Prestigous Pets

December 5, 2016

Index to Prestigious Pets (Texas) Lawsuit Updates [Public Citizen & Paul Alan Levy]

In response to recent queries about the current status of the Prestigious Pets lawsuit in Dallas County, Texas, I have prepared this resource page that lists Public Citizen’s posts and updates to the case. There are many stories written about the Prestigious Pets lawsuit but most are secondary sources of reporting. Paul Alan Levy of Public Citizen is at the very heart of the case as he is currently lead counsel representing defendants, Robert and Michelle Duchouquette against Prestigious Pets and its owner, Kalle McWhorter.

For people who don’t know what the Prestigious Pets lawsuit is all about, in short, it is about a Texas-based pet-sitting business (Prestigious Pets) who objected to one of its customers (Michelle Duchouquette) negative and unflattering Yelp review about their experience. Prestigious Pets felt that what Michelle wrote was unfair, untrue, and a violation of the non-disparagement clause in their agreement. Michelle stood by her review.

A local lawyer, Tom Fleischer, sent a cease-and-desist letter to the Duchouquettes. The Duchouqettes did not acquiesce to the demand to take down the Yelp review but Michelle modified the Yelp review to accommodate some points made in Fleischer’s letter. Prestigious Pets then filed a $6,700 lawsuit in a Texas small claims court but it was ultimately dropped after the Duchouqettes went public with their story. However, instead of cutting their losses and letting the matter go, Kalle McWhorter, owner of Prestigious Pets, with the assistance of Texas Attorney Bill Richmond, came forward to file a much larger and accusatory lawsuit naming HERSELF and Prestigious Pets as plaintiffs against the Duchouqettes. She and Prestigious Pets asked for up to $1 million in this lawsuit. Paul Alan Levy of Public Citizen subsequently took on the case and became lead counsel for the Duchouquettes. The case was ultimately dismissed by the judge. Despite Mr. Levy’s attempts to settle the matter with Mr. Richmond following the court’s dismissal, Kalle McWhorter and Prestigious Pets have chosen to not settle the matter which has forced the case forward with several matters still unresolved.

I have followed the case closely. I have personally read nearly every court document filed in Case #DC-16-03561: Kalle McWhorter and Prestigious Pets LLC (Plaintiffs) v. Robert and Michelle Duchouquette. There is a LOT of information in the case documents that the general news media have NOT reported on. At some point, I will comment on what I found that will be of interest to those following this case. For now, I refer people to read Paul Alan Levy’s own posts of the case thus far. Although it appears the Duchouquettes appear to have won, there is still uncertainty in this case because an appeal is possible.

Most recent articles listed first. (This page will be periodically updated as the story unfolds and reported.)

From Public Citizen: Consumer Law & Policy Blog

September 27, 2016: Time for Prestigious Pets to Pay the Piper

August 30, 2016: Texas Court Strikes Down Prestigious Pets’ Nondisparagement Clause Lawsuit

June 2, 2016: Dallas Pet-Sitting Firm Raises the Ante, Seeks Up to a Million Dollars in Damages for Yelp Review

February 26, 2016: Self-help against non-disparagement clauses?

February 22, 2016: Prestigious Pets, or Litigious Pets? Dallas Pet Care Company Invokes Non-Disparagement Clause to Maintain Its Yelp Rating

In addition to Paul Alan Levy’s updates, I recommend Cristin Severance’s CBS-DFW TV news reports as they are one of the original reporting sources and directly interview Michelle Duchouquette and Paul Alan Levy.

May 4, 2016: Couple Fights Off $1 Million Lawsuit Over Bad Yelp Review

February 17, 2016: Yelp Review Lands Couple In Court

=====

March 25, 2016

Infamous “Prestigious Pets” Sends Takedown Notice to Defiantly.net

yelp-sqr I haven’t posted anything for over a month since I have been busy with other projects and my personal life. The last column I posted was from February 20, 2016. It was a relatively short column I wrote commenting on how stupid “Prestigous Pets” of Dallas, Texas was to file a lawsuit against Robert and Michelle Duchouquette for a 1-star Yelp review. Much of what I reported came from two online CBS video news reports where they displayed court documents on national TV. I took the extra step of closely studying and watching the news videos to discern the details from televised documents. I found a lot of interesting details not discussed in the original story.

Anyhow, the “Prestigious Pets” column was supposed to be a one-off story. But today, I received an email notification from an unnamed “representative of Prestigious Pets LLC” to take down my story.

=====

From: Prestigious Pets <prestigiouspetsdallas@yahoo.com>
To: mattXXXX@gmail.com
Subject: https://defiantly.net

I am a representative of Prestigious Pets LLC. Your company has published a story regarding Prestigious Pets, LLC that contains defamatory statements and negative statements that violate a contract between a party and Prestigious Pets LLC. Please remove the story promptly.

Intrepid – Defiantly
P.O. Box 6391
Columbus, GA 31917

Thank you!

Prestigious Pets, LLC
214-912-7799

Reg Office Hours:
M-F 9am-4pm
Sat 11am-3pm
Sun Closed

The contents of this e-mail message and any attachments are confidential and are intended solely for addressee. They may not be copied, distributed, forwarded or reproduced. The information may also be legally privileged. This transmission is sent in trust, for the sole purpose of delivery to the intended recipient. If you have received this transmission in error, any use, reproduction or dissemination of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail or phone and delete this message and its attachments, if any.

I assumed the email came from business owner, ~~David McWhorter~~ Kalle McWhorter. No ethical lawyer in good standing would send a blind email from prestigiouspetsdallas@yahoo.com asserting the incorrect things he did. This guy is seriously brain-damaged in trying to send me a takedown notice. Does he even have a clue that I (with the help of my legal and support team) won a unanimous victory last year with the Georgia Supreme Court regarding online speech issues?

Here was my email reply to prestigiouspetsdallas@yahoo.com:

Dear Unnamed Representative of Prestigious Pets LLC (presumably David McWhorter),

You have sent me a very foolish email request given your recent situation. I assume you are objecting to my recent column about various news stories about your efforts to sue a Texas couple (the Duchouquette’s) for giving your business service a negative Yelp review.

https://defiantly.net/prestigious-pets-stupidly-sues-customer-for-negative-yelp-feedback/

I presume you know that your story was well covered nationally by the Dallas Morning News, Fox News, USA Today, and The Daily Mail to name a few sources.

I have re-read my column and much of the information I reported conveniently came from the two CBS video news stories which show the content of the court documents.

http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2016/02/17/yelp-review-lands-couple-in-court/

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/yelp-negative-online-review-texas-couple-sued-jeremy-stoppelman/

Other information came from public records freely available online.

It is apparent you did not read my column carefully. Do you know what the Streisand Effect is? I made mention of it in my column. Well, you are starting it all up again.

I can promise you that my one short “negative” column on a small website does not compare to all the wonderful media attention you managed to get for yourself based on your foolish lawsuit against Michelle and Robert Duchouquette.

And regarding your comment about my “violating a contract between a party and Prestigious Pets”, I am not a party to that. I have no agreement with you or anyone else to NOT write or publish information that was already put out publicly by the two CBS video news stories and other news reporting organizations. If you want to be upset, go complain to them.

In closing, I will NOT remove my column. I stand by what I wrote as being factually correct and my “negative” opinion is entirely appropriate. If there any facts I have inadvertently missed, I will happily correct it. Absent incorrect facts, I will not change or take my column down.

My suggestion to you is to let it go. Give it up. As I wrote in my column, you seriously need to cut your losses and just move on. How much more negative publicity do you need? Why are you trying to revive a story that has gone stale?

Matthew

I am still deciding on whether or not I want to call CBS News in Dallas or any of the other news media who reported on the original story. Do I let my email response and this new column stand alone? Or do I take it further? I may reach out to the Duchouquette’s and show them the takedown email from Prestigious Pets LLC. I wonder what they would say if they knew that Prestigious Pets is still trying to “motivate” people into taking down unfavorable comments about them.

May 6, 2016 UPDATE: The lawsuit filed by Dallas lawyer, Bill S. Richmond on March 28, 2016 reveals that Prestigious Pets LLC is owned by Kalle McWhorter, not David McWhorter.

=====

Follow Defiantly on Twitter at http://twitter.com/defiantlynet or the Defiantly Facebook Fan Page at http://facebook.com/defiantly.net. Subscribe by Email to the Defiantly Blog in the Blue Box in the Upper Right Corner.

=====

February 20, 2016

“Prestigious Pets” Stupidly Sues Customer For Negative Yelp Feedback

yelp At any given time, there is no shortage of topics for me to write about. However, there are certain triggers that motivate me to my keyboard. One of those triggers is any business owner who thinks they are so smart that they want to sue someone into silence for expressing legitimate negative opinions and negative feedback. They trigger the infamous Streisand Effect and I do my small part to ensure it remains alive and well.

I am certainly not a person or business owner who likes negative opinions or negative feedback written about me or my business but I absolutely know that the ABSOLUTE DUMBEST thing to do with negative feedback issues is to use a “non-disparagement” clause as a basis to sue an unhappy customer regarding negative Yelp feedback.

It appears the Internet has gleefully rewarded “Prestigious Pets” of Dallas, Texas with free negative publicity from various news stories like the Dallas Morning News, Fox News, and The Daily Mail.

They have triggered a hornet’s nest of unhappy Yelpers going on the attack against Prestigious Pets’ Yelp account for the foolish $6,766 lawsuit against a customer who posted a 1-star Yelp feedback.

Particularly ignorant is the business owner’s digging his heels into their position. According to Dallas News, they obtained an email quote “We are honest people seeking protection from dishonest individuals, not other honest ones. Fair and honest feedback is not the issue here.” I read the Yelper’s feedback against Prestigious Business and it appears to be a legitimately informative Yelp review.

What is truly a travesty is the lawyer and law firm that sent the cease-and-desist letter and the lawsuit. I have reached out to the victims to find out what lawyer and law firm filed the papers.

Update: From what I can tell from the CBS video, the cease-and-desist letter comes from the Law Office of Tom Fleischer. The Texas State Bar and LinkedIn shows this guy’s winning good looks.

texas-state-bar-tom-fleischer

The small-claims complaint and lawsuit itself reveals that it was filed by David McWhorter(?) [partially-illegible last name] on behalf of Prestigious Pets LLC. It does not appear that Texas lawyer Tom Fleischer filed this lawsuit.

The complaint being made is: “Violation of Non-Disparagement clause from signed agreement. Irreparable and continued harm. Libelous and slanderous harm. Monetary damages due to legal fees, and lost work opportunities. Tort. Intentional Misrepresentation and Fraud by omission. Continued lost work opportunities.”

David is going to find out he is going to lose a lot more business by his ignorance of the Streisand Effect. And it might even be unenforceable due to First Amendment issues. He seriously needs to cut his losses and move on.

=====