For years Let's Adopt Global president Ivan Jiminez Chacon and Treasurer Raciel Fernendez of Southbridge, Massachusetts issued the threats. Their detractors would be sued and silenced. We all waited & kept telling them to put their money (donors money) where their mouth was. Finally last April, they launched what they considered to be a "landmark" lawsuit, naming 38 defendants in seven countries. They did their best to promote the lawsuit on social media, publicly posting the named participants and their home addresses online (against court procedures), and stating several of the "defendants" had criminal records.
Why do I use the term defendants in parentheses? It's simple. Of the 38 named "defendants", less than one third were actually served paperwork. You read that correctly. Let's Adopt Global simply named as many individuals as they could to strike fear into the detractors, hoping they would stop telling the truth about the organization. The people stood for what is right, and refused to be bullied.
Today, the Superior Court of Worcester Massachusetts dismissed the case against those defendants that Let's Adopt Global did not serve. We were not surprised, as we maintain the organization never even attempted to serve individuals outside the United States. Those individuals, contrary to Let's Adopt Global's lies were never being sued, as a case was never pursued against them.
Even up to yesterday a website was created to inform people that myself, Gord Macey of The Toronto Pet Daily, was being sued. On the website is a number for the court in Massachusetts where one can call to determine that I am being sued. I thank the website for posting the number, as had it not I wouldn't have called the court, resulting in a lengthy conversation with the clerk and a quick dismissal. Thank you to whomever created that website. It directly caused a phone call that resulted in a dismissal in one day.
As I write this some other individuals (those Let's Adopt Global actually pursued) are still actively involved in a case on jurisdiction. The next scheduled date is at the end of May. Those of us who were never involved in this frivilous lawsuit to begin with? We wish them the best of luck and hope a judge will echo today's decision to dismiss.Let's Adopt Global has the right to appeal the dismissal (the clerk said it's unlikely it would be granted), and I expect them to do just that. In the meantime, I'll still be wondering where on earth they are getting the funds to continue with this charade. I for one hope it's not coming from the pockets of good natured people donating funds that should go toward animal care.
UPDATE April 22
As expected, Let's Adopt Global put forth a motion that was filed this morning, to vacate the dismissals of the 22 other named parties in the lawsuit. This comes as no surprise, but what is extremely troubling is that since April 4, when the dismissal went through, Let's Adopt Global has hidden the fact from its donors. One year ago the organization sent out a mass email to solicit YOUR money since they apparently had no money to launch such a case. Now one year later, they still refuse to be transparent to donors. As a donor it is your right to know if money you are giving is being put to good use as pertains to this lawsuit. It is also your right to know any ruling on the order to vacate the dismissal. I will update as soon as there is any new information, though you shouldn't need to be hearing any such updates from me. I'm not the one using your money for legal fees.
UPDATE May 3
The judge in the case has indeed vacated the decision to dismiss the motion on 22 individuals, and has given Let's Adopt Global until May 27 to try to serve the remaining named parties, yours truly included. Legally Massachusetts gives the party bringing the motion to court 90 days to do so. In this case, Let's Adopt Global was given the 90 days, then 180, then 270, then 360, and now it has been over a year. I'm sure if that doesn't work they will apply for another extension. In that year, less than one third of the named parties were served. Now they are trying one last ditch effort to save face. As always, I will update you all on a case that Let's Adopt Global should transparently be doing so to its donors.
This case has been brought about by the Let's Adopt Global Board Of Directors :
Diana Rumenova Zhivkova, Sofia, Bulgaria
Daniela Beier, Bad Nauhem, Germany
Carolina Fajar, Tangerang, Banten Indonesia
Jill Gerew, Spenceport, New York
Sabine Nowack, Sankt Ingbert, Germany
Isabel Carvalho, Lelystad, Netherlands
Andrea Rosebrock, Piscataway, New Jersey
Maria Nikolaeva Kutreva-Williamson, Bulgaria
Cansu Ozge Ozmen Pushkin, Tekirdag, Turkey
Yasemin Muller Balikci, Meerbusch
Ivan Jimenez Chacon, Lleida, Spain
Raciel Fernandez, Southbridge Massachusetts
Patricia Gonzalves, Southbridge Massachusetts
**Public information republished via Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley
This case is estimated to have cost all involved parties over $50 000 thus far, AND IT HASN'T EVEN GONE TO TRIAL YET!!! I'm sure by then it will be in the hundreds of thousands of dollars, but as is your right as an animal advocate, keep donating to whoever you see fit. What would I do with $50 000? I would spend it on saving the lives of as many animals as I possibly could. Let's Adopt Global amassed that number in donations and used it to save one. The dog died.
Update May 3
Last year Ivan Jimenez Chacon pursued a civil case in Spain against reputable animal rescuer Cristina Munoz Garcia, who published her horror story of dealing with Let's Adopt Global. The organization's claim? You guessed it, defamation, the exact thing they are trying to prove in their current case. The result of the case? Cristina and the two other individuals taken to court were found innocent of defamation. Basically it comes down to Ivan Jimenez Chacon not being able to handle criticism. Congratulations to Cristina and the other individuals who were subject to such a ridiculous procedure.
Meanwhile while we wait for the current case to work its way through the court system, Let's Adopt Global states they are using their lawyers against one woman in Germany. Let's not forget the legal bills they previously racked up to pursue a woman in Canada a short time ago. They have not updated. Vexatious litigation much? When funds are solicited to help with Let's Adopt Global's current case, are potential donors notified the last time the organization attempted civil litigation it didn't go their way?
As you were, donate where you see fit.