HUBERT HELLER, an individual
SUMMONS IN A CIVIL CASE
CASE NUMBER: (illigible)
URSULA CABERTA, an individual
TO: (Name and address of defendant)
URSULA CABERTA
Belleview Biltmore Hote1
25 Be11eview Blvd.
Clearwater, FL
YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED and required to serve upon PLAINTIFF'S ATTORNEY (name and address)
F. Wallace Pope, Jr.
JOHNSON,BLAKELY,POPE,BOKOR,RUPPEL & BURNS, P.A.
P.O. Box 1368
C1earwater, FL 33757
727-461-1818
an answer to the comptaint which is herewith served upon you, within 20 days after service of this summons upon
you, exclusive of the day of service. If you fail to do so, judgment by default will be taken against you for the
relief demanded in the complaint. You must also file your answer with the Clerk of this Court within a reasonable
period of time after service.
CLERK
SHERYL L. LOESCH
(BY) DEPUTY CLERK
SHERI PEACOCK
DATE
JUL. 27. 2000
RETURN OF SERVICE
Service of the Summons and Complaint was made by me1
DATE: 7.27.2000
TITLE: SPECIAL PROCESS SERVER
NAME OF SERVER (PRINT): ROBERT BOSSARD
Served personally upon the defendant. Place where served: Belleview Biltmore Hôtel. Clearwater, Fl
DECLARATION OF SERVER
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing information
contained in the Return of Service and Statement of Service Fees is true and correct.
Executed on 7.27.2000
Signature of Server: Robert Bossard
Address of Server: Gientzen's Associates TAMPA, FL
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION
HUBERT HELLER, an individual,
Plaintiff,
CASE NO. (illigible)
Vs. URSULA CABERTA, an individual,
Defendant.
COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
Plaintiff, Hubert Heller, sues defendant, Ursula Caberta, and says:
JURISDICTION, VENUE AND PARTIES
1. Plaintiff, Hubert Heller, is a citizen of Germany, admitted to the United States for permanent residence, and
domiciled in Clearwater, in the State of Florida.
2. Defendant, Ursula Caberta, is a citizen of Germany, and is employed by the government of the City of Hamburg,
Germany. The acts complained of herein occurred, in part, in Pinellas County, Florida. Caberta is present in Pinellas
County, Florida.
3. Jurisdiction is based upon the provisions of 28 U.S.C. §1332, and the amount in controversy exceeds the
sum or value of $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs.
.1
4.Venue is proper in the Tampa Division of the Middle District of Florida pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1391(a) because
a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred in this District, and/or the defendant
is subject to personal jurisdiction within this District at the time of the commencement of this action.
5. Within the meaning of Florida Statutes, Section 48.193, and Rule 4, Fed.R.Civ.P., Caberta has caused in jury
to Heller within this State arising out of an act or omission, outside this State at a time when Caberta was engaged
in solicitation or service activities within this State; Caberta is engaged in substantial and not isolated activity
within this State; and Caberta is operating, conducting, engaging in or carrying on a business or business venture
in this State.
6. All conditions precedent to the institution and maintenance of this action have been performed or have occurred.
FACTS
7. Caberta is the head of a German task force on the Scientology religion for the government of the City of Hamburg.
8. As head of the task force, Caberta initiated a series of discriminatory and exclusionary measures designed to
stigmatize, clisenfranchise and ostracize Scientologists based solely on their association and beliefs.
9. Caberta created and disseminates so-called "sect filters" both in the public and private sectors.
These "sect filters" require individuals and companies to declare in writing:
.2
(1) That they do not 'use the technology of L. Ron Hubbard;'
(2) That they are not trained and do not participate in the
'technology of L. Ron Hubbard;' and
(3) That they reject the 'technology of L. Ron Hubbard.'
An example with translation of Caberta's "sect filters" is attached as Exhibit A. L. Ron Hubbard is the
founder of the Scientology religion and the author of all Scientology scripture, sometimes referred to as the "religious
technology" or the "technology" of Scientology.
10. Caberta's "sect filters" are designed to make employment and contractual relations conditional
on an individual attesting that he or she and/or his or her company rejects the teachings of L. Ron Hubbard. Individuals
and companies who refuse to sign these declarations are subject to economic sanctions based solely on their association
and belief. The "sect filters" force corporations and businesses to adopt a discriminatory and exclusionary
policy toward Scientologists or to suffer serious economic consequences.
11. With knowledge that plaintiff and other Scientologists are doing business or attempting to do business with
German companies, Caberta distributed copies of her "sect filter" to numerous companies and individuals
throughout Germany, including governmental entities, businesses, chambers of commerce and banks. In speeches, conferences
and over the internet, Caberta advocates the systematic use of her "sect filters" to discriminate against
Scientologists. It is Caberta's intent to disrupt and destroy any business relationship that any Scientologist
may have with any business, person or government in Germany, the United States and elsewhere.
.3
12. Caberta pressures businesses and officials in Germany to use her "sect filters" in all their business
endeavors and in hiring employees. Businesses that fail to do so face the prospect of losing government contracts,
or being labeled as companies that are owned by or employ Scientologists, thereby resulting in the systematic boycotting
of such businesses.
13. On July 25, 2000, Caberta was present in Clearwater, Pinellas County, Florida, and held a press conference
in which she publicly promoted in the United States and the State of Florida her use and dissemination of her "sect
filters" to blacklist Scientologists.
14. RTI is a computer software company in Sacramento, California. RTI's clients are large and small retail companies
and manufacturers of retail products in the United States and abroad. RTI has customers in 58 countries with over
18,000 installations of it's point-of-sale inventory control software. The software controls ordering, receiving
and distribution of products in stores, it monitors how well individual merchandise and products are selling, and
it controls inventory of products essentially monitoring and controlling the flow of merchandise through a retail
system. RTI is the market leader in this type of inventory control software, with installations in clothing stores,
specialty shops, gift shops, sporting goods stores and many other types of businesses. A large market exists for
RTI's products in Europe, and particularly in Germany.
15. Plaintiff, Hurbert Heller, is "Vice-President, International, of RTI, who is paid in large part on commission.
Heller negotiated with the German firm, POSPartner G.M.B.H. (POS) to establish a distribution agreement whereby
POS
.4
would distribute RTI's software products in Germany. Heller would realize substantial commissions from such sale
to POS as weil as other sales in Germany exceeding $75,000. The negotiations occurred in part between Heller and
representatives of POS in Orlando, Florida, in the Middle District of Florida.
16. POS and Heller negotiated to the point that POS offered to enter into an agreement with RTI. During the process
of the negotiation, POS learned that Heller is a Scientologist. Heller has been a devoted member of the Church
of Scientology since 1971. Upon learning that Heller is a Scientologist, POS, as a result of Caberta's inducement,
demanded that Heller sign one of Caberta's "sect filters." Heller refused to sign Caberta's "sect
filter," and POS refused to enter into the agreement unless Heller signed Caberta's "sect filters",
thereby causing substantial damage to Heller.
COUNT I - (TORTIOUS INTERFERENCE)
17. This is a count for tortious interference with an advantageous business relationship and a business expectancy.
18. Plaintiff adopts and realleges the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 16 above.
19. Defendant's actions constitute a willful, wanton and malicious interference with plaintiffs advantageous business
relationship and prospective economic advantage with POS, and defendant's actions have damaged plaintiff.
WHEREFORE, plaintiff demands judgment against defendant for damages, including, but not limited to, loss of profits,
loss of business reputation, costs, expenses, increased overhead, prejudgment interest and such exemplary
.5
damages as may later be allowed by court on motion, and such other and further relief as to the court may appear
just and proper.
COUNT II (UNFAIR AND DECEPTIVE TRADE PRACTICES)
20. This is a count for unfair and deceptive trade practices pursuant to Florida's Little FTC Act, Florida Statutes
Section, §§501.201, et seq. (1999).
21. Plaintiff adopts and realleges the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 16 above.
22. Florida Statutes, §501.204 declares unlawful "unfair methods of competition, unconscionable acts
or practices, and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of any trade or commerce..." Florida
Statutes, §501.202 provides that Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act shall be construed liberally
to promote the following policy: To protect the consuming public and legitimate business enterprises from those
who engage in unfair methods of competition, or unconscionable, deceptive, or unfair acts or practices in the conduct
of any trade or commerce.
Plaintiffs business activities constitute a legitimate business enterprise within the meaning of Section 501.202(2).
23. Florida Statutes, §501.202(8), defines trade or commerce to include "the advertising, soliciting,
providing, offering or distributing, whether by sale, rental, or otherwise, of any good or service, or any property,
whether tangible or intangible, or any other article, commodity, or thing of value wherever situated. 'Trade or
commerce' shall include the conduct of any trade or commerce, however denominated, including any nonprofit or not-for-profit
person or activity.
.6
Plaintiff is engaged in trade or commerce within the meaning of Section 501.202(8), and is a "consumer"
within the meaning of Section 501.202(7).
24. Florida Statutes, Section 501.211 (1) provides that "without regard to any other remedy or relief to which
a person is entitled, anyone aggrieved by a violation of this part may bring an action to obtain a declaratory
judgment that an act or practice violates this part and to enjoin a person who has violated, is violating, or is
otherwise likely to violate this part."
25. Florida Statutes, §501.211 (2) provides that "in any individual action brought by a consumer who
has suffered a loss as a result of a violation of this part, such consumer may recover actual damages, plus attorneys
fees and court costs..."
26. Targeting plaintiff with Caberta's so-called "sect filter" both in the State of Florida and in Germany
and the introduction of Caberta's "sect filters" into the United States and the State of Florida for
the purpose of using a person's religious beliefs to harm the person in their business activities constitutes an
unfair method of competition, and/or an unconscionable act or practice, and/or an unfair or deceptive act or practice
within the meaning of Chapter 501, Florida Statutes.
27. To protect his rights, plaintiff has been required to retain the services of the undersigned attorneys and
has agreed to pay them a fee for their services herein.
WHEREFORE, plaintiff demands:
.7
1. An award of compensatory damages exceeding the sum of $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs;
2. An award of plaintiffs reasonable attorneys fees pursuant to Florida Statutes, Section 501.2105;
3. An award of prejudgment interest, plus court costs;
4. A permanent injunction prohibiting defendant from engaging in the unfair, deceptive and unconscionable trade
practices alleged herein; and
5. Such other and further relief as to the court may appear just and proper.
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
Plaintiff demands a trial by jury on all issues so triable.
JOHNSON, BLAKELY, POPE, BOKOR,
RUPPEL & BURNS, P.A
BY
F. WALLACE POPE, JR.
P.O. Box 1368
Clearwater, Fla. 33757
(727) 461-1818
Attorneys for Plaintiff
FBN #: 124449
and
.8
MOXON & KOBRIN
Kendrick Moxon
Helena Kobrin
FBN#: 0259713
1100 Cleveland Street, Suite 900
Clearwater, FL 33755
(727) 443-5620
.9
DECLARATION
I, the signer,
declare,
1) that I i.e. my company do not work with the technologies of L. Ron Hubbard,
2) that neither I or my fellow workers are trained in the technologies of L. Ron Hubbard, i.e. I do not attend
any courses and/or seminars on the technologies of L. Ron Hubbard, and
3) that I reject the technologies of L. Ron Hubbard for the running of my company (and the conduct of my seminars.)
SAME DECLARATION IN GERMAN
