Preview
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF DEKALB COUNTY
STATE OF GEORGIA
PYTHAGORAS MASONIC TEMPLE '
ASS’N, et al. '
'
Plaintiffs, '
' CIVIL ACTION
v. ' FILE NO. 23CV9161
'
MICHAEL KESSLER, et al, '
'
Defendants. '
PLAINTIFF’S EMERGENCY MOTION FOR CIVIL AND CRIMINAL CONTEMPT
AND
DEMAND FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES
COMES NOW PLAINTIFFS, by and through their undersigned counsel of record and, file
this their Emergency Motion for Civil and Criminal Contempt and Demand for Attorney’s Fees,
respectfully showing the Court as follows:
This case is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Complaint for Temporary Restraining Order,
Temporary and Permanent Injunctions, and Other Relief. The Defendants have filed their Answer
and Counterclaim. The actions is a suit for a restraining order and temporary and permanent
injunctions against the Defendants arising due to the failure to Defendants Michael A. Kessler,
Charles Anthony Frazier, and others, to follow the internal rules and regulations of the Grand
Lodge of Georgia, F & A.M. (hereinafter, the “Grand Lodge”) in their improper and unlawful
attempt to discipline certain members of Pythagoras Masonic Lodge, No. 41, F & A.M.
(hereinafter “Pythagoras Lodge”), interfere with the normal business operations of the Pythagoras
Masonic Temple Association (hereinafter, the “PMTA”), and to interfere with the rights retained
by Plaintiff Andrew Byrd, and other similarly situated members of Pythagoras Lodge.
PMTA et al v. Michael Kessler, et al, CAFN: 23CV9161
Plaintiff’s Emergency Motion for Civil and Criminal Contempt and Demand for Atty Fees
Page 1
Prior to this case being filed, several members of Pythagoras Lodge (including Plaintiff
Byrd and others) were “charged” with alleged violations of Masonic Law, said charges being
frivolous and without evidentiary support. These charges were brought by Defendant Frazier in
April, 2023. The resolution of those charges and the issues in this case will involve the
interpretation and application of Masonic Law. At the time of the emergency hearing, no masonic
trials had taken place, although they had been scheduled, and then rescheduled for a number of
reasons.
The Court held an interlocutory hearing on December 5, 2023 and issued two orders in the
case. This motion is based upon the second Order entered on December 8, 2023. In that Order,
the Court ruled that the Defendants were “free to proceed with the internal business related to the
trial of the Lodge members at issues, and the Lodge’s usual mechanisms for voting procedures,
including the arresting of the charter for said Lodge.” The Court granted the Plaintiffs’ request
that the Defendants be enjoined from dissolving the charter and/or its assets. Within days of the
entry of this Order, the Defendants conspired to do exactly what the Court prohibited.
It is clear that the Court intended for the “usual mechanisms” to be employed by the
Defendants in their dealings with Masonic matters. However, the Defendants are violating the
Court’s Order by their flagrant use of an unusual mechanism to conduct the trials of the Lodge
members.
Specifically, as shown in the Plaintiff’s complaint, Defendant Kessler (who was Grand
Master at that time) “may not take jurisdiction of a Masonic offense by a private member; but if
he has probable cause to believe that a member of a subordinate Lodge is guilty of a Masonic
offense and that the Lodge having jurisdiction fails to take appropriate action, he may in his
discretion order the trial of such member for such offense; and if said Lodge should fail to prefer
PMTA et al v. Michael Kessler, et al, CAFN: 23CV9161
Plaintiff’s Emergency Motion for Civil and Criminal Contempt and Demand for Atty Fees
Page 2
charges promptly, the Grand Master may arrest its charter and direct another constituent Lodge to
prefer charges against the offending member.” Mason Code § 76-109 (2023). (EXHIBIT A)
Here, Defendant Kessler purposefully bypassed this requirement, arresting the Lodge’s
charter first, (EXHIBIT B) and then ordering a trial of the suspended members at a second Lodge,
to wit: Tucker Lodge, No. 42. As shown in the Complaint, Defendant Kessler exceeded his
authority by arresting the Lodge’s charter first, and without giving the Lodge the opportunity to
investing and take appropriate action with respect to the frivolous allegations raised by Defendant
Frazier. Upon information and belief, Tucker Lodge No. 42 was selected specifically due to the
members’ willingness to follow blindly the directions of Defendant Kessler and to conduct a
“show-trial” for the purposes of convicting and expelling the suspended members.
The Courts Order plainly states and specifically requires that the “usual mechanisms”
should govern the actions of all parties. In that event, then Defendants must be required to follow
the prescribed protocol for Masonic trials of the suspended members, including Plaintiff Byrd, in
this case. The usuals mechanisms require that the Grand Master refer the allegations of Masonic
offenses to the Lodge having jurisdiction over said offenses, i.e., Pythagoras Lodge, No. 41. In
the event that said Lodge fails to act, then and only then, may the Grand Master take jurisdiction
of said offenses, arresting Pythagoras Lodge’s charter, and directing another constituent Lodge to
prefer charges against the offending members. See Masonic Code § 76-109 (2023) (Exhibit A,
attached).
Tucker Lodge, No. 42, by definition a separate and distinct entity, cannot possibly be
considered to be a part of “the internal business related to the trial of the [Pythagoras] Lodge
members at issues” as required by the Order.
PMTA et al v. Michael Kessler, et al, CAFN: 23CV9161
Plaintiff’s Emergency Motion for Civil and Criminal Contempt and Demand for Atty Fees
Page 3
Further, as shown above, Tucker Lodge, No. 42, does not have jurisdiction over the
members of Pythagoras Lodge, No. 41. The trials currently scheduled by Tucker Lodge have been
scheduled per Defendant Kessler’s unlawful Ruling (EXHIBIT B) which reversed the authorized
and usual sequence for handling Masonic charges. As noted previously, the Masonic charges in
this case have never been brought to Pythagoras Lodge for consideration. That being the case, the
usual mechanism for voting procedures have not been followed and the Defendants are now
flagrantly violating the Court’s Order by scheduling the Masonic trials with another Lodge and
completely ignoring the usual mechanism required in order to do so and in flagrant violation of
this Court’s Order.
The Plaintiffs have filed their Motion to Disqualify Counsel for Defendants
contemporaneously with this motion and incorporate by reference all averments therein. As shown
in that motion, the Masonic trials have been scheduled to take place, en masse, less than 24 hours
after the mediation currently scheduled by the parties. This is a textbook example of bad faith.
The new officers of Tucker Lodge were installed on December 17, 2023 and apparently, their first
order of business was the scheduling of the trials of the suspended members, said notice for trials
being sent two days later on December 19, 2023. The notices were then personally served on the
suspended members at their home addresses in a clear act of harassment, since all members had
been served previously. Clearly, the prosecution, conviction, and expulsion of the suspended
members is the top priority of the Defendants and they are utilizing any mechanism to do so.
Accordingly, they are willfully ignoring and violating this Court’s Order that the usual protocols
be followed.
The Defendants further continue to violate the usual protocols of Masonry by refusing to
restore the charter to Pythagoras Lodge, No. 41. Defendant Kessler issued his Ruling 2023-04 and
PMTA et al v. Michael Kessler, et al, CAFN: 23CV9161
Plaintiff’s Emergency Motion for Civil and Criminal Contempt and Demand for Atty Fees
Page 4
said ruling was to be voted on at the 2023 Annual Communication of Grand Lodge on October 23-
25, 2023. The Rule was not voted on and accordingly, it has now expired, and the charter must be
returned. A Grand Master’s Ruling “would only remain in effect for the terms of that Grand
Master.” Masonic Code § 71-102.1 (2023) (Exhibit C, attached). Accordingly, the Ruling issued
by Defendant Kessler has expired and no longer has any effect. The Court’s Order requires that
the usual mechanisms be employed with respect to the arrest of the charter. Here, there is no
question that the Defendants continue to willfully violate this Court’s Order concerning the charter
of the Lodge and the trials of the suspended members in this case. There can be no other conclusion
that the Defendants are acting in bad faith and in willful defiance of the Court’s Order and said
actions require the highest possible sanction by the Court in order to both punish the Defendants
as well as to coerce compliance with the Court’s Order.
ARGUMENT AND CITATION TO AUTHORITY
Per O.C.G.A. § 15-1-(a)(3), the Court has the power to punish a party for the
disobedience of any order, rule, decree or command of the Court. Based upon the above, it is
clear that the Defendants have willfully disregarded the provisions of the Court’s Order and
should be sanctioned appropriately by the Court.
Plaintiffs shows that at some point the Defendants must learn that rules do actually apply
to them and that a Court Order is not a set of suggestive guidelines that can be arbitrarily
disregarded when inconvenient, or blatantly circumvented like Masonic Code using obvious
tricks or gimmicks such as seen in this case. Instead, the Defendants need to understand that the
Court’s Order is an Order that they are bound to follow. Defendants appear to have the notion
that they are in some sort of power-sharing relationship with the Court. This is a perception that
needs significant recalibration. The fact that the Defendants continue to act as autocrats shows
that their indifference to the Court’s explicit Order is more than just an irritation to the Plaintiffs.
PMTA et al v. Michael Kessler, et al, CAFN: 23CV9161
Plaintiff’s Emergency Motion for Civil and Criminal Contempt and Demand for Atty Fees
Page 5
Plaintiffs show that the Defendants’ indifference to the Court’s Order indicated a need for this
Court to emphatically reorient Defendants’ comprehension of the nature of a court Order and
that obedience is mandatory.
Plaintiffs request that the Court exercise its discretion and sanction the Defendants’ civil
and criminal contempt in such a manner that may serve to ensure their compliance with the letter
and spirit of further Court Orders. Plaintiff requests that the Court even consider incarceration as
provided by law to remedy the abject disobedience of the Defendants and to ensure that the
Defendants may purge themselves of their contumacious conduct.
Finally, Plaintiffs have had to incur attorney’s fees in order to bring these egregious
matters to the Court’s attention and respectfully requests that they be reimbursed for said
expenses.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request as follows:
(a) That the Court set this matter down for a hearing, a Rule Nisi issue requiring the
Defendants to appear and show cause why the prayers of the Plaintiffs’ motion should
not be granted;
(b) That pursuant to said hearing the Defendants be found in criminal contempt of court;
(c) That the Defendants also be found in civil contempt of court;
(d) That Plaintiffs be awarded a reasonable sum as attorneys fees;
(e) That Plaintiffs have such other and further relief as the Court may consider just,
equitable and appropriate under the circumstances.
This 2nd day of January, 2024.
/s/Kevin J. Pratt
KEVIN J. PRATT
Attorney for Plaintiffs
PMTA et al v. Michael Kessler, et al, CAFN: 23CV9161
Plaintiff’s Emergency Motion for Civil and Criminal Contempt and Demand for Atty Fees
Page 6
Georgia State Bar No. 586690
PRATT & WALL, ATTORNEYS AT LAW
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
3461 Lawrenceville-Suwanee Road, Suite D
Suwanee, Georgia 30024
770-614-4811
kpratt@georgiatrials.com
lora@georgiatrials.com
PMTA et al v. Michael Kessler, et al, CAFN: 23CV9161
Plaintiff’s Emergency Motion for Civil and Criminal Contempt and Demand for Atty Fees
Page 7
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF DEKALB COUNTY
STATE OF GEORGIA
PYTHAGORAS MASONIC TEMPLE , '
ASS’N, et al. '
'
Plaintiffs, '
' CIVIL ACTION
v. ' FILE NO. 23CV9161
'
MICHAEL KESSLER, et al, '
'
Defendants. '
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that I have this day served counsel for all parties the Plaintiff’s Emergency
Motion for Civil and Criminal Contempt and Demand for Attorney’s Fees by STATUTORY
ELECTRONIC SERVICE by Odyssey e-file as follows:
Mr. William H. Kitchens, Jr.
Wm. H. Kitchens, Jr & Associates, LLC
5855 Jimmy Carter Boulevard, Ste. 155
Norcross, GA 30071
bill@wmkitchens.com
This 2nd day of January, 2024.
/s/Kevin J. Pratt
KEVIN J. PRATT
Attorney for Plaintiffs
Georgia State Bar No. 586690
PRATT & WALL, ATTORNEYS AT LAW
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
3461 Lawrenceville-Suwanee Road, Suite D
Suwanee, Georgia 30024
770-614-4811
kpratt@georgiatrials.com
lora@georgiatrials.com
PMTA et al v. Michael Kessler, et al, CAFN: 23CV9161
Plaintiff’s Emergency Motion for Civil and Criminal Contempt and Demand for Atty Fees
Page 8
Masonic Code 2023 A 103
76-108. Foreign Waiver
Inasmuch as a waiver from a foreign jurisdiction is not recognized by this Grand Lodge, such a waiver confers
no penal jurisdiction except as provided in Section 76-106.
76-109. Grand Master Without Jurisdiction
The Grand Master may not take jurisdiction of a Masonic offense by a private member; but if he has prob- able
cause to believe that a member of a subordinate Lodge is guilty of a Masonic offense and that the Lodge having
jurisdiction fails to take appropriate action, he may in his discretion order the trial of such member for such
offense; and if said Lodge should fail to prefer charges promptly, the Grand Master may arrest its charter and
direct another constituent Lodge to prefer charges against the offending member. (Section 21-107)
76-110. Grand Lodge May Expel
The Grand Lodge may upon its own motion expel any Georgia Mason, though not a member of its body and
with or without the recommendation of the constituent Lodge.
CHAPTER 77-1. MASONIC OFFENSES
77-101. Masonic Offenses
The following are Masonic offenses subjecting the offender to Masonic discipline:
1. Violation of the moral law.
2. Violation of the laws of Masonry.
3. Violation of the laws of the land involving moral turpitude.
4. Violation of the laws of the land involving a felony.
77-102. Performance of an Official Duty Not a Masonic Offense
A Mason who occupies an official position such as judge, prosecuting attorney, juror, mayor, etc., should perform
his official duties without showing partiality to anyone, whether Mason or profane. Thus, it is not a Masonic
offense for a Mason in the performance of such official duty to issue an execution against a Brother Mason.
77-103. Insane Member
No Lodge may suspend from membership or strike from its rolls a member who is insane. A member laboring
under such disability is incapable of committing a Masonic offense.
77-104. Hearsay Not the Basis of Charges
Charges may not be based solely upon rumor, without evidence of a specific offense against the laws of the
Order. Such charges would tend to encourage slander and backbiting, themselves Masonic offenses. If any
member, however, should do anything contrary to the good order, peace, and dignity of the Craft, or by overt act
or improper practices should bring reproach upon the Order of Freemasonry, he shall be subject to charges and
discipline.
77-105. Must Report an Offense
The Lodge within whose jurisdiction an offense is committed by a member of another Lodge in this State must
report such offense to such Lodge, and upon its failure to act, should report the matter to the Grand Master for
action.
B
THE GRAND LODGE OF FREE AND ACCEPTED
MASONS FOR THE STATE OF GEORGIA
Michael A. Kessler, Grand Master
RULING NO. 2023 - 04
IN RE: Pythagoras Lodge No. 41, F. & A.M.
A number of complaints about the operation of Pythagoras Lodge No.41, F. & A.M. (herein
after "the Lodge") have been received by various Grand Masters over the years including recent
complaints. Therefore, I, as Grand Master, summonsed the members of the Lodge, pursuant to
Masonic Code Section 4-101(11), to a stated meeting of the Lodge on January 19, 2023 for the
purposes of reviewing the work of the Lodge, investigating allegations against the Worshipful
Master, Secretary, and other officers of the Lodge, to consider whether grounds or cause exists for
the removal of the Worshipful Master, Secretary, or other officers of the Lodge, and to consider
whether the charter of the Lodge should be arrested. I presided over the Lodge as Grand Master
with the Worshipful Master at my left hand and Grand Lodge officers occupying the stations. All
members of the Lodge were given an opportunity to be heard.
After a discussion that lasted over three hours the following is obvious:
a) Members of the Lodge have serious complaints and concerns about how the Lodge is
and has been managed.
b) There had been electioneering to select the officers at the December 2021 and
December 2022 annual elections;
c) Officers and members of the Lodge demonstrated a disrespect for the offices of Grand
Master and Grand Secretary before and during the meeting;
d) At least one officer was less than truthful when addressing the Grand Master;
81 I Mulberry Street • Macon, GA 3120 I • Office: ( 478)742-1475 • Email: gsec@glofga.org • www.glofga.org
Masonic Code 2023 C 100
V. MISCELLANEOUS
A. MISCELLANEOUS
CHAPTER 71-1. MISCELLANEOUS
71-101. Landmarks and Unwritten Law Not Repealed
The unwritten law, the immemorial usages and the landmarks of Masonry, are not repealed by the adoption of
any constitution and bylaws. Nor is it in the power ofany man or body ofmen to change, alter, or repeal them or
any of them.
71-102. Masonic Code the Approved Law
This Masonic Code and the official approved supplements thereto constitute the approved body oflaws effective
in this Grand Jurisdiction. It should be consulted and relied upon. If any other manual or book may vary or
differ from the Masonic Code, this Code must and does control.
This Code repeals all enactments and edicts ofthe Grand Lodge at variance with its provisions or not contained
herein. (Section 2-211)
71-102.1 Rulings and Edicts of the Grand Master
The Grand Master may from time to time as he determines appropriate during his term of office, issue a Ruling
or an Edict regarding some question or issue of interest or importance to the craft. A Ruling would only remain
in effect for the term of that Grand Master. An Edict would apply to a more significant question or issue which
may be enacted as Masonic law by the Grand Lodge in session and then preserved in this Code. However, in the
event the Grand Lodge does not enact an Edict into Masonic law, it would only remain in effect during the term
of office ofthe Grand Master that issued it. (Section 71-102)
71-102.2 Rulings and Edicts of the Grand Master in the Case of Emergencies
Wherever and whenever a public health or public safety emergency is declared at the national, state, county, or
municipal level by lawful authorities or the Grand Master determines, in his sole discretion, that conditions exist
which may constitute a public health or public safety emergency affecting the Fraternity such that the normal
methods of conducting Masonic work are considered inadvisable because of social distancing or otherwise, the
Grand Master may issue rulings suspending portions of the ritual, balloting, degree work, and examinations.
(Edict 2020-1)
71-103. Masonry Non-Sectarian, Non-Political
The avoidance ofpolitical subjects in the Lodge room is a cardinal principle of Masonry, and a Mason must not
use his Lodge connection to further his political ambition. Masonry unites, upon the principles ofbrotherly love,
men of every country, sect, and opinion. No political or religious distinction should ever limit its charity. It is
peculiar to no country, but common to all. It recognizes no religion but that unfaltering trust in God, who created
the world and all things therein the Grand Architect of the Universe, by whose unerring square the blocks we
offer must at last be tried, and who will reward us according to our merit. (Section 77-104)
71-104. Politics
A Lodge may not legally petition the Legislature on any political subject. It is contrary to the spirit and teachings
of Masonry for a member to be endorsed for political preferment on account ofhis Masonic membership either
by a Masonic Lodge or by members of the Craft as such. (Section 77-102)
Preview
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF DEKALB COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA PYTHAGORAS MASONIC TEMPLE ' ASS’N, et al. ' ' Plaintiffs, ' ' CIVIL ACTION v. ' FILE NO. 23CV9161 ' MICHAEL KESSLER, et al, ' ' Defendants. ' PLAINTIFF’S EMERGENCY MOTION FOR CIVIL AND CRIMINAL CONTEMPT AND DEMAND FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES COMES NOW PLAINTIFFS, by and through their undersigned counsel of record and, file this their Emergency Motion for Civil and Criminal Contempt and Demand for Attorney’s Fees, respectfully showing the Court as follows: This case is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Complaint for Temporary Restraining Order, Temporary and Permanent Injunctions, and Other Relief. The Defendants have filed their Answer and Counterclaim. The actions is a suit for a restraining order and temporary and permanent injunctions against the Defendants arising due to the failure to Defendants Michael A. Kessler, Charles Anthony Frazier, and others, to follow the internal rules and regulations of the Grand Lodge of Georgia, F & A.M. (hereinafter, the “Grand Lodge”) in their improper and unlawful attempt to discipline certain members of Pythagoras Masonic Lodge, No. 41, F & A.M. (hereinafter “Pythagoras Lodge”), interfere with the normal business operations of the Pythagoras Masonic Temple Association (hereinafter, the “PMTA”), and to interfere with the rights retained by Plaintiff Andrew Byrd, and other similarly situated members of Pythagoras Lodge. PMTA et al v. Michael Kessler, et al, CAFN: 23CV9161 Plaintiff’s Emergency Motion for Civil and Criminal Contempt and Demand for Atty Fees Page 1 Prior to this case being filed, several members of Pythagoras Lodge (including Plaintiff Byrd and others) were “charged” with alleged violations of Masonic Law, said charges being frivolous and without evidentiary support. These charges were brought by Defendant Frazier in April, 2023. The resolution of those charges and the issues in this case will involve the interpretation and application of Masonic Law. At the time of the emergency hearing, no masonic trials had taken place, although they had been scheduled, and then rescheduled for a number of reasons. The Court held an interlocutory hearing on December 5, 2023 and issued two orders in the case. This motion is based upon the second Order entered on December 8, 2023. In that Order, the Court ruled that the Defendants were “free to proceed with the internal business related to the trial of the Lodge members at issues, and the Lodge’s usual mechanisms for voting procedures, including the arresting of the charter for said Lodge.” The Court granted the Plaintiffs’ request that the Defendants be enjoined from dissolving the charter and/or its assets. Within days of the entry of this Order, the Defendants conspired to do exactly what the Court prohibited. It is clear that the Court intended for the “usual mechanisms” to be employed by the Defendants in their dealings with Masonic matters. However, the Defendants are violating the Court’s Order by their flagrant use of an unusual mechanism to conduct the trials of the Lodge members. Specifically, as shown in the Plaintiff’s complaint, Defendant Kessler (who was Grand Master at that time) “may not take jurisdiction of a Masonic offense by a private member; but if he has probable cause to believe that a member of a subordinate Lodge is guilty of a Masonic offense and that the Lodge having jurisdiction fails to take appropriate action, he may in his discretion order the trial of such member for such offense; and if said Lodge should fail to prefer PMTA et al v. Michael Kessler, et al, CAFN: 23CV9161 Plaintiff’s Emergency Motion for Civil and Criminal Contempt and Demand for Atty Fees Page 2 charges promptly, the Grand Master may arrest its charter and direct another constituent Lodge to prefer charges against the offending member.” Mason Code § 76-109 (2023). (EXHIBIT A) Here, Defendant Kessler purposefully bypassed this requirement, arresting the Lodge’s charter first, (EXHIBIT B) and then ordering a trial of the suspended members at a second Lodge, to wit: Tucker Lodge, No. 42. As shown in the Complaint, Defendant Kessler exceeded his authority by arresting the Lodge’s charter first, and without giving the Lodge the opportunity to investing and take appropriate action with respect to the frivolous allegations raised by Defendant Frazier. Upon information and belief, Tucker Lodge No. 42 was selected specifically due to the members’ willingness to follow blindly the directions of Defendant Kessler and to conduct a “show-trial” for the purposes of convicting and expelling the suspended members. The Courts Order plainly states and specifically requires that the “usual mechanisms” should govern the actions of all parties. In that event, then Defendants must be required to follow the prescribed protocol for Masonic trials of the suspended members, including Plaintiff Byrd, in this case. The usuals mechanisms require that the Grand Master refer the allegations of Masonic offenses to the Lodge having jurisdiction over said offenses, i.e., Pythagoras Lodge, No. 41. In the event that said Lodge fails to act, then and only then, may the Grand Master take jurisdiction of said offenses, arresting Pythagoras Lodge’s charter, and directing another constituent Lodge to prefer charges against the offending members. See Masonic Code § 76-109 (2023) (Exhibit A, attached). Tucker Lodge, No. 42, by definition a separate and distinct entity, cannot possibly be considered to be a part of “the internal business related to the trial of the [Pythagoras] Lodge members at issues” as required by the Order. PMTA et al v. Michael Kessler, et al, CAFN: 23CV9161 Plaintiff’s Emergency Motion for Civil and Criminal Contempt and Demand for Atty Fees Page 3 Further, as shown above, Tucker Lodge, No. 42, does not have jurisdiction over the members of Pythagoras Lodge, No. 41. The trials currently scheduled by Tucker Lodge have been scheduled per Defendant Kessler’s unlawful Ruling (EXHIBIT B) which reversed the authorized and usual sequence for handling Masonic charges. As noted previously, the Masonic charges in this case have never been brought to Pythagoras Lodge for consideration. That being the case, the usual mechanism for voting procedures have not been followed and the Defendants are now flagrantly violating the Court’s Order by scheduling the Masonic trials with another Lodge and completely ignoring the usual mechanism required in order to do so and in flagrant violation of this Court’s Order. The Plaintiffs have filed their Motion to Disqualify Counsel for Defendants contemporaneously with this motion and incorporate by reference all averments therein. As shown in that motion, the Masonic trials have been scheduled to take place, en masse, less than 24 hours after the mediation currently scheduled by the parties. This is a textbook example of bad faith. The new officers of Tucker Lodge were installed on December 17, 2023 and apparently, their first order of business was the scheduling of the trials of the suspended members, said notice for trials being sent two days later on December 19, 2023. The notices were then personally served on the suspended members at their home addresses in a clear act of harassment, since all members had been served previously. Clearly, the prosecution, conviction, and expulsion of the suspended members is the top priority of the Defendants and they are utilizing any mechanism to do so. Accordingly, they are willfully ignoring and violating this Court’s Order that the usual protocols be followed. The Defendants further continue to violate the usual protocols of Masonry by refusing to restore the charter to Pythagoras Lodge, No. 41. Defendant Kessler issued his Ruling 2023-04 and PMTA et al v. Michael Kessler, et al, CAFN: 23CV9161 Plaintiff’s Emergency Motion for Civil and Criminal Contempt and Demand for Atty Fees Page 4 said ruling was to be voted on at the 2023 Annual Communication of Grand Lodge on October 23- 25, 2023. The Rule was not voted on and accordingly, it has now expired, and the charter must be returned. A Grand Master’s Ruling “would only remain in effect for the terms of that Grand Master.” Masonic Code § 71-102.1 (2023) (Exhibit C, attached). Accordingly, the Ruling issued by Defendant Kessler has expired and no longer has any effect. The Court’s Order requires that the usual mechanisms be employed with respect to the arrest of the charter. Here, there is no question that the Defendants continue to willfully violate this Court’s Order concerning the charter of the Lodge and the trials of the suspended members in this case. There can be no other conclusion that the Defendants are acting in bad faith and in willful defiance of the Court’s Order and said actions require the highest possible sanction by the Court in order to both punish the Defendants as well as to coerce compliance with the Court’s Order. ARGUMENT AND CITATION TO AUTHORITY Per O.C.G.A. § 15-1-(a)(3), the Court has the power to punish a party for the disobedience of any order, rule, decree or command of the Court. Based upon the above, it is clear that the Defendants have willfully disregarded the provisions of the Court’s Order and should be sanctioned appropriately by the Court. Plaintiffs shows that at some point the Defendants must learn that rules do actually apply to them and that a Court Order is not a set of suggestive guidelines that can be arbitrarily disregarded when inconvenient, or blatantly circumvented like Masonic Code using obvious tricks or gimmicks such as seen in this case. Instead, the Defendants need to understand that the Court’s Order is an Order that they are bound to follow. Defendants appear to have the notion that they are in some sort of power-sharing relationship with the Court. This is a perception that needs significant recalibration. The fact that the Defendants continue to act as autocrats shows that their indifference to the Court’s explicit Order is more than just an irritation to the Plaintiffs. PMTA et al v. Michael Kessler, et al, CAFN: 23CV9161 Plaintiff’s Emergency Motion for Civil and Criminal Contempt and Demand for Atty Fees Page 5 Plaintiffs show that the Defendants’ indifference to the Court’s Order indicated a need for this Court to emphatically reorient Defendants’ comprehension of the nature of a court Order and that obedience is mandatory. Plaintiffs request that the Court exercise its discretion and sanction the Defendants’ civil and criminal contempt in such a manner that may serve to ensure their compliance with the letter and spirit of further Court Orders. Plaintiff requests that the Court even consider incarceration as provided by law to remedy the abject disobedience of the Defendants and to ensure that the Defendants may purge themselves of their contumacious conduct. Finally, Plaintiffs have had to incur attorney’s fees in order to bring these egregious matters to the Court’s attention and respectfully requests that they be reimbursed for said expenses. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request as follows: (a) That the Court set this matter down for a hearing, a Rule Nisi issue requiring the Defendants to appear and show cause why the prayers of the Plaintiffs’ motion should not be granted; (b) That pursuant to said hearing the Defendants be found in criminal contempt of court; (c) That the Defendants also be found in civil contempt of court; (d) That Plaintiffs be awarded a reasonable sum as attorneys fees; (e) That Plaintiffs have such other and further relief as the Court may consider just, equitable and appropriate under the circumstances. This 2nd day of January, 2024. /s/Kevin J. Pratt KEVIN J. PRATT Attorney for Plaintiffs PMTA et al v. Michael Kessler, et al, CAFN: 23CV9161 Plaintiff’s Emergency Motion for Civil and Criminal Contempt and Demand for Atty Fees Page 6 Georgia State Bar No. 586690 PRATT & WALL, ATTORNEYS AT LAW ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF 3461 Lawrenceville-Suwanee Road, Suite D Suwanee, Georgia 30024 770-614-4811 kpratt@georgiatrials.com lora@georgiatrials.com PMTA et al v. Michael Kessler, et al, CAFN: 23CV9161 Plaintiff’s Emergency Motion for Civil and Criminal Contempt and Demand for Atty Fees Page 7 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF DEKALB COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA PYTHAGORAS MASONIC TEMPLE , ' ASS’N, et al. ' ' Plaintiffs, ' ' CIVIL ACTION v. ' FILE NO. 23CV9161 ' MICHAEL KESSLER, et al, ' ' Defendants. ' CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I have this day served counsel for all parties the Plaintiff’s Emergency Motion for Civil and Criminal Contempt and Demand for Attorney’s Fees by STATUTORY ELECTRONIC SERVICE by Odyssey e-file as follows: Mr. William H. Kitchens, Jr. Wm. H. Kitchens, Jr & Associates, LLC 5855 Jimmy Carter Boulevard, Ste. 155 Norcross, GA 30071 bill@wmkitchens.com This 2nd day of January, 2024. /s/Kevin J. Pratt KEVIN J. PRATT Attorney for Plaintiffs Georgia State Bar No. 586690 PRATT & WALL, ATTORNEYS AT LAW ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF 3461 Lawrenceville-Suwanee Road, Suite D Suwanee, Georgia 30024 770-614-4811 kpratt@georgiatrials.com lora@georgiatrials.com PMTA et al v. Michael Kessler, et al, CAFN: 23CV9161 Plaintiff’s Emergency Motion for Civil and Criminal Contempt and Demand for Atty Fees Page 8 Masonic Code 2023 A 103 76-108. Foreign Waiver Inasmuch as a waiver from a foreign jurisdiction is not recognized by this Grand Lodge, such a waiver confers no penal jurisdiction except as provided in Section 76-106. 76-109. Grand Master Without Jurisdiction The Grand Master may not take jurisdiction of a Masonic offense by a private member; but if he has prob- able cause to believe that a member of a subordinate Lodge is guilty of a Masonic offense and that the Lodge having jurisdiction fails to take appropriate action, he may in his discretion order the trial of such member for such offense; and if said Lodge should fail to prefer charges promptly, the Grand Master may arrest its charter and direct another constituent Lodge to prefer charges against the offending member. (Section 21-107) 76-110. Grand Lodge May Expel The Grand Lodge may upon its own motion expel any Georgia Mason, though not a member of its body and with or without the recommendation of the constituent Lodge. CHAPTER 77-1. MASONIC OFFENSES 77-101. Masonic Offenses The following are Masonic offenses subjecting the offender to Masonic discipline: 1. Violation of the moral law. 2. Violation of the laws of Masonry. 3. Violation of the laws of the land involving moral turpitude. 4. Violation of the laws of the land involving a felony. 77-102. Performance of an Official Duty Not a Masonic Offense A Mason who occupies an official position such as judge, prosecuting attorney, juror, mayor, etc., should perform his official duties without showing partiality to anyone, whether Mason or profane. Thus, it is not a Masonic offense for a Mason in the performance of such official duty to issue an execution against a Brother Mason. 77-103. Insane Member No Lodge may suspend from membership or strike from its rolls a member who is insane. A member laboring under such disability is incapable of committing a Masonic offense. 77-104. Hearsay Not the Basis of Charges Charges may not be based solely upon rumor, without evidence of a specific offense against the laws of the Order. Such charges would tend to encourage slander and backbiting, themselves Masonic offenses. If any member, however, should do anything contrary to the good order, peace, and dignity of the Craft, or by overt act or improper practices should bring reproach upon the Order of Freemasonry, he shall be subject to charges and discipline. 77-105. Must Report an Offense The Lodge within whose jurisdiction an offense is committed by a member of another Lodge in this State must report such offense to such Lodge, and upon its failure to act, should report the matter to the Grand Master for action. B THE GRAND LODGE OF FREE AND ACCEPTED MASONS FOR THE STATE OF GEORGIA Michael A. Kessler, Grand Master RULING NO. 2023 - 04 IN RE: Pythagoras Lodge No. 41, F. & A.M. A number of complaints about the operation of Pythagoras Lodge No.41, F. & A.M. (herein after "the Lodge") have been received by various Grand Masters over the years including recent complaints. Therefore, I, as Grand Master, summonsed the members of the Lodge, pursuant to Masonic Code Section 4-101(11), to a stated meeting of the Lodge on January 19, 2023 for the purposes of reviewing the work of the Lodge, investigating allegations against the Worshipful Master, Secretary, and other officers of the Lodge, to consider whether grounds or cause exists for the removal of the Worshipful Master, Secretary, or other officers of the Lodge, and to consider whether the charter of the Lodge should be arrested. I presided over the Lodge as Grand Master with the Worshipful Master at my left hand and Grand Lodge officers occupying the stations. All members of the Lodge were given an opportunity to be heard. After a discussion that lasted over three hours the following is obvious: a) Members of the Lodge have serious complaints and concerns about how the Lodge is and has been managed. b) There had been electioneering to select the officers at the December 2021 and December 2022 annual elections; c) Officers and members of the Lodge demonstrated a disrespect for the offices of Grand Master and Grand Secretary before and during the meeting; d) At least one officer was less than truthful when addressing the Grand Master; 81 I Mulberry Street • Macon, GA 3120 I • Office: ( 478)742-1475 • Email: gsec@glofga.org • www.glofga.org Masonic Code 2023 C 100 V. MISCELLANEOUS A. MISCELLANEOUS CHAPTER 71-1. MISCELLANEOUS 71-101. Landmarks and Unwritten Law Not Repealed The unwritten law, the immemorial usages and the landmarks of Masonry, are not repealed by the adoption of any constitution and bylaws. Nor is it in the power ofany man or body ofmen to change, alter, or repeal them or any of them. 71-102. Masonic Code the Approved Law This Masonic Code and the official approved supplements thereto constitute the approved body oflaws effective in this Grand Jurisdiction. It should be consulted and relied upon. If any other manual or book may vary or differ from the Masonic Code, this Code must and does control. This Code repeals all enactments and edicts ofthe Grand Lodge at variance with its provisions or not contained herein. (Section 2-211) 71-102.1 Rulings and Edicts of the Grand Master The Grand Master may from time to time as he determines appropriate during his term of office, issue a Ruling or an Edict regarding some question or issue of interest or importance to the craft. A Ruling would only remain in effect for the term of that Grand Master. An Edict would apply to a more significant question or issue which may be enacted as Masonic law by the Grand Lodge in session and then preserved in this Code. However, in the event the Grand Lodge does not enact an Edict into Masonic law, it would only remain in effect during the term of office ofthe Grand Master that issued it. (Section 71-102) 71-102.2 Rulings and Edicts of the Grand Master in the Case of Emergencies Wherever and whenever a public health or public safety emergency is declared at the national, state, county, or municipal level by lawful authorities or the Grand Master determines, in his sole discretion, that conditions exist which may constitute a public health or public safety emergency affecting the Fraternity such that the normal methods of conducting Masonic work are considered inadvisable because of social distancing or otherwise, the Grand Master may issue rulings suspending portions of the ritual, balloting, degree work, and examinations. (Edict 2020-1) 71-103. Masonry Non-Sectarian, Non-Political The avoidance ofpolitical subjects in the Lodge room is a cardinal principle of Masonry, and a Mason must not use his Lodge connection to further his political ambition. Masonry unites, upon the principles ofbrotherly love, men of every country, sect, and opinion. No political or religious distinction should ever limit its charity. It is peculiar to no country, but common to all. It recognizes no religion but that unfaltering trust in God, who created the world and all things therein the Grand Architect of the Universe, by whose unerring square the blocks we offer must at last be tried, and who will reward us according to our merit. (Section 77-104) 71-104. Politics A Lodge may not legally petition the Legislature on any political subject. It is contrary to the spirit and teachings of Masonry for a member to be endorsed for political preferment on account ofhis Masonic membership either by a Masonic Lodge or by members of the Craft as such. (Section 77-102)