Part of a public library containing court papers related to lawsuits involving Scientology in some way. Collected to help lawyers and critics of Scientology in future lawsuits from or against this cult. Please report back if this has been of help, or send new contributions to the collection. Thanks. Andreas Heldal-Lund (heldal@online.no)

       NOTICE:  Although citation of unpublished opinions remains
       unfavored, unpublished opinions may now be cited if the opinion has
       persuasive value on a material issue, and a copy is attached to the
       citing document or, if cited in oral argument, copies are furnished
       to the Court and all parties.  See General Order of November 29,
       1993, suspending 10th Cir. Rule 36.3 until December 31, 1995, or
       further order.

       (The decision of the Court is referenced in a "Table of Decisions
       Without Reported Opinions" appearing in the Federal Reporter.)

                      Barbara SCHWARZ, Plaintiff-Appellant,
 CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY INTERNATIONAL, in Los Angeles CA, their executives;  Utah
             State Department of Corrections, Defendants-Appellees.
                             Nos. 93-4082, 93-4092.
                         United States Court of Appeals,
                                 Tenth Circuit.
                                  Nov. 2, 1993.

  Before SEYMOUR, ANDERSON, and EBEL, Circuit Judges.
                            ORDER AND JUDGMENT [FN1]
  **1 After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has
 determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the
 determination of this appeal.  See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a);  10th Cir. R.
 34.1.9.  The cause is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
  Barbara Schwarz, appearing pro se, filed actions for monetary and injunctive
 relief against the Church of Scientology International (CSI) and Utah State
 Department of Corrections.  Both suits were driven by Ms. Schwarz' attempts to
 ascertain the whereabouts of Mark Rathbun, whom Ms. Schwarz alleges is her
 husband.  Her complaint against CSI alleges that Mr. Rathbun is a high official
 in that organization, and that CSI knows where he is but refuses to tell her.
 Her suit against the Department asserts that Mr. Rathbun is incarcerated at one
 of the Department's institutions and seeks a court order allowing her to
 personally search for him in the Department's facilities.  The district court
 consolidated the cases and, after a hearing, granted CSI's motion to dismiss
 for failure to state a claim for relief and the Department's motion for summary
 judgment.  We affirm. [FN2]
  CSI argued below that the court lacked personal jurisdiction over it due to a
 lack of minimum contacts and, alternatively, that Ms. Schwarz had failed to
 state a claim for relief.  The court ruled that it had jurisdiction but granted
 CSI's motion to dismiss.  We agree with the district court's conclusion that
 Ms.Schwarz has presented no legally cognizable theory to support her claim that
 CSI's failure to reveal the whereabouts of Mr. Rathbun entitles her to relief
 in federal court.
  The Department filed a motion for summary judgment, supported by documents
 showing that the Department had searched its records and that Mark Rathbun was
 not then and never has been incarcerated or supervised under its authority.
 The court considered this material together with that presented by Ms. Schwarz
 and granted summary judgment for the Department.  We have carefully reviewed
 the court's ruling, and we affirm substantially for the reasons set out

      FN1. This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall not be
     cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, except for purposes
     of establishing the doctrines of the law of the case, res judicata, or
     collateral estoppel. 10th Cir. R. 36.3.

      FN2. We grant Ms. Schwarz' motions to exceed page limits and her motion to

End of file...