BRUDERHOF LAWSUIT

purcell family mailbox

unread,

Mar 25, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/25/97

to

A lawsuit was filed yesterday by the Bruderhof Communities and Christian
Domer (in Rifton, New York) against Ramon Sender and the Peregrine
Foundation (in San Francisco, California. the specific complaint was
that Sender reproduced a letter ON THE INTERNET and in a monthly
publication (the KIT newsletter) from Domer to a western Hutterite
minister without permission. The same letter had been mailed to (about)
fifteen ministers in the west and had circulated between 'hofs by fax
for at least a week prior to publication.

This is the SECOND lawsuit filed by the Bruderhof against Sender in the
last three years. The Bruderhof, which has historically proclaimed
itself bound by Anabaptist beliefs, has again violated Anabaptist
tradition by "going to law."

Anyone desiring a copy of the lawsuit may contact me by e-mail. The
letter (the publication of which Domer filed the suit over) is attached
to the suit and a matter of public record in the U. S. Federal Court of
northern New York.

Visit the home page of the Peregrine Foundation at:

http://www.matisse.net/~peregrin/home2.html

Be sure to read some of the KIT newsletters to be found at that site.

A CBS NEWS PROGRAM FEATURING THE BRUDERHOF IS SCHEDULED FOR SOME
THURSDAY NIGHT IN APRIL. WATCH YOUR LOCAL LISTINGS.

Blair Purcell
pur...@erols.com

Chris Arndt

unread,

Mar 27, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/27/97

to

purcell family mailbox <pur...@erols.com> wrote:
>>Anyone desiring a copy of the lawsuit may contact me by e-mail. The letter (the publication of which Domer filed the suit over) is attached to the suit and a matter of public record in the
U. S. Federal Court of northern New York.<<

Blair,
I'd like a copy. Also, why do you think Bruderhof is a cult?

-Chris

Enchanted Fling

unread,

Mar 28, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/28/97

to

I must agree with Blair. The Bruderhof is a cult and is intent upon
persecuting the individuals who escape or whom are thrown out. There are
too many reasons to list in one note, so check out some of these sites.
Some of this really only skims the surface. The Bruderhof cult has a lot
of very deep secrets.

http://www.personal.psu.edu/wxc21/bhof/bhof.htm
http://www.matisse.net/~peregrin/KIT2_97.html#2
http://www-personal.umich.edu/~elph/ic/fic/cmag/88/6188.html
http://www.bruderhof.org/
http://www.matisse.net/~peregrin/home.html

http://www.execpc.com/~cfeyrer/ndl.html
http://aris.sfrc.ufl.edu/~maryjo/peep_nuke.html#peepfun

--
"Never ask a sailor when he is going to get there."

* *

* * *
* <|
|
* /|\
* / | \
/ | \
/ | \
/ | \
/ | \
/ | \
<| / | \
| / | \
/| / T-27 | \
/ | / | \
/ | / 3 | \
/ | / | \
/ | / | \
/ | / | \
/ | / | \
/ | / | \
/ | /_________________| \
/_________| --------------|_______ \
____| [ 0 0 o \ \
\ |===========================================?
~~~~~ \ / ~~
~~~~~~~~|_____________________________________________/ ~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[[ ENCHANTED FLING ]]

purcell family mailbox

unread,

Mar 28, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/28/97

to

Chris Arndt wrote:

>
> Blair,
> I'd like a copy. Also, why do you think Bruderhof is a cult?
>
> -Chris

Here it is. When did I say the Bruderhof is a cult??

Cults are groups with a distinct "us vs. them" mentality. Cults destroy
ties with families. Cults contend (openly or not) that the end
justifies the means. Cults may find it convenient to make 2,000 +
harrassing phone calls in thirty days. Cults may send members to
another church with some sort of electronic equipment. Cults may send
members to critics home after dark when women and children are home
alone. Cults sue their critics rather than sit down to mediate
differences. Cults ask members to do illegal things that they would
never have done prior to joining. Now, if you believe the Bruderhof has
done even a FEW of these things, then I suppose YOU would say it DOES
have some of the characteristics of a cult. That's up to you.

Blair Purcell

(Served on Monday March 24, 1997 to Ramon Sender/
Peregrine Foundation, as co-defendants. Full text
follows)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT,
DISTRICT OF NORTHERN NEW YORK

HUTTERIAN BRETHREN IN NEW YORK, INC.
a/k/a WOODCREST BRUDERHOF and
CHRISTIAN DOMER, Individually
SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION
Case Number 97 - CV - 0379
V.
THE PEREGRINE FOUNDATION and
RAMON SENDER, individually,
=

TO:
(name and address of defendant/s)

YOU ARE HEREBY summoned and required to serve with
the Clerk of this Court and serve upon

PLAINTIFF'S ATTORNEY

LAZARE POTTER & GIOCOVAS LLP
950 Third Avenue
New York, New York 10022

an answer to the complaint 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.

Clerk: George A . Ray date:
March 19 1997
Tara Burtt

COMPLAINT

Plaintiffs HUTTERIAN BRETHREN IN NEW YORK, INC.,
a/k/a WOODCREST BRUDERHOF (hereinafter "HBNY" or
"THE BRUDERHOF") and CHRISTIAN DOMER (hereinafter
"DOMER") by their attorneys, Lazare Potter & Giocovas,
LLP, as and for their Complaint, upon information and
belief, aver as follows:

JURISDICTION AND VENUE
1. This is an action for copyright infringement
arising under the Copyright Act of 1976, 17 U.S.C. §101 et
seq., and for related claims of invasion of privacy under
New York Civil Rights Law §50 et seq.

2. The Court has jurisdiction of this action under 28
U.S.C. §§1331, 1338(a) and 1339 (b), and under its
supplemental jurisdiction.

3. Venue is proper in this district under 28 U.S.C.
§§1391 and 1400(a).

THE PARTIES

4. Plaintiff THE BRUDERHOF is a corporation
organized and existing under the laws of the State of New
York and has its principal location at the Woodcrest
Bruderhof, Route 213, Rifton, New York.

5. Plaintiff, CHRISTIAN DOMER, is an individual
residing at the Woodcrest Bruderhof , Route 213, Rifton,
New York.

6. Defendant, THE PEREGRINE FOUNDATION
(hereinafter "PEREGRINE"), is a non-profit corporation
duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of
California.

7. Upon information and belief, defendant
PEREGRINE at all time relevant hereto, regularly transacts,
solicits and does business in New York.

8. Upon information and belief, defendant RAMON
SENDER (hereinafter "SENDER"), is a citizen of the State of
California residing at 2933 23rd Street, San Francisco,
California, 94114 and, as both an officer of defendant
PEREGRINE and in his personal capacity, regularly
transacts, solicits and does business in NEW YORK.

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS

9. Plaintiff HBNY (THE BRUDERHOF) was formed in
1954 and is a collective membership organization. THE
BRUDERHOF'S purpose is for its members to live together
in the spirit of, and in obedience to, the teachings of Christ
as was done by Christians throughout the centuries.
Central tenets of THE BRUDERHOF are the spirit of love as
professed by Jesus and a respect for family, children,
purity in relationships, and lifelong faithfulness in
marriage. Members of THE BRUDERHOF also work together
and share the income they generate in common, as
instructed in Bible teachings.

10. The purposes of THE BRUDERHOF are achieved
only by, and through, communal living. Members of THE
BRUDERHOF earn their livelihood by manufacturing
educational furniture and toys for children or by
manufacturing specialized equipment for the physically
disabled.

11. Defendant, PEREGRINE, via its founder and
president, SENDER, was established for the sole purpose of
undermining the goals and membership of THE
BRUDERHOF. Toward this end, it conducts and participates
in a regular course of activities in New York (e.g. protests,
meetings and mailings) designed to further its purpose, to
wit, the ultimate dissolution of THE BRUDERHOF
communities.

12. PEREGRINE'S recent past activities against THE
BRUDERHOF have also included misappropriation of the
names and membership marks of "BRUDERHOF" and
"HUTTERIAN BRETHREN." As a result of these unlawful
activities directed against THE BRUDERHOF, PEREGRINE'S
principals, including defendant SENDER, were named as
defendants in a trademark infringement suit commenced
in this court which resulted in a Consent Order. A copy of
the Amended Complaint and Final Judgment Upon Consent
in that case are attached hereto as Exhibits "A" and "B",
respectively.

13. At all times relevant hereto, PEREGRINE
conducted a project known as the 'KIT newsletter", which
itself was an activity of the KIT Information Service (a
Service also run by PEREGRINE)

14. At all times relevant hereto, PEREGRINE also
maintained a web site on the Internet for, inter alia, the
publication of KIT newsletters.

15. Defendant SENDER is the editor of the KIT
newsletter, the President of PEREGRINE and,
PEREGRINE/KIT's chief proponent of the dissolution of THE
BRUDERHOF communities and, in those capacities, acts as a
recipient and repository of letters submitted for
publication.

16. Upon information and belief, the KIT newsletter
is mailed to subscribers throughout the United States,
including New York. Attached hereto as Exhibit "C" is a
copy of the February 1997 edition of he KIT newsletter
which was mailed by KIT/SENDER and which bears a New
York zip code, i.e. 12061-3721

17. On or about January 23. 1997, plaintiff, DOMER,
authored and signed a letter (hereinafter "Subject Letter")
on behalf of the WOODCREST BRUDERHOF to Michael
Waldner 0f certain Hutterite colonies in South Dakota. Said
letter as mailed and published to Michael Waldner on
January 23, 1997. A copy of the Subject Letter is attached
hereto as Exhibit "D".

18. The Subject Letter contains material wholly
original with plaintiffs and constitutes copyrightable
subject matter under the laws of the United States.

19. Plaintiffs are currently and at all times relevant
hereto, have been the sole proprietors of al right, title and
interest in and to the copyright in the Subject Letter.

20. On March 17, 1997, attorney Robert Giacovas, on
behalf of the plaintiff DOMER, and on behalf of the
WOODCREST BRUDERHOF, applied to the Register of
Copyrights for a Certificate of Registration for the Subject
Letter. A true and correct copy of the application is
attached hereto as Exhibit "E".

21. Upon information belief, subsequent to January
23, 1996, Michael Waldner, either directly or indirectly,
may have provided the Subject Letter to defendant
SENDER>

22. Defendant SENDER, in furtherance of the
objectives of PEREGRINE as against THE BRUDERHOF, did
knowingly, wantonly, wilfully, recklessly and without
authorization and in bad faith, publish the Subject Letter
in the February 1997 issue of the KIT newsletter.

23. Defendants, SENDER and PEREGRINE, published
the Subject Letter in a wilful attempt to confuse and
deceive the public and impugn the reputation of THE
BRUDERHOF.

24. The February 1997 edition of the KIT newsletter
was published via PEREGRINE'S aforementioned web site
as well as to its regular mail subscribers.

AS AND FOR A FIRST CAUSE OF
ACTION
FOR VIOLATION OF THE COPYRIGHT ACT
OF 1976

25. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate by reference
each and every allegations et forth in paragraphs 1
through 24, inclusive, as though fully set forth herein.

26. By their actions as alleged above, defendants
have infringed and will continue to infringe plaintiffs'
copyright in and relating to the Subject Letter by
publishing via mail and on the Internet direct copies of
plaintiff's copyrighted Letter.

AS AND FOR A SECOND CAUSE OF
ACTION
FOR VIOLATION OF THE NEW YORK CIVIL
RIGHTS LAW

27. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate by reference
each and every allegation set forth in paragraphs 1
through 26, inclusive, as though fully set forth herein.

28. By their actions as alleged above, defendants
have violated and will continue to violate plaintiff
DOMER's civil rights by virtue of their unauthorized and
knowing use of the Subject Letter for the purposes
heretofore alleged.

29. By their actions as alleged above, defendants
have invaded and will continue to invade plaintiff
DOMER's privacy rights by virtue of their unauthorized
and knowing use of the Subject Letter for the purposes
heretofore alleged.

AS AND FOR A THIRD CAUSE OF
ACTION
FOR PRIMA FACIE TORT

30. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate by reference
each and every allegation set forth in paragraphs 1
through 29, inclusive, as though fully set forth herein.

31. By publishing the Subject Letter in various
mediums, defendants have inflicted intentional harm
upon plaintiffs.

32. Upon information and belief, defendants can
offer no justifiable reason or excuse for these actions.

33. As a result of these actions, defendants have
suffered and will continue to suffer special damages
including, but not limited to, loss of prospective economic
advantage and damage to their personal and professional
reputations.

WHEREFORE< plaintiffs pray for judgement as
against the defendants as follows:

1. That the Court will find that the defendants have
infringed plaintiffs' copyrights in the Subject Letter.

2. That the Court find a substantial likelihood that
the defendants will continue to infringe plaintiff's
copyrights in the Subject Letter unless enjoined from
doing so.

3. That the Court find that the defendants have
violated plaintiff DOMER's civil rights and, thereby,
invaded his privacy.

4. That the Court find a substantial likelihood that
defendants will continue to invade plaintiff DOMER's
privacy unless enjoined from so doing.

5. That defendants, their officers and directors,
agents., servants, employees and all other person in active
concert of privity or in participation with them, be
enjoined from directly or indirectly infringing plaintiffs'
copyrights in the Subject Letter or continuing to publish
and reproduce the Subject Letter.

6. That defendants, their officers and directors,
agents., servants, employees and all other person in active
concert of privity or in participation with them, be
enjoined to return to plaintiffs any and all originals,
copies, facsimiles or duplicates of the Subject Letter in
their possession, custody or control.

7. That defendants, their officers and directors,
agents., servants, employees and all other person in active
concert of privity or in participation with them, be
enjoined to recall from all distributors and any others
known to defendants to return to plaintiffs any and all
originals, copies, facsimiles or duplicates of the Subject
Letter in their possession, custody or control.

8. That defendants be required to file with the court
and to serve on the plaintiffs, within thirty (30) days after
service of the Court's order as herein prayed, a report in
writing under oath setting forth in detail the manner and
form in which defendants complied with the Court's order.

9. That judgement be entered for plaintiffs and
against defendants for plaintiffs' actual damages according
to proof.

10. That judgement be entered for plaintiffs against
defendants for statutory damages based upon defendants'
acts of infringement pursuant to the Copyright Act of
1976, 17 U.S.C. §101 et seq.

11. That defendants be required to account for all
gains, profits and advantages derived from its acts of
infringement and for its other violations of law.

12. That all gains, profits and advantages derived by
defendants from their acts of infringement be held in
constructive trust for the benefit of plaintiffs.

13. That plaintiffs have judgement against
defendants for plaintiff's costs and attorney's fees.

14. That plaintiffs have judgement against
defendants for punitive damages owing to defendants'
wanton, wilful, reckless and bad faith conduct.

15. That the Court grant such other, further and
different relief as the Court deems proper under the
circumstances.

LAZARE POTTER & GIACOVAS LLP

By Robert A. Giacovas (RG-8375)

A member of the firm
50 Third Avenue
New York, New York 10022

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

Internet Office

unread,

Mar 29, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/29/97

to

Just to complete the picture, you should also see
http://www-personal.umich.edu/~elph/ic/fic/cmag/88/6288.html

Enchanted Fling

unread,

Mar 29, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/29/97

to

I think that it is important to note that the 48 Hours expose of the
Bruderhof Cult was not intended by CBS to indicate any sort of
connection to the other religious cult (Heaven's Gate, Higher Source)
who committed mass suicide. There are those who fear that this could
happen there someday. We hope not.

Bill

rosaphil

unread,

Mar 30, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/30/97

to Enchanted Fling

i missed that. when was it and will they rebroadcast it?

+********** Snail me yer rosehips if you liked this post! ************
+ GABRIELLI WINERY (Mendocino,CA): Zinfandel, Ascenza (White-Blend), +
+ Pinot-Noir, Sangiovenese Grapes--Yummy! +
*Better Living Thru Better Living!* http://www.interport.net/~rugosa *