Complaint for Malicious Prosecution the Rev. Will bouvel

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY ILLINOIS CIVIL DEPARTMENT, LAW DIVISION DAVID G. DUGGAN Plaintiff, v.

WILLIAM BOUVEL, WEBSTER SMEDLEY, ST. CHRYSOSTOM’S EPISCOPAL CHURCH, and BRENDAN F. KELLY, individually and in his capacity as Director of the Illinois State Police, Defendants.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. 24 L 001036 Hon. Maire Dempsey

Room 2209, Daley Center

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR MALICIOUS PROSECUTION, CIVIL CONSPIRACY and VIOLATION of CIVIL RIGHTS LAWS Plaintiff David G. Duggan (“Duggan”), pro-se, complains of Will Bouvel (“Bouvel”), Webster Smedley (“Smedley”), St. Chrysostom’s Episcopal Church (“St. Chrys”), and Brendan F. Kelly (“Kelly”), individually and in his capacity as Director of the Illinois State Police, as follows: Jurisdiction and Venue 1. At all times relevant, Duggan was a resident of Cook County, Illinois.

2. At all times relevant, Bouvel was a resident of Cook County, Illinois.

3. At all times relevant, Smedley was a resident of Cook County, Illinois.

4. At all times relevant, St. Chrys was a parish of The Episcopal Church in the Diocese of Chicago, on information and belief registered under the Illinois Religious Corporation Act. 5. At all times relevant, on information and belief, Brendan F. Kelly was a resident of St. Clair County, Illinois.

6. This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 735 ILCS 5/2-209 in that all the events which form the basis of this complaint took place in Cook County, IL. 7. Venue is proper in Cook County pursuant to 735 ILCS 5/2-101 because some part of the transactions which form the basis of this complaint took place in Cook Count, IL and defendants reside or do business in Cook County.

Parties 8. Duggan is an attorney admitted to practice law in both Illinois and New York states. He 1

has never been subject to any bar disciplinary measures, or criminal prosecutions, nor before 2022 an order of protection. He is also a writer of devotional essays published in print by the Episcopal Diocese of Chicago and online. For nearly all of his life, Duggan has worshiped at Episcopal parishes. In the Diocese of Chicago, he has served the Episcopal Church in a number of board and executive functions. He has never served in the United States military.

9. Bouvel is a minister ordained in June 2022 in The Episcopal Church (“TEC”), a denomination headquartered in New York City and a member of the world-wide Anglican Communion, headquartered in Canterbury, England. On information and belief, he is married to another man. At the relevant times, Bouvel was employed by St. Chrysostom’s Episcopal Church in Chicago, IL and all of his actions were during the course and within the scope of that employment.

10. Smedley is a minister ordained in TEC and until June 30, 2022 was the chief religious officer of St. Chrys, known as the Rector. His actions alleged were during the course and within the scope of that employment.

11. St. Chrys was the employer of Bouvel, Smedley and others involved in the matters alleged, and it is where Duggan had worshiped from 2017 until 2022.

12. Brendan F. Kelly is and was the director of the Illinois State Police. On information and belief, he is a lawyer admitted to practice in Illinois. He is being sued in both his individual capacity and as a representative of the ISP. Factual Allegations-Common to All Counts 13. Shortly before Bouvel was to be ordained, Duggan wrote and hand-delivered to the “assisting bishop” of the Chicago Diocese of TEC a confidential letter objecting to Bouvel’s impending ordination.

14. In that letter, Duggan said that he was “too much of a gentleman” to voice his objection during the service of ordination, and asked that the letter be read during that segment when the congregation is asked if there was any “crime or impediment” to the ordination.

15. As he stated, Duggan did not attend the ordination service.

16. Also in June 2022, Duggan wrote an allegorical tale about a homosexual seeking ordination and posted this on-line. The tale did not mention Bouvel.

17. The day after this allegorical tale (¶ 16) was posted, on June 28, 2022, Bouvel filed a prose handwritten petition for an “Emergency No Stalking Order of Protection” (“ENSOP”) against Duggan. Bouvel alleged that the confidential letter (¶ 13) and the allegorical tale, both appended to his petition, were “acts of stalking” behavior.

2

18. During the hearing on Bouvel’s petition, he was sworn and under oath testified falsely to three “facts” about Duggan: a. That “other people in our diocese have” had an order of protection entered against Duggan; b. That Duggan “[ha]s caused violence in other churches”; and c. That Duggan “was staying at our church under an agreement that he, you know, not do anything disruptive or violent.”

19. Each of these statements was materially false and misleading. Together and separately, they were a factor in the judge’s decision to grant the ENSOP. 20. Bouvel also testified that he resided on the grounds of St. Chrys.

21. Accordingly, under the terms of the ENSOP which restricted Duggan’s freedom of movement so as not to be within 50 feet of Bouvel, he was not able to worship at St. Chrys, without regard to whether Bouvel was performing a religious service at that church.

22. Immediately on issuance of the ENSOP, Smedley on behalf of Bouvel or St. Chrys or the Episcopal Diocese of Chicago, acting under color of law, notified the ISP of the entry of the ENSOP. 23. On June 30, 2022, before Duggan was served with the ENSOP, the ISP wrote Duggan to inform him that it had revoked Duggan’s Firearm Owner’s Identification (“FOID”) card. Duggan had held a FOID card for 10 years without incident. As a result of this, Duggan was required by law to transfer any weapons which he owned to a third party.

24. During the course of the proceedings on the ENSOP, Bouvel was apprised through counsel that his statements (¶18a-c) were false.

25. On information and belief, Bouvel’s first lawyer refused to continue to represent Bouvel in the face of these falsehoods. After a change in counsel, Bouvel proceeded with his petition.

26. Bouvel’s new counsel continued to rely on Bouvel’s false statements in pleadings and briefs filed with the Circuit Court and the Illinois Appellate Court.

27. In January 2023, Bouvel’s petition for an ENSOP was dismissed pursuant to Sec. 2-615 of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure. The ENSOP was vacated. Bouvel did not replead his case.

28. In or about May 2023, Duggan’s FOID card was restored.

3

Count I [Pled Conditionally-Pending Appeal] Action for Malicious Prosecution 29. Duggan repeats and re-alleges the allegations of ¶¶ 1-28 as if fully set forth.

30. Bouvel’s petition for an ENSOP was brought and maintained in bad faith, maliciously and without probable cause. Bouvel had the ulterior motive of silencing Duggan, and by example silencing all those in the Episcopal Church who publically oppose the “gay agenda” of “marriage equality” and ordination of practicing homosexuals. This is in derogation of Duggan’s rights under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and Art. I, Sec. 4 of the Illinois Constitution to comment on matters, particularly those involving the free exercise of religion.

31. In addition, Bouvel’s petition was brought with the ulterior motive of depriving Duggan of his right to own a firearm. This is in derogation of Duggan’s rights under the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and Art. I, Sec. 22 of the Illinois Constitution to keep and bear arms.

32. By bringing his action for an ENSOP, and continuing to pursue it after having been apprised that he had testified falsely, and with the ulterior motives of silencing Duggan and depriving him of his right to own a firearm, Bouvel committed the tort of malicious prosecution.

33. Duggan paid more than $84,000 in legal fees to contest Bouvel’s petition, have the ENSOP vacated, and have his right to own a firearm restored. Because the FOID card revocation was predicated on Bouvel’s false pleading and testimony, every dollar which Duggan spent to vacate the ENSOP and dismiss Bouvel’s petition was necessary to protect Duggan’s rights under the First and Second Amendments to the Constitution, and Art. I, sections 4 and 22 of the Illinois Constitution.

34. Bouvel’s ENSOP action was quasi-criminal in nature, and as such the legal fees which Duggan incurred are properly accounted for as his damages. Facts which support this conclusion include but are not limited to: a. Duggan’s liberty during the pendency of the ENSOP was restricted. He was not able to worship at St. Chrys where he had worshiped without restriction for five years. This was in violation of his Constitutional right to worship where he pleased as determined in Lozman v. City of Riviera Beach, 585 US ___ (2018). b. Duggan’s right to keep and bear a firearm was restricted during the pendency of the ENSOP, even though he did not receive actual notice of the hearing and an opportunity to be heard as is required under federal law. c. The penalty for violating the ENSOP was not a finding of civil contempt, but a criminal charge of a Class A misdemeanor.

4

35. In addition, Duggan suffered psychological injury by having to defend Bouvel’s action.

As a life-long Episcopalian, Duggan questioned the validity of his faith to which he had devoted a significant portion of his life. This caused him psychic trauma.

WHEREFORE, Duggan prays that he have damages in excess of $50,000 for Bouvel’s malicious prosecution of his action for an ENSOP. Count II [Pled Conditionally-Pending Appeal] Action for Civil Conspiracy.

36. Duggan repeats and realleges the allegations of ¶¶ 1-28, and 30-35 as if fully set forth.

37. In pursuing the unfounded action for an ENSOP, Bouvel communicated with the assisting bishop of Chicago, Chilton Knudsen (“Knudsen”) who had ordained him to the ministry; Smedley, at the time the rector of St. Chrys; and Samuel Portaro (“Portaro”), the “theologian in residence” at St. Chrys. These communications were set forth in a series of June 27, 2022 emails in which Smedley stated his belief that Duggan had a “social-emotional disability” and owned a firearm.

38. In pursuing this action, Bouvel committed the tortious acts of malicious prosecution, lying under oath and slandering Duggan by swearing that: a. Duggan had been subject to a prior “order of protection”; b. that he had “caused violence at other churches”; and c. that he was worshiping at St. Chrys under some sort of an “agreement.”

39. By bringing his unfounded action for an ENSOP, Bouvel committed an overt act and joined this civil conspiracy to deprive Duggan of his rights both to comment on matters of public importance, even if they involve the church, and to own a firearm.

40. Smedley joined this conspiracy by commenting in his June 27, 2022 email (¶ 37) that: a. “I believe David has some kind of mental or social-emotional disability ...”; and b. “I think David is a proud gun/guns owner...”.

41. With these statements, Smedley turned the discussion from a parishioner’s concern over ordination to a cleric’s concern for personal safety.

42. To preserve his constitutional rights and reputation, Duggan paid more than $84,000 in legal fees to have the ENSOP vacated.

43. St. Chrys joined the conspiracy by: 5

a. providing the email domain (“saintc.org”) on which Bouvel, and Smedley communicated; b. employing Bouvel and Smedley whose actions were within the course and scope of their employment; and c. causing a letter to be written by its wardens barring Duggan from attending worship services at St. Chrys because of “inflammatory communications” notwithstanding the holding of the United States Supreme Court in Lozman v. City of Riviera Beach (2018).

WHEREFORE, Duggan prays that he have damages in excess of $50,000 against Bouvel and St Chrys for their knowing participation in this civil conspiracy.

Count III Action for Violating 42 United States Code Section 1983 44. Duggan repeats and realleges the allegations of ¶¶ 1-28, 30-35, and 37-43 as if fully set forth.

45. Section 1983 of Title 42 of the United States Code provides a civil action to those who have been injured by a violation of their rights secured by the US Constitution under color of law.

46. On information and belief formed from Bouvel’s ENSOP testimony, Smedley, or someone acting directly on his behalf, notified the ISP of the entry of the ENSOP. In doing so, he was acting under color of law to deprive Duggan of his Constitutional right to own and possess a firearm.

47. The ENSOP as submitted to the ISP was invalid on its face. Appended to Bouvel’s petition as exhibits were Duggan’s letter to the bishop ordaining Bouvel (¶¶ 13-14), and the allegorical tale (¶ 16). Neither of these documents could be construed in any way to be a threat against Bouvel, and are in all events protected by the First Amendment and are therefore specifically exempted from consideration as an “act of stalking.” 720 ILCS 5/12-7.3(d)(2).

48. In addition, the petition contained a hearsay account of a conversation which Duggan had with Smedley. This conversation did not mention Bouvel by name, nor contain any threats against him. Bouvel’s hearsay account falsely alluded to Duggan’s “military background.”

49. On its face, the petition only accounted for one hypothetical “act of stalking,” the hearsay conversation (¶ 40) which is only one of the two which are required under Illinois law. 720 ILCS 5/12-7.3(a) & (c)(1).

50. As a public official sworn to uphold the law, and as a lawyer, Kelly has a duty to look behind the allegations of a petition to see if they can withstand scrutiny before revoking a person’s constitutional rights.

6

51. The letter revoking Duggan’s FOID card was not signed by any individual member of the ISP. Instead, it was uttered over the name of the “Firearms Services Bureau,” with the name “Brendan J. Kelly, Director” at the top of the letterhead.

52. Accordingly, Kelly is responsible for the decision to revoke Duggan’s FOID card.

53. In addition, because the ISP has a pattern and practice of revoking FOID cards immediately on entry of an ENSOP, without regard to the veracity of the underlying allegations, Kelly was acting as an agent of the ISP, which should be responsible under the doctrines of respondeat superior and Monell v. Dep’t of Social Services, 436 US 658 (1973).

54. Duggan has been damaged by this deprivation of his Constitutional right by having to defend against the ENSOP and have it vacated in an amount to be proved at trial but which exceeds $50,000.

WHEREFORE, Duggan prays for judgment against Bouvel, St. Chrysostom’s Episcopal Church and John Doe, jointly and severally for a. monetary damages to be proved at trial but which exceed $50,000; b. his attorney’s fees as provided in sec. 1988; and c. such other and further relief as is just.

Count IV [Pled Conditionally-Pending Appeal] Action for Violating 42 United States Code sec. 1985(3) 55. Duggan repeats and realleges ¶¶ 1-30, 30-35, 37-43, and 46-53 as if fully set forth.

56. As a holder of a valid FOID card, Duggan was a member of a class of persons entitled to protection against the deprivation of his constitutional rights, including the right to keep and bear arms under the Second Amendment to the US Constitution and Art. I, §22 of the Illinois Constitution.

57. As a writer of devotional essays, Duggan was also a member of a class of persons who comment on matters pertinent to the Christian faith and to TEC specifically. As such, he was entitled to protection against the deprivation of his constitutional right to worship where he chose, and to question the doctrines of that church.

58. Title 42 USC sec. 1985(3) provides a civil right of action against those who conspire to deprive a citizen or class of citizens of the equal protection of the laws and the privileges and immunities conferred under the laws, including the privilege of owning a firearm and the immunity from prosecution for speaking out on public issues, including the ordination of homosexuals to the Episcopal ministry.

7

59. In June 2022, St. Chrys by its senior warden wrote to Duggan to advise him that he was “not permitted at St. Chrysostom’s ... at any event or time, on any and all of its property” because of Duggan’s “inflammatory communications directed at and/or addressed to clergy and laity here in recent days.” Those “inflammatory communications” and the “clergy and laity” to which they were “addressed” were not specified.

60. By filing a petition for an ENSOP based on false testimony and a disregard for Duggan’s rights under the First and Second Amendments to the Constitution, Bouvel, together with Knudsen, Smedley, Portaro, and persons now unknown conspired to deprive Duggan of his constitutional rights to the equal protection of the laws, and equal rights, privileges and immunities of citizens under the laws of the United States and Illinois. These include but are not limited to the privilege of owning a firearm, of worshiping at a house of worship of his choosing, and of speaking out on the ordination of practicing homosexuals to the Episcopal ministry, and his immunity from prosecution for voicing his opinion. The overt acts in furtherance of the conspiracy included the filing of the petition for an ENSOP and the email trail identified in ¶¶ 37 and 40, supra.

61. Duggan has been damaged by this conspiracy to deprive him of the equal protection of and the privileges and immunities secured by the laws and Constitution by having to defend against the ENSOP and have it vacated in an amount to be proved at trial but which exceeds $50,000.

WHEREFORE, Duggan prays for judgment against Bouvel, Smedley and St. Chrysostom’s Episcopal Church, jointly and severally for a. monetary damages to be proved at trial but which exceed $50,000; b. his attorney’s fees as provided in sec. 1988; and c. such other and further relief as is just.

S/ David G. Duggan pro-se David G. Duggan Cook County No. 30849 3108 N. Southport Ave. Coachhouse Chicago, IL 60657 (773) 281-2873 email: davidgraysonduggan@hotmail.com

8