of law in support of motion for partial summary judgment by Plaintiff, filed January 15, 1988.
Dkt. 110 Affidavits/exhibits in support of Plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment, filed January 15, 1988.
Dkt. 111 Request for oral argument on the issues of motion for summary judgment by Defendants, filed February 16, 1988.
Dkt. 112 Memorandum of law in opposition to Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment with exhibits 1-4 attached yet filed under separate cover by Defendants, filed February 16, 1988.
Dkt. 113 Memorandum of law in opposition to Defendants' motion for summary judgment with Exhibit A attached by Plaintiff, filed February 16, 1988.
Dkt. 116 Reply memorandum in support of its motion for partial summary judgment by Plaintiff, filed March 15, 1988.
Dkt. 117 Reply memorandum to Plaintiff's memorandum in opposition to Defendants' motion for summary judgment by Defendants. (Exhibit, Deposition Excerpts and Case Authorities attached), filed March 16, 1988.
Dkt. 129 Notice of filing documents in support of motion for summary judgment and in opposition to Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment by Defendants (Documents filed under separate cover), filed January 20, 1989.
Dkt. 133 Supplemental memorandum of points and authorities in support of motion for partial summary judgment and in opposition to motion for summary judgment by Plaintiff, filed July 11, 1989.
Dkt. 137 Motion to strike memorandum of points and authorities in support of motion for partial summary judgment and in opposition to motion for summary judgment by Defendants, filed July 26, 1989.
Dkt. 139 Memorandum in response to Defendants' motion to strike Plaintiff's supplemental memorandum and request to permit the filing and consideration of supplemental authorities by Plaintiff, filed August 18, 1989.
Dkt. 143 Motion to strike letter of July 16, 1990 and memorandum in support by Plaintiff, filed August 9, 1990.
Dkt. 144 Response to Plaintiff's motion to strike and Defendants' motion for leave to file notice of supplemental authorities and memorandum in support by Defendants, filed August 22, 1990.
The cross motions for summary judgment require this Court to determine whether Church of Scientology Flag Service Organization, Inc. has standing to sue in this matter and whether Clearwater Ordinance 3479-84 regulating charitable contributions is constitutional.
The Court finds that Scientology has standing and that all provisions of Clearwater Ordinance 3479-84 are constitutional. Therefore, the Court grants Scientology's motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of standing, but denies summary judgment on all other issues. The Court denies Defendant Clearwater's motion for summary judgment on the issue of standing, but grants summary judgment on all other issues. The Court's reasoning is set out below.
Defendant City of Clearwater (Clearwater) is a municipality of the State of Florida. In 1975, Plaintiff Church of Scientology Flag Services Organization, Inc. (Scientology) established a major base in Clearwater. Scientology rests almost entirely upon the writing L. Ron Hubbard. Founding Church of Scientology of Washington, D.C. v. United States, 409 F.2d 1146, 1153 (D.C.Cir.), cert. denied 396 U.S. 963, 90 S.Ct. 434, 24 L.Ed.2d 427 (1969). In the early 1950's Hubbard wrote tracts elucidating what he called Dianetics. Dianetics is a theory of therapeutic mind techniques, based on the idea that man possesses both a reactive mind and an analytic mind. The analytic mind is comparable to a superior computer, incapable of error and human misjudgments that create social problems and individual suffering. The reactive mind is made up of patterns imprinted on the nervous system in moments of pain, stress or unconsciousness. These patterns are called engrams. Engrams are triggered by stimuli associated with the original imprinting, and produce unconscious or conditioned behavior that is harmful or irrational. The reactive mind makes the errors and misjudgments that create social problems and individual suffering. Id.
Supposedly, Dianetics is a practical science that can cure many of man's problems by erasing the old imprinted engrams. According to Dianetics theory, the ordinary person, encumbered by the engrams of his reactive mind, is a preclear, similar to a computer that contains previously programmed instructions. Just as computer program instructions can be erased, a person's imprinted engrams can be erased. Dianetics' goal is to erase the programs and make persons clear, thus freeing the rational and analytic mind. Id.
The process of working toward clear is described as auditing. An auditor asks the person being audited a set of structured questions and drills, called rundowns, leading the subject or preclear along his time track discovering and exposing engrams along the way. The auditor's goal is to detect the buttons that indicate a conscious or subconscious response to the rundown and enable the subject to identify his or her own engrams. Although the auditor works one-on-one with a preclear, the content of each session is not individually tailored. The process of auditing allegedly improves the physical as well as the spiritual condition of the subject. Id.
The E-meter plays an important part in the process of auditing. The E-meter is a skin galvanometer, similar to those used in lie detector tests. The subject holds two tin soup cans in his hands. The cans are attached to an electrical device. A needle on the device registers changes in the electrical resistance of the subject's skin when the subject answers the auditor's questions often addressing personal, intimate and confidential subject matters. Supposedly the auditor, using a set of complex rules and procedures, can identify the subject's emotional reaction to the questions by the analyzing the needle movement. Then the auditor uses the analysis to diagnose the mental and spiritual condition of the subject. Scientology provides doctrinal courses known as training for becoming an auditor. Like auditing courses, training courses are provided in sequential levels. Id. Auditors are sometimes young persons with no training other than having been audited themselves for a short period of time. (Memorandum of Law in Support of Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment Defendants' Support Memorandum, p. 2 ). Auditors are paid directly by Scientology. Founding Church of Scientology of Washington, D.C., 409 F.2d 1146.
Scientology receives most of its income from auditing and training, although it also sells E-Meters, books and tapes. Id. Scientology charges a fixed donation, also known as a price or a fixed contribution, for auditing services. Hernandez v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 490 U.S. 680, 109 S.Ct. 2136, 2141, 104 L.Ed.2d 766 (1989) (citing Church of Scientology of California v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 823 F.2d 1310 (9th Cir.1987), cert. denied, 486 U.S. 1015, 108 S.Ct. 1752, 100 L.Ed.2d 214 (1988)). The charges are set out in schedules. In 1972, auditing charges ranged from $625 for a twelve and one half hour session to $4,250 for a one hundred hour intensive session. Id. The system of mandatory fixed charges is based on Scientology's doctrine of exchange that requires an even balance between what a person pays to the organization and what he receives in return. Id. Scientology promotes auditing sessions through newspaper, magazine and radio advertisements and also through free lectures, free personality tests and leaflets. Id. In addition, Scientology encourages prepayment for the auditing services and allows a five percent discount for advance payment. Id.
Scientology will refund unused portions of prepaid auditing or training fees, less an administrative charge if the audited person believes that he or she has not received religious or spiritual benefit from his participation in the organization's activities. (Plaintiff's Memorandum in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment Plaintiff's 1988 Support Memorandum, p. 5, note 5; Support Affidavits and Exhibits; Supplemental Sydejko aff., pp. 2-3, pars. 5, 6). "There is no membership in the Church as such; persons are accepted for auditing on the basis of their interest in Scientology (and presumably their ability to pay ...)" Founding Church of Scientology of Wash- ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Church of Scientology Flag Service Org., Inc. v. City of Clearwater
......453, 466, 13 L.Ed.2d 471 (1965). In this respect the district court's order upholding the ordinance is affirmed. 47 . X. REFUND POLICY REGULATIONS . As part of its doctrine of "exchange," Scientology collects payments from adherents whenever they receive religious services or training. As a corollary to that doctrine, the organization has a practice of offering to refund the payments to anyone who is not satisfied with the spiritual benefits he or she derives from such services. Scientology challenges the provision of the 1984 Ordinance requiring that it provide a ......
-
Alabama & Coushatta Tribes v. BIG SANDY SCHOOL D.
...S.Ct. 2965, 119 L.Ed.2d 586 (1992). See also United States v. Boyll, 774 F.Supp. 1333 (D.N.M. 1991); Church of Scientology v. City of Clearwater, 756 F.Supp. 1498, 1514 (M.D.Fla. 1991). These cases more closely follow established Supreme Court precedent. "However free the exercise of religi......
-
Friedman v. Southern Cal. Permanente Med.
...States v. Meyers (D.Wyo.1995) 906 F.Supp. 1494, 1503, affd. (10th Cir.1996) 95 F.3d 1475; Church of Scientology Flag Services v. City of Clearwater (M.D.Fla. 1991) 756 F.Supp. 1498, 1509-1510, affd. in part, vacated in part, & revd. in part on other grounds (11th Cir.1993) 2 F.3d 1514; May ......
-
Church of Scientology v. City of Clearwater, 84-96-CIV-T-17.
...in 84-719, and granted Clearwater's motion for partial summary judgment against Scientology on all issues other than standing in 84-719. 756 F.Supp. 1498. The Court held that all sections of Ordinance No. 3479-84 are constitutional. A summary of Ordinance No. 3479-84 appears in Appendix The......