Scott Pilutik

I am an attorney and consultant living and working in Manhattan, focusing primarily on church/state constitutional law. I'm a recognized expert on the Church of Scientology organization. I also have strong interests in intellectual property law where it intersects with emerging media, and free speech.

I support the efforts of the Americans United for Separation of Church and State, the Freedom From Religion Foundation, the National Lawyers Guild, the ACLU, Creative Commons, and the Electronic Frontier Foundation. I am a member of the New York County Lawyers Association and the New York State Bar Association. I also enjoy (watching) hockey and (doing) photograhy.

Online I can be found on Facebook, Twitter. My resume can be viewed here. I can be reached by phone at 212.645.6241 or by e-mail at pilutik[at]gmail.com.

Diskeeper loses on Summary Judgment motion

On May 21, 2009, the Los Angeles Superior Court ruled against Diskeeper’s Motion for summary judgment in its case against Godelman and Le Shay, although it did find for Diskeeper in part by preemptively removing the availability of punitive damages from the case, likely to prompt settlement. Jury trial is now set for July 13, 2009 [PDF], and is estimate to run 14 days. The Court issued separate rulings(Godelman ruling [PDF]; Le Shay ruling [PDF]) with regard to Diskeeper’s summary judgment motion to reflect the minor factual differences in the plaintiffs’ cases. One other difference is that the Court accepted Diskeeper’s argument that Godelman failed to show that he sought a reasonable accommodation in lieu of of Hubbard Management Technology.

But the news is largely good insofar as a jury is now scheduled to decide (amongst other things) whether Hubbard Management Technology is religious in nature. An adverse ruling for Diskeeper will greatly decrease the ability of other Scientology front groups to intrude into various secular spheres.

I don’t have the time to delve too deeply into the Court’s rulings, but I did perform some light research into a matter which seemed odd to me: that being the Court’s having removed punitive damages as an available remedy before trial. In American Airlines v. Sheppard, the state appeals court ruled that California’s “clear and convincing” evidentiary standard for punitive damages “does not impose on a plaintiff the obligation to ‘prove’ a case for punitive damages at summary judgment.” In other words, the Court prematurely ruled on punitive damages, which may yet be borne out at trial. I’m not a California lawyer, however, and so it’s not clear how this will play out.

For now, however, we can look forward to a trial.

  • Alison

    I worked in the Uk for these people. I was dismissed after visiting Saint Hill and refusing to spend my money on courses.

    When I made it clear I would be taking legal action they tried to say I was made redundant. Although they had given no warning,notice or pay in lieu of notice. However they gave a Scientologist my exact role, job title/description/salary the lot within 24 hours.

    My legal action was short lived as I had worked for the company less than 18 months, the one and only reason they got away with it!

    These guys are telling the truth, I was small fry in comparison.

    I have only just come across this link whilst providing detail on a job application.

  • No Disleeper

    What never came out or at least not until now was how Diskeeper systematiclaly removed non scientolgist from the payroll leading up to the settlement of their case with these two. A search of the courts will show there are many new cases pending against this company most all stemming from dismisals during the final phase of their original settlement. Stay tuned to learn more about Diskeepers employment practices as these caes surface.