Six Million Dollar Judgement Upheld

UPDATE: 4/10/2015 – Cummins loses her appeal contesting the Six-Million Dollar judgement we have against her. In part, the court stated: “…From our review of the record, Lollar showed by clear and convincing evidence that Cummins acted with malice as that term is used in chapter 41 and with the actual malice required under the First Amendment. The evidence supports a conclusion that Cummins engaged in a persistent, calculated attack on Lollar with the intention to ruin both Lollar’s life’s work and her credibility and standing in the animal rehabilitation community. Cummins posted innumerable derogatory statements about Lollar impugning her honesty and her competency, and she repeatedly and relentlessly reported Lollar to multiple government agencies. The comments she made about Lollar leave no doubt that she had a specific intent to cause substantial injury or harm to Lollar.

Click here to read the Appellate Court’s complete opinion.

UPDATE: 8/28/2015  – Cummins loses her appeal to the Texas Supreme Court.

SCOT DENIAL

Mary Cummins Loses Final RO Appeal Against Lollar

As reported on July 11, 2013, Mary Cummins filed false police reports against Amanda Lollar, then used them to convince a judge into giving her a temporary restraining order (TRO) against Lollar in an attempt to force Lollar to attend a hearing in Los Angeles, CA. During this time, Cummins made continual threats to shoot Lollar when she came to defend herself against the TRO.

Lollar did not attend the hearing in fear of her own safety. The overwhelming evidence against Cummins (including her death threats) was presented to the Judge Carol Goodson by Lollar’s attorneys. Not only did Cummins LOSE her case against Lollar, she was ordered to pay Lollar’s attorney’s fees of over $6,000.

Click this link to access the court document from the hearing which also contains Mary Cummins death threats against Amanda Lollar.

After the judge ruled against Cummins, she began defaming the judge on the internet, and then filed a Motion to Reconsider, which was denied. Cummins then filed for an appeal of the TRO, which was also denied on Dec. 13, 2013. Mary Cummins then filed ANOTHER appeal of the restraining order (see our response), all the while alleging that Lollar was sending continual death threats her way (yet showing no proof whatsoever). On February 23, 2015 the Appellate Court made their final ruling denying Cummins appeal and ordered her to pay Lollar’s additional attorney fees of $144,000. (Note that these fees were paid by insurance and will be collected by said insurance company.)

UPDATE: 5/15/15: Mary Cummins appeals to the Supreme Court of California in her attempt to get the above mentioned restraining order against Amanda Lollar.  Her appeal was DENIED.

Mary Cummins Loses Motion to Quash Subpoena to her Bank Account

In the fall of 2012, approximate $4,300 was seized from Mary Cummins bank account and a subpoena for her account records was presented to her bank. Mary Cummins tried to stop our subpoena with a Motion to Quash (click here to read) but the court ruled in our favor on 5/23/14.

Mary Cummins Loses Restraining Order Appeal

As reported on July 11, 2013, Mary Cummins filed false police reports against Amanda Lollar, then used them to convince a judge into giving her a temporary restraining order (TRO) against Lollar in an attempt to force Lollar to attend a hearing in Los Angeles, CA. During this time, Cummins made continual threats to shoot Lollar when she came to defend herself against the TRO.

Lollar did not attend the hearing in fear of her own safety. The overwhelming evidence against Cummins (including her death threats) was presented to the Judge Carol Goodson by Lollar’s attorneys. Not only did Cummins LOSE her case against Lollar, she was ordered to pay Lollar’s attorney’s fees.

Click this link to access the court document from the hearing which also contains Mary Cummins death threats against Amanda Lollar.

After the judge ruled against Cummins, she began defaming the judge on the internet, and then filed a Motion to Reconsider, which was denied. Cummins then filed for an appeal of the TRO, which was also denied on Dec. 13, 2013.

Mary Cummins Attacks Another Rescue Group

We just became aware that Wildhorse Ranch Rescue (WHRR), a struggling non-profit in Arizona posted a plea to their Facebook followers to please donate to Bat World Sanctuary.

This was an immensely unselfish gesture of the 2013 Holiday Season because, despite their own needs, WHRR sought to do something for another rescue group. The sole mission of WHRR is to save animals from abuse, neglect, slaughter and premature death and provide a safe place for them to live for the remainder of their lives. They give sanctuary to former US Cavalry Horses, US Forest Service Equines, wild mustangs and others who would otherwise face a horrible end.

Derringer, a US Calvary horse retired to WHRR

Because of WHRR’s show of kindness towards BWS, our malicious cyber-stalker is attacking WHRR for one reason only; they spoke up for us.

Allegedly, our cyber-stalker went so far as to post on WHRR’s page pretending to be us. These posts contained horrific and false allegations about our rescue work. (WHRR has since deleted those public posts and we are looking into the possibility of pressing federal charges against Cummins for impersonation.) Cummins then sent WHRR a private FB message with more lies about Bat World. Their reply was, “Why don’t you find something better to do with your time?”

Mary Cummins is now going after WHRR in a rage. As she did with us, Cummins is creating numerous false and defamatory blogs in an attempt to ruin WHRR financially. We cannot allow her to harm another organization that is saving and preserving suffering animals. Please show your support for Bat World and Wildhorse Ranch by liking and posting your support to their Facebook page and assisting them in whatever way possible.

Pasted below is a reply to the recent correspondence that Mary Cummins sent to an official in the county where Wildhorse Ranch is located. Cummins’ typical MO begins with launching attacks within the city where her victim resides (as she did with us). Note that Cummins will often make Freedom of Information Act requests (FOIAs) to the city of her victim, then she may manipulate the documents she receives to reflect complaints and then upload these falsified documents to the internet to further her smear campaign.

—————

From: Mary Cummins [mailto:mmmaryinla@aol.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2013 5:16 PM
To:  PLANDEVX
Subject: Status of WildHorse Ranch Rescue violations

Could you tell me the status of WildHorse Ranch Rescue’s code violations? Are they up to code? I can send in a state information act request if necessary. I was hoping to find the public files online.

Mary Cummins
MMMARYinLA@AOL.COM

—————

Subject: RE: Status of WildHorse Ranch Rescue violations
From: *****
Date: Thu, December 19, 2013 5:57 pm
To: ‘Mary Cummins’ <mmmaryinla@aol.com>
Cc: *****

Ms. Cummins: Violation 201000887 was closed.  The property was denied an agricultural exemption (LU20110058) because ARS-11-812.A.2 requires a min. 5 contiguous commercial acres and the site is on 1.25 acres.  A number of unpermitted structures benefitted from regulatory reform over the past three years that negated need for construction permits for many structures and liberalized building setbacks and separation distance. Also, due to regulatory reform, parcels as small as one acre can be considered a farm which is a permitted use in the Rural-43 zoning district. The rescue operation is considered a farm.  Temporary/special events such as fundraiser concerts will only permitted with an approved Temporary Use Permit.  Since the site is not agriculturally exempt from the county’s zoning, drainage and construction safety codes – new construction may require an issued construction permit.  There is an active permit B201302673 to erect a pre-engineered horse barn without electrical or plumbing that is not for commercial use. This permit was issued on 5/23/13.   They need to call in for the 970 Final Drainage and 900 Final construction safety inspections in order to complete the permit.  There does remain an unpermitted 15’ x 24’ canopy and the property owner was notified of this issue. There is not an open zoning violation at this time.

I’ve copied ************, operator of the facility, on this email in order to give her a status update on her active permit.  She will be able to answer questions regarding the horse rescue facility.

Maricopa County Planning & Development Department
501 N. 44th St. # 200 Phoenix, AZ 85008
602-506-7139, 602-506-3711 (fax)
http://www.maricopa.gov/planning

****************

NOTE: Many people ask why Mary Cummins can’t be arrested. Unfortunately, it is not a crime to attempt to ruin someone’s life by posting defamation. People can be sued and a judgement levied against them (as we have done with Mary Cummins), however, there are no laws in place to protect victims from internet smear campaigns unless they include death threats or threats of physical harm. That being said, because Mary Cummins continues to post defamation about BWS on the internet after she was ordered to stop, she will eventually be charged with Contempt of Court with the likelihood of jail time after a decision is made on her appeal. Until then, our only recourse is to expose her malicious activities to our followers.

****************

Mary Cummins Harassment & Terrorist Threat Reports

Click here to read the police reports filed against Mary Cummins for Harassment and Terroristic Threats:

Mary Cummins Harassment File

Mary Cummins Terroristic Threats

Contempt Filed Against Mary Cummins

“Defendant Mary Cummins was duty-bound to obey the commands of the Court contained in the judgment. Defendant failed and refused, and continues to fail and refuse to obey the commands of the Court. Specifically, Defendant has intentionally violated the Court’s order by failing and refusing to permanently remove the above-described statements from the internet. Each statement which Defendant failed and refused to permanently remove constitutes a separate act of contempt of court.

On return of such show cause order, the judge shall proceed to hear proof, and if satisfied that such person has disobeyed the injunction, either directly or indirectly, may commit such person to jail without bail until he purges himself of such contempt, in such manner and form as the judge may direct.

Because Defendant, Mary Cummins, continues to fail and refuses to obey the commands of the Court contained in the injunction, Movant has no alternative but to institute this contempt proceeding to have Defendant held in contempt of court and punished in accordance with Rule 692 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure.

WHEREFORE, Movant requests that Defendant, Mary Cummins, be ordered to appear before the Court at a designated date and time and show cause why she should not be held in contempt of court for violations of the injunction contained in the August 27, 2012 Final Judgment and punished accordingly.”

CLICK HERE TO VIEW CONTEMPT OF COURT DOCUMENT