Pages Navigation Menu


☛ Dos Cats Partners: Legal Fact or Creative Writing? 7-1-18





By Glory Ann Kurtz
July 1, 2018

The “DOS CATS PARTNERS” name is identified, referenced to and provable in its use as a “business entity” by Dufurrena and in a myriad of  “identifiable locations, e.g., :

  1. In legally filed, open-record court documents in the Minshall Versus Dufurrena and “DOS CATS PARTNERS” lawsuit.

1a–Minshalls v Dufurrena

  1. In Legally filed, open-record court documents in the Vogel Versus Dufurrena lawsuit and “DOS CATS PARTNERS” receivership appointment request.

  2-Vogels vs Dufurrena

  1. In Dufurrena’s June 14, 2018 letter, to the Officers and Directors of the National Cutting Horse Association (NCHA).

Ed Dufurrena Ltr to NCHA Board 06.14.18 copy


  1. The March 25, 2011 “DOS CATS PARTNERS” (agreement-contract) by and between Eugene and Janie Vogel and Edward L. and Shona Dufurrena, which is included in Dufurrena’s June 14, 2018-letter, to the Officers and Directors of the National Cutting Horse Association (NCHA).


Furthermore, records reflect: Dufurrena’s use of the “DOS CATS PARTNERS” identifier is also  accompanied by the use of the acronym “D.B.A.”  An acronym is a word formed from the initial letter or letters of each of the successive partsor major parts of a compound term, e.g.:


  • * In Dufurrena’s letter to the NCHA, he refers to his “dba”– in the following paragraph: On January 1, 2016, I purchased the Vogel’s share of Auspicious Cat. Exhibit 14. At that time, the co-ownership agreement was over as there were no horses remaining. Auspicious Cat was owned by me before the Vogel’s acquired 49 percent of him. The horse was originally part of Dos Cats Partners that was, at one time, a partnership. I ultimately bought out the other partners and kept the name. The partnership ceased to be such an entity when there were no other partners. I used it like an assumed name, or “dba”.  Once the Vogel’s no longer owned 49 percent, I kept the horse under the same name.

*       In the handwritten Dufurrena/Vogel contract-agreement on March 25, 2011, marked as, “Exhibit A and Exhibit 2,” Dufurrena also uses the (dba) acronym  to describe this agreement, e.g., “1) This owners agreement entered in on the 25thday of March 2011 between Ed Dufurrena, 820 CR 133, Gainesville, Texas 76240, a 51% share holder with Don and Janie Vogel ______________, St Jo Texas _____________ a 49% share holder in all horses entered into this agreement now or in the future to be known as Dos Cats Partners.”

4-Dufurrena-Vogel contract



“DBA. Definition. DBA. Stands for “doing business as,” which in Texas is also termed the “assumed name.”  The DBAis the alternate name under which you will operate your business, as compared to the format business name registered with the state or your own individual name.”



According to Texas law, as well as the Texas Secretary of State; A D.B.A. must be filed with the State of Texas in order to legally conduct business in Texas. More specifically, Form 503. A domestic or foreign corporation, limited liability company, limited partnership, partnership or other foreign filing entity that regularly conducts business or renders a professional in this state under a name other than its legal name.(The name stated in certificate of formation or comparable document must file an assumed name certificate with the secretary of state and with the county clerk in the appropriate county. (Texas business and commerce code [TBCC] 71.103).

6-dba laws18



As an investigative journalist, I conducted research into the foregoing; Dufurrena self-admitted information and facts referencing (“his”) “d.b.a.,” i.e., “Dos Cats Partners” and ascertained the following:

  • The Texas Secretary of State has no record of “Dos Cats Partners” ever being filed with the State of Texas.
  • A check with the Cooke county clerk pertaining to any “Dos Cats Partners” filings on record with the same, revealed: Their office has“NO RECORD” of “Dos Cats Partners” ever being filed and recorded as a legal business “assumed name – d.b.a.” in the county, as required by identified Texas law in the foregoing.



However, in item (12) of the March 25, 2011 contract-agreement, by and between Ed Dufurrena, Don and Janie Vogel, and signed by S. Dufurrena; the handwritten document states as follows: “The obligations and undertakings of each of the parties to this agreement shall be performable in Cooke County, Texas and shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Texas.”


Therefore, the foregoing Dufurrena/Vogel, “contract – agreement” referencing ‘governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Texas,’ couldn’t be corroborated or legitimized by my research due to the fact, each reporting agency stated that they have no record of “Dos Cats Partners” ever being recorded with them.


Clearly, the researched and stated facts in the foregoing, “speak for themselves”  specifically, Dufurrena states: “Dos Cats Partners” will be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Texas,” yet it appears his – d.b.a. isout of compliance with Texas law, governing assumed namesor “d.b.a.” registration filings, as required by law.


Notwithstanding, this revelation of fact also provides evidence that the “Dos Cats Partners” wasn’t a legally filed d.b.a. entity in the State of Texas, as required by – law, during the first “Dos Cats Partners” lawsuit with the Minshall’s, nor was it a legally filed entity during the Vogel lawsuit. This conclusion is in accordance to the Texas Secretary of State and Cooke County information herein and obtained by me while conducting my investigative journalistic research.





(a)     If the court, as a matter of law, finds the contract or any clause of the contract to have been unconscionable at the time it was made, the court may refuse to enforce the contract, or it may enforce the remainder of the contract without the unconscionable clause, or it may so limit the application of any unconscionable clause as to avoid any unconscionable result.


(b)     When it is claimed or appears to the court that the contract or any clause thereof may be unconscionable, the parties shall be afforded a reasonable opportunity to present evidence as to its commercial setting, purpose and effect to aid the court in making the determination.



My investigative journalistic research also indicated that billing from Dufurrena to the Vogels was conducted through Ed Dufurrena Cutting Horses and not through“Dos Cats Partners,” which would be a “usual and customary” normal business practice in lieu of the fact Dufurrena is alleging a business partnership with the Vogel’s, (aka) “also known as,” “Dos Cats Partners.  However, my scrutiny of the signed agreement known as, “Dos Cats Partners” didn’t include a performance clause that such accounting practices would be performed by Ed Dufurrena Cutting Horses.

468 ad

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.