Since some of the materials which describe the $cientology cult could be
considered to be copywritten materials, I have censored myself and The
Skeptic Tank by deleting any and all possible text files which describes
the cult's hidden mythologies.  I have elected to quote just a bit of the
questionable text according to the "Fair Use" legal findings afforded to
those who report.  -  Fredric L. Rice, The Skeptic Tank, 09/Sep/95

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

From news.interserv.net!news.sprintlink.net!rockyd!cmcl2!is2.NYU.EDU!spurgeon Thu Jul 20 11:48:15 1995
Path: news.interserv.net!news.sprintlink.net!rockyd!cmcl2!is2.NYU.EDU!spurgeon
From: spurgeon@is2.nyu.edu (Keith Spurgeon)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: A Canadian Supreme Court Decision due 7/20
Date: 19 Jul 1995 01:47:49 GMT
Organization: New York University
Lines: 55
Message-ID: <3uho85$5mt@cmcl2.NYU.EDU>
NNTP-Posting-Host: is2.nyu.edu
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]


                    Copyright 1995 Canada NewsWire Ltd.
                                Canada NewsWire

                             July 14, 1995, Friday

HEADLINE:  THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA TO RENDER 
JUDGMENT ON APPEALS

DATELINE: OTTAWA, July 14

 BODY:
    THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA ANNOUNCED TODAY 
THAT JUDGMENT IN THE FOLLOWING APPEALS WILL BE 
DELIVERED AT 9:45 A.M. ON THURSDAY JULY 20, 1995.

<Other decisions to be announced are clipped>

    3. Morris Manning v. S. Casey Hill - and between - Church of
        Scientology  of Toronto v. S. Casey Hill (Ont.)(24216)

   24216      MORRIS MANNING v. S. CASEY HILL; CHURCH OF
                SCIENTOLOGY  OF TORONTO v. S. CASEY HILL (Ont.)
 
    S. Casey Hill, Crown counsel, advised the O.P.P. in connection  with 
a 
search warrant authorizing a search of the premises of the Church of  
Scientology  of Toronto.  Documents were seized and some of them 
ordered sealed.  An order was obtained granting access to the sealed 
documents.  The Church retained Manning to commence a contempt 
application against Hill and the lawyer who had obtained  the order. On 
September 17, 1984, Manning gave instructions for the notice of motion 
to be served.  The same day, Manning attended a press conference 
arranged by the Church and answered questions about the contempt 
proceedings and read a passage from the notice of motion which alleged, 
among other things, that Hill had breached the order sealing the 
documents.  The notice of motion requested that Hill and the lawyer be 
fined or imprisoned.  The allegations against Hill were found to be 
totally false and without foundation.  The contempt charges were 
dismissed on a motion for non-suit and Hill commenced an action for 
damages for libel.  The action was allowed and Manning and the 
Church were found jointly liable for general damages in the amount of 
$ 300,000.00, and the Church alone liable for aggravated damages of $ 
500,000.00 and punitive damages of $  800,000.00.  Manning and the 
Church were ordered, jointly and severally, to pay  prejudgment 
interest from January 1, 1985, to March 11, 1992, in respect of the  
award of general damages, and the Church was ordered to pay 
prejudgment interest on the aggravated damages during the same 
period.  Manning and the Church were made jointly and severally liable 
for Hill's costs.  The Court of Appeal for Ontario allowed the appeal in 
part, on the question of prejudgment interests and costs.   

---end