Colbern C. Stuart III

Transcription

1 California Coalition for Families and Children PBC 4891 Pacific Hwy., Ste. 102 San Diego, CA D: Senator Diane Feinstein United States Senate 331 Hart Senate Office Bldg. Washington, DC August 20, 2014 Dear Senator Feinstein, I write in response to your correspondence of August 4, 2014 (enclosed). On behalf of California Coalition for Families and Children, PBC, thank you for your assistance in directing our Federal Tort Claims Act claim to the Department of Justice, and for forwarding Assistant Attorney General Delery s acknowledgement of our claim. Neither Mr. Delery nor anyone within the Department of Justice had responded to our direct communication of the Claim to the Department. Your assistance in achieving the Department s attention is very much appreciated by our membership. To assist your office in maintaining its file in this matter, I am enclosing a complete copy of the Tort Claims Act Form and attachments thereto submitted to the Department, and other documents you may find helpful in understanding the ongoing illegal activities of California s divorce industry. Another resource your office might fund useful in understanding the scope and devastating impact of this widespread exploitation of parents and children is a professional documentary recently produced by a San Diego film-maker and entrepreneur, Joseph Sorge. The film is narrated by Dr. Drew Pinsky and features many California officials and agencies you will recognize. Mr. Sorge has produced an outstanding introduction of this poorly-understood phenomenon of coordinated fraud, extortion, and abuse of state law authority victimizing families and children in the crisis of a domestic dispute. It is available on YouTube at Thank you again for your kind attention to our efforts. Please don t hesitate to reply should we be able to assist your office in any way. Sincerely, Colbern C. Stuart III Colbern C. Stuart, III, J.D. President, California Coalition for Families and Children, PBC encl.

2 Enclosures to August 20, 2014 letter from California Coalition to Senator Feinstein: 1. August 4, 2014 letter from Senator Feinstein to California Coalition; 2. July 16, 2014 letter from Assistant Attorney General Stuart F. Delery to Senator Feinstein; 3. July 24, 2014 letter from California Coalition to Senator Rand Paul; 4. April 10, 2014 letter from California Coalition to Governor Edmund Brown; 5. April 16, 201 letter from California Coalition to Attorney General Eric Holder; 6. Federal Tort Claims Act Claim Form against United States Department of Justice/United States Attorney Laura Duffy; 7. First Amended Complaint, California Coalition for Families and Children, PBC v. San Diego County Bar Assn. et al., USDC Case No. 13-cv-1944 (CAB) JLB

3

4

5 California Coalition for Families and Children PBC 4891 Pacific Hwy., Ste. 102 San Diego, CA D: July 24, 2014 Senator Rand Paul 124 Russell Senate Office Building Washington DC, Rand Paul for Senate PO Box Newport, KY Dear Senator Paul: I write to congratulate you on setting an outstanding example of integrity in leadership, and offer the support of California Coalition for Families and Children, a parents and children s civil liberties organization, toward what we hope to be your successful 2016 Presidential bid. California Coalition supports and defends the interests of family autonomy, health, and independence nationwide. We are nonpartisan, gender-neutral, privately funded, and strongly committed to fundamental constitutional values. We recognize that you share those values, and offer our organization s support toward what we hope to be your successful election to President of the United States in Our modest community of thousands of parents and children nationwide will be proud to stand with Rand. On behalf of California Coalition, I am also requesting your attention to a current issue important to our community of families and children, and which may garner attention in your future political campaigns. Crisis in Family Dispute Resolution One of our current initiatives is supporting families and children in the crisis of the tragic yet common crisis of family strife. We regularly witness the interests of families involved in local family and juvenile courts compromised at the hands of entrenched governmental and professional institutions which, though commissioned to assist families and children, frequently trespass on their interests. California Coalition has mobilized to promote family welfare through litigation and lobbying for family-oriented civil liberties, autonomy, and respect. California Coalition s parent network and litigation activity has uncovered a disturbing truth about our nation s family law institutions that has escaped federal attention: State- and locally-operated family dispute resolution institutions are broken, and regularly cause enormous harm to families in crisis. Our observation is not disputed even within the family law professional community. Large, highly-respected organizations such as the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts ( have over the past decade attempted to redirect the family law industry through development of professional ethical standards and professional education programs to

6 redress a growing crisis. Yet entrenched institutional interests and ideologically-warped family law policies have impeded sensible reform. We regularly report on these matters at our online news and information resource at Our experience working to defend families from the overreach of powerful professional and institutional interests has revealed three critical areas deserving of immediate attention: (1) the over-use of unregulated, unaccountable forensic psychologists as arms of a family court to coercively reorganize a dissolving family according to partisanship, ideology, or other interests extrinsic to the family itself; (2) the widespread abuse of legal process by loosely-regulated family law professionals who defraud and extort families including often their own clients through family dissolutions, and (3) standard legal processes in family courts that deprive families of fundamental due process and other rights that are mandatory for every other criminal and civil litigant. Through our litigation and reform efforts we are seeking to restore accountability of family court psychologists, judges, and lawyers, who collectively cast themselves as a single community, yet behave akin to a seventeenth century Star Chamber, functioning collectively as cop, judge, jury, and tragically often executioner of families in crisis. Their policies are not driven by science, but ideology. Their values not universal, but parochial. Their community is not populated or even influenced by those it serves families but by those who depend on the community s existence and expansion for survival. The offspring of this marriage of judge, cop, administrator, and advocate has been a behemoth quasi-public profit center for lawyers, psychologists, and government pensioners who have evolved to become a monstrous parasite on those they are constituted to serve. Our racketeering litigation has revealed that family law professionals themselves recognize that the practices of their own lawyers, judges, and evaluators are normally harmful and often dangerous, yet they have been ineffective at achieving a solution. In some cases professional organizations such as the American Psychological Association and American Bar Association have carved out special rules permitting this odd hybrid of psychologist-copjudge to run amok, trouncing family autonomy in an unimpeded power grab at the target family s expense. Our observations are not controverted by the family law industry itself but because the solutions require the institutional pain of change, inertia is fierce. We and others have resorted to litigation in federal courts, yet because these courts themselves see domestic relations matters as entirely local subjects, families reaching out for protections under the federal laws and the Constitution are often shut out of district courts. As a result, civil protections readily available to any ordinary criminal, immigrant, small business owner or billionaire banker are routinely denied to families, whose welfare is pronounced subordinate to more important matters on a federal docket. The result has been a relegation of family matters to the backwaters of a county courthouse, where vulnerable litigants become easy game in a civil rights vacuum. What We re Suggesting Though the institutions that inflict these injuries on families are organized locally, like education, employment, social welfare, and civil rights, the scope of the problems and potential solutions are nationwide. Families need and deserve at least the same level of respect for their autonomy and well-being as any other U.S. citizen. That welfare would benefit greatly from an 2

7 articulation of national policy to promote family integrity, autonomy, and respect backed by the power of principled federal oversight. Though the fundamental constitutional rights of familial association have been repeatedly articulated through decades of jurisprudence by our United States Supreme Court, local jurists, social workers, and bureaucrats deem themselves free to ignore this tradition because few fear accountability through indifferent state court systems. Indeed, many social welfare institutions see the family unit as competition, or even worse prey. We believe family health and integrity before, during, and after the sad yet common crisis of a dissolution should be a paramount priority of national domestic policy. One solution is simple for a political candidate: A clear articulation of the importance of family and need for local government to respect that American institution as a core plank in a national political campaign platform. Families even those in crisis can and should be empowered to do for themselves what government and professional institutions have in recent decades repeatedly failed. That message would likely ring true with millions of voters in every state. A second is to support the several existing reform initiatives such as the University of Denver s Honoring Families Initiative ( or improving accountability among state judges through the Quality Judges Initiative led by Justice Sandra Day O Connor ( in collaboration with the Institution for the Advancement of the American Legal System ( These programs offer a credible promise to improve the healthy function of local family courts and their appendage professional communities. Many other outstanding programs exist; more support and implementation of them is needed. A third involves your own colleagues within the Senate Judiciary Committee. Vetting for judges with the highest respect for non-partisan family interests and civil rights in general could greatly improve the prospects for family health and integrity within state and local institutions. Federal district and appellate court judges who respect fundamental family rights and the importance of federal oversight of state institutions that govern them is critical. Our federal courts are busy, but few customers deserve more attention than families in crisis. A fourth would be legislation reigning-in the ever-expanding judicial and quasijudicial immunities being counterfeited by judicial fiat in federal district and appellate courts. These judge-created immunities were imported by American courts from pre-revolution European monarchies. Initially justified as a necessary evil, today they have metastasized far beyond the limited scope intended by seminal United States Supreme Court decisions that invented them. Lately, social workers, psychologists, court-appointed guardians and others commissioned by a county judge are immunized from federal law, free to impose even intentional insults, injuries, and deprivations on families with little or no accountability. As a result, public and even private professionals hired by families regularly injure their own clients with absolute immunity. Whether caused by negligence, indifference, habitual incompetence, or malice, the harm is real, yet shielded by a judicial doctrine with which no legislature ever has or likely ever would approve. Immunities protect a system, but leave no incentive to improve that system, or potential for redress for damage done by that system. Congress re-examination of the proper scope of immunities of state officials with the goal of enhancing protections for our nation s most 3

8 important system families, not governments could re-invigorate self-correcting accountability within a system that has become dangerously habituated to externalizing the costs of its expansion. It might also win a few votes from the millions benefited by restoration of the most cherished and non-controversial of civil rights family. Selecting Bed Partners A final word of caution. We have learned through our work with families and the systems that govern them that today the foxes often guard the family law henhouse. Distinguishing factional interests is critical in this area laden with entrenched repeat players. Traditional professional organizations masquerade as guardians of family interests when in fact they are predators. The worst include the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, sections of the American Bar Association, and even the American Psychological Association, who have mobilized their enormous wealth and influence to protect their professional interests at the expense of healthy and open debate including the voices of families themselves. The area is also highly fractured along gender lines that touch on sensitive ideological imperatives. State-level institutions such as the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, state judges associations and government institutions such as California s Judicial Council, and national gender-identified organizations also use their influence to drive ideology and partisan policy. Distinguishing partisanship and ideology from honest reform in the debate is an important screen to develop in advancing true reform rather than a political agenda. Conclusion Thank you for your attention, integrity, and dedication to the core values that have made our nation great, and will keep it great for generations to come. We look forward to supporting your history-changing success. Sincerely, Colbern C. Stuart III Colbern C. Stuart, J.D. President, California Coalition for Families and Children, PBC cc: California Coalition for Families and Children, PBC membership 4

9 California Coalition for Families and Children 4891 Pacific Hwy., Ste. 102 San Diego, CA D: April 10, 2014 Governor Jerry Brown State Capitol, Suite 1173 Sacramento, CA Re : Report of Illegal Activity Among California Family Courts; California Coalition for Families and Children et al. v. San Diego County Bar Association et al., United States District Court, Southern District of California Case No. 13-cv-1944 CAB (BLM) Dear Governor Brown: I write to request you attention to a pattern of illegal activity within our state Superior Court system and ask for your help in remedying ongoing exploitation and oppression of families and children in our State. I am the President of California Coalition for Families and Children, PBC, a public benefit corporation comprised of parents and children organized to protect and promote parental autonomy, rights, and interests in domestic dispute and juvenile justice matters. I am also a lawyer and a parent. California Coalition has recently filed a lawsuit on behalf of its California members in United States District Court for the Southern District of California. I enclose a copy of the complaint in that matter. The allegations detail patterns of illegal collaboration between San Diego Superior Court Family Division judges, divorce attorneys, and the San Diego City Attorney s Office. These activities include patterns of fraud, extortion, and abuse of parents and children by Family Court psychologist custody evaluators who are appointed or hired to assist families undergoing divorce or family law matters. Our efforts in alerting the courts to these illegal abhorrent practices have been met with aggressive oppression. Local law enforcement has been deaf to our requests for protection. The complaint details the prosecution of our parenting group by San Diego City Attorney Jan Goldsmith in collusion with the San Diego County Bar Association and several county judges. It describes the efforts of Coalition members including Eileen Lasher, a mother who has been threatened and even arrested by the San Diego Superior Court in her efforts toward reform. Dr. Emad Tadros, M.D. is a father and Board Certified Psychiatrist and Neurologist practicing medicine at Scripps Medical Center in San Diego. He is a highly-respected member of the American Medical Association, American Psychiatric Association, and past Vice Chief of Scripps Behavioral

10 health Services. As a behavioral health professional he identified deviant practices among family court psychologists, and brought the issues to the attention of the Family Courts. Rather than gratitude, the courts sanctioned him for bringing a lawsuit against a leading custody evaluator psychologist, Dr. Stephen Doyne. He has been attacked personally and professionally, so much so he has quieted his efforts in support of reform despite maintaining strong convictions. I have represented the Coalition as its lawyer, President, and a parent in our reform efforts since As a lawyer practicing in California since 1995 I recognize how my own legal community is also a center of the problem, driving conflict-oriented solutions. Attorneys do so by stoking the already heightened emotions, and playing to the unfortunately common ignorance of our own clients. Unchecked, emotions and ignorance are easily converted into litigious clients, depleting public and private resources to resolve conflict which didn t exist before becoming involved in a court system that depends on conflict. Yet my efforts to reform my professional community has been met with resistance in the form of violence. In 2010 I was arrested at a meeting of the San Diego County Bar Association a group I have been a lawyer member of since beginning my practice in San Diego in 1995 while peacefully participating in a Family Law Practice Subsection seminar event. I was illegally prosecuted and spent fourteen months in San Diego County jail. The complaint details the coordinated lawlessness of the prosecution leading to my illegal imprisonment. We re asking for your help in reigning in certain practices of our Family Courts. These courts have adopted an extravagant scheme of requiring families in a divorce to hire private child psychologists to assist parents in a custody dispute. The psychologists are extremely expensive at $ per hour or more. Judges require parents to cooperate and pay for them or face losing custody. Once appointed, they assume reign over minute aspects of a divorcing family s life, and yet may not be fired without severe repercussion. They are trained as clinical psychologists, but offer opinions on the state s best interests of the child standard an extremely vague benchmark which even psychologists decry as unscientific. The evaluator best interests opinions create a vehicle for defrauding unsophisticated parents who, trusting in an authority figure psychologist or judge, invest a family s future in attempting to win a custody battle. Yet the opinions are little more than sleekly-packaged bias, speculation, and junk science. Details of this custody evaluator fraud scheme are available at our website at Exhibit 2 to the attached complaint provides additional detail of this process, and describes how it is going very, very wrong in San Diego. Middle class parents nationwide are enduring similar catastrophes, often absorbing tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars of family savings wealth far better saved for a child s education. An excellent description of the debacle has recently been the subject of a documentary film entitled DivorceCorp produced and direct by a San Diego entrepreneur, Joeseph Sorge, in cooperation with several Los Angeles-based film 2

11 producers. It focusses on California s divorce industry, identifying events and entities with which you will be familiar. Previews of the film are available free on YouTube and the entire film is available for download on ITunes. The problem arises because of the peculiar nature of Family Court jurisdiction and lack of federal and state oversight. Family courts exercise an unusual form of equity jurisdiction which gives them virtually unlimited authority, discretion, and few reviewable questions of law for appeal. There is little federal oversight through civil rights actions. Many federal courts have abstained from accepting even when they assert violations of federal civil rights laws, and state actors regularly assert immunities under the Eleventh Amendment or personal immunities for judicial or quasi-judicial activities. Attorneys have little exposure to malpractice lawsuits as the entire divorce industry has set its own best practices to incorporate fraud and extortion as the relevant standard of care. The industry regards itself as untouchable by it s own vulnerable client base families in crisis. The result of this unusual absence of checks and balances has become a perfect storm of unchecked power, absence of meaningful oversight, and financially-motivated professionals who operate the system lawyers, psychologists, and county-level bureaucrats, none of whom are open to input from litigants. Litigants encounter the system as a revolving door process with short term goals. There is no longer term litigant-side input to protect the legal and ethical integrity of the processes which deployed and policed by the system operators themselves. The resulting exploitation ruins families while enriching attorneys, psychologists, social workers, and judges who administer the processes they, and they alone, created. Solutions Your office can assist in many ways. We urge you to immediately direct the attention of law enforcement to the ongoing illegal activity identified in the complaint. Others solutions include encouraging or require use of meaningful alternative dispute resolution services in all Family Court cases. We suggest that even though Family Court matters are often difficult, collaborative and inexpensive solutions are not embraced because the existing interests directing litigants have no incentive to do so. Sponsored mediation and collaborative solutions are competition for attorneys and psychologists. Courts decry budget difficulties yet administer extraordinarily meticulous processes in a divorce. There are abundant solutions that don t require more funding, but they can t achieve adoption while entrenched interests desire their failure. Existing potential solutions include sponsored genuine mediation (not evaluation which pits parents in acrimony) by truly neutral professionals, dispute resolution education, programs, and coursework such as UpToParents for parents and professionals, and support for domestic dispute reform legislation, litigation, and parenting networks such as California Coalition to refocus the struggle away from 3

12 personal conflict or social or political ideology implementation to healthy outcomes for parents and children alike. We also support adoption of technological solutions to facilitate what should be ordinary interactions between divorcing parents child drop-offs, visitation, vacations and holidays, and other necessary co-parenting events that today often cannot be accomplished without court intervention. Citizens who have little choice but to utilize court services to accomplish what many families do with ease-such as schedule time with our children or resolve financial issues with a co-parent are often caught in unnecessarily wasteful trap of conflict. We enthusiastically support adoption of existing technology to promote efficiency and reduce conflict, and can provide your office with additional references for such resources on request. At a policy level, we urge more careful vetting of judicial candidates. Judges who approach their public duties with strong political or ideological agendas or weak respect for state and federal litigant rights are easily manipulated by family court regulars. Parents or lawyers who seek to exploit these judges know how to tweak a case to suit a judge s ideological leanings, needlessly attack a spouse, and escalate litigation costs. Selecting and disciplining judges to eliminate social or political agendas from the process and returning decision-making to parents promotes dignity, integrity, and ultimately financial stability for parents, children, and even Family Courts themselves. Disciplined judges with strong integrity and the utmost respect for state and federal law are qualities we perceive as largely absent from the family court bench. Divorce attorneys and Family Court judges have failed us they offer unhealthy institutional or coercive solutions to deeply personal issues that will never work no matter how much money is invested in them. Parents in crisis need support, perhaps education, and and guidance toward longer-term solutions, not judgment, litigation, and endless paperwork. They re today being sold an extraordinarily harmful and expensive solution that only solves the financial goals of those who administer the solution. We ask for your action. Our futures quite literally are at stake. Thank you for your attention. Sincerely, Colbern C. Stuart III Colbern C. Stuart, III, J.D., President, California Coalition for Families and Children 4

13 cc: Commission on Judicial Nominees Evaluation of the State Bar of California Commission on Judicial Performance Ms. Laura Duffy, Esq., United States Attorney, Southern District of California Ms. Daphne Hearn, Special Agent In Charge Federal Bureau of Investigation Ms. Bonnie Dumanis, Esq., District Attorney, County of San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer Mr. Robert Brewer, Esq. Mr. Steve Cooley, Esq. The San Diego Union Tribune California Coalition for Families and Children, PBC Membership 5

14 California Coalition for Families and Children 4891 Pacific Hwy., Ste. 102 San Diego, CA D: April 16, 2014 Mr. Eric Holder United States Attorney General U.S. Department of Justice 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC Re : Federal Tort Claims Act Claim Against Ms. Laura Duffy, United States Attorney, Southern District of California, by California Coalition for Families and Children, PBC, Colbern C. Stuart, III; United States District Court, Southern District of California, Case No. 13-cv-1944 CAB (BLM) Dear Mr. Holder: I write to alert you of a claim presented yesterday pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1346(b) regarding Ms. Laura Duffy, United States Attorney, Southern District of California. I enclose a copy of the complete claim form and attachments. This claim is premised on violations of 42 U.S.C and Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). Ms. Duffy and unknown attorneys and personnel within the United States Attorney s Office are alleged to maintain policies and practices in violation of Claimants rights to equal protection under the Constitution and Laws of the United States. Such policies and practices within the United States Attorney s Office have and continue to cause, allow, or fail to prevent deprivation of the Claimants rights as members of each EQUAL PROTECTION CLASS defined in the Amended Complaint, causing injury therein. I am the individual claimant and President of claimant California Coalition for Families and Children. California Coalition has filed a lawsuit in United States District Court for the Southern District of California entitled California Coalition for Families and Children et al. v. San Diego County Bar Association et al., United States District Court, Southern District of California Case No. 13-cv-1944 which details the allegations underlying this claim. A copy of the First Amended Complaint in this matter and key exhibits thereto is enclosed. This claim alleges that Ms. Duffy and others within her office maintain policies depriving a class of citizens of violation of Equal Protection of the Laws. Ms. Duffy has enacted, maintained, and enforced these policies by failing to prosecute Family Court

15 judges, attorneys, social workers, and law enforcement who are within the U.S. Attorney s Office jurisdiction for their violations of civil rights laws protecting families and children. Families are a class a class that has been identified under federal and California state law as entitled to the highest protection from discriminatory laws, policies, procedures, and customs. But rather than treating families with the special care required under state and federal law, California color of law actors regularly treat them in the words of California s former Supreme Court Chief Justice Ronald George as second-class citizens, depriving families of the rights, privileges, and immunities extended to all other California citizens. See Elkins v. Superior Court, 41 Cal. 4th 1337, 1368, 163 P.3d 160, 177 (2007). Ms. Duffy s policies in enforcement of the civil rights laws restraining state officials facilitates and illegally tolerates those deprivations. We have observed a distinctive failure of federal authorities to respond to meritorious claims of flagrant illegal activity by state actors such as that detailed in the First Amended Complaint. Prosecution for those crimes are within the jurisdiction of this District s United States Attorney, yet despite abundant evidence of illegal activity, no prosecutions have been initiated, and those investigations we are aware of or have participated in have not resulted in initiation of formal criminal or civil action by the government. With this failure to enforce the laws protecting families and children, suffering continues unabated. The First Amended Complaint details the expansion of the illegal criminal enterprises that have grown up around this permitted illegal behavior, and the violence those enterprises have resorted to in protecting their commercial markets from competition by healthier alternative service providers such as California Coalition. The fallout is a deplorable and widespread exploitation of the futures and wealth of families and children in the crisis of a domestic dispute all under the nose of state and federal officials with the power to prevent the same. Our calls for assistance from state and local law enforcement have gone unanswered. We have requested the assistance of federal law enforcement to date without significant response. We are therefore proceeding with the enclosed claim to begin the formal process for redressing the heinous crimes against our most vulnerable citizens occurring undeterred within our District. Thank you for your attention. Sincerely, Colbern C. Stuart III Colbern C. Stuart, III, J.D., President, California Coalition for Families and Children 2

16 Enclosures cc: Ms. Laura Duffy, United States Attorney United States Attorney s Office Southern District of California California Coalition for Families and Children, PBC Members 3

17 CLAIM FOR DAMAGE, INJURY, OR DEATH INSTRUCTIONS: Please read carefully the instructions on the reverse side and supply information requested on both sides of this form. Use additional sheet(s) if necessary. See reverse side for additional instructions. FORM APPROVED OMB NO Submit to Appropriate Federal Agency: 2. Name, address of claimant, and claimant's personal representative if any. (See instructions on reverse). Number, Street, City, State and Zip code. United States Attorney's Office Civil Division 880 Front St. Room 6293 San Diego, CA TYPE OF EMPLOYMENT MILITARY CIVILIAN 4. DATE OF BIRTH 5. MARITAL STATUS 6. DATE AND DAY OF ACCIDENT 7. TIME (A.M. OR P.M.) 03/02/1968 N/A California Coalition for Families and Children, PBC, and Colbern C. Stuart, III 4891 Pacific Hwy Ste 102 San Diego, CA /20/2013 Ongoing Ongoing 8. BASIS OF CLAIM (State in detail the known facts and circumstances attending the damage, injury, or death, identifying persons and property involved, the place of occurrence and the cause thereof. Use additional pages if necessary). Please see attached. This claim is pursuant to 42 U.S.C and Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). Ms. Laura Duffy and unknown attorneys and personnel within the United States Attorney's Office maintain policies and practices in violation of Claimants' rights to equal protection under the Constitution and Laws of the United States. Such policies and practices within the United States Attorneys Office have and continue to cause, allow,or fail to prevent deprivation of the Claimants' rights as members of each EQUAL PROTECTION CLASS defined in the Amended Complaint, causing injury therein. 9. PROPERTY DAMAGE NAME AND ADDRESS OF OWNER, IF OTHER THAN CLAIMANT (Number, Street, City, State, and Zip Code). BRIEFLY DESCRIBE THE PROPERTY, NATURE AND EXTENT OF THE DAMAGE AND THE LOCATION OF WHERE THE PROPERTY MAY BE INSPECTED. (See instructions on reverse side). Lost business revenue, income, business property, reputational injury. See attached First Amended Complaint 10. PERSONAL INJURY/WRONGFUL DEATH STATE THE NATURE AND EXTENT OF EACH INJURY OR CAUSE OF DEATH, WHICH FORMS THE BASIS OF THE CLAIM. IF OTHER THAN CLAIMANT, STATE THE NAME OF THE INJURED PERSON OR DECEDENT. See attached First Amended Complaint 11. WITNESSES NAME ADDRESS (Number, Street, City, State, and Zip Code) See attached First Amended Complaint 12. (See instructions on reverse). AMOUNT OF CLAIM (in dollars) 12a. PROPERTY DAMAGE 12b. PERSONAL INJURY 12c. WRONGFUL DEATH 12d. TOTAL (Failure to specify may cause forfeiture of your rights). 100,000, ,000,000 I CERTIFY THAT THE AMOUNT OF CLAIM COVERS ONLY DAMAGES AND INJURIES CAUSED BY THE INCIDENT ABOVE AND AGREE TO ACCEPT SAID AMOUNT IN FULL SATISFACTION AND FINAL SETTLEMENT OF THIS CLAIM. 13a. SIGNATURE OF CLAIMANT (See instructions on reverse side). 13b. PHONE NUMBER OF PERSON SIGNING FORM 14. DATE OF SIGNATURE Colbern C. Stuart III CIVIL PENALTY FOR PRESENTING FRAUDULENT CLAIM April 15, 2014 CRIMINAL PENALTY FOR PRESENTING FRAUDULENT CLAIM OR MAKING FALSE STATEMENTS The claimant is liable to the United States Government for a civil penalty of not less than $5,000 and not more than $10,000, plus 3 times the amount of damages sustained by the Government. (See 31 U.S.C. 3729). Fine, imprisonment, or both. (See 18 U.S.C. 287, 1001.) Authorized for Local Reproduction Previous Edition is not Usable NSN STANDARD FORM 95 (REV. 2/2007) PRESCRIBED BY DEPT. OF JUSTICE 28 CFR 14.2

18 INSURANCE COVERAGE In order that subrogation claims may be adjudicated, it is essential that the claimant provide the following information regarding the insurance coverage of the vehicle or property. 15. Do you carry accident Insurance? Yes If yes, give name and address of insurance company (Number, Street, City, State, and Zip Code) and policy number. No 16. Have you filed a claim with your insurance carrier in this instance, and if so, is it full coverage or deductible? Yes No 17. If deductible, state amount. 18. If a claim has been filed with your carrier, what action has your insurer taken or proposed to take with reference to your claim? (It is necessary that you ascertain these facts). 19. Do you carry public liability and property damage insurance? Yes If yes, give name and address of insurance carrier (Number, Street, City, State, and Zip Code). No INSTRUCTIONS Claims presented under the Federal Tort Claims Act should be submitted directly to the "appropriate Federal agency" whose employee(s) was involved in the incident. If the incident involves more than one claimant, each claimant should submit a separate claim form. A CLAIM SHALL BE DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN PRESENTED WHEN A FEDERAL AGENCY RECEIVES FROM A CLAIMANT, HIS DULY AUTHORIZED AGENT, OR LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE, AN EXECUTED STANDARD FORM 95 OR OTHER WRITTEN NOTIFICATION OF AN INCIDENT, ACCOMPANIED BY A CLAIM FOR MONEY Complete all items - Insert the word NONE where applicable. DAMAGES IN A SUM CERTAIN FOR INJURY TO OR LOSS OF PROPERTY, PERSONAL INJURY, OR DEATH ALLEGED TO HAVE OCCURRED BY REASON OF THE INCIDENT. THE CLAIM MUST BE PRESENTED TO THE APPROPRIATE FEDERAL AGENCY WITHIN TWO YEARS AFTER THE CLAIM ACCRUES. Failure to completely execute this form or to supply the requested material within two years from the date the claim accrued may render your claim invalid. A claim is deemed presented when it is received by the appropriate agency, not when it is mailed. If instruction is needed in completing this form, the agency listed in item #1 on the reverse side may be contacted. Complete regulations pertaining to claims asserted under the Federal Tort Claims Act can be found in Title 28, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 14. Many agencies have published supplementing regulations. If more than one agency is involved, please state each agency. The claim may be filled by a duly authorized agent or other legal representative, provided evidence satisfactory to the Government is submitted with the claim establishing express authority to act for the claimant. A claim presented by an agent or legal representative must be presented in the name of the claimant. If the claim is signed by the agent or legal representative, it must show the title or legal capacity of the person signing and be accompanied by evidence of his/her authority to present a claim on behalf of the claimant as agent, executor, administrator, parent, guardian or other representative. If claimant intends to file for both personal injury and property damage, the amount for each must be shown in item number 12 of this form. The amount claimed should be substantiated by competent evidence as follows: (a) In support of the claim for personal injury or death, the claimant should submit a written report by the attending physician, showing the nature and extent of the injury, the nature and extent of treatment, the degree of permanent disability, if any, the prognosis, and the period of hospitalization, or incapacitation, attaching itemized bills for medical, hospital, or burial expenses actually incurred. (b) In support of claims for damage to property, which has been or can be economically repaired, the claimant should submit at least two itemized signed statements or estimates by reliable, disinterested concerns, or, if payment has been made, the itemized signed receipts evidencing payment. (c) In support of claims for damage to property which is not economically repairable, or if the property is lost or destroyed, the claimant should submit statements as to the original cost of the property, the date of purchase, and the value of the property, both before and after the accident. Such statements should be by disinterested competent persons, preferably reputable dealers or officials familiar with the type of property damaged, or by two or more competitive bidders, and should be certified as being just and correct. (d) Failure to specify a sum certain will render your claim invalid and may result in forfeiture of your rights. This Notice is provided in accordance with the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(3), and concerns the information requested in the letter to which this Notice is attached. A. Authority: The requested information is solicited pursuant to one or more of the following: 5 U.S.C. 301, 28 U.S.C. 501 et seq., 28 U.S.C et seq., 28 C.F.R. Part 14. PRIVACY ACT NOTICE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT NOTICE B. Principal Purpose: The information requested is to be used in evaluating claims. C. Routine Use: See the Notices of Systems of Records for the agency to whom you are submitting this form for this information. D. Effect of Failure to Respond: Disclosure is voluntary. However, failure to supply the requested information or to execute the form may render your claim "invalid." This notice is solely for the purpose of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 6 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to the Director, Torts Branch, Attention: Paperwork Reduction Staff, Civil Division, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC or to the Office of Management and Budget. Do not mail completed form(s) to these addresses. STANDARD FORM 95 REV. (2/2007) BACK

19 California Coalition for Families and Children 4891 Pacific Hwy., Ste. 102 San Diego, CA D: April 17, 2014 Senator Diane Feinstein United States Senate 331 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, D.C Re : Federal Tort Claims Act Claim Against Ms. Laura Duffy, United States Attorney, Southern District of California, by California Coalition for Families and Children, PBC, Colbern C. Stuart, III; United States District Court, Southern District of California Case No. 13-cv-1944 CAB (BLM) Dear Senator Feinstein: I write to alert you to a claim filed yesterday relating to ongoing illegal activity within the Southern District of California, and the illegal policies and practices of your United States Attorney s Office for the Southern District and our local Federal Bureau of Investigation office which comprise the claim. By copy of this letter to your Chairman and Ranking Member of the Committee on the Judiciary, I alert the Committee to the same, and request their attention and action as well. Yesterday California Coalition for Families and Children presented a tort claim related to this activity to the United States Department of Justice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1346(b). A copy is enclosed. I am the individual claimant and President of claimant California Coalition for Families and Children. The claim alleges that Ms. Laura Duffy, United States Attorney for the Southern District of California, maintains policies and practices which violate the equal protection rights of a class of citizens comprised of parents, children, and others in familial relationships defined under California law. The policies cause or allow state family courts, divorce attorneys, and related professionals unrestrained ability to deprive families and children of fundamental rights under the First, Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. California Coalition has also filed a lawsuit in United States District Court for the Southern District of California entitled California Coalition for Families and Children et al. v. San Diego County Bar Association et al., United States District Court, Southern District of California Case No. 13-cv-1944 which details the allegations underlying this claim. A copy is enclosed.

20 The claim asserts that Ms. Duffy has enacted, maintained, and enforced policies of refusing to police or prosecute Family Court attorneys, social workers, judges, and law enforcement who are within the U.S. Attorney s Office and local Federal Bureau of Investigation s jurisdiction. These policies constitute a violation of federal equal protection rights of families and children. Families are a class a class that has been identified under federal and California state law as entitled to the highest protection from discriminatory laws, policies, procedures, and customs. But rather than treating families with the special care required under state and federal law, California color of law actors regularly treat them in the words of California s former Supreme Court Chief Justice Ronald George as second-class citizens, depriving families of the rights, privileges, and immunities extended to all other California citizens. See Elkins v. Superior Court, 41 Cal. 4th 1337, 1368, 163 P.3d 160, 177 (2007). Ms. Duffy s policies in refusing to enforce the civil rights laws which should restrain state officials instead facilitates those deprivations. We have observed a repeated failure of federal authorities to respond to meritorious reports of flagrant illegal activity by state actors such as that detailed in the First Amended Complaint. Prosecution for those crimes is within the jurisdiction of this District s United States Attorney, yet despite abundant evidence of illegal activity, no prosecutions have been initiated, and those investigations we are aware of or have participated in have not resulted in initiation of formal criminal or civil action by the government. With this failure to enforce the laws protecting families and children, business practices of a domestic dispute industry built on fraud, extortion, deprivation of civil rights and abuse of process have spawned and continue to grow unabated. The First Amended Complaint details the expansion of the illegal racketeering enterprises that have grown up around this permitted illegal behavior, and the violence those enterprises have resorted to in protecting their commercial markets from competition by healthier family friendly alternative service providers such as California Coalition. The fallout is a deplorable yet widespread exploitation of the futures and wealth of families and children in the crisis of a domestic dispute all under the nose of state and federal officials with the power to prevent the same. Our calls for assistance from state and local law enforcement have gone unanswered. We have requested the assistance of federal law enforcement to date without significant response. We are therefore proceeding with the enclosed claim to begin the formal process for redressing these crimes against our most vulnerable citizens occurring undeterred within our District. We re asking for your assistance in (1) compelling local federal law enforcement to investigate and prosecute these crimes, (2) to examine the administrative policies of the U.S. Attorney s Office which permit this abuse and exploitation for compliance with standards of equal protection for these protected classes, and (3) to review the performance of Ms. Duffy and other federal officials who permit the same to occur with these performance failures in mind. 2