1 Richard Lee Abrams, Esq.

SBN 077258
Attorney at Law
2 1916 North Saint Andrews Place
Hollywood, California 90068-3602
3 323/957-9588 Tel * 323/464-7066 * Fax
AbramsRL@Gmail.com
4
5 Attorney in Prop Per: Plaintiff Richard Lee Abrams

6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
FOR CENTRAL DISTRICT OF STATE OF CALIFORNIA
9
10
11 RICHARD LEE ABRAMS, ) Case #
)
12
) First Cause of Action
13 Plaintiff, ) COMPLAINT FOR CIVIL RIGHTS
1916 North Saint Andrews Place
Richard S. MacNaughton, Esq.

Hollywood, California 90068

) VIOLATIONS; REQUEST TO DE-

14
vs. ) CLARE ORDERS VOID 42 USC 1983
15 )
THE STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA,)
16 a public corporation, DANIEL J. ) REQUEST FOR STAY ORDER
17 BUCKLEY in official capacity as )
presiding Judge the los Angeles ) ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS
18 Superior Courts, TANI GORRE )
19 CANTIL-SAKAUYE in official ) with Civil Cover Statement and with
capacity as Chief Justice of Supreme ) Request to Proceed In Forma Pauperis
20 Court ) with Declaration in Support
21 )
Defendants. )
22 )
______________________________)
23
24 JURISDICTION and VENUE
25
26 1. The federal courts have jurisdiction of this action under 28 U.S.
27 Code § 1331, (Federal question), 28 U.S. Code § 1343(a)(3), 42 U.S. Code §
28 1988(b), 42 U.S. Code § 1983, and the 14th Amendment due to certain state
_______________________________
Complaint for Civil Rights Violations Page 1 of 12
 1 court orders and/or judgments which were void for lack of jurisdiction, lack of
2 notice and lack of due process.
3
4
2. Venue is in the Central District Court for the State of California as
all the actions occurred within the City of Los Angeles, State of California.
5
Plaintiff had a property right in his attorney-client contract with his client
6
SaveHollywood.Org aka People for Livable Communities, an unincorporated
7
association. 28 U.S. Code § 1391
8
9 PARTIES
10
11 3. Plaintiff is Richard Lee Abrams also known as Richard Scott Mac
12 Naughton [hereinafter usually referred to as Abrams/MacNaughton]. For all
times herein relevant Abrams/MacNaughton has been an attorney in the State
13
1916 North Saint Andrews Place
Richard S. MacNaughton, Esq.

Hollywood, California 90068

of California State Bar #77258 and has been admitted to the central district court
14
of California and the ninth circuit court of appeals under the name Richard Scott
15
MacNaughton.
16
17 4. Defendant STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA is a public corporation
18 operating under the laws of California, in particular the State Bar Act. [herein-
19 after Defendant State Bar]. Defendant State Bar is being sued for a Stay Order
20 on its case number 16-O-13106 In Matter of Richard Scott MacNaughton, aka,
21 Richard Lees Abrams, until final determination of this federal case.
22
5. Plaintiff is informed, believes and thereupon alleges that DANIEL
23
J. BUCKLEY is still the presiding judge of the los Angeles Superior Courts and
24
he is sued in his official capacity as presiding judge of the Los Angeles County
25 Superior Court for declaratory and injunctive relief. Said court is sued to have
26 certain state court order/s declared void and for injunctive relief.
27
28 6. TANI GORRE CANTIL-SAKAUYE is sued in official capacity as Chief
_______________________________
Complaint for Civil Rights Violations Page 2 of 12
 1 Justice of Supreme Court.
2
3 FACTS
4
7. On July 18, 2012, Abrams/MacNaughton entered into a written
5
attorney-client agreement with his client SaveHollywood.Org aka People for
6
Livable Communities, an unincorporated association [SaveHywd]. SaveHywd
7
never terminated that attorney-client contract but on several occasions, it has
8 affirmed that attorney-client contract. [Hereinafter The MacNaughton Attorney
9 Client Contract]
10
11 8. The SaveHywd case, for which Abrams/MacNaughton was retained,
12 is on-going as it is a CEQA case which is awaiting “returns” by Defendant-
Respondent City of Los Angeles which is not a party to this dispute.
13
1916 North Saint Andrews Place
Richard S. MacNaughton, Esq.

Hollywood, California 90068

14
9. Defendant Sate Bar is properly subject to a stay order by this district
15
court as Plaintiff is seeking a stay of the State Bar matter 16-O-13106, which is
16
a case whose outcome is contingent upon the resolution of the matter herein
17 presented.
18
19 10. On March 28, 2018, Defendant State Bar in the case of Joseph
20 Patrick Collins, State Bar Review Department, Case No. 16-O-10339, that
21 attorneys during State Bar proceedings may not defend against a state bar charge
on the grounds that the underlying sanctions’ orders/s are void. Under
22
California law a void order is a nullity. Nontheless, the state bar rules as set
23
forth in Collins require Plaintiff have orders underlying the State Bar complaint
24
16-O-13106 declared void in a regular trial court. The State Bar apprised
25 Plaintiff of the Collins case on June 25, 2018. Thus, Plaintiff is acting timely
26 in light of circumstances.
27
28 11. On September 18 and 24, 2014 in the case of SaveHywd & HELP
_______________________________
Complaint for Civil Rights Violations Page 3 of 12
 1 etc. Los Angeles Superior Court case Number BS 138370, Judge Allan
2 Goodman confirmed that Abrams/MacNaughton was the attorney for SaveHywd
3 and that attorney Frank Angel was not. On September 18, 2014, after Judge
4
Goodman reiterated that Frank Angel was not the attorney for SaveHywd but
was the attorney for a non-party corporation, Frank Angel had told Judge
5
Goodman that he was SaveHywd’s attorney and asked Judge Goodman to make
6
an order to that effect. In response to Frank Angel’s oral motion, Judge
7
Goodman asked for briefing and set September 24, 2014 for a hearing date, at
8 which time Judge Goodman chose not to change his determination that Frank
9 Angel was not SaveHywd’s attorney but that Abrams/MacNaughton was still
10 SaveHywd’s attorney. Judge Goodman also advised Frank Angel that the
11 SaveHywd-HELP case was not the proper forum for his motion.
12
12. Neither Frank Angel nor anyone else appealed Judge Goodman’s
13
1916 North Saint Andrews Place
Richard S. MacNaughton, Esq.

Hollywood, California 90068

September 24, 2014 minute order nor did anyone seek any other type of
14
appellate review.
15
16
13. On December 18, 2014 the law office of Frank Angel and Justice
17 Paul Turner’s Office, Division Two, District 5, had a secret ex parte
18 communication wherein Frank Angel’s office falsely stated that Abrams/Mac-
19 Naughton was not SaveHywd’s attorney but MacNaughton would not cease to
20 act as SaveHywd’s attorney, i.e. “I explained that Mr. MacNaughton refused to
21 accept that he had been terminated by SaveHollywood.Org and that a motion for
sanctions had been filed against him in the trial court,” Jessica Cheng May 29,
22
2015 declaration. This false representation was unduly prejudicial to
23
Abrams/MacNaughton and it exceeded the scope of any permitted ex parte
24
communication for scheduling. When prejudicial statement was made during the
25 ex parte communication, the offices of Frank Angel knew that its representation
26 was the opposite of what Judge Goodman had determined about two and one-
27 half months earlier. Neither Justice Turner nor Frank Angel disclosed this secret
28 ex parte communication until long after the Supreme Court had denied cert.
_______________________________
Complaint for Civil Rights Violations Page 4 of 12
 1 (The Cheng May 29, 2015 declaration came to light as an attachment to a letter
2 which Frank Angel submitted to the appellate court on or about September
3 2015.)
4
14. On December 19, 2014, Judge Turner issued an order that the client
5
SaveHwyd without its attorney identify its attorney. The order stated: “A
6
dispute exists as to who represents plaintiff, SAVEHOLLYWOOD.ORG. ¶
7
Within 5 days of the filing date of this order, plaintiff is file declarations
8 identifying who it wishes to act as its counsel.”
9
10 15. When Ziggy Kruse who was a member of SaveHywd’s Legal
11 Committee telephoned Division 5 for clarification, Justice Turner’s clerk told
12 her to look at the order, i.e. it was direct to the client and not to its attorney, and
that Attorney MacNaughton was to file nothing. The clerk advised Ms. Kruse
13
1916 North Saint Andrews Place
Richard S. MacNaughton, Esq.

Hollywood, California 90068

that the client was to file only a couple sentence limited to identifying its
14
attorney. When Ms. Kruse objected, the court clerk assured her that if two
15
different attorneys were identified, Justice Turner would seek more information.
16
Justice Turner’s December 19, 2014 order excluded Abrams/MacNaughton in
17 that it was directed to his client ad he was advised to file nothing. The order also
18 said nothing about removing any attorney.
19
20 16. Because Justice Turner’s December 19, 2014 order only pertained
21 to the client and excluded Abrams/MacNaughton, the court gained no personal
jurisdiction over Abrams/MacNaughton. Abrams/MacNaughton followed the
22
Justice Turner’s order and filed nothing, but his client though Robert Blue did
23
submit a declaration identifying Attorney MacNaughton as SaveHywd’s
24
attorney.
25
26 17. Frank Angel was allowed to file his own response with an additional
27 100 pages of material, to which neither SaveHywd or Abrams/MacNaughton
28 was allowed to respond.
_______________________________
Complaint for Civil Rights Violations Page 5 of 12
 1
2 18. On the morning of December 26, 2014, Justice Turner without
3 consultation of other appellate justices issued an order removing Attorney
4
MacNaughton as SaveHywd’s attorney and making Frank Angel SaveHywd’s
attorney. SaveHywd again promptly fired Frank Angel and affirmed that
5
Abrams/MacNaughton was its attorney. (SaveHywd had previously fired Frank
6
Angel on February 14, 2014, which is one reason Judge Goodman had
7
determined in September 2014 that Frank Angel was not SaveHywd’s attorney.)
8
9 19. Because no one had appealed Judge Goodman’s September 24, 2014
10 Minute Order, Justice Turner, presiding justice of division five of second district
11 the appellate court gained no subject matter jurisdiction to overrule Judge
12 Goodman’s determination due to his December 18, 2014 secret ex parte
communication with the law offices of Frank Angel.
13
1916 North Saint Andrews Place
Richard S. MacNaughton, Esq.

Hollywood, California 90068

14
20. As Justice Turner acted without jurisdiction, he incurred personal
15
liability under Ex Parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908). Division Five’s majority
16
of justices had a duty to disqualify Justice Turner after he failed to recuse
17 himself from a matter where he had a personal stake, to wit, if Turner’s
18 December 26, 2014 order were found void, he could face personal liability.
19 (Justice Paul Turner died May 18, 2017.)
20
21 21. Although SaveHywd tried to appeal the removal of its attorney,
Justice Turner would not accept their papers which SaveHywd itself had filed,
22
despite the fact Justice Turner’s December 19, 2014 order said that SaveHywd
23
should file by itself without its attorney. When SaveHywd refiled it appeal with
24
its Attorney Richard MacNaughton, Justice Turner determined the validity of
25 his own orders and when SaveHywd petitioned the Supreme Court it to refused
26 to consider the matter.
27
28 22. Defendant State Bar has filed charges against Abrams/Mac
_______________________________
Complaint for Civil Rights Violations Page 6 of 12
 1 Naughton due to his claim that he is SaveHywd’s attorney and that he failed to
2 pay sanctions related to the state court proceedings. All the sanctions are based
3 upon Justice Turner’s December 26, 2014 order removing Abrams/Mac
4
Naughton as SaveHywd’s attorney

5
23. Because the appellate court never had jurisdiction of the issue of
6
who was the attorney for SaveHywd at the trial court level, it had no subject
7
matter jurisdiction to impose Justice Turner’s December 26, 2014 order on the
8 trial court.
9
10 24. Because Justice Turner excluded Abrams/MacNaughton from his
11 December 19, 2014 order, the appellate court never obtained personal juris-
12 diction over Abrams/MacNaughton. Furthermore, the December 19, 2014 order
gave no notice of removal of any attorney and gave Abrams/MacNaughton no
13
1916 North Saint Andrews Place
Richard S. MacNaughton, Esq.

Hollywood, California 90068

opportunity to be heard in violation of Abrams/MacNaughton constitutional

14
rights due notice and due process, making it legally void to ry to impose the
15
December 26, 2014 order on Abrams/MacNaughton.
16
17 25. In November 2014, after Judge Goodman had dismissed Frank
18 Angel’s motion and had determined that Frank Angel was not SaveHywd’s
19 attorney, Frank Angel had no standing to re-file his Code of Civil Procedure
20 §128.7 Motion.
21
26. In the latter part of 2017, Judge Goodman started to serve as justice
22
pro tem in the Second Appellate District, and the SaveHywd case was trans-
23
ferred to Judge John Torribio Department G in Norwalk.
24
25 27. Although Judge Goodman had taken Frank Angel’s Code of Civil
26 Procedure, § 128.7 Motion off calendar, on December 3, 2014, Frank Angel
27 ignored the fact his motion was off calendar and he filed a Notice of Change in
28 Hearing Location and Time re Motion of Petitioner Savehollywood.org for
_______________________________
Complaint for Civil Rights Violations Page 7 of 12
 1 Sanctions under Code of Civil Procedure Section 128.7.
2
3 28. On February 9, 2015 Judge John Torribio issued a tentative ruling
4
denying Frank Angel’s Code of Civil Procedure § 128.7 motion for monetary
sanctions. The next day on February 10, 2015 during oral argument, Frank
5
Angel told Judge Torribio that Attorney MacNaughton was a troublemaker Jew
6
who would “refuse Jesus Christ” and then Frank Angel rushed to the bench
7
where he and Judge Torribio had a sidebar which excluded Attorney Mac
8 Naughton over his repeated objections, but Attorney MacNaughton heard a few
9 words discussing the fact that he was really a trouble, and a Jew named Abrams.
10 After that sidebar about Attorney MacNaughton’s being a Jew, Judge Torribio
11 changed his ruling and granted Frank Angel’s motion and sanctioned Attorney
12 MacNaughton $26,000.00 plus costs.
13
1916 North Saint Andrews Place
Richard S. MacNaughton, Esq.

Hollywood, California 90068

29. On May 14, 2015 without denying any of the facts of the side bar
14
with Frank Angel over Abrams/MacNaughton’s Jewish heritage, Judge Torribio
15
denied a Petitioner Hollywoodians Encouraging Logical Planning’s [HELP’s]
16
motion to disqualify Judge Torribio on the grounds of bias. Abrams/Mac
17 Naughton was also the attorney for co-petitioner HELP and Judge Torribio was
18 excluding HELP from the post judgment CEQA notices and hearings. In his
19 Strike Order to HELP Motion to Disqualify, Judge Torribio did not dispute any
20 of the facts nor did he make any statement that an attorney’s Jewish heritage
21 should not be inserted into a judicial proceeding, 4 but rather he asserted that he
had a state constitutional right, Art VI, Sec 10, stating "The court may make any
22
comment on the evidence and the testimony and credibility of any witness as in
23
its opinion is necessary for the proper determination of the cause." “Comment
24
on evidence” was an oblique reference to Frank Angel’s and judge Torribio’s
25
26
4
27 Judge Torribio May 14, 2015 verification contained this statement which
ignored the actual exchange in which he participated. “I am not prejudiced or
28 biased against or in favor of any party to this proceeding or their counsel.”
_______________________________
Complaint for Civil Rights Violations Page 8 of 12
 1 side bar conference that Attorney MacNaughton was a troublemaker Jew who
2 would refuse Jesus Christ. In line with his assertion of a state constitutional
3 right extending to “evidence, testimony, and credence of any witness,” Judge
4
Torribio’s March 9, 2015 decision had also altered the evidence which Abrams-
MacNaughton had offered in opposition to Frank Angel’s CCP, § 128.7 Motion.
5
For example, in the Frank Angel CCP 128.7 Motion before Judge Torribio,
6
Abrams/Mac Naughton produced The MacNaughton Attorney Client Contract
7
whereby SaveHywd had retained him and not Frank Angel, but Judge Torribio
8 said that it was an Undisputed Fact that The MacNaughton Attorney Client
9 Contract had hired Frank Angel. Judge Torribio also said it was an undisputed
10 fact that Ziggy Kruse, a member of SaveHywd, had stated that Frank Angel was
11 SaveHywd’s CEQA attorney which was false; she had stated the opposite.
12 Judge Torribio also concealed the August 25, 2012 Frank Angel contract which
showed that MacNaughton was the lead attorney and that Frank Angel was not
13
1916 North Saint Andrews Place
Richard S. MacNaughton, Esq.

Hollywood, California 90068

authorized to participate in any appellate proceedings. Plaintiff is informed,

14
believes and thereupon alleges that the aforesaid mischaracterization of evidence
15
fall under the rubric of Judge Torribio’s May 14, 2015 assertion of a state
16
constitutional right: "The court may make any comment on the evidence and the
17 testimony and credibility of any witness as in its opinion is necessary for the
18 proper determination of the cause."
19
20 30. When Abrams/MacNaughton appealed Judge Torribio’s Strike
21 Order in the HELP case, on June 26, 2015 in appellate case #B 264397 Justice
Turner sustained Judge Torribio’s Order Striking the Disqualification based on
22
trial court judges’ state constitutional right including the use of religious criteria
23
to governing their courtrooms.
24
25 31. When SaveHywd appealed Judge Torribio’s March 9, 2015
26 decision, Justice Turner refused to allow Division 5 to hear the appeal on the
27 grounds that Abrams/MacNaughton had been removed as SaveHywd’s attorney.
28 When Justice Turner learned that SaveHywd had a co-counsel, Edward Pilot
_______________________________
Complaint for Civil Rights Violations Page 9 of 12
 1 who is also Jewish, and he had actually been the signatory to the appeal, Justice
2 Turner became irate and threatened Attorney Pilot with state bar disciplinary
3 actions and heavy financial sanctions. Attorney Pilot withdrew as SaveHywd’s
4
attorney in face of the threats.

5
32. Thereafter, on April 12, 2015, Division 5 issued $9,000.00 in
6
sanctions against Abrams/MacNaughton on the ground that he had to know that
7
the December 26, 2014 prevented him from acting as SaveHywd’s attorney.
8 Abrams/MacNaughton seeks to have this sanctions order also set aside as void
9 since it is expressly based upon Justice Turner’s void December 26, 2014 order.
10 The sanctions award was made in favor of SaveHywd, and SaveHywd waived
11 the sanctions and again SaveHywd fired Frank Angel, and SaveHywd affirmed
12 that Abrams/Mac Naughton was its attorney.
13
1916 North Saint Andrews Place
Richard S. MacNaughton, Esq.

Hollywood, California 90068

33. After December 26, 2014, SaveHywd and Abrams/MacNaughton

14
made repeated requests that Justice Turner recuse himself from hearing any
15
subsequent case wherein he wanted to use the December 26, 2014 order due to
16
Justice Turner’s personal involvement that the order had been void for lack of
17 jurisdiction and hence outside the bounds of his judicial immunity. Under the
18 general principles set forth in 28 USC § 455, Justice Turner had a serious
19 conflict of interest of both appearance of impropriety and actual personal stake
20 in outcome. Unlike a case where the trial court makes an order, Justice Turner
21 acted like a court of original jurisdiction, decided an issue where he had no
jurisdiction and then he presided over the appeal of his void order.
22
23
34. Without a stay order against the defendant State Bar, Abrams/Mac
24
Naughton will suffer irreparable harm in that case 16-O-13106 can continue and
25 he will be deprived of the defense that the order/s on which the charges are
26 based are void.
27
28 35. Abrams/MacNaughton seeks a judicial determination that Justice
_______________________________
Complaint for Civil Rights Violations Page 10 of 12
 1 Turner’s December 26, 2014 order removing Richard MacNaughton as
2 SaveHywd’s attorney and making Frank Angel SaveHywd’s attorney was void
3 for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, lack of personal jursisdiction over
4
Abrams/MacNaughton and lack of due process (no notice and no opportunity
to be heard).
5
6
36. Abrams/MacNaughton invokes both the court’s equitable power and
7
Federal Rule 60 to have the state court order/s declared void. Void orders are
8 a nullity and may be set aside years later.
9
10 37. Abrams/MacNaughton may invoke Rule 15(a) of Federal Rules of
11 Civil Procedure to amend his Complaint one time as a matter of right within 21
12 days of service without leave of court. Defendant State Bar gave him from
Wednesday afternoon July 18, 2018 until close of business Friday July 20, 2018
13
1916 North Saint Andrews Place
Richard S. MacNaughton, Esq.

Hollywood, California 90068

to file his complaint and seek a stay order from the state bar, and he lacks the
14
time and expertise in advance of filing to make certain his complaint is accurate
15
on all its particularities.
16
17 38. Abrams/MacNaughton seeks a determination that the afore-
18 mentioned conduct has deprived him of his civil rights under 42 USC § 1983
19 including but not limited to judicial officers, such as Judge John Torribio, using
20 Abrams/MacNaughton’s Jewish heritage as grounds to discriminate against him
21 and his clients.
22
39. Abrams/MacNaughton also seeks a stay order against the State Bar
23
of California in case # 16-O-13106 (the Abrams/MacNaughton case) until after
24
a final determination of this federal litigation.
25
26 40. Abrams/MacNaughton seeks reasonbale attorneys fees and costs
27 including costs be reimbursed to this court under 42 U.S.C. § 1988(b) against
28 Defendant State Bar and against Defendant Los Angeles Superior Court.
_______________________________
Complaint for Civil Rights Violations Page 11 of 12
 1 Wherefore plaintiff prays for relief as follows:
2
3 1. A stay order against Defendant State Bar’s proceeding with its case
4
number 16-O-13106 against Abrams/MacNaughton and said stay shall remain
in effect until the final judicial determination of this federal case.
5
6
2. Judicial determination the December 26, 2014 order by Justice Paul
7
Turner and all subsequent orders based thereupon, directly or indirectly as will
8 be established by proof, are void as products of a void order.
9
10 3. That Decision 5's April 12, 2015 ca. $26,000.00 and ca. $9,000.00
11 in sanction orders against Abrams/MacNaughton are void.
12
4. That any other or further orders based, directly or indirectly, upon
13
1916 North Saint Andrews Place
Richard S. MacNaughton, Esq.

Hollywood, California 90068

Justice Turner’s void orders are likewise void.

14
15
5. That Abrams/MacNaughton has been deprived him of his civil rights
16
under 42 USC 1983.
17
18 6. That Abrams/MacNaughton is entitled to attorneys fees and costs
19 under 42 U.S.C. § 1988(b))
20
21 Dated: July 20, 2018 Plaintiff in Pro Per
22
By ______________________________
23 Richard Lee Abrams
24
25
26
27
28
_______________________________
Complaint for Civil Rights Violations Page 12 of 12