About Opentopia
Opentopia Directory Encyclopedia Tools

Art Schreiber

Encyclopedia : A : AR : ART : Art Schreiber

Art Schreiber (1941 - ) (Full name, Arthur H. Schreiber)http://www.rickross.com/reference/landmark/landmark177.pdfis the General Counsel and Chairman of the Board of Directorshttp://home.swbell.net/danchase/art.htm for Landmark Education, which is known for offering its Landmark Forum course. A founder of Landmark Education, he has served as General Counsel and the Executive for the Legal Department and Human Resources Department since 1991. Prior to his work with Landmark Education, Mr. Schreiber was a partner in the Washington, DC law firm of Silverstein and Mullens. He is a member of the bar in California, the District of Columbia and New York.

Mr. Schreiber resides in Oakland, California. Art received his law degree with an LLB from Columbia University and his LLM (Taxation) from Georgetown Law Schoolhttp://www.law.georgetown.edu/alumni/events/2003/reunion/lostAlumni.cfm?class=68 in 1968, as well as a BA in Accounting from City College in New York. He is married to Janet C. Schreiber, (1948 - ).

Art Schrieber was a prior "Forum Leader"[link] for Landmark Education.

Art Schreiber was also the personal attorney for Werner Erhard.

Art Schreiber was at one time President and Registered agenthttp://www.xs4all.nl/~anco/mental/randr/rename.txt for Werner Erhard and Associates, before the sale and conversion to Landmark Education.

On February 23, 1988, Art Schreiber [contributed] to Werner Erhard's brother Nathan Rosenberg's campaignCampaign Contribution Search, Arthur Schreiber, Nathan Rosenberg for Congress, contribution made through organization Werner Erhard and Associates http://www.newsmeat.com/fec/bystate_detail.php?st=CA&last=SCHREIBER&first=ARTHUR for congress in the 40th congressional district of California, through the organization Werner Erhard and Associates.

Contents

Landmark Education - Classification by various governmental agencies

In France, Landmark Education 'assistants' have the apparent French legal status of volunteer unpaid workers.

Also in France, an agency of the French government, the Interministerial Mission for Awareness against Sectarian Risks ([MILS]) has classified Landmark Education as a secte (cult). It remains unclear what criteria the MILS uses to make this classification, and many of the organisations which it has so classified strenuously dispute the validity of such classification. Defamation lawsuits in the US and the Netherlands refute this French-language classification Regarding France, the US State Department noted in a 2002http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2002/13938.htm report that the French legislation creating the MILS did not define the term "cult" and that the president of MILS had resigned in mid-2002 and that no replacement had emerged by the time of the US State Department's reporting deadline.)

On May 24, 2004, the France 3 showhttp://info.france3.fr/emissions/1389638-fr.php Pièces à conviction broadcast the investigative report "Voyage au pays des nouveaux gourous" ("Voyage to the land of the new gurus"). The next month, in June 2004, the French government (L’Inspection du Travail) investigated labor practices regarding "volunteer workers". Shortly thereafter, Landmark Education ended operations in France. ([A short timeline in French].)

Although the Berlin State Senatehttp://www.ariplex.com/ama/amasenat.htm#7.4.2. report on Sects - their risks and consequences originally listed Landmark Education as espousing "a religious world view". The Berlin Senate subsequently retracted that, and re-classified Landmark Education as a "provider of life-assistance" (Anbieter von Lebenshilfe). (The literal translation of the word Lebenshilfe, "life help", does not accurately reflect the contexts in which speakers of German use Lebenshilfe.)

Lawsuits against Landmark Education in the United States

In the years since the emergence of Landmark Education in 1991, two customers (out of a total of over 800,000 world-wide) have brought their claims on the effects of the courses to court hearings in the United States of America, and in neither case did the court uphold the claim.

Landmark Education's standard http://www.landmarkeducation.com/uploaded_file/24/LFIF.PDF "course information form"] for use within the United States of America (but not elsewhere) has, for several years, required any disputes to go to arbitration rather than to court. (The use of binding arbitration occurs commonly in the United States.)

1) In September 1989 Stephanie Ney attended "The Forum", conducted by Werner Erhard (doing business as Werner Erhard & Associates (WE&A)). In 1992 Ney sued Landmark Education Corporation (LEC) for $2,000,000, saying that three days after attending the Forum she "suffered a breakdown and was committed to a psychiatric institute in Montgomery County".http://www.xs4all.nl/~anco/mental/randr/robhow.htm The trial court dismissed her suit on summary judgment. The appeals court affirmed, ruling that "although perhaps her participation in the Forum might have led in part to her psychotic reaction," Virginia law did not allow recovery for emotional injury unaccompanied by physical injury. http://www.rickross.com/reference/landmark/landmark49.html#Appendix%20A:%20%20Text%20of%20Court%20Ruling%20in%20Ney%20Case

In 1996, Art Schreiber, general counsel for Landmark Education, summarized Landmark Education's view of the case: "Out of more than 350,000 people who have participated in The Landmark Forum around the world, there has been only 1 person who filed a lawsuit. ... the United States District Court rejected Mrs. Ney's claims and ruled that The Forum did not cause her emotional problems."http://www.stelling.nl/landmark/schreib2.htm

2) In 2002, Jeanne Been versus Jason Weed with Landmark Education as a cross-defendant. Jason Weed had a psychotic episode shortly after his participation in the Landmark Advanced Course and shot and killed a letter-carrier, Robert Jenkins. The United States government had jurisdiction because the case involved the killing of a government employee. Jason Weed was found not guilty by reason of insanity. At the sanity hearing, the witness for the United States Government, Dr. Harrison Pope, a Harvard Medical School psychiatrist who also helped draft the DSM-III and DSM-IV stated,

"Weed's previous steroid use and participation in an exhaustive self-awareness program [the Landmark Advanced Course] the week prior to the shooting could be ruled out as causes of the psychotic break, leaving only 'very rare possibilities' as the triggering factors." http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=search&case=/data2/circs/10th/035100.html

3) In 1997, Tracy Neffhttp://www.rickross.com/reference/landmark/landmark8.html sued Landmark Education, not over the content or effects of the courses, but alleging a Landmark Education center manager sexually assaulted her. Landmark lacked a sexual harassment policy at the time, but introduced comprehensive anti-harassment and anti-discrimination policies following this case, as well as detailed complaint procedures. The parties settled out of court, and no charges were filed against the alleged perpetrator.

Lawsuits initiated by Landmark Education in the United States

Since 1991, Landmark Education has filed a total of five lawsuits in the United States, in each case over issues of alleged defamation. (For an alternative count and legal summary of Landmark Education litigation history, including events outside the United States of America, see the summary written by Peter L. Skolnik and Michael A. Norwick of http://www.lowenstein.com/ Lowenstein Sandler PC, Roseland NJ http://www.rickross.com/reference/landmark/landmark193.html Skolnik and Norwick, 2006).) Some cases appear here discussed in chronological order as listed in the declaration of Art Schreiber (the Schreiber Declaration), filed May 5, 2005, at the US http://pacer.njd.uscourts.gov District Court of New Jersey, civil action 04-3022 (JCL).

1. Condé Nast Publications (1993)

In 1993, Landmark Education sued Self Magazine (Condé Nast Publications) for defamation. Defendants moved for summary judgement, which the court denied. Rather than stand trial by jury, Self Magazine issued a retraction.

2. The Cult Awareness Network / Cynthia Kisser (1994)

In 1994 Landmark Education sued Cynthia Kisser, the Executive Director of the original Cult Awareness Network, which had issued leaflets containing a list of purported "Destructive Cult Organizations" which included "The Forum."

During a deposition Kisser stated as follows: "http://home.swbell.net/danchase/depo.html 

Q. Do you, Cynthia Kisser, say that
... the Landmark
Forum is a cult?
A. No.

Q. Do you Cynthia Kisser as executive
director of the Cult Awareness Network say that
Landmark is a cult -- Landmark Forum is a cult?
A. No, no.

Q. So the Cult Awareness Network does not
hold Landmark Forum to be a cult.
A. It does not.

Q. Now, with respect to your individual
opinion first, do you say that the Landmark Forum
is a destructive cult?
A. No.

Q. And that's your personal opinion.
A. Correct.

Q. And does the Cult Awareness Network say
or hold the position that Landmark Forum is a 
destructive cult?
2 A No.

3. Dr. Margaret Singer (1996)

In 1996, Landmark Education sued Dr Margaret Singer, an adjunct UC Berkeley professor and author of Cults in Our Midst (published in 1995) for defamation. Singer mentioned Landmark Education in her book; it remained unclear whether she labelled Landmark Education as a cult or not. Singer issued a retraction stating that she did not intend to call Landmark a cult nor did she consider it a cult. http://www.landmarkeducation.com/uploaded_files/694/msing.pdf Singer removed the references to Landmark Education from subsequent editions of the book. She also stated at deposition that the had "no personal, firsthand knowledge of Landmark or its programs."

Scioscia (2000)http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/Issues/2000-10-19/news/feature_print.html reports:

Singer says she never called it a cult in her book, but simply mentioned it as a controversial New Age training course. In resolution of the suit, Singer gave a sworn statement that the organization is not a cult or sect. She says this doesn't mean she supports Landmark.
"I do not endorse them -- never have," she says. Singer, who is in her 70s, says she can't comment on whether Landmark uses coercive persuasion because "the SOBs have already sued me once."
"I'm afraid to tell you what I really think about them because I'm not covered by any lawyers like I was when I wrote my book."
Singer will say, however, that she would not recommend the group to anyone.

4. Elle Magazine - Hachette Filipacchi Media U.S. (1998)

In 1998, Landmark Education sued Hachette Filipacchi Media U.S. publishers of Elle Magazine for an allegedly defamatory http://www.rickross.com/reference/landmark/landmark2.html article published in Elle magazine (August 1998), written by Rosemary Mahoney and entitled "Do you believe in miracles?" (Mahoney, 1998). See the [press release] for the lawsuit from August 31, 1998. The court dismissed the claim without going to trial and Landmark chose not to appeal; Landmark received neither retraction nor apology.

5. Rick Ross Institute (2004)

In June 2004, Landmark Education filed a one million US dollar lawsuit against the Rick A. Ross Institute, claiming that the Institute's online archives did damage to Landmark Education's product. In April 2005, Landmark Education filed to dismiss its own lawsuit with prejudice on the grounds that a material change in case law regarding statements made on the Internet occurred in January 2005; see http://lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/courts/appellate/a5942-02.opn.html Donato v. Moldow, 374 N.J. Super. 475 (N.J. App. Div. 2005), which held an operator of an online bulletin board not liable for defamatory statements posted by others on his bulletin board, unless he made a "material substantive contribution" to the defamatory material. http://techlawadvisor.com/caselaw/2005/02/communications-decency-act-nj.htmlhttp://www.religionnewsblog.com/13089

For the case against the Rick Ross Institute, Landmark Education also obtained expert-witness testimony of Dr. http://www.csufresno.edu/linguistics/directory/mcmenamin.htm Gerald McMenamin, a professor and leader in the field of forensic linguistics, claiming that Rick Ross himself has authored many of the materials on www.rickross.com, though presented as anonymous third-party postings.

In December 2005, Landmark Education succeeded in withdrawing the lawsuit with prejudice to avoid paying legal expenses of the opposing council. Landmark Education issued a http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/051221/nyw149.html?.v=36 press release on the matter. The Rick Ross Institutehttp://www.cultnews.com/archives/000830.html responded.

See also

External links

References

 

From Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. Original article here. Support Wikipedia by contributing or donating.
All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License See Wikipedia Copyrights for details.

Search Titles
0123456789
ABCDEFGHIJ
KLMNOPQRST
UVWXYZ?

E-mail this article to:

Personal Message: