A Lubbock resident has taken legal action against multiple parties, including former judicial officers and local government entities, alleging constitutional violations. On November 20, 2025, Charles Brice Chapman filed a civil rights complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth Division, naming Christina Michelle Chapman and others as defendants.
Chapman’s lawsuit accuses several individuals and organizations of engaging in unlawful actions under color of state law. The complaint centers around a decree signed on January 7, 2016, by Stephen L. Johnson, who Chapman claims was constitutionally disqualified from doing so due to a conflict of interest outlined in the Texas Constitution Article V, Section 11. According to Chapman, Johnson had previously represented his ex-wife in related legal matters back in 2005. As a result, Chapman argues that all subsequent enforcement actions based on this decree are void ab initio—meaning they are null from the outset.
The complaint outlines various grievances stemming from this allegedly void decree. Chapman contends that he has been subjected to numerous unconstitutional harms over the years, including wrongful arrests and incarcerations, property seizures such as his home being sold at a sheriff’s sale while he was jailed, and even threats of deadly force should he return to his residence. Furthermore, Chapman’s driver’s license was suspended solely due to the void judgment.
Chapman also highlights what he perceives as municipal conflicts of interest exacerbating his situation. He alleges that Mark McBrayer, Mayor of Lubbock and member of the same law firm as one of the disqualified judges involved in his case, represents a structural conflict that undermines impartiality. Additionally, Chapman suggests that there is an improper governmental motive tied to plans for a recreational lake project near his homestead—a project he believes is being advanced at his expense through unlawful means.
In seeking relief from the court, Chapman requests several remedies: declaratory judgment affirming the void nature of the January 7 decree; a permanent injunction preventing its enforcement; restoration of all rights and properties taken under its guise; expungement of related legal actions; and potentially compensatory and punitive damages following judicial review.
Representing himself pro se in this matter is Charles Brice Chapman. The case has been assigned Case ID 4:25-cv-01310-O with no other attorneys or judges named within the provided document excerpts.
Source: 425cv01310_Chaman_v_Chapman_Complaint_Northern_District_of_Texas.pdf
