Lawsuit: JZK Inc vs Virginia Coverdale

Please support the RSE whistleblowers and citizen journalism and voice your concerns here. Act collectively and hold JZ Knight and the Thurston County public officials accountable for fraud and human rights abuse at RSE. This is about accountability and pursuing justice.
Qui tacet consentire
User avatar
EMFWebmaster
Site Admin
Posts: 290
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2007 2:28 am
Contact:

Lawsuit: JZK Inc vs Virginia Coverdale

Unread post by EMFWebmaster » Tue Apr 23, 2013 1:31 am

Lawsuit brought by Virginia Coverdale against JZK Inc. for defamation and damages.

JZK v. Virginia Coverdale, et al. - No. 12-2-02241-8; Motion to Amend and Notice of Appearance

BRECKAN C.L.SCOTT, ATTORNEY & COUNSELOR OF LAW, PLLC
Dfts Amended Answer and Counterclaims
Quote:
5.1 Defamation. JZK, Inc., and its agent JZ Knight, have made false statements regarding Virginia Coverdale. At all relevant times hereto, such statements were unprivileged and published to persons other than Virginia Coverdale. These statements include, but are not limited to, the statement during the February 2012 live stream event, and/or similar event, that Ms. Coverdale was a “whore.” JZK, Inc.’s defamatory conduct continues via posted material regarding Ms. Coverdale on its website(s), and/or websites of its agent, JZ Knight. In making the relevant statements herein, the Counter-Defendant JZK, Inc./RSE was negligent, reckless, malicious, and/or acted intentionally. As a result of the defamation, Ms. Coverdale has been damaged in an amount to be determined at trial;
5.2 Defamation, per se. Ms. Coverdale incorporates herein the allegations contained in paragraphs 1.1-5.3 of this Amended Answer and Counterclaims. The statements made by or on behalf of the Counter-Defendant were and are false, were unprivileged communications, and were published to persons other than Ms. Coverdale. In making the defamatory
5.3
statements, Counter-Defendant JZK, Inc. and its agent JZ Knight were negligent, reckless, malicious, and/or acted intentionally. The statements exposed Ms. Coverdale to hatred, contempt, ridicule or obloquy, and deprive her of the benefit of public confident or social intercourse or pursuit of gainful employment. As a result of the defamation, Ms. Coverdale has been damaged in an amount to be determined at trial.
5.4 False Light. Coverdale incorporates herein all previously made allegations in this Amended Answer and Amended Counterclaims. The statements made by the counter defendants and/or on behalf of the counter defendants about Coverdale were and are false and placed Coverdale in a false light. The false light created by the false statements was and is highly offensive to Coverdale and would be highly offensive to a reasonable person.
The counter defendants knew of or recklessly disregarded the falsity of the publications and the false light in which Coverdale would be placed. As a result of the false light, Coverdale has been damaged in an amount to be determined at trial.
5.5 Outrage Coverdale incorporates herein all previously made allegations in this Amended Answer and Amended Counterclaims. The counter defendants have engaged in extreme and outrageous conduct. Their conduct has been intentional or reckless and has caused emotional distress. Coverdale has suffered severe emotional distress as an actual result of such conduct. Because of the outrage, Coverdale has been damaged in an amount to be determined at trial.
5.6 Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress Coverdale incorporates herein all previous allegations in this pleading. The counter defendants have engaged in extreme and outrageous conduct. Their conduct has been intentional or reckless and has caused emotional distress. Coverdale has suffered severe emotional distress as an actual result of such conduct.

Because of the infliction of emotional distress, Coverdale has been damaged in an amount to be determined at trial.
5.7 Violation of the Consumer Protection Act Coverdale incorporates herein all previous allegations in this pleading. JZK, Inc. uses deceptive and unfair business practices, including relevant marketing, advertising, and program materials. The deception of such material is based, in part, on making specific false factual assertions, or vital material omissions, about itself, its members, the results potential members should reasonably expect to obtain, in what specific activities members are expected to participate in progressive stages of membership, the scientific validity of the material promulgated by the organization, and various other deceptive statements and/or deceptive material omissions. JZK, Inc.’s business practices, including contracts and nondisclosure agreements, are unfair and deceptive acts. The nature and content of the contracts and nondisclosure agreements, especially given the coercive environment at JZK, Inc./RSE, make them unfair and deceptive. Counter¬Defendant JZK, Inc.’s actions and inactions are unfair and deceptive acts or practices in violation of RCW 19.86 et seq. Even a loss of use of money or property that is casually related to an unfair or deceptive act or practice is sufficient to sustain a claim under the Consumer Protection Act. Griffin v. Allstate Ins. Co., 108 Wn. App. 133, 29 P.3d 777 (2001). JZK, Inc./RSE’s previous and ongoing acts or practices have the capacity to deceive, and do deceive, a substantial portion of the public and affect the public interest as a matter of law. Ms. Coverdale has suffered damages as a result of this Counter-Defendant’s unfair and deceptive practices and is entitled to compensation for all resulting damages.
5.8 Misrepresentation and Fraud Coverdale incorporates herein all previous allegations in this pleading. Counter Defendant JZK, Inc., itself and through its agent, JZ Knight,


engage in a pattern and practice of misrepresentation and fraudulent assertions in connection with its profit-seeking ventures. All relevant representations were material in Ms. Coverdale’s entering into any alleged contractual relationship with the Counter Defendant, and/or in her involvement/participation with the organization in any manner. The Counter¬Defendant made one or more representations of an existing fact; such representations were material; the representation(s) were false; Counter-Defendant JZK, Inc. and/or its agent knew it was false and intended it to be acted upon by Counter-Plaintiff Coverdale. Ms. Coverdale did not know such representations were false, had a right to rely, and did so rely, upon the truth of the representation and such reliance caused Ms. Coverdale damages to be determined at trial. The fraudulent misrepresentations include, but are not limited to, misrepresenting the validity of scientific studies purporting to substantiate RSE’s claimed abilities; making contradictory statements in advertising versus less public forums to induce membership; misrepresenting the nature of the organization and its expectations; misrepresenting the credentials of the organization’s staff; making statements regarding the scientific nature of the school as using the “latest discoveries in neuroscience and quantum physics,” as well as other misrepresentations regarding the nature of the school; and misrepresenting the identity of individuals responsible for publications, material, and other products/events.
5.9 PRAYER FOR RELIEF
Counter-Plaintiff Virginia Coverdale respectfully requests the following relief from Counter-Defendant JZK, Inc./RSE:
II. That Plaintiff JZK, Inc./RSE takes nothing in the Complaint, and that it be dismissed with prejudice;
That Defendant/Counter Plaintiff Virginia Coverdale should be allowed her

attorney’s fees, costs and expenses incurred herein to the fullest extent allowed by law,

5.10 That Defendant/Counter Plaintiff Virginia Coverdale should be granted general and special damages as proven at trial, including interest on all liquidated damages;
5.11 Damages for violations of the Consumer Protection Act, RCW 19.86. et seq., including damages without limitation, treble damages, attorney fees and costs, including expert witness and litigation fees, in an amount to be proven at trial, and damages as allowed by RCW 4.24.500, et seq.
5.12 Such other relief as the Court deems proper.
DATED this 15th day of April, 2013.

BRECKAN C.L.SCOTT, ATTORNEY & COUNSELOR OF LAW, PLLC
PDF documents JZK v. Virginia Coverdale, et al. - No. 12-2-02241-8;
Download Links

Dfts Amended Answer and Counterclaims.PDF Download link - DivShare
http://www.divshare.com/download/24028149-f90

Motion to Amend. PDF Download link - DivShare
http://www.divshare.com/download/24028150-f30

Declaration of Breckan Scott in Support o. PDF Download link - DivShare
http://www.divshare.com/download/24028148-437

seriously
Posts: 205
Joined: Fri May 20, 2011 7:17 pm

Re: Lawsuit: Virginia Coverdale vs JZK Inc

Unread post by seriously » Tue Apr 23, 2013 1:49 am

Way to go Virginia.

Shocked
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Apr 03, 2013 2:08 am

Re: Lawsuit: Virginia Coverdale vs JZK Inc

Unread post by Shocked » Tue Apr 23, 2013 2:35 am

thumbs up to you

Tree
Posts: 974
Joined: Sun May 18, 2008 12:31 am

Re: Lawsuit: Virginia Coverdale vs JZK Inc

Unread post by Tree » Tue Apr 23, 2013 3:49 am

BE STRONG!!

and way to go!!!

Jingz
Posts: 86
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2012 12:52 am

Re: Lawsuit: Virginia Coverdale vs JZK Inc

Unread post by Jingz » Tue Apr 23, 2013 3:51 am

Way to go Virginia! You and Breckan are kicking some ass, and I love it! Keep it up girl, it always gets darkest before its light!

All my love and support to you!

Jingz

joe sz
Posts: 1008
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 2:43 am
Location: Birdsboro, PA
Contact:

Re: Lawsuit: Virginia Coverdale vs JZK Inc

Unread post by joe sz » Sat Jun 29, 2013 8:56 am

http://www.yelmonline.com/news/local_ne ... 963f4.html

Steven Wyble news3@yelmonline.com YelmOnline.com | 0 comments
A judge ruled in favor of JZK, Inc.'s lawsuit against former Ramtha School of Enlightenment student Virginia Coverdale Friday morning. The case will not proceed to a trial.

Thurston County Superior Court Judge Gary Tabor granted a motion for summary judgment filed by JZK, Inc., and ruled against a motion from the defense.

Coverdale's lawyer, Breckan Scott, said her client intends to appeal the ruling.

Tabor also made permanent a temporary injunction imposed against Coverdale prohibiting the release of the initial video she posted, as well as any other proprietary material from the school.

The ruling concludes seven months of court proceedings, at times seeming to defy what Tabor has referred to as a "simple breach of contract case," with almost 375 court documents filed since the lawsuit was initiated, and consisting of "more hearings than I can count," he said.

Tabor said none of the issues brought up by Scott in her arguments were "legally sufficient" to grant the defense's motion.

He ruled Coverdale violated the Conditions of Participation contracts she signed as an RSE student in 2006 and 2007 when, in October 2012, she uploaded videos of Yelm channeler and JZK, Inc. President JZ Knight making disparaging remarks about Catholics, Jews and gays. The company has maintained that the remarks were taken out of context.

Tabor said the language of the contract was "sufficient to prevent this type of disclosure" of the company's proprietary material.

Tabor said protecting one's proprietary information is an important concern that may be addressed in a contract. Coverdale agreed not to disclose such information when she signed the contracts, he said.

Scott's motion for summary judgment centered on three claims: The Conditions of Participation contract is unconscionable; Coverdale didn't breach the contract; and JZK, Inc., breached the contract first, thereby excusing Coverdale from it.

Scott cited McKee v. AT&T Corporation, a Washington State Supreme Court ruling, as evidence that the court held "confidentiality provisions in consumer contracts are, as a matter of law, substantively unconscionable."

Tabor said McKee doesn't apply "to this particular situation."

Scott argued Coverdale never breached the contract, because it states that the prohibition on disseminating the school's material applies to "information and techniques taught here are for your knowledge only," and prohibits dissemination of "any information or techniques that you learn or are taught at the School … nor will you assist or facilitate other persons in doing so without the prior written consent of the School."

Scott said Coverdale did not receive the video from the school — Coverdale has said she received it anonymously in the mail on a flash drive — as she never attended an RSE event after 2010. The contract therefore doesn't apply, she argued.

She also argued that because the school's online live video streams — referred to as "livestreams" — didn't exist when Coverdale signed the contracts, they don't apply to the video Coverdale uploaded, which was a copy of a livestream event.

Tabor said Coverdale was an RSE student and signed a contract with the school, and agreed not to disseminate information from the school.

He also said whether the livestreams existed when Coverdale signed the contracts doesn't affect the validity of the contracts.

Scott argued Coverdale was no longer bound by the contract because she was removed from the school in 2008.

She cited an email sent Nov. 2, 2008, by RSE Event Services Manager Steve Klein on behalf of Knight to Coverdale.

The email read, "You are out of School. You will not be allowed to attend this Event (Nov. 5 Fall Follow-up or an Follow-up). Your School record indicates you have not paid any money for any 2008 Fall Follow-up and you will not be permitted to do so. You have achieved your goal. You got your Card. You made it to The Void. You took my sweet guy away from me. Congratulations. JZ Knight."

However, Coverdale attended RSE events after the email was sent — both in person and online — in 2009 and 2010.

Scott argued Coverdale was not informed the Conditions of Participation still applied when she began attending RSE events again, and was never asked to sign another one.

Tabor said the fact that Coverdale attended RSE events after the email indicated there was a still relationship between she and the school, and the contract still applied.

"We think the ruling was the right one, that what was at issue here was the contract itself and that Ms. Coverdale acknowledged that she broke it when she disseminated materials that belonged to the plaintiff," McNeely said. "We also feel very vindicated that this contract is fair — that's what the court said today — and that it's reasonable, and that it's a reasonable expectation for the school to expect people to abide by their promise when they go there."

Scott said she believes "this case has been tainted by JZK, Inc.'s clear misrepresentations since the beginning."

"Unfortunately the ruling today did not examine and recognize the true undisputed facts," she continued. "The contract says it is limited to information received while participating in events. It is undisputed that Virginia did not participate in the February 2012 (livestream) event. For that reason, and many other reasons, we are excited and confident bringing the issue before the court of appeals."
...

User avatar
David McCarthy
Site Admin
Posts: 2481
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:09 am
Location: New Zealand
Contact:

Re: Lawsuit: Virginia Coverdale vs JZK Inc

Unread post by David McCarthy » Sat Jun 29, 2013 10:02 pm

Coverdale's lawyer, Breckan Scott, said her client intends to appeal the ruling.
Hopefully Breckan will get Virginia's case and fight out of Thurston County where JZ Knight 'rules the roost'...
and re-examined in the higher courts where I am sure truth and human rights will prevail above the needs of a corrupt corporation.
David
But he has nothing on at all, cried at last the whole people....

Shocked
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Apr 03, 2013 2:08 am

Re: Lawsuit: Virginia Coverdale vs JZK Inc

Unread post by Shocked » Sun Jun 30, 2013 2:36 am

I totally agree with you David, it has to be heard outside of thurston county!!!

joe sz
Posts: 1008
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 2:43 am
Location: Birdsboro, PA
Contact:

Re: Lawsuit: Virginia Coverdale vs JZK Inc

Unread post by joe sz » Sun Jun 30, 2013 10:46 am

no matter which "side" won, this would go to appeals, so it may be better this way as Breckan has specific violations of law by this imo "lazy" judge for the appelate court to consider. Other lawyers are following this case.
Tabor seemed to go with the idea that "you signed it, so you live with it" as his default position.
next case :!:

meanwhile, back at the ranch, there is celebration

until JZ's next faux pas or worse.....stay tuned :lol:

User avatar
David McCarthy
Site Admin
Posts: 2481
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:09 am
Location: New Zealand
Contact:

Re: Lawsuit: Virginia Coverdale vs JZK Inc

Unread post by David McCarthy » Sun Jun 30, 2013 10:45 pm

"lazy" judge
Hi Joe,

For the "lazy list awards" of Thurston county officials I nominate the following...

The Thurston County Fire Marshal
2000 Lakeridge Drive S.W.
Olympia, WA 98502-6045

Thurston County Planning Manager
Development Services
Thurston County Courthouse
Building 1, Second Floor
2000 Lakeridge Dr. SW
Olympia, Washington 98502

Thurston County Prosecuting Attorney's Office
2000 Lakeridge Dr S.W.
Building 2
Olympia, WA 98502

Attorney General Rob McKenna
WA STATE OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
1125 Washington Street SE
PO Box 40100
Olympia, WA 98504-0100

State Auditor Brian Sonntag
WA STATE AUDITOR'S OFFICE
Insurance Building
Capitol Campus
P.O. Box 40021
Olympia, Washington 98504-0021


Natural Resources Program Manager:
Mark Swartout
Development Services
Thurston County Courthouse
Building 1, Second Floor
2000 Lakeridge Dr. SW
Olympia, Washington 98502

Permit Assistance Center Supervisor: Gina Suomi
Development Services
Thurston County Courthouse
Building 1, Second Floor
2000 Lakeridge Dr. SW
Olympia, Washington 98502

Building Inspection/PlanReview Lead:
Jay Barney, Acting
Development Services
Thurston County Courthouse
Building 1, Second Floor
2000 Lakeridge Dr. SW
Olympia, Washington 98502

Compliance:
Guy Jaques
Development Services
Thurston County Courthouse
Building 1, Second Floor
2000 Lakeridge Dr. SW
Olympia, Washington 98502[/i]

But I think a more accurate nomination title should be... “The Thurston County JZK Cover-up Awards".
Did I miss anyone?
Just follow the 'Celebrity' money > :oops:
But he has nothing on at all, cried at last the whole people....

seriously
Posts: 205
Joined: Fri May 20, 2011 7:17 pm

Re: Lawsuit: Virginia Coverdale vs JZK Inc

Unread post by seriously » Wed Jul 03, 2013 6:45 pm

Just to make sure I'm understanding correctly: Virginia signed the conditions of participation contract. Whether actively participating in R$E or not, Virginia is bound to the contract and therefore can not release proprietary information about R$E to the general public. There is also the issue of copyrighted material. Is the video/audio of a live stream copyrighted material? If one pays for the content, are they permitted to disseminate the material? If one pays for a live stream, are they agreeing via electronic signature to the conditions of participation?

I left R$E in 91 or 92 at the latest. I never remember signing a conditions of participation contract. Could I legally publish R$E audio/video? I would guess no. If I recorded a Tony Robbins video and published it on the internet, I would imagine I'd get cease and desist orders. However, if I published spinets to prove a point or invoke conversation without publishing enough content that would dissuade a potentially paying customer from paying for the full content, would that be legal? I'm typing out loud here.

Ockham
Posts: 785
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2011 6:15 am

Re: Lawsuit: Virginia Coverdale vs JZK Inc

Unread post by Ockham » Thu Jul 04, 2013 2:31 am

I believe the Conditions of Participation first appeared in approximately 1993.

I am not a lawyer and the following is not legal advice.

I believe the may be specific deficiencies in the 1993 Conditions of Participation which could render one of more of the strictures set out in the document void. I don't want to discuss it publicly. I have mentioned what I found to the EMF moderators. If the reader is being pursued by JZK, Inc on the basis of the COP document, the reader may want to contact the moderators by personal message for more information.

User avatar
David McCarthy
Site Admin
Posts: 2481
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:09 am
Location: New Zealand
Contact:

Re: Lawsuit: Virginia Coverdale vs JZK Inc

Unread post by David McCarthy » Thu Jul 04, 2013 2:56 am

the reader may want to contact the moderators by personal message for more information.
Yes please do, Thanks for that Ockham :idea:
But he has nothing on at all, cried at last the whole people....

User avatar
David McCarthy
Site Admin
Posts: 2481
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:09 am
Location: New Zealand
Contact:

Re: Lawsuit: Virginia Coverdale vs JZK Inc

Unread post by David McCarthy » Mon Jul 08, 2013 10:37 pm

It is clear that a corrupt corporate entity by and clever using unscrupulous lawyers trashed justice, consumer protections and civil rights inherent in American law and the US First Amendments ...... Shame on Judge Gary R. Tabor
ramseyjusticesupremecourt.jpg
But he has nothing on at all, cried at last the whole people....

Cedar
Posts: 76
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 10:39 am

Re: Lawsuit: Virginia Coverdale vs JZK Inc

Unread post by Cedar » Tue Aug 20, 2013 8:34 pm

I am not surprised myself. I know Breckan means well, but from the beginning I saw shocking mistakes, for example in Breckans role in the conflict between Virginia and myself. One needs a big gun lawyer going against a big cult as RSE. Its not to begrudge anyone necessarily, its just the way fighting a big organization is. Not to mention the obvious local corruption in Thurston County that was evident to me from day one.

All of thesematters need to be away from the local money trail of JZ greasing pockets with our money from RSE, or it seems JZ always gets her way like a spolied kid in a candy store.

Once again, the only way to fight a monster way bigger than you is in a group,which may or may not be worth the stress and trouble. Otherwise the beast is just encouraged by the win which is just more bullying the courts on JZ's behalf.

I wonder where the judge addresses the inappropriate behaviour of JZ Knight? Not even on the radar here it seems, yet it should be front and center.

Rooster
Posts: 392
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 11:30 pm

Re: Lawsuit: Virginia Coverdale vs JZK Inc

Unread post by Rooster » Wed Aug 21, 2013 5:43 am

The sad truth! J.Z knight is very accomplished in the court system at this time. She was shaky in the beginning, but has become a professional. This is hard for those that have little or no court experience. Court has a rules and are very aware of a certain etiquette. a professional against the average can take one down. You have to have that etiquette to beat those with experience. She knows how to use it. It is just a part of the system as far as I can see. A sociopath knows this quite well. Not to say it was her in court. It is all about presentation that leads or lures one in as she does the members of rse.

User avatar
Robair
Posts: 696
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 10:49 pm
Location: Nevada

Re: Lawsuit: Virginia Coverdale vs JZK Inc

Unread post by Robair » Wed Aug 21, 2013 10:15 pm

Hello Everyone
It's have been sometime since I have put my two cent on all what have been happening the last few months.
One of the main reason is that I also have been in a court battle with someone here in Vegas that have disturbed my wife and I lives even more then JZ can ever do, but since it is personal no need for detail to be on here.

That brings me to what I have learned about our so called Justice System here in the US since I have seen so called Judges disregard facts even fraudulent acts in my case, and in Virginia's case taking personal even offended at some of the letters send to him in support of her. That judge never wanted to hear or acknowledge That JZ Knight is a Charlatan a rapist of mind and soul, reaping people of their lives and hard earned money, instead like my judge here have supported the stronger law firm and the one with most money perhaps of fear of having to battle them back, the Judge here even told my lawyer that fraud directly committed in our case by the other side was irrelevant, my lawyer could not believe it. Lucky for us we are going to go in front of another judge where we will be able to present facts.
The Department Of Justice DOJ either be State or Federal should change their name to The Department Of Loop Hole DOLH with many new laws writing by Lawyers that have become so Called Judges themselves. Common Senses have not been seen in our Court System for a longtime. The Rule of Laws they tell us. Pretty much like JZ programming would have us to accept it in order to control us.
In court they called them self Consolers and your Honor. In those two cases I have not seen anything honorable about them even at times prompted me to wanted to throw up.
Not commenting On David's case in New Zealand since it has not been in Court. Who knows maybe New Zealand will show the U.S System how Justice really work.

Robair
I Value Things Not For What They Worth But For What They Represent

User avatar
David McCarthy
Site Admin
Posts: 2481
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:09 am
Location: New Zealand
Contact:

Re: Lawsuit: Virginia Coverdale vs JZK Inc

Unread post by David McCarthy » Sun Feb 23, 2014 12:10 am

From what I understand to be fact....

Breckan Scott, Virginia Coverdale's lawyer, notice of appeal on Aug 15 2013
seeking direct review from the Washington State Supreme court has been approved.
That all legal actions presently involved with the JZ Knight vs Virginia Coverdale lawsuit is now frozen.
This is a significant setback for JZ Knight and her vicious and unfounded lawsuit against Virginia
and very good news for all RSE survivors.
Perhaps reason, accountability and justice will prevail after all?
Well done Breckan Scott... :idea:

David

Washington State Courts - Supreme Court
http://www.courts.wa.gov/appellate_tria ... remeCourt/
But he has nothing on at all, cried at last the whole people....

Breckan
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 10:56 pm

Re: Lawsuit: JZK Inc vs Virginia Coverdale

Unread post by Breckan » Tue Feb 25, 2014 4:25 am

Hello David,

I don't generally browse EMF as of late...oddly, I have been kept quite busy. ;)

To clarify:

1. We are seeking direct review to the WA Supreme Court - the SC has indicated that it is waiting until all of the briefing has been submitted before deciding on whether they are accepting direct review, or whether it will go to the Court of Appeals first. Frankly, I'm taking it as a good sign that they haven't referred it to the CoA yet -it is very rare to get a case accepted for direct review (especially under the prong we are primarily arguing - public policy, rather than a clear conflict between divisions of the CoA - which is generally more compelling for direct review), and the fact that they haven't kicked it yet may be a good sign - especially since we already filed the Statement of Grounds for Direct Review - something in there must have piqued interest to keep it around at least until they see the full briefing.

2. I did file a Motion to Stay Enforcement of the Judgment pending appeal - the absolute absurdity that has transpired since entry of judgment is appalling, and clearly the trial court judge wasn't going to stop the abuse. (After pointing out that, even under the best of circumstances and without any objection from us, JZK, Inc. would be losing money even seeking the Writ against her vehicle, the Judge said that they have the right to do that, and he has no issue with it. Clearly against CR 11, in that you cannot use the legal system/process for an improper purpose - i.e. using collection of judgment tactics when there is not even a potential for financial gain, for the purpose of annoying/harassing/burdening the other side).

Anyway, in that motion I asked for an emergency/interim stay of enforcement while the motion is pending (about 15 days - the SC is not as rigid with calendaring/docket schedule), as JZK, Inc. had scheduled a multitude of motion hearings over the next two weeks (y'know, right before the opening brief is due), including one where it was likely (based on a "Status Report" they filed) they would attempt to get her imprisoned.

The interim/emergency stay was granted, pending the SC's full consideration of the Motion to Stay Enforcement for the remainder of the time the appeal is pending. So, all of the hearings JZK, Inc. set for the upcoming weeks will be struck, until further order of the SC. :)

Hope all is well with the litigation in NZ - we've had our hands full, but I always keep positive thoughts in mind for you guys.

Take care,

Breckan

User avatar
David McCarthy
Site Admin
Posts: 2481
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:09 am
Location: New Zealand
Contact:

Re: Lawsuit: JZK Inc vs Virginia Coverdale

Unread post by David McCarthy » Tue Feb 25, 2014 10:04 am

Hi Brecken,

My apologies for my error...
I really appreciate your clarification and update.
I do understand the enormous challenges you have faced fighting off JZ Knights Wolves in suits'.
May I ask how you keep your sanity? I highly recommended German chocolate..;-)
There are Huge Red Flags raised over this lawsuit the Supreme Court are bound to notice.
This goes WAY beyond any corporate COP / NDA copyright infringement.
That $600,000 legal cost slammed on Virginia (a Cult Whistle blower) defies belief.
I have much respect and faith in US First Amendment Bill of Rights embodied in the U.S. Constitution
That Virginia Coverdale's human rights have greater standing and protection than that of a corrupt corporate Cult, and when seen in the light of the Washington State Supreme Court....
I am confident that common sense and justice will prevail and finally JZ Knight vicious and unjust lawsuit will be overturned and defeated.
As will happen in NZ
Knight has accused me of wanting to shut RSE down? I think that is something of an understatement :-?
Thank you for your work helping to expose this diabolical cult and its leader > :idea:
And through this injustice and cult intimidation and madness,
Wishing you great strength of heart, mind and spirit,

David
But he has nothing on at all, cried at last the whole people....

User avatar
David McCarthy
Site Admin
Posts: 2481
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:09 am
Location: New Zealand
Contact:

Re: Lawsuit: JZK Inc vs Virginia Coverdale

Unread post by David McCarthy » Tue Mar 04, 2014 2:12 am

Supreme Court Grants Temporary Stay for Coverdale
Ruling in JZK, Inc. Lawsuit Delays Sending Coverdale to Jail
Posted: Friday, February 28, 2014

Supreme Court Grants Temporary Stay for Coverdale By Steven Wyble swyble@yelmonline.com

The state Supreme Court has granted an interim stay of judgment for Virginia Coverdale in her case against JZK, Inc.

The court is still considering the motion before granting a final stay, said Coverdale’s lawyer, Breckan Scott.
Last June, Judge Gary Tabor ruled against Coverdale in a lawsuit brought by JZK, Inc. after Coverdale posted videos of JZ Knight, the purported channeler of 35,000-year-old Lemurian warrior Ramtha, making controversial statements about gays, Catholics, Jewish people and Mexicans. The statements were made at the Ramtha School of Enlightenment in Yelm.
Tabor made permanent a temporary injunction imposed against Coverdale that prohibited her from releasing any of the school’s proprietary materials.
In July, Tabor ordered Coverdale to pay $600,021 in attorney’s costs and fees.
Scott said lawyers for JZK, Inc. were seeking imprisonment of Coverdale as a possible means of enforcing the judgment. The interim stay prevents Coverdale from being thrown in jail while the court reviews the motion for a permanent stay, she said.
The superior court doesn’t have the authority to stay enforcement unless Coverdale posts a bond. Coverdale doesn’t have cash or assets, Scott said. The Supreme Court sometimes stays enforcement under special circumstances, she said.
Scott said her client would seek a stay throughout the appeal process.
“In this case I believe a stay pending the entire appeal is appropriate given the reprehensible collection tactics … since entry of judgment,” Scott said.
Supreme Court Grants Temporary Stay for Coverdale - Nisqually Valley News

http://www.yelmonline.com/news/local_ne ... f887a.html
But he has nothing on at all, cried at last the whole people....

User avatar
David McCarthy
Site Admin
Posts: 2481
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:09 am
Location: New Zealand
Contact:

Re: Lawsuit: JZK Inc vs Virginia Coverdale

Unread post by David McCarthy » Sat Aug 09, 2014 5:10 am

Good News for Virginia.... :-)
Court Denies Motion to Dismiss Coverdale’s Appeal, Denies Stay of Enforcement
Division Two of the Washington State Court of Appeals dismissed JZK, Inc.’s motion to dismiss Virginia Coverdale’s appeal of a court ruling last year.

The court granted the company’s motion to strike some of Coverdale’s court filings because “they append and refer to matters outside the record on appeal,” according to the court order. Coverdale has 20 days to file an amended brief omitting the stricken material.
Coverdale lost a lawsuit against her in Thurston County Superior Court last June. Judge Gary Tabor ordered Coverdale to pay JZK, Inc. more than $600,000 in court costs and attorney’s fees last July.

The state Supreme Court granted a temporary stay of enforcement while it decided whether or not to hear Coverdale’s appeal by direct review. The Supreme Court sent her case to the Court of Appeals, which denied her motion to keep the stay of enforcement in place.
“Although it does not come as a surprise, this decision is a welcome substantiation that Ms. Coverdale’s appeal does, in fact, have merit,” Coverdale’s lawyer, Breckan Scott, said in an email. “We are confident and optimistic as we proceed towards a full decision on the merits. Regarding the record, clearly the Court of Appeals’ position is that the case has merit even without the evidence relating to JZK, Inc.’s questionable relationship with local government officials, or it would have granted the Motion on the Merits. If the Court of Appeals decides that the case has merit even without the need for the additional evidence, I am not going to argue with that position.”

- Nisqually Valley News: Local News
http://www.yelmonline.com/news/local_ne ... f887a.html
But he has nothing on at all, cried at last the whole people....

Post Reply

Return to “Lawsuits & Court cases - JZK,Inc - latest lawsuit - RSE Music Copyright Infringments”