Dear Friends --
Pacifica Board Chair, David Acosta, announced Sunday that the Pacifica Board of Directors will hold a special meeting on July 1st in New York (location not announced) to "nominate directors for election to the board."

We will, of course, add any new directors to our lawsuit to get them removed for having been illegally elected under illegal bylaws -- just as the last 7 directors add to the board have all been illegally elected. It would have been better had the judge granted our preliminary injunction prohibiting additions to the board during pendency of the lawsuits. But I think Pacifica's complaints that "my minions" are "hounding" the directors off the board and that it would be "unfair" to prevent them from replacing them did have some effect on the Judge.

In the meanwhile, the Judge "clarified" his order that Pacifica must comply with the law that requires an "undertaking" (a bond) from its directors to repay Pacifica if they ultimately lose the case before Pacifica can advance their their legal defense expenses. Pacifica's attorneys told the judge that "it costs no more to defend the directors than it does to defend the corporation" -- an absurdity, since the corporation is a "nominal" defendant and our claims are against the directors, themselves, for breach of trust, gross abuse, & illegal election. For for the time being at least, the Judge is letting them get away with it. He said that so long as the attorneys' fees don't exceed what is necessary to defend the corporation, they can also defend the directors. We're studying our options on this.

Pacifica's attorney is also continuing his personal attacks on me to the Judge, this time writing him a letter mischaracterizing my statements to a reporter (double hearsay). Such conduct by an attorney is "unusual" to put it mildy! We will send a letter objecting to this improper communication, of course. But there is no doubt that Pacifica's attorneys intend to conduct a "dirty" lawsuit -- attacking the integrity of anyone and everyone who opposes the directors. I think this is an indication that they fear that they will lose on the law unless they can prejudice the judge with "stench." We have been attempting in good faith to reach an agreement ("stipulation") with Pacifica, as the judge requested, requiring 30 days notice from them prior to their taking certain actions -- in order to give us time to get to court to try to prevent it, if necessary. The Judge said he would issue a "Case Management Order" of some kind, whether or not we reached agreement. The agreement was sent to the judge yesterday. Mr. Temchine now wants the judge to put what amounts to a gag order in his Case Management Order -- by adding following words:

"Any person or entity who or which in any manner describes or characterizes the Order in which the conditions appear as constituting an injunction or restraint imposed by the Court against the Foundation defendants, or as representing in any manner or degree a view by the Court that Plaintiffs are likely to prevail on the merits, or that there is present evidence of wrongdoing by the Foundation Defendants, will be making knowing misrepresentations respecting both the nature of the required notices, and as to the findings and conclusions of the court."

We are receiving many donations to help keep us funded. Thank you all so much. We couldn't do this without you! Our current goal is $100,000. I can't tell you what we have raised so far, or how much we have in the bank, because Pacifica can use that as tactical information to try to run us out of money. But I can tell you that we believe Pacifica's attorneys will do everything they can to drive up the costs of this litigation and we expect we will ultimately need at least $250,000 to take our case to trial. So, we hope you will consider making a donation if you haven't done so already. (Information on where to send checks is below.) We are also encouraged that some people are setting up regular automatic donations through their banks. With many banks that is pretty easy to do as part of their automatic "bill payment" service -- you just tell the bank who to send the check to and how much and on what day of the month, and they will take care of it for you.

Thanks again, and again, for your wonderful support and encouragement. I am presently studying for the California Bar Exam, so am not able to respond to much email -- but I appreciate it all very much.

Carol Spooner
Committee to Remove the Pacifica Board
(sponsoring the "listeners' lawsuit")
http://home.pon.net/wildrose/remove.htm