How did the Hearing go? Well, the important thing is, Judge Daniel DIDN'T issue the Injunction!

This Hearing was important because -- if the Foundation were able to get an Injunction against us, they could take it to the Arizona Court (where the Copyright Appeal is in progress) and say, "This is a Colorado Judge's interpretation of Judge Schroeder's Opinion."

The Foundation was basically asking Colorado Judge Daniel to decide which parts of the Urantia Book are revelation (and therefore in the public domain) and which parts are under copyright (because of being "created" by the contact commission). The Foundation was asking the Colorado Judge to rule that ALL parts -- every word -- of the revelation be under copyright, as being "created" by the contact commission.

Before the Hearing (which was in Denver) a group of Urantians held hands and prayed that God's will be done. These Urantians about half filled the gallery on the Defendants' side. Eric and I had learned that in a Preliminary Injunction Hearing, we could invite witnesses -- and these believers had kindly volunteered. (However, the Judge made his decision without our having to call witnesses.)

In this same Court last December 13th, one of the Foundation lawyers had put his face about 2 inches from Joe Lewis's face and shouted at him. And -- just to make Eric look bad to the Judge -- another Foundation lawyer had claimed that they hadn't received stuff that Eric was supposed to have sent them. (Fortunately, Eric had a Post Office receipt signed by the law firm that his package had been received.)

Also, that was the Hearing in which the Foundation told the Judge that the Urantia Book is NOT a religious book-- it's philosophy, cosmology, and so forth. (That's when Joe Lewis quipped, "The Old Testament teaches kosher, but it's not a cookbook!")

When Eric spoke at the December 13th Hearing, the Judge was thumbing through a book (not the Urantia Book). Three times in this Hearing, when the Judge said the word "Urantia," he waved his hand toward the Foundation lawyers -- which is the sort of prejudicial behavior that can have a Judge removed from a case.

Anyway, in this Hearing, the Foundation lawyers stayed relatively honest. And civil. And the Judge was alert and attentive. I believe all this good behavior was because of the audience.

Judge Daniel probably hadn't paid that much attention to this case for this past year (the Foundation filed this case last August already) because he has about 400 other cases -- and I guess he thought this case would settle. But, remember? it was at the Court-mandated Settlement Conference that the Foundation handed us 3 new Motions!

Friday, Judge Daniel was "no nonsense." He took his Docket sheet and started down it, quickly ticking off items. The Foundation's Stay Motion was "Denied as moot." Eric and my Copyright Summary Judgments were "Denied as Moot," also.

Eric argued that his Copyright Summary Judgment was NOT tied to what the 9th Circuit might rule. "I thought this Court could make up its own mind about the copyright issue," Eric said, very respectfully. There was a pause. (Imagine suggesting to a Judge that he is capable of making up his own mind! I was about splitting my sides.) "Well, I'm not going to do that," Daniel shot back.

But anyway, now we were up to the big one -- the Motion for Preliminary Injunction. The Judge asked Eric if his home page were still up. Eric told him, "I took it down last November in an attempt to settle this case."

To tell the Judge why they needed this Injunction against us so bad, Foundation lawyer Steve Hill made a speech about the "self- justifying behavior" of both defendants -- that there is "cognizable danger of recurrent behavior" because the defendants obviously don't think they've done anything wrong. He called a statutory injunction a "prophylactic injunction."

Judge Daniel commented that he's "worried about issuing an injunction when the reason no longer exists."

In Eric's Response Brief to the Foundation's Motion for Preliminary Injunction, you might remember he had asked the Judge to issue the Injunction against him -- but also challenged the Judge to tell him just which Papers or Parts of the Urantia Papers are in public domain and can be placed on the Internet.

I think this made the Judge very suspicious -- like it was some sort of, "Don't throw me in the briar patch," trick. The Judge wasn't about to do something to Eric that Eric wanted done! Judge Daniel cited all sorts of case law supporting why he should not issue an Injunction.

Foundation lawyer Steve Hill also cited case law. He brought up another "similar," case concerning the defendants' "intransigent insistence" that they're in the right.

Eric told the Judge: "I could agree to notify the Court, your Honor, before I put up my home page again."

And that's what Daniel went with -- he called it "an advisement." He ordered defendant to "give notice in writing within 20 days of putting up a home page." And denied the Foundation their Preliminary Injunction.

The Foundation had brought along a notebook of Exhibits it might file in connection with the Hearing. One of the Exhibits they titled "proof" they do sell the Urantia Book. It was an excerpt from a 1977 Newsletter of the Foundation which their lawyers had printed off the Internet. I kinda felt sorry for the Foundation lawyers -- that's all the "proof" they could find!

Yet, I was also hoping they'd bring that up -- because I had with me a notebook full of letters the trustees had written refusing to sell books to individuals -- and even to bookstores! -- these letters were dated 1991 and later.

Next, Judge Daniel took up the issue of Joe Lewis' Notice of Withdrawal from the Colorado case. "You don't want a lawyer anymore?" he asked me. "I DO want a lawyer," I told him, "And I NEED a lawyer. I just can't afford one." (Joe Lewis has been by far the largest donor to the lawsuit, both in Arizona and Colorado, by his gift of tens of thousands as a "courtesy discount," and for his non-billed time). Daniel said fine, he'd sign the release. (Joe Lewis is still lawyer of record for the Copyright Appeal case in Arizona -- but as of Friday, he's off the Colorado case).

Next, Daniel dealt swiftly with their Motion to Stay Discovery, by saying first he'd hold a Hearing on the pending dispositive motions -- which Foundation lawyer Steve Hill assured Daniel would, "dramatically narrow the scope of issues." (We hope not, of course).

Steve Hill told Daniel he'd need at least 1+ hours to argue the Motion on the Pleadings, (I think he mentioned fraud and genericness) but that the Res Judicata argument would be short. He said he's "uncovered 5 or 6 more decisions" on virtual representation he will do a supplemental briefing on.

So then Judge Daniel went to trying to find time in his calendar. August 28 wouldn't do Foundation lawyer Steve Hill will be getting a blood test in Oklahoma City that day for his wedding on the 30th -- returning to work September 8. Then another date wouldn't do, for some reason or other. I was just sitting there waiting to write down whatever time the Judge finally came up with.

"On August 21st we'll have a Hearing on the Pending Motions," Daniel said -- and there was a collective gasp from the Urantian spectators. "That's Jesus' Birthday," everyone was muttering. (What better time to stand up for his banner! What better birthday present!) "Your Honor," I said, "That's Jesus' Birthday."

Then court was dismissed, and we went to the Oasis (Boulder microbrewery) for a beer.

Love, and God bless you, Kristen.