Pages Navigation Menu


☛ Would the real Dos Cats Partners Please Stand Up 5-2-18

☛ Would the real Dos Cats Partners Please Stand Up 5-2-18






By Glory Ann Kurtz and Rick Dennis, Contributing Risk Analyst
May 2, 2018


Just when we all thought the final hand had been played in the Dufurrena – Vogel lawsuits, the plot thickens. On Feb. 18, 2018, after close to eight years of disagreements and lawsuits and only weeks after a private settlement was agreed on by the Plaintiffs, Donald Eugene Vogel, Janie Vogel and Jandon Ltd., Saint Jo, Texas, and Defendants Rieta, Brandon and Edward Dufurrena, Gainesville, Texas, were still in a dispute over the ownership of three horses: Stevie Rey Von, Auspicious Cat and Creyzy Train, as well as Ozzum Man and Whata Sneaky Cat.


According to court documents (No. 1) in the District Court of Montague County, Texas, 97thJudicial District Court, Exhibit A: “all issues were settled between the Vogels and the Dufurrenas who were parties to the lawsuit. The Vogels, Ed Dufurrena, Shona Dufurrena and Brandon Dufurrena entered into a settlement agreement, Plaintiff Rieta Dufurrena did not participate in the lawsuit or the release.


The “Full and Final Release (Exhibit A of No. 1) stated that Donald Eugene Vogel, Janie S. Vogel and Jandon, Ltd., paid the sum of $1,150,000 to Ed Dufurrena and Shona Dufurrena, who tendered a bill of sale to the horses Stevie Rey Von, Auspicious Cat and Creyzy Train.


The court document stated that each party agreed to and does release and discharge each other party from any and all claims, actions, causes of action, demands, complaints, allegations, obligations, losses, detriments, counter claims, gross claims, third-party claims, subrogation claims, defenses, rights, damages, costs, penalties, fines, expenses, attorneys’ fees, compensation and relief of any kind whatsoever, whether known or unknown, whether fixed or contingent, whether liquidated, whether legal or equitable, and whether administrative, statutory or common law and whether under federal, state or municipal law, law of a foreign country or any other type of law, which any of the Parties now have or which may hereafter accrue on account of or in any way growing out of or resulting from the Pending Litigation, save and except the obligations and rights arising under this Agreement and the document signed by the parties on Jan. 24, 2018 and Feb. 7, 2018. The parties expressly agreed that the intent of each of the parties is to release all claims one against another regarding the litigation pending between them.



1-Original PetititonDufurrena v Vogels 4:13:18





 Federal Court filings in the Eastern District of Texas, Sherman Division lists a lawsuit entitled Shawn, and Lisa Victoria Minshall, and Lauren Victoria Minshall versus Ed Dufurrena, Ed Dufurrena Cutting Horses LLC, Anthony and Dufurrena, INC., Hartman Equine Reproduction Center (HERC), and DOS CATS PARTNERS dated October 30, 2015.


The filed public court records allege the Plaintiffs suffered specific damages arising from the material fact that the Plaintiffs bred their mare to Auspicious Cat, a stallion owned by the Defendants, and the produced foal owned by the Plaintiffs suffers from HERDA.  The court filings continue to state the Defendants specifically misrepresented the HERDA designation on Auspicious Cat both verbally and in an advertisement prior to the breeding, stating the stallion was HERDA negative or was free of the HERDA GENE by the American Quarter Horse Association 5 panel genetic test designation: HERDA N/N.


Court records verifies the misrepresentation of material fact or “false and fraudulent advertisement,” with the inclusion of a copy of a web-page ad with Ed Dufurrena riding Auspicious Cat, noting he stood at Pinnacle Equine Veterinary services, with Chelsea Makloski – Colhorn with a $2,500.00 stud fee and marked HERDA N/N – meaning the stud didn’t have the HERDA gene.  However, court records indicate Auspicious Cat is HERDA POSITIVE (carries the HERDA gene and can pass it on to his offspring).


As a result of the filed Minshall’s lawsuit, court records also indicate an “Out-Of-Court” settlement was reached on April 26, 2016 by and between the Plaintiffs – Minshall’s, and Defendants EDWARD L DUFURRENA,EDWARD DUFURRENA CUTTING HORSES LLC, ANTHONY AND DUFURRENA, INC., DOS CATS PARTNERS, KAREN CLAYCOMB, TOM DONAHUE, LINDA DONAHUE, GARY CRAIGHEAD, BARBRA HANSELMAN, MICHAEL NOLAN, TRACY A. AGRALL, BUTCH REDISH, and BLAIR VISSAR. The Order Of Dismissal (WITHOUT PREJUDICE) was filed by the Plaintiff Attorney and signed by Federal District Court Honorable Judge Amos I. Mazzant, United States District Judge.





The curious nature of the “Out-Of-Court” settlement without prejudice listed in the paragraph above, is that it doesn’t include Donald and Janie Vogel who entered into a separate contractual agreement with Edward L. Dufurrena on March 25, 2011 and/or four years prior to the Minshall’s litigation and is also entitled: “DOS CATS PARTNERS”, whereby the Vogel’s paid Dufurrena $105,000 for a 49 percent market ownership share in the partnership which included a 49 percent interest in horses and frozenembryos. Dufurrena is listed as 51 percent owner in this “DOS CATS PARTNERS”and the Vogel’s are listed as 49 percent interest investment partners, except the Miss Hickory Wheel X Auspicious Cat embryo which they are listed as 100 percent.  The listed horses and embryos on the hand-written Dufurrena “DOS CATS PARTNERS” 2011 contract are:


Auspicious Cat, Ozzum Man, Ozzum Cat, Whata Sneaky Cat, and three embryos designated as:

  1. Miss Ella Rey x Auspicious Cat – a 2011 embryo,
  2. Miss Ella Rey x Metalicat – a 2011 embryo (Stevie Rey Von), and
  3. Miss Hickory Wheel x Auspicious Cat – 2011 embryo


Dufurrena-Vogel agreement 3-25-11


For the record, and according to the hand-written contract between Edward L. Dufurrena and Donald and Janie Vogel AUSPICIOUS CAT was included in the 49 percent investment in “DOS CATS PARTNERS,”legally making the Vogel’s 49 percent “vested interest partners” in this horse who is the “SUBJECT” of the Minshall’s lawsuit. However, according to AQHA records, AUSPICIOUS CAT was recorded into the “DOS CATS PARTNERS” in 2006, or four years prior to the Vogel’s and Dufurrena partnership. Also, AQHA records indicate AUSPICIOUS CAT was purchased by “DOS CATS PARTNERS” on 12/30/2006 with the date of transfer being finalized by the AQHA on 01/16/2008.

3-Auspicous Cat owners 4-30-18


One would think, all of the horses included in the Vogel/Dufurrena “DOS CATS PARTNERS” executed in 2011 agreement, as well as any resulting foals from the embryos listed in the agreement, would’ve been transferred into the pre-existing “DOS CATS PARTNERS” on file with the AQHA which included AUSPICIOUS CAT, to make everything tidy and legally binding in lieu of the executed agreement between Vogel and Dufurrena orchestrated on March 25, 2011 along with the issuance of a $105,000.00 check to Dufurrena by the Vogel’s, which effectively makes it a binding and fully enforceable contract with performance clauses.


Therefore, how in the world could the Vogel’s as 49 percent “vested -interest partners” in the 2011 Vogel/Dufurrena “DOS CATS PARTNERS,”including AUSPICIOUS CAT – a subject of the Minshall’s lawsuit, be excluded from the Minshall’s  2015 lawsuit, as well as the 2016 “out-of-court” settlement between the “DOS CATS PARTNERS,”Dufurrena, and the Minshall’s?  The court settlement document specifically lists the current members as defendants. However, the Vogel’s are absent from court-settlement records.  Perhaps: coincidence, oversight by the Plaintiff attorney, intentional error, or intentional non-disclosure.  Another theory is no one was ever informed of the separate existing partnership by and between Edward L Dufurrena and Donald and Janie Vogel entitled “DOS CATS PARTNERS.”It’s a mystery !


One specific validation vehicle of use to verify whether or not the Vogel’s were ever included in the “DOS CATS PARTNERS”on file with the AQHA as 49 percent “vested interest partners,” in lieu of their $105,000.00 monetary investment would be to use the newly filed lawsuit against the Vogel’s, by Dufurrena, to issue a subpoena duces tecum to the American Quarter Horse Association including a production of documents request to ascertain:


  1. Any and/or all horses listed in the partnership – from inception, and
  2. The names of any and/or all members included as partnership since its organization along with membership date of entry as well as the partnership organizer(s), and
  3. The percentage of legal investment interest each member holds in the partnership by each ones specific monetary investment amount and what horses or embryos are included in respect to the investment fee


A cross section analysis of the three lawsuits in question, the two apparent separate and referred to “DOS CAT PARTNERS,”in two separate lawsuits, as well as the hand-written 2011 contract between the Vogel’s and Dufurrena indicate the 2011 embryo by Metallic Cat and out of Miss Ella Rey – later was born, and is alleged by court documents to be Stevie Rey Von, the NCHA Futurity Champion.


The curious nature of the researched AQHA ownership records indicates this horse was never placed in the “DOS CATS PARTNERS” name even though the Vogel’s owned a 49 percent share of a Metallic Cat X Miss Ella Rey embryo as indicated in the 2011 hand-written contract by and between Donald and Janie Vogel and Ed Dufurrena, also known as “DOS CATS PARTNERS,” as well as the later lawsuit instituted by the Vogel’s against Dufurrena and the“DOS CATS PARTNERS.”


This matter intensifies when AQHA horse registration records indicate Stevie Rey Von was placed in the name of Ed Dufurrena’s son: Brandon Dufurrena, instead of the “DOS CAT PARTNERS” on his birth date of 01/02/2012.


The horse registration records become more complicated when the horse is transferred from Brandon Dufurrena to Edward L. Dufurrena on 12/01/2015 right in the middle of the NCHA Futurity.

4-Stevie Rey Von – ownership 2018, AQHA.




However, pursuant to a filed lawsuit by the Vogel’s and a return lawsuit by Dufurrena, a settlement agreement was reached between Vogel and Dufurrena on January 28, 2018.  The agreement provides as follows with Exhibit C further complicating matters:


  1. EXHIBIT A: Donald Eugene Vogel, Janie S. Vogel and Jandon, Ltd., having paid the sum of $1,150,000 to Ed Dufurrena and Shona Dufurrena who have tendered a bill of sale to the horses Stevie Rey Von, Auspicious Cat and Creyzy Train, hereby enter into this release agreement. Each Party hereto agrees to and does release and discharge each other party.


  1. EXHIBIT B: Bill of Sale. For the sum of One Million One Hundred and Fifty Thousand Dollars ($1,150,000) “Consideration” Edward L. Dufurrena, an individual, Brandon Dufurrena, an individual, and Edward L. Dufurrena, doing business as “DOS CATS PARTNERS” (collectively, “Sellers”), hereby agree to sell to Jandon, Ltd. (“Buyer”) all of Sellers’ right, title and interest, free and clear of all encumbrances, in and to the following horses:
  2. Stevie Rey Von, AQHA No. 5557563;
  3. Creyzy Train, AQHA No. 5655857, and
  4. Auspicious Cat, AQHA No. 4639993


Sellers acknowledge this sale includes rights to frozen semen of Stevie Rey Von and Auspicious Cat as provided in the Memorandum of Settlement dated January 24, 2018.


  1. EXHIBIT C: STATEMENT REGARDING HORSE OWNERSHIP HISTORY. A dispute arose among Donald Eugene Vogel, Janie S. Vogel and Jandon, Ltd, on one hand, and Edward L. Dufurrena, Shona Dufurrena, and Brandon Dufurrena, on the other hand, regarding the ownership of the horses listed below.  Donald Eugene Vogel, Janie S. Vogel, and Jandon, Ltd., acknowledge and confirm and do not dispute the AQHA records of ownership of the following horses as set forth below:


  1. Stevie Rey Von,
  2. Auspicious Cat,
  3. Creyzy Train,
  4. Ozzum Man,
  5. Whata Sneaky Cat.


As of November 12, 2012, Edward L. Dufurrena and Shona Dufurrena acquired all rights to such horses. This agreement was signed 02/7/2018 as part of the Dufurrena/Vogel settlement. Since then, the Vogels, who obtained Stevie Rey Von in the settlement, have sold him to Alvin and Becky Fults, Amarillo, Texas for $2 million. The stallion was ridden by Beau Galyean for a win at the most recent NCHA Open Super Stakes with a record score.


See article in link No. 1


This is one of the most incredulous series of lawsuits I have ever covered. It has all the makings of a Hollywood movie. However, this is a real life series of events rather than a fictional hypothesis scribed by a Hollywood writer!


The attached chart with important dates puts this story in perspective for the reader.

5-Chart of history of DOS CATS PARTNERS Lawsuits

468 ad

One Comment

  1. It looks like the NCHA is at it again, making poor decisions. Anyway, I have received a letter from a fellow director that is being sent to the Executive Committee. I asked if I could pass it on to you and they didn’t have an objection. Use it how you see fit. A LOT of us are at our wits end and can only hope something can be done to change the tide of current situations within our association.
    Name withheld

    Dear Executive Board Members,
    A short while ago I read an open letter to the NCHA, from a director, on the website, regarding many issues within the NCHA and the dubious decisions that caused them. Ifyou have not read the letter, I would advise you to do so promptly! We are in a state of emergency, and actions must be taken to ensure our longevity. In the letter, I read about several rule violations perpetrated by the Dufurrena family, and possibly the assistance of NCHA Vice-President Phil Rapp in helping to “go easy” on the Dufurren,as in regard to disciplinary actions by the NCHA.
    Upon learning ofthe verdict oftheir recent grievance hearing, we see that plan being executed. Everyone who has been guilty of violating the non pro ownership rule has received harsh penalties that were appropriately applied and justified. Now we see a much different set of sanctions that are in no way consistent with other cases regarding the same rule. Every lawyer I’ve talked to has said this can turnintoamajorlegalfiascoforus. I’mimploringtheleadershipofourAssociationtoseekadvice from a competent lawyer before the Appeals Committee hearing is held. Trust me when I say, there is a contingency ofpast and current members and directors who are adamant about exposing the many deficiencies and lack of common sense that is present within our association. This present matter “smacks” of yet another example of poor judgment if not dealt-with in an appropriate and consistent sanction. In the opinion ofmany, this matter can have very serious legal and financial consequences.
    In addition to legal liability from former members who have been suspended for life from the same rule violations, we are also liable to the competitors who were directly damaged by the Dufurrenas’ bad conduct. Right now, we have the luxury of being able to follow the Olympic rules for athletes who break their rules. I f athletes are deemed in violation, they are banned from competition, and the awards are presented to the appropriate winners. Why not follow their approach to dealing with contestants who break the rules? Are we not bound to recognize and compensate the rightful champions? Also, the fines that were levied against the Dufurrenas in the grievance hearing are absurd! In the least, the fines should equal the amount of money that was won fraudulently in the various events by the Dufurrenas, and the awards should be given to the rightful winners! I f anything less than the above suggestions are done, it will be regarded as a sham by our Association leaders and produce another example ofpoor leadership. Now is our opportunity to demonstrate to the general membership and public that our association is trustworthy and will be regarded as the model to which other associations aspire to be. Currently, there is great bewilderment and dismay felt among the people who make up our industry, and feel that our great association has deteriorated to an all-time low, especially within the last severalyears. TheseproblemshaveonlybeenexacerbatedduringthetenureofChuckSmith’s leadership beginning with his presidency and extending through his time as our Executive Director.
    In closing, I want to bring to your attention just how many of us are opposed to the choice of Chuck SmithasourExecutivedirector. We,thebodyofDirectors,wereneverconsultedpriortohishiring, thus making it apparent that he was hired out ofmere convenience, rather than conducting a rigorously due diligent effort to find the right candidate for the position. Not only does he lack experience running any association whatsoever, he is also completely in over his head, and lacks the intestinal fortitude oftrue leadership, all the while being paid a ridiculously high salary usually reserved for someone in upper management in a corporate setting. This is just another example of why our association is currently facing the dire economic conditions we find ourselves in.
    Let it be known that many strongly suggest that the present Executive board and Appeals Committee take this opportunity to fulfill it’s fiduciary duties and demonstrate strong leadership that has been lacking in the past.
    —-Let the content o f this letter concern you, rather than the author

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.