I know I should take this seriously but it’s so ridiculous my normal analytical state is stymied. It’s like trying to code 2 + 2 =17. My brain seizes up at the absurdity and I can’t even think of code. I almost wish I’d get one of these to frame in honor of reaching my goal through my “torturous interference” with GARD. Yes, I take inordinate pride in that knowledge.
The legal chain letter below is flying around southern Georgia faster than the Nigerian Prince Scam. At last count seven people have received the exact same letter with only the recipients’ names changed. I think they’re going down the list of Facebook users who “like” or comment on the page to get names and addresses. For obvious reasons I’ve removed this particular recipient’s name. The part that matters is the text and not only for its hilariously dreadful use of the English language (when all of this is done I’m giving it to one of my writing professors to use in his business writing course to illustrate poor writing skills ruining a business document.)
If I addressed every fallacy and falsehood this post would sprint past 50,000 words so I’m going to stick with the parts that obviously apply to me.
Page 1 §2 item 1: Have you paid attention to the news Mr N, Esq.? People are writing and shouting “shut down the POLICE” all over the country without legal interference, yet my statement of purpose is “libel?” You actually believe that?
Page 1 §2 items 2 & 3: If criticizing information created by the Georgia Department of Agriculture and subject to FOI requests is “intimidation,” every press outlet in the country is in trouble. Why do you think the Freedom of Information Act was written—so the public could be the government’s cheerleaders? I cannot believe an attorney actually wrote that sentence. Had I known law school was that easy to pass I might’ve attended just to have “Esq” on my checks.
Page 2 §1: If you really want to claim www.georgiaanimalrescuedefense.com is your client’s “intellectual property” explain why their own domain hasn’t been keep current since what, 2015? If their domain name is so critical to their business—and yes, they’re a business selling dogs—why are all of their day-to-day operations performed on Facebook? Gardonline.org looks and sounds nothing like georgiaanimalrescuedefense.com. Why hasn’t your client parked any and all domains that they believe infringe upon their “rights?”
Domain names are not protected or approved or licensed by the U.S. Copyright Office but they do recommend working with the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), an organization that performs domain system management. In some cases, however, they can be protected by trademark, and while this is good for you once you have a name, as you are choosing one, be careful that it is not protected by a trademark—and this goes for businesses or websites operating in other countries too.
Your client has no trademarks in the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s TESS system. Given its intentional misspelling in American English I doubt TESS would miss it.
GARD’s logo doesn’t even have a ™ on it. If you want to try that feel free but don’t count on a BMW payment for your trouble.
Page 2 §3: The only mention of Michelle Trammel on this site until today occurred in reference to her husband’s statement on heartworm testing.
Bryan Woods, whom I later learned is married to veterinarian Michele Tremmell-Woods, returned my call and told me dogs aren’t tested for heart worms before age four years. I know for a fact that’s lunacy, especially in the mosquito-infested Savannah region, but he insisted. Finn was never tested for heart worms while in GARD’s possession and was not on a preventative.
That’s the absolute truth, period. In case you need a refresher:
First and foremost, truth is an absolute defense to a defamation lawsuit. If the statement that is the subject of the suit is true, and you can prove it, your attorney can move to have the plaintiff’s claim dismissed. No one is punished for speaking the truth, even if it is an ugly truth.
Good luck with that.
Page 3 §1 Items 2-4: In your dreams.
Page 3 §2: Every single word I write is either documented fact or my opinion stated as such. When I learn I’m in error—yes, it happens—I openly edit the post and correct any statement that I learn is not accurate. Neither you nor anyone else will compel me to remove any of it. End of discussion.
Page 3 §5: What makes you think I want or need to have any direct contact with any of those people? They’ve put all their misdeeds online in a public forum known as Facebook. Their Georgia Department of Agriculture inspection reports are public record. Their IRS 990s are public record. I don’t need to speak word one to any of them. I’m doing quite well without them as your claim of “tortuous interference” makes plain (I just love that!)
Page 3 §4: I will retract NOTHING. Not happening. Feel free to sue me if you can even locate me.
I really ought to have gone to law school if this letter is indicative of the quality of intellect required to pass the bar.