On April 5, 2007 a Washington U.S. District court after previously ordering a federal judgment against psychic Noreen Renier for breaching a Florida state settlement with the publication of her 2005 psychic book titled A Mind for Murder, also awarded costs and fees to a skeptic writer originally sued by Renier in 1985. The costs awarded to the skeptic are stunning as they come 22 years after Noreen Renier sued the same skeptic writer, John Merrell in a small county court.

The total estimated costs and losses for Noreen Renier following the April 5th order now are estimated to top $100,000 --- with the U.S. District court awarding Merrell $39,558.00 --- and the publisher of Renier's book A Mind for Murder halting all further publication. A link to the court order is below, as well as a link to an update on Merrell's website. The $100,000 + estimate includes Renier's own legal fees, plus estimated loss on book revenue since the filing of the lawsuit, plus a loss claim by Renier filed with the court, plus Merrell's $39,558 due from Renier. All issues below were DENIED and rejected by the U.S. District Court:

1. Renier's claim that John Merrell tortiously interfered with her publishing contract and with her business expectancies associated with ongoing publication of her book.

2. Renier's motion that the court ruling conflicts with her constitutional rights.

3. Renier's claim that Merrell was not entitled to his fees and costs because he was not the "prevailing party".

4. Argument that Renier's counterclaims should stand. (All were dismissed).

5. All damages sought by Renier against Merrell.

6. Claim that Renier did not breach the settlement agreement.

7. Claim that Merrell "cannot manufacture a case against Ms. Renier simply because she told the truth. He has no damages, his claims are untimely, and his theories would violate constitutional rights."

www.amindformurder.com/pdf/04052007CourtAwardsCost.pdf
www.amindformurder.com/oneminutesummary.htm
www.amindformurder.com

On her current web site (as of April 5, 2007) Renier writes that following the publication of her book A Mind for Murder in 2005 "the publisher's attorney went thru the book looking for data to backup my quotes, etc. Unfortunately they neglected to spot the problem that was to materialize in this latest lawsuit, although they were told to be very careful; the skeptic sued at the drop of a hat."

But according to John Merrell "there was never any problem in the publisher's attorney failing to 'spot the problem' because the problem continued for page after page after page throughout Renier's own book!"

Indeed the judge dismissed all of Noreen Renier's counter claims noting "The court rejects Ms. Renier's claim that she did not breach the Settlement Agreement because her statements in A Mind for Murder are, according to her, true."

In his April 5 2007 federal order the judge wrote "The gravamen of Plaintiff's lawsuit was breach of contract; Plaintiff prevailed on this claim. Defendant, on the other hand, failed to prevail on any of her counterclaims. Accordingly , the court finds Plaintiff is the prevailing party and is entitled to the reasonable fees and costs associated with presecuting his claim for breach of contract."

Renier herself commented that "the skeptic sued at the drop of a hat" but according to Merrell that is an example of exaggerating that Renier has previously showcased to millions of TV viewers when she claimed to have located a crashed aircraft. Renier told an Oregon jury that she saw a male who heroically survived the crash and carried another injured female passenger outside the plane. But a recent investigation shows a Massachusetts father and daughter independently found the plane and never knew or spoke with Renier. And a state medical examiner concluded no passengers survived the crash.

Rather than a quick launch of his lawsuit, Merrell actually waited five months following the initial release of Renier's book before notifying Renier of possible legal action in September 2005. Court records show Merrell then waited another 72 days with no response from Renier before he filed his lawsuit. And Renier did not acknowledge even his lawsuit for weeks after that. The process from trigger point to conclusion was a full two years.