The Prohibition Party was founded in 1869 as an unincorporated entity.
In 2003, a competitor organization was founded, Earl Dodge's New Party, the "National Prohibition Party." It was incorporated by Dodge and his daughter Karen.
The original of the Incorporation is online at the Colorado secretary of State website.
The original historic Prohibition Party had not consented to this new competing Party, formed by the secession of Mr. Dodge and his daughter. Some ten (10) of his supporters, Mr. Dodge claims as his members, but it is unknown whether they are aware of the new Party, or even of the name change.
Mr. Dodge let his cronies know the name change. His crony Howard Lydick sent this writer a letter using the new name and denouncing this writer for not going along.
Mr. Dodge may well have concealed the name change from his alleged supporters. His letterhead does not reflect the name change. He kept on soliciting funds using the historic name, siphoning funds away from that group, bu giving the wrong impression to people he was soliciting that his new 2002 entity was still the same Party, the same historic 1869 Party.
A lawsuit resulted from Dodge's behavior. He put in writing that the old historic entity had "created a new group." No doubt, the bigger the "Big Lie," the more likely the unsuspecting might be deceived!
A lawsuit resulted, in October 2005. The recipient of Dodge's false accusation against the historic 1869 group was in fact deceived, and reacted accordingly.
Not until January 2007 during a court hearing did the truth come out, that Dodge had himself "created [the] new group"!! with the different name!
This site provides links to the key documents filed in court by the historic 1869 Party defeedning itself against Dodge's charges. You will note that none of the historic group's pleadings, affidavits, etc., filed in the October 2005 - January 2007 period cite the new Dodge Party. The historic entity literally did not know that Dodge had founded the New Party. The historic entity only knew that it had not created a different group, only knew that it had not changed!
Defense against false charges is obviously difficult! The accused may, and here, have no idea what misconduct the accuser had committed! This reminds of the pertinent court precedent, wherein the Court -- ruling on a false accusation against another unsuspecting defendant, said:
the Party's original 25 Oct 2005 Answer to the Surprise Lawsuit
the Party's November 2005 interrogatories which Dodge never answered
the Party's 28 Nov 2005 Motion to Dismiss due to Dodge not having answered the Lawsuit
the Party's 15 Dec 2005 motion for summary judgement against Dodge
the Party's 6 April 2006 Answer to the rewrite of the Dodge-caused lawsuit as an interpleader
Motion for Summary Judgment 25 September 2006, citing all relevant Penn. Parliamentary law precedents back to 1840’s: Dodge’s then lawyer Robert A. Carpenter, Jr., thereupon quit
the Party's further answer 6 November 2006 when the re-written case was served formally
the Party's 28 Dec 2006 Motion to Strike Dodge’s new lawyer’s exaggerated claims
10 March 2007 Reply to Bodager’s Answer to the Party's Supplement based on the surprising new information Dodge had revealed under court questioning at hearing 16 Jan 2007)
Dodge lawyer's 5 July 2007 Letter asking for a postponement of the trial, and the envelope showing mailing by Dodge’s lawyer 4 days afterwards
Willard D. Watkins Affidavit (28 Nov 2005)
Wagner Affidavit (15 February 2006 on Dodge’s reported stealing and psychiatric defense claims
Swift Affidavit (4 November 2005)
The Party's member chart showing substantially more members than Dodge
Note that none of Dodge's alleged supporters filed any affidavits under oath; and none of them showed up for the trial! despite being notified in writing! Wonder if they didn't dare testify for Dodge's accusations against the Party?!!
See also the two Court Transcripts: