Post reply

Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
Log in
Sign up

May 04, 2026, 09:38 PM

AntiPolygraph.org Message Board
► Polygraph and CVSA Forums
► Polygraph Policy
► Post reply ( Re: Polygraph Operators John Grogan and Lisa Javoric Named as Defendants in California Lawsuit )

Post reply

The message has the following error or errors that must be corrected before continuing:: Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.

Name
Email
Subject
Message icon

[quote author=George W. Maschke link=msg=37413 date=1365359255]
Polygraph operators [url=http://www.groganpolygraph.com]John Grogan[/url] and [url=http://www.lisajavoric.com/]Lisa Javoric[/url] have been named as defendants in a lawsuit filed in the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles. The plaintiff, Norma Guzman, has filed suit against her former employer, [url=http://www.macrolifenaturals.com/]Macrolife Naturals, Inc.[/url], and others. Among Guzman's allegations is that her employer unlawfully forced her to submit to a polygraph test over an allegedly stolen ring:

[quote]19. On or about July 26, 2010, Defendants, and each of them, took the Plaintiff against her will to a Polygraph company, to perform a polygraph and/or lie detector test on her. The Defendants, and each of them, keep the Plaintiff waiting at this third party location for approximately three hours to interrogate her.

20. This polygraph was taken not only without the willful and written formal consent, but also without even the willful and oral consent, of Plaintiff, and in violation of State and Federal law.[/quote]

The complaint also alleges:

[quote]28. On or about August 19, 2010, the Defendants continued to harass the Plaintiff by having a female from the polygraph company call her to give up information on someone they claim purchased the ring.[/quote]

See also the 5th cause of action at paras. 79-84.

The case is number BC489103, filed 26 July 2012. Grogan and Javoric were named as "Does" in the original complaint, which may be downloaded along with Doe amendments here:

[url]https://antipolygraph.org/litigation/guzman/guzman-doe-amendments-with-original-complaint.pdf[/url]
[/quote]

Attachments: (Clear attachments)

Restrictions: 4 per post (4 remaining), maximum total size 192 KB, maximum individual size 64.00 MB

Uncheck the attachments you no longer want attached

Click or drag files here to attach them.

Insert width (px):

Insert height (px):

(Clear attachments)

Other options

Return to this topic
Don't use smileys

Verification:

Please leave this box empty:

Listen to the letters / Request another image

Type the letters shown in the picture:

Shortcuts: ALT+S post or ALT+P preview

Topic summary

Posted by pailryder

- Apr 08, 2013, 07:06 AM

Thank you for the information.

Posted by George W. Maschke

- Apr 07, 2013, 02:27 PM

Polygraph operators John Grogan and Lisa Javoric have been named as defendants in a lawsuit filed in the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles. The plaintiff, Norma Guzman, has filed suit against her former employer, Macrolife Naturals, Inc., and others. Among Guzman's allegations is that her employer unlawfully forced her to submit to a polygraph test over an allegedly stolen ring:

Quote19. On or about July 26, 2010, Defendants, and each of them, took the Plaintiff against her will to a Polygraph company, to perform a polygraph and/or lie detector test on her. The Defendants, and each of them, keep the Plaintiff waiting at this third party location for approximately three hours to interrogate her.

20. This polygraph was taken not only without the willful and written formal consent, but also without even the willful and oral consent, of Plaintiff, and in violation of State and Federal law.

The complaint also alleges:

Quote28. On or about August 19, 2010, the Defendants continued to harass the Plaintiff by having a female from the polygraph company call her to give up information on someone they claim purchased the ring.

See also the 5th cause of action at paras. 79-84.

The case is number BC489103, filed 26 July 2012. Grogan and Javoric were named as "Does" in the original complaint, which may be downloaded along with Doe amendments here:

https://antipolygraph.org/litigation/guzman/guzman-doe-amendments-with-original-complaint.pdf