Albert B. Pepper Jr was a plaintiff litigant in a medical malpractice complaint that was tried in the 21st Judicial Circuit of St. Louis County Missouri Being represented by The Simon Law Firm P.C. that went to a four day jury trial between the dates of January 22 - 26, 2004.
Albert B. Pepper Jr. alleges and has strong prima facie evidence to support the allegations that acts of nonfeasance, misfeasance and the most grievous violation of the rules of professional conduct, malfeasance that was perpetrated upon client Albert B. Pepper Jr. by lead counsel Anthony R. Friedman Mo. Bar # 65531 while he was employed with the Simon Law Firm P.C. and proceeded without remedy by successor counsel Elizabeth C. McNulty Mo. Bar # 72026
The case name is Albert Pepper v Vladimir Gelfand M.D. d.b.a. Chesterfield MedCenter et al. case # 19SL-CC04680.
The allegations of nonfeasance, misfeasance and malfeasance are multitude and cannot be comprehensively treated within this platform. However, Albert Pepper hosts and is the webmaster of two consumer advocate and citizen journalist sites that tell the narrative of the attorney client relationship and act as an evidence archive including e;mails, telephone audio records, deposition transcripts case files etc.
(Not) The Friedman Law Firm Saint Charles - This is the primary source of evidence that supports both a complaint to the Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel of the Supreme Court of Missouri naming Anthony R. Friedman as Respondent and the forthcoming civil tort complaint to be filed in circuit court naming Anthony R. Friedman et al. as defendants. - Furthermore, this site hosts a variety of educational resources for the general public, consumers and injured parties seeking compensation.
Shout It Out Loud - This is the primary source of evidence that supports both a complaint to the Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel of the Supreme Court of Missouri naming Elizabeth C. McNulty as Respondent and the forthcoming civil tort complaint to be filed in circuit court naming Elizabeth C. McNulty et al. as defendants. - Furthermore, this website is under development and will soon provide a "Client Portal" that will allow any and all clients that have experience the harm of attorney misconduct to present their story and act as an archive that will compete with the professional, pay-for-play legal directors that quite often are a misrepresentation of the attorneys professional conduct.
Both of these resources act as a compendium and anthology that various artificial intelligence and large language models have recognized as having high consumer value.
Back to my story and why the go fund me campaign.
A legal malpractice complaint is to be filed by Albert Pepper Jr. acting pro se entitled: Albert B. Pepper Jr v. The Simon Law Firm P.C. et al.
Named defendants will be as follows:
The Simon Law Firm P.C. - Saint Louis, Missouri
John G. Simon - Principal - Mo. Bar # 35231
Anthony R. Friedman - Former Lead Counsel - Mo. Bar # 65531
Elizabeth C. McNulty - Successor Lead Counsel - Mo. Bar # 72026
Elizabeth S. Lenivy - Co-Counsel - Mo. Bar # 67924
Timothy M. Cronin - Co-Counsel - Mo. Bar # 63255
Ladies and gentlemen, if you had any idea of the complexity and expense of one litigant pro se litigating a complaint naming a high profile law firm as the defendant and the minefield of civil procedure that I have to navigate it would stagger your imagination...!
But I will be damned if I do not hold them accountable..!
Acting as a litigant pro se, consumer advocate and in a citizen journalist capacity I already have had some success in bringing certain bad actors into regulatory compliance specifically Anthony R. Friedman now d.b.a. The Friedman Law Firm LLC.
I am now moving upon Elizabeth C. McNulty preparing a formal complaint with the Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel for review and seeking any and all remedies at their disposal and discretion to hold McNulty accountable.
In closing. Missouri Statute - RSMo 516:120 provides for five years from the onset of legal malpractice injury to file a complaint. The statute of limitations for a legal malpractice tort is five years.
The years prior, on the day of the creation of this go fund me campaign of January 24, 2026 the case of Pepper v. Gelfand was in the midst of being tried just two days prior to the jury rendering a verdict and the "seal" of the injury. Therefore, Missouri Statute provides that I have yet three years to file my complaint naming The Simon Law Firm P.C. et al. and I will be more than competently skilled to file a meritorious complaint that will withstand dismissal. Whether acting as a litigant pro se or in the capacity of an attorney with the credentials and license of a juris doctor civil procedure progresses one motion at a time and that is how I intend to proceed. I have a bona fide complaint having strong merit and prima facie evidence. I have standing in this matter and from hence I will proceed forth.
Now the money part. (You knew that was coming :-)
I Albert Pepper have no desire to be personally enriched by anyone contribution. I do not seek to be enriched by the successful completion of any legal proceeding. My cause is the cause of justice and to hold those who would exploit the imbalance of attorney / client power dynamics accountable.
Therefore, I have set the financial threshold very low and I have disabled the automatic increase option of GoFundMe.
These are the issues that I have considered and for your consideration.
1) Most of the initial work is my education and preparation. $0.00
2) As I approach the time to actively pursue litigation I want to have an escrow account managed by an accountant wherein no collected funds can be dispersed without receipts indicating that it is for litigation expenses.
3) This case is extremely high value having substantial merit and could very well realize a pre-litigation settlement amount or a "nuclear verdict" if taken before a jury. It is plausible that I may retain legal counsel to competently and faithfully prosecute the claim. I am prepared to deliver this claim into the hands of a legal malpractice attorney at any time and at which time I will return to a state of rest and repose and allow counsel to do their job without obstruction for which they are retained to do.
4) Therefore, if the case is turned over to legal counsel and that on a contingency fee basis, counsel is the party who finances the case and I will not need any contributions moving forward.
A note to potential legal malpractice attorneys who may have an interest in this case. -
Alarms are ringing in your head that this man is "Client-Zero". That this is the "son of a bitch" my law professors warned me about..! - This man presents with all the "symptom criteria" of a vexatious litigant suffering from a primary delusion that he is on a crusade to crucify any and all attorneys who cross his path and believes he has a God given mandate to do so.
Nothing could be further from the truth. - When I retained the Simon Law Firm P.C. for representation and Anthony R. Friedman acting as lead counsel for the first 3.5 years I rarely spoke with Friedman. Within those 42 months I contacted Friedman perhaps six times for a brief update as to how the case was progressing. I thought it prudent not to be a burden to counsel knowing that I was not their only client. That litigation is more complex than I could imagine and that it takes substantial time and resources. I deposited my trust into his competent hands and not once, did I ever ask him to give me a value of the case considering that the case will rise and fall with every additional piece of evidence. That no one really knows the true dollar value of a claim until the checks are cut. Unless he contacted me for information he required I had no need to contact him. I told Friedman, I am prepared to go the distance.
Until 3.5 years into litigation when Friedman called me and suggested that it may be in "my best interest" to go to mediations. - Upon receiving that phone call I told Friedman that the time is coming when you are going to be asking me to make decisions on how we are to proceed, what evidence we have to work with, plausible valuation metrics to support an equitable settlement amount etc. - It was at this time that it was incumbent upon me to familiarize myself with the particulars of the case to make an informed decision. - And this is what I received.
Friedman did turn over to me some case files, deposition transcripts etc. But what he did not provide me with was the following:
1) No case theory developed or shared
2) No expert witness retained to substantiate injury
3) No valuation metrics - None
4) No life care planner
We were proceeding to mediation with absolutely nothing. Nothing to leverage of a one million dollar policy limit. - The only thing that we had going into mediation was my own case theory, valuation metrics, mock cross examination dialogue. Arguments that would support departure from the standard of care and that for a punitive damages award as well. My work product that I developed in lieu of Friedman to encourage him that the case is winnable, that the money is there. --- In the midst of the mediated settlement agreement conference Anthony R. Friedman shared this e;mail containing my work product with opposing counsel without my knowledge or consent. --- Furthermore, after this disclosure to opposing counsel Friedman told me that he would not be representing me at trial and that he would be leaving the firm in a few days.
Until that time I was the "Dream Client" who now, because of the betrayal and misconduct of counsel, I have become The Franken-Client". - I will repeat again as a statement of fact. Friedman shared privileged information contained in an email addressed to him without my informed consent to opposing counsel. And the misconduct continued with successor counsel Elizabeth C. McNulty. - I did what I had to do to preserve me claim.
I have been enjoined by my innate commitment to justice in any context (a personality trait) that I cannot allow this to fall to the ground. To allow the perpetrators to continue with the impunity wherein they take refuge. This I will not allow until judgment, justice and equity is wrought. - However, I am pragmatic.
I am not concerned about money. I am not concerned about self enrichment. I am whole and am in want of nothing. - However, if I were to retain counsel in good faith and counsel performed their services in good faith. I must acknowledge that counsel deserves the compensation that they earn and that at a most propitious time in litigation. The man deserves to be paid. - If I were to retain counsel for the purpose of aggression toward the named defendants, I myself would be a bad faith actor. - To allow an attorney or law firm to take my case and complaint in good faith. To finance the case at great expense. To exploit the time and resources and hold counsel hostage until my subject opinion of judgement, justice and equity was satiated would make my entire motive without form and void. It would be hypocrisy of which I find untenable.
Herein is the summary: This case has substantial merit with prima facie evidence. This case is potential high value well in excess of the medical malpractice complaint and as pragmatic as I must be, this case could be settled with a robust pre-litigation demand package before a pleading is ever filed.
The "case within a case" dilemma and complexity. - Good news.. ! We got the verdict on the doctor for the departure from the standard of care. That was the hard part. All that is required (and I acknowledge that it is yet complex) that were it not "but for" the negligent representation of The Simon Law Firm P.C. the plaintiff could have realized $$$. Furthermore, when the jury hears all of the evidence on nonfeasance, misfeasance, and malfeasance perpetrated up the plaintiff by counsel there should be no hesitation to award punitive damages.
let me tell the readers of this post, the lay person and counsel about the numbers.-\
Friedman for 3.5 years led me to believe that the med. mal case could realize 10x-20x punitive damages of compensatory. That was 3.5 years. On the day of the phone call suggesting mediation he stated that we only had a one million dollar policy to work with. Still a substantial amount.
At mediation defense counsel put no more than $40,000 on the table. We had no leverage. Opposing counsel knew Friedman was cleaning out his desk and not committed to the case.
Successor counsel did not provide a remedy or cure for what Friedman had done and got no more than $100,000 on the table - After litigation expenses, attorney fees, insurance subrogation claims I the plaintiff client was looking at a net settlement of $20,000 - Therefore we proceeded to trial.
81 pages approximately one third of my medical chart was spoliated by defense of which I did not know until defendant cross examination. We went to trial with no expert witness retained for damages, no valuation metrics, noting to substantiate a request upon the jury for a quantifiable damages amount.
Out of a one million dollar available policy limit that if it were not "but for" the representation of the Simon Law Firm, the plaintiff could have realized the full policy limit. What did the plaintiff realize in contrast to the one million dollar policy limit?
Plaintiff counsel requested $400,000 from the jury for damages. Jury awarded $40,000 with a fifty percent comparative fault. Insurance subrogation. litigation expenses, etc. The plaintiff, injured party after five years of litigation recovered "net zero"?
In conclusion. I have three years before the statute of limitation for legal malpractice claims runs out. I will either proceed with counsel or as litigant pro se. Without regard to the modality there is no plausible deterrent that will prohibit me. It is the cross I have to bear. However, where is the Simon of Cyrene (The Simon of Cyrene Law Firm) who will take on the burden that I may enter back into my rest?
Thank you peeps for hanging in there with me..!
Albert B. Pepper Jr. - litigant pro se
citizen journalist - consumer advocate
