A disbarred attorney who has waged a crusade against extra pay for Los Angeles County judges has launched a grass-roots campaign urging voters to reject all incumbent judges in the June 5 primary.

Richard Fine of Tarzana founded the Campaign for Judicial Integrity in an effort to rid courts of judges who receive about $60,000 a year in additional pay from counties, on top of the $180,000 they receive in state salaries and benefits.

"Traditional methods to remove these judges failed due to political cronyism and prosecutorial inaction," said Fine, 72. "The only way to restore fairness and integrity to the judiciary is for citizens to exercise their right to vote, and vote out those judges who received the illegal payments."

He said judges in 34 California counties, including Los Angeles, receive those benefits and are therefore "tainted." He believes it creates a conflict of interest that has resulted in LA County, for example, winning all but three of its cases when a Superior Court judge made the decision from 2005-2011. Fine got the data from the L.A. County Counsel's Annual Litigation Reports.

A spokesperson for the L.A. County Superior Court declined to address Fine's allegations.

"It hurts you (the public) every time you walk into a courtroom," Fine said. "Because the judge has been paid by one of the parties to the case... the judge is biased against you (the public), and under law cannot sit on your case."

He hope once incumbent judges are removed, the new judges will reject the benefits. He said several counties have already stopped making the payment, but not L.A. County.

Fine was a prominent anti-trust and taxpayer advocate attorney for decades before being jailed for more than a year and a half for contempt of court. He was disbarred for moral turpitude in 2009 after a State Bar Court review found he had filed numerous meritless lawsuits against judicial officers.

Philip Carrizosa, spokesman for the Administrative Office of the Courts, said state law allows the benefits that Fine is protesting.

"The benefits payments go back decades, to a time when counties were paying the salaries of judges and sometimes giving additional pay to cover such expenses as their continuing education," Carrizosa said. "The system continued even through the time that the state started paying judges."

A San Diego appellate court ruled in 2008 the counties' benefits payments to judges were unconstitutional because they were not authorized by the state Legislature. The ruling did not address whether the benefits created a conflict of interest.

The state Legislature later authorized the payments.