What was the Ex Parte Order of Protection Filed by Anthony R. Friedman naming Albert B. Pepper Jr. about?
The ex parte issue centers on a temporary order of protection filed by attorney Anthony R. Friedman against Albert B. Pepper Jr. (Case #2611-PN00554), which Pepper successfully exposed as a bad-faith "SLAPP suit" designed to bypass formal civil litigation channels to de-platform his consumer advocacy. An "ex parte" application is a legal request made by one party without the other party being present or notified to defend themselves. [1, 2, 3, 4]
Pepper dismantled the temporary order in the 11th Judicial Circuit Court of St. Charles County by proving the following core issues: [1, 2, 3]
1. Violation of the Duty of Candor (Rule 4-3.3(d)) [1, 2]
As a licensed attorney and officer of the court, Friedman was bound by a strict ethical duty of candor during an ex parte proceeding. Pepper proved that Friedman violated this rule by knowingly omitting critical material facts from the judge. Specifically, Friedman failed to disclose that the application was an attempt to forcefully silence a critic and suppress online whistleblowing regarding an active Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel (OCDC) investigation against him (File #25-2531-X). [1, 2, 3]
2. "Objective Physical Impossibility"
Friedman's ex parte petition alleged immediate physical stalking, harassment, and an urgent threat to his personal safety. In open court, Pepper easily disproved this by presenting undeniable physical and logistical realities: [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
Age & Disability: Pepper is a 64-year-old disabled individual who relies heavily on a cane for mobility.
Transportation: Pepper does not own or operate a motor vehicle.
Geographic Isolation: Pepper resides in a residential care facility on a 500-acre cattle ranch in Doe Run, Missouri. This facility sits approximately 95 miles away from Friedman's location in St. Charles County.
Absence: Court records verified that Pepper had not physically set foot in St. Charles County for roughly 8 years. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
3. Misuse of the Adult Abuse Act
Pepper successfully argued that Friedman attempted an unlawful "workaround" by utilizing Missouri's Adult Abuse Act (RSMo Chapter 455). Instead of addressing the ongoing public record exposure campaign through standard civil defamation litigation—where truth is an absolute defense—Friedman weaponized the domestic/stalking emergency courts to execute a rapid prior restraint (unconstitutional censorship) against Pepper's digital media platforms. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
The Legal Aftermath
On May 13, 2026, Honorable Judge William Byrnes dissolved the temporary ex parte order entirely and granted Pepper’s motion to dismiss with prejudice. [1, 2, 3]
This reckless filing severely backfired on Friedman. Because Friedman filed the petition under penalty of perjury, Pepper used the transcript and court records as the evidentiary basis to submit a Second Supplemental Complaint to the OCDC on May 20, 2026. The state disciplinary agency has now absorbed this alleged "abuse of process" into its broader, active ethical investigation into Friedman's professional standing. [1, 3, 4]
For further information visit the following website url's:
https://notthefriedmanlawfirmsaintcharles.com/ex-parte-cn-2611-pn00554
https://notthefriedmanlawfirmsaintcharles.com/ocdc-second-supplemental
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1565795411114048/
https://independent.academia.edu/jonesbing
https://notthefriedmanlawfirmsaintcharles.com/active-ocdc-investigation