DORIS M. RICH

Plaintiff

-against-

JOHN D. O'HARA, R. MICHAEL SMITH, NEEL S. RICH, MYRNA RICH, BETH RHEA and JAMES A. MOORE

Defendants.
_____________________________________________________

COMPLAINT
_____________________________________________________

DORIS M. RICH, being duly sworn, deposes and says:

1. This action is brought under the Federal Anti-Kidnapping Act, 18 U.S.C. 1201, under the Federal Hostage Taking Act, 18 U.S.C. 1203, under the provisions of the Social Security Act pertaining to the rights of the elderly and the protection of residents, and under the First, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth, Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States including the First Amendment Constitutional right to freedom of association and the First, Forth, Fifth, Ninth and Fourteenth Amendment Constitutional rights to privacy and the freedom to conduct family affairs without outside governmental interference. This action is also brought under 42 U.S.C. 1981, 1982, 1983, 1985 and 1986 for violations of the civil rights of the plaintiff and to enjoin the actions of the state court judge, also under 42 U.S.C. 1983. The plaintiff alleges violations of section 42 U.S.C. 1395i-3, subsection (c) (3) (B), of the Social Security Act regarding "requirements relating to residents' rights", which guarantees the constitutional right of unlimited access to immediate family members and section 42 U.S.C. 1395i-3, subsection (c) (1) (A) (ii-iii) which guarantees the plaintiff grandmother the right to be free from physical restraints.

2. Jurisdiction is based upon the Klu Klux Klan Act, under 42 U.S.C. 1983, under Federal Question, 28 U.S.C. 1331, and under pendent jurisdiction.

THE PARTIES

3. Doris M. Rich was born on April 26, 1905 and is now 89 years old. Doris Rich presently resides at 2550 Webster Street, San Francisco, Cal. 94115, after having been forced to flee her home at 733 York Street, Vallejo, Cal. by the abusive actions of Myrna Rich, one of her daughters. Doris Rich has a net worth of between one and one and a half million dollars. Her assets consist primarily of houses, apartment buildings and other rental properties in Vallejo and Benicia.

4. John D. O'Hara is a crooked attorney practicing in Vallejo, Cal. and is the mastermind of a nefarious criminal scheme to steal all of the money of Doris M. Rich and to confine and isolate from her friends and relatives the person of Doris M. Rich. His address is 850 Tuolumne Street, Vallejo CA 94590

5. R. Michael Smith is a judge of the Solano County Superior Court in Fairfield, California who has, corruptly and in total absence of all jurisdiction, entered orders which would place the plaintiff under civil arrest and deprive the plaintiff of all of her money and all of her rights to associate with friends, relatives and family members. The address of R. Michael Smith is Solano County Superior Court, Solano County Courthouse, 600 Union Avenue, 2nd floor, Fairfield CA 94533.

6. As a result of the aforementioned corruptly entered and jurisdictionally void court orders, Plaintiff Doris M. Rich has been forced to flee and to go into hiding for fear of being placed under civil arrest. Doris M. Rich has already been deprived of all of her financial assets and is now dependent of friends and family members for support. The defendants are now seeking to prevent Doris M. Rich from having any association with the very friends and family members who are presently assisting her.

7. James A. Moore is a professional conservator. His address is P. O. Box 163657, Sacramento, Cal. 95816, Tel: (916) 523-1471, FAX: (916) 368-5503.

8. Neel S. Rich is the son of Doris M. Rich. His address is 277 West "H" St., Benicia CA 94510. Myrna Rich is the daughter of Doris Rich. She resides with her beloved boyfriend, Ralph Finley, at 525 Virginia Street, Vallejo, Cal.

9. Beth Rhea is a court investigator. Her address is 600 Union Avenue, 2nd floor, Fairfield CA 94533.

10. All of the above named defendants are engaged, have been engaged and, unless restrained and enjoined, will continue to be engaged in a scheme to steal all of the money of the plaintiff.

11. In or about May, 1994, the above named defendants, with the exception of James A. Moore, entered into a plan or conspiracy to seize all of the financial assets of Doris Rich, which amount in the aggregate to about one and a half million dollars, for their own financial betterment. Pursuant to this conspiracy, defendant Beth Rhea issued a false and fraudulent investigators report which was filled with lies and false information provided to her by Neel S. Rich and Myrna Rich. Beth Rhea never conducted a meaningful interview with Doris Rich and never spoke at all to her other daughter Arden Van Upp, who has an entirely different view that Neel Rich and Myrna Rich.

22. Since that time, in spite of being g bombarded with information which proves every sentence of the notorious Beth Rhea report to be false she has refused to change her report or to update her findings.

23. Subsequently, Judge R. Michael Smith, solely on the basis of this false report and without taking any sworn evidence under oath, and without receiving any medical evidence at all, imposed a "temporary" conservatorship on Doris Rich, and appointed James A. Moore as the conservator, all in violation of 42 U.S.C. 1983. For this reason, and because Doris Rich has been physically abused by Myrna Rich, Doris Rich was forced to flee from her home in Vallejo the next day.

24. Judge R. Michael Smith is personally liable for money damages as well as injunctive relief, because his actions were taken in total absence of all jurisdiction under the provisions of the California Code which govern such matters and Judge Smith knew or should have known that Doris Rich is fully competent.

25. Presently, the plaintiffs are in the process of hunting down Doris Rich for the purpose of confining her against her will. Meanwhile, Doris Rich is attempting to complete medical tests at the UCSF Medical Center to prove that she is competent. Doris Rich has already been tested on numerous occasions. Doris Rich has appointments scheduled for Monday, January 9 and Tuesday, January 10. These are supposed to be the final tests. The conservator and the other defendants know about these appointments. Doris Rich is afraid to keep her appointments for fear that she will be forcibly seized on the hospital premises and that she will not be allowed to complete her tests. James A. Moore has a financial interest in seeing to it that she never completes her tests because, if she proves herself to be fully competent, then he will not get paid.

26. The purpose to all of this is that the defendants anticipate the death of Doris Rich. The objective of Neel and Myrna Rich is and has been to write Arden Rich, the other daughter of Doris Rich, out of the will, so that Arden will get no money and Neel and Myrna (plus another sister, Rosalind, who lives in Ohio and is not involved in this) will get it all. None of the defendants have any interest in the health and well being of Doris Rich. Instead, the defendants are solely interested in getting her money.

26. For these reasons, the plaintiff demands a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction and permanent injunction against all of the defendants or their agents from picking up or transporting against her will or otherwise the plaintiff or from interfering with her financial assets. The plaintiff demands a judgment in the amount of ten million dollars and that this action be tried by jury

WHEREFORE, the plaintiff demands a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction and permanent injunction against all of the defendants or their agents from picking up or transporting against her will or otherwise the plaintiff or from interfering with her financial assets. The plaintiff demands a judgment in the amount of ten million dollars and that this action be tried by jury.

Subscribed and sworn this 9th day of January, 1995

_______________________
DORIS M. RICH

For the Story of Doris M. Rich, see: Under House Arrest at Age 90 . For the Motion by Doris M. Rich for a Temporary Restraining Order, see: Doris TRO. For the Petition for Rehearing by Doris M. Rich, see: Petition for Rehearing . For the complaint by Doris M. Rich to the California State Bar, see: Complaint to the State Bar . For the complaint to the San Francisco Grand Jury, see: Complaint to the Grand Jury . For the refutation to the report of the Court investigator, see: Answer to Report of Beth Rhea . For the opening brief of Doris M. Rich, see: Opening Brief .