David Carroll – Page 7 – Warren Throckmorton

Former Donors Request to Join Gospel for Asia RICO Suit

On February 6, 2017, Garland D. Murphy, III, M.D. and his wife Phyllis A. Murphy filed a motion to join the RICO lawsuit agains Gospel for Asia. In the motion, the Murphy’s allege that they were defrauded by Gospel for Asia and would not have donated had they known how GFA planned to use their donations.
Specifically, the Murphys took the GFA promise to send 100% to mission work at face value and donated on that basis.
From Exhibit A attached to the Motion:

Plaintiffs-Intervenors Garland D. Murphy, III, M.D. and Phyllis A. Murphy made several donations to GFA over the course of several years. They made each such donation only after learning of GFA’s guarantee that it would apply 100% of every donation exactly as the Murphys designated.
For example, on December 29, 2012, the Murphys decided to donate $225 to GFA’s “Widows and Abandoned Children” fund. The Murphys viewed a webpage on GFA’s website discussing the “Widows and Abandoned Children” fund. The webpage for the “Widows and Abandoned Children” fund at GFA.org (as it appeared 1n December, 2012).
On December 29, 2012, with the understanding that GFA would apply 100% of their $225 donation to the “Widows and Abandoned Children” fund in the Field, the Murphys made the donation through GFA’s website. GFA provided the Murphys with a receipt (Exhibit 8 hereto) reciting the GFA 100% guarantee and noting that $605 in donations, presumably including the December 29 donation, was designated to the “Widows and Abandoned Children” fund. The Murphys’ 2012 Annual Receipt documenting their gifts to GFA’s “Widows and Abandoned Children” fund.
The 2012 Annual Receipt the Murphys received from GFA, bearing the GFA 100% Guarantee, a statement that GFA is “committed to apply your gifts according to your preferences,” and the ECFA and ICA seals of approval and assurances thereby (valid at the time this receipt was issued). Exhibit 8 hereto.
Every single donation the Murphys made to GFA was made only with the understanding, based entirely on Defendants’ representations, that 100% of the donation would be applied exactly as designated by the Murphys.

GFA hoped the district court would require former employees Matthew and Jennifer Dickson to comply with an arbitration agreement and avoid a public trial. However, the district court denied that request. GFA then appealed. Even if the Appeals Court requires the Dicksons to go through arbitration instead of a RICO suit, the Murphys would not have to do so since they never worked for GFA. Their case would presumable require a different remedy, one they hope will be in court.
For the many articles on the GFA story, click here.

Federal Court Rejects Gospel for Asia's Motion for a Stay; New Plaintiffs Request to Join Suit

On Wednesday, the Western Arkansas federal district court rejected Gospel for Asia’s request for a stay of trial proceedings while an appeals court considers GFA’s motion to dismiss the case. This will allow the case to proceed to discovery and trial.
Read the judge’s order at the link below. Some best hits from the order:

The only foreseeable “harm” of discovery in this forum is that it might reveal that Defendants have, in fact, committed fraud against Plaintiffs and the purported class. This is not the kind of harm a stay is intended to prevent.
Because this Court has no control over appellate dockets or calendars, the risk of harm a stay poses to Plaintiffs and putative class members is substantial.
The public interest weighs heavily against staying this matter. It is certainly the case that the Federal Arbitration Act’s liberal preference for arbitration would favor a stay if Defendants were more likely to succeed on the merits of their appeal. However, the gravity of Plaintiffs’ allegations—that between 2003 and 2014, Defendants fraudulently solicited $700,000,000 in donations from putative class members, and that Defendants continue to fraudulently solicit such donations—and the publicity generated by those allegations give rise to a strong public interest in resolving the merits of this dispute.

In another development, another donor couple have requested to join the suit against GFA.

Motion to Intervene as Plaintiffs
Plaintiffs Matthew Dickson and Jennifer Dickson and proposed Plaintiffs-Intervenors Garland D. Murphy, III, M.D. and Phyllis A. Murphy (residents of this jurisdiction) respectfully request the Court to grant the Murphys permission to intervene as Plaintiffs and proposed class representatives, and to file the proposed amended complaint attached hereto as Exhibit A.

The Murphys donated to GFA but were never employees of GFA.
Motion to Intervene as Plaintiffs
Order on Motion to Stay

Gospel for Asia Claims They Want an Impartial Arbiter but Acts to Delay Discovery

Wills Point GFA Chapel - Architect website — Wills Point GFA Chapel – Architect website

One year ago, Gospel for Asia’s leaders said it was a “blessing” to have “an impartial arbiter” bring resolution to the allegations contained in the RICO lawsuit advanced by former donors Matthew and Jennifer Dickson. In a February 15 article, GFA is quoted by Charisma News:

We consider it a blessing to finally have the opportunity to bring this matter to full resolution through an impartial arbiter, and you can rest assured that in the meantime we will continue operating on behalf of some of the world’s most desperate people in some of its most complex environments.

However, since then, GFA has attempted to have the suit dismissed and is now appealing the most recent ruling which would allow the RICO case to proceed to discovery and trial. GFA would also like the federal judge to grant a stay of discovery while the appeal is being decided by the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals.
For their part, the Dicksons have opposed the appeal and the stay:

Defendants ask the Court to use its discretion to grant them a stay, delaying all proceedings in this case for however long it takes the Eighth Circuit to dispose of their appeal of the Court’s carefully reasoned Order denying their motion to compel arbitration. Under a straightforward application of the four-factor analysis that governs the disposition of such requests, Defendants fail to carry their burden. And Defendants’ alternate argument for a “mandatory stay” is neither supported by Eighth Circuit law nor otherwise warranted. This important case potentially affects the rights of tens of thousands of donors across the country, and it should not be delayed a day longer. The Court should deny Defendants’ request.

Apparently, GFA no longer counts it a “blessing” to have the opportunity to bring these allegations to “full resolution through an impartial arbiter.” If GFA’s leaders really want that blessing, then they should allow the case to proceed to discovery. It is hard to take GFA’s claims seriously when they are doing everything possible to keep the case from moving forward.

GFA’s Motion to Appeal
GFA’s Motion to Stay Action on Proceedings

U.S. District Court of Western Arkansas Rules RICO Case Can Proceed Against Gospel for Asia

In April 2016, Gospel for Asia’s celebrity attorneys asked the Western Arkansas District Court to either dismiss the RICO suit against them or to require plaintiffs Matthew and Jennifer Dickson to submit to binding arbitration. Today, the court declined to dismiss the case. Furthermore, they declined to require the Dicksons to enter arbitration, ruling that their employment contract did not envision a case such as this.
In short, the RICO suit against Gospel for Asia will go forward. From the court order:

Plaintiffs’ complaint is sufficiently pled to overcome the hurdles posed by Defendants’ motions to dismiss, and this case must proceed to discovery.
III. Conclusion
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendants’ motion to compel arbitration (Doc. 23) is DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants’ motions to dismiss (Docs. 25 and 27) are DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 18th day of January, 2017.
/s/P. K. Holmes, III P.K. HOLMES, III CHIEF U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE

Over the next several days, I hope to review my posts concerning GFA from 2015 which should give some indication of what discovery will be like for the defendants.

Indian Government Cracks Down on NGOs; Gospel for Asia India Changes Name to Ayana Charitable Trust

Earlier this week, the Indian press reported that 20,000 NGOs had been cancelled by Prime Minister Modi’s crusade against corruption. According to those reports, only 13,000 NGOs remain as approved by the government.
It is unclear if any of the NGOs connected to mission giant Gospel for Asia has been caught up in the crack down. The government’s Home Ministry website provides lists of about 12,000 NGOs which are not now approved and none of the GFA organizations are listed. However, given the reports of 20,000 cancelled, presumably more will be announced in the days ahead.
In looking for information about the drastic measures, I learned that Gospel for Asia in India is now called Ayana Charitable Trust (see this blog post at India Happenings). To my knowledge, this name change was not disclosed to donors outside of India. The Gospel for Asia – India website is not functional and hasn’t been for months. Apparently, donations from America, Canada and around the world are being sent to Believers’ Church as well as a handful of NGOs in India, all affiliated with Believers’ Church.
Apparently, Gospel for Asia isn’t operating as GFA in India.
Recent government filings indicate no foreign contributions to Ayana Charitable Trust. For instance, look at this report filed in the last quarter of FY 2015-2016.

However, in April 2016 the Deccan Chronicle reported robust contributions for 2014-2015 to Ayana Charitable Trust, Believers’ Church, Love India Ministry and Last Hour Ministry, all affiliated with Believers’ Church. This reflects donations from GFA in Wills Point, TX to these NGOs. The Chronicle reported the donations to Ayana and not the old name of Gospel for Asia. However, as noted above, Ayana reported no contributions in the last quarter of FY 2015-2016.
It is unclear why GFA has changed the name in India. Creating multiple NGOs and changing their names does make it harder to track donations. Given the intense scrutiny of GFA’s activities (leading to expulsion from the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability), making it hard to track activities might be a defensive strategy.