Pages Navigation Menu

ON-LINE MAGAZINE & WEB SITE - SCROLL DOWN FOR NEWS

☛ NCHA Suspension and Appeal Guidelines Getting An Overhaul 9-21-18

Posted by on Sep 21, 2018 in BREAKING NEWS, COW HORSE NEWS, CUTTING NEWS, FROM THE EDITOR, HORSE LAWSUITS, HORSE ORGANIZATIONS, INDUSTRY NEWS, LAWSUITS & INDICTMENTS, WHO, WHAT & WHERE | 11 comments

NCHA SUSPENSION AND APPEAL GUIDELINES GETTING AN OVERHAUL

 

STANDING RULE 37 AND 38 UPDATED FOLLOWING DUFURRENA/VOGEL CASE

 

By Glory Ann Kurtz
Sept. 21, 2018

According to an interesting e-mail that I received, following the Dufurrena/Vogel situation I previously wrote about, the NCHA is revising Standing Rule 37 and 38, which cover members who have done something that places them on probation or suspends them from the NCHA by the Grievance Committee, Amateur, Non-Pro Review Committee, Medication Review Committee or any other committee authorized by NCHA for violating any rule.

 

Following are the major parts of the new suspension and appeal guidelines:

 

Rule 37: Non-members involved in NCHA rule violations may also be denied privileges of the Association for “violation of or assisting in the violation of NCHA rules.”  When the NCHA rule in question contains specific provisions concerning disciplinary actions or burdens of proof, any disciplinary action taken by an initial Hearing Committee, the Executive Committee or an Appeal Committee should be consistent with that provision.

 

Any member can file a complaint regarding any alleged violation of NCHA rules by submitting the complaint in writing to the NCHA Executive Director (ED), signed or identified by the person filing the complaint, and sent with a check or credit card payment for $50, payable to the NCHA, unless the person filing the complaint is an NCHA Director, a class representative, show management or a judge. Anonymous complaints will not be accepted, investigated or acted on by the NCHA, with the exception if a complaint is reporting a violation of the Zero Tolerance policy or for a complaint submitted by an NCHA Director, a class representative, show management or a judge. Anonymous complaints will not be accepted, investigated or acted on by the NCHA.

 

A complaint must be filed, postmarked, faxed, emailed or hand-delivered within seven (7) days of the closing date of the show involved or within seven (7) days of the alleged rule violations. The timing for filing a complaint alleging a violation of the Zero Tolerance Policy is contained in Standing Rule 35.6. No complaint is required regarding a member’s competitive status (non-pro or amateur rules) or for violation of the NCHA Medication and Drug Rules.

 

The ED will refer complaints to (1) Grievance, (2) Medication Review, (3) Non-Pro Amateur, (4) or any other hearing or review committee. A quorum of an initial hearing committee will consist of three members with one being elected chairman.

 

The NCHA will notify the alleged violator in writing of the complaint and alleged action being investigated, each NCHA rule(s) potentially violated, the disciplinary actions applicable to the alleged violation and request that the violator file a written election with the ED to contest or not contest the alleged violation within 10 business days. If not received in that timeframe the case will be deemed not contested.

 

Initial Hearing:

The initial Hearing Committee shall schedule a hearing not less than 15 days‘ notice of the hearing date but not less than five business days notice of the hearing date. The alleged violator and NCHA shall exchange all proposed documents and evidence to be considered in the hearing no less than three days prior to the hearing. Legal counsel for NCHA and the alleged violator may appear and participate in the evidentiary position of the hearing. The hearing committee shall deliberate in private and shall render a decision in contested matters by majority vote and shall notify the EC of the decision in writing. The initial Hearing Committee will only be required to note in its report the NCHA rule(s) violated and will not be required to provide a detailed reason or opinion for its decision.

 

The Medication Review Committee shall consider potential violations of the Medication and Drug Rules and guidelines. Potential disciplinary actions for proceedings relating to alleged violations are contained in Rule 35A.7. The alleged violator bears the burden of proof to establish that he or she has NOT administered any drug or medication in violation of the NCHA Medication and Drug rules.

 

The Non-Professional Amateur Review Committee shall initially consider all violations of the NP and Amateur rules. The potential disciplinary actions for proceedings relating to alleged violations are in rules 50-51. The alleged violator bears the burden to establish entitlement to hold NP and/or Amateur status.

 

The Grievance Committee (GC) shall initially consider all violations of rules relating to alleged violations of NCHA Zero Tolerance Policy (35A) alleging improper conduct toward judges and monitors (35B), alleged improper conduct by and between members (35C) and alleged violations of other rules that are not considered by the Medication Review Committee, the Non-Pro Amateur Review Committee or Executive Committee.

 

For matters for which the rule allegedly violated contains suggested disciplinary action, the GC should consult those provisions in connection with discipline to be assessed for such rule violations. In cases where the rule allegedly violated does not contain suggested disciplinary action, the GC should consult the following general guidelines:  (i) First Offense: fine, probation or both. A first offense will be removed from a member’s record if that member has no further infractions for two years after the first offense is committed. (ii) Second offense within 2 years of first offense (a) increased fine (b) increased probation, (c) suspension or all of the foregoing. (iii) Additional offenses within 2 years will be dealt with severely, including heavy fines, lengthy probation and suspension will be increased as deemed appropriate by the committee.

 

Effects of Membership Probation and Suspension: Probation will be for a length of time decided by appropriate committee and also set a term of suspension imposed in the event the probation is violated. The term of suspension shall only become effective upon the probated member’s violation of the terms of his probation. In the event suspension is imposed for subsequent rule violation(s), the balance of the probated suspension shall begin on the day after the suspension for the subsequent rule violation s completely served.

Any membership Suspension that went into effect on or before Aug. 21, 2018 will not be allowed to participate in any way (owner, agent of horse, contestant, helper mounted  or on foot, in an NCHA approved or sponsored cutting horse contest. A suspended person can only attend an NCHA approved or sponsored cutting horse contest as a spectator seated in the stands. Any horse owned or controlled in whole or part by a suspended person will not be allowed to enter or compete in an NCHA approved or sponsored cutting. In the event a suspended person violates this rule, an additional six months will be added to his suspension. The rider of any horse ineligible to enter or compete in an NCHA-approved or sponsored cutting horse contest under this rule will be subject to a six-month membership suspension.

 

Membership Suspensions that went into effect after August 21, 2018:

Any person who has had their membership suspended, where suspension commences after August 21, 2018, will not be allowed in the premises of an NCHA approved or sponsored cutting contest. “Premises” include all show arenas, practice pens, loping arenas, sales barns, exhibit halls, trade shows and all other parts of the show grounds.

Any horse owned or controlled in whole or part by a suspended person or in which the suspended person holds any future rights of any kind, will not be allowed to enter, compete or transfer existing entries in an NCHA-approved or sponsored cutting horse contest. This includes horses owned by a corporation, partnership or any entity in which the suspended member has any ownership interest. If a suspended person violates this rule, an additional six (6) months will be added to his suspension. The rider of any horse in any NCHA approved or sponsored horse contest which is ineligible to enter or compete under this rule will be subject to six-month membership suspension.

 

Failure to timely pay fine:  When a member is assed a fine in addition to a suspension and/or probation, as a result of a committee finding made after Aug. 21, 2018, such fine must be paid in full within 15 days after the fine is assessed. In the event the fine is not paid in full in that timeframe, the corresponding suspension and/or probation will be extended by a period equal to the number of days over 15 that it takes for the member to pay to fine in full.

 

Transfer of horses owned by suspended member: This applies to all membership suspensions that went into effect after Aug. 21, 2018. A horse owned by a suspended member at the time of his/her suspension that is sold, gifted or for which ownership is otherwise transferred to an immediate family member, or that is sold, gifted or for which ownership is otherwise transferred to any corporation, partnership or any other entity of any kind in which the suspended member has any present or future ownership interest will not be allowed to show in any NCHA approved or produced event during the term of that member’s suspension. In the event the NCHA questions the legitimacy of a transfer made by a suspended person during his/her suspension, the suspended person shall bear the burden of proof to establish the legitimacy of the transfer.

 

Suspension by other associations: Every person suspended by the AQHA or APHA for unsportsmanlike conduct at a show or contest or for inhumane treatment of horses, shall stand suspended by the NCA upon official notification to this Ass’n from the AQHA or the APHA of any such disciplinary action which has become final and  non-appealable. The NCHA may honor the disciplinary actions of its affiliate organizations when supplied with satisfactory evidence that the person so disciplined has been given a full and impartial hearing by the affiliate organization involved; however, any action taken by an affiliate will not limit any authority of jurisdiction of the NCHA.

 

Publication of Findings:When disciplinary action is taken the results will be published in the Cutting Horse Chatter. Also, all decisions a final and binding unless subsequently overturned by an appeal committee under NCHA Standing Rule 38.

 

Rule 38: Appeal Guidelines:

Appeal Prerequisites: (a) Anyone found in violation of any NCHA rule by an Initial Hearing Committee, is entitled to appeal so long as (1) written notice of such request for appeal by each person appealing the ruling is received by the NCHA ED within 21 days of the date of the letter notifying the person of such action taken by the Initial hearing Committee and (2) an appeal fee as required by section (b) below is also received by the NCHA ED within the 21-day period.

 

(b) The appeal fee is $6,000 per person appealing that decision. For cases in which the Initial Hearing Committee has assessed a suspension of membership or competitive status, the appealing party shall have the right to request an expedited appeal as described in section (c) below. The appeal fee for an expedited appeal is $10,000 for each person filing an expedited appeal of the decision of an Initial hearing Committee. Appeal fees will not be refunded unless all findings of the initial Hearing Committee are completely overturned by an Appeal Committee.

 

(c) In the case of a non-expedited appeal, the appealing member(s) shall be given not less than 15 days notice of a time and place for appeal hearing to be heard by the EC or by an Appeal Committee appointed by the NCHA President. In cases of an expedited appeal, the appealing member(s) shall be entitled to an appeal hearing no more than five business days after the expedited appeal is perfected.

 

Appeal Proceedings: (a) An appeal is a “de  novo” proceeding that could result in a new finding concerning whether or not there was a violation of any NCHA rule(s) and either an affirmation, enhancement or decrease in the disciplinary action taken by the Initial Hearing Committee. (b) Eight members of the Executive Committee shall constitute a quorum. (c) The NCHA President may appoint a Special Appeal Hearing Committee  (the “Appeal Committee”) to conduct any appeal hearing or disciplinary actions. This Committee shall have a minimum of five members and a maximum of nine. Each member must be a member in good standing of the NCHA. Five members of the Appeal Committee members shall constitute a quorum for hearing an appeal. (d) No continuance of an appeal hearing shall be granted unless a written request is received by the ED at least 7 days prior to the hearing and good cause is shown as determined at the sole discretion of the President or Chairman of the Appeal Committee. (e) At the hearing the appealing member shall have the opportunity to be heard, be represented by legal counsel, present evidence in his/her own behalf and to hear and refute any evidence offered against them. (g) The decision of the EC or Appeal Committee in an appeal proceeding under this rule shall be final and binding on all parties. The committee hearing an appeal shall only be required to note in its report the NCHA rule(s) it found were violated and shall not be required to provide a detailed reasoned option for its decision. (h) When disciplinary action is taken, the results in probation or suspension, the person’s name, the rule violated, and the disciplinary action taken will be published in the Cutting Horse Chatter.

 

From the Editor:

As a member of the NCHA for close to 20 years, I was sued at one time by the NCHA for asking for Rick Ivey’s salary and refusing to sign a non-disclosure form to prevent my dissemination of the information I was provided. (They dropped the suit when I told them I didn’t need his salary, I found it out another way.) As an investigative journalist and the owner of this website, my only remark about the above Guidelines is that they should include: “Any NCHA member who loses a lawsuit filed by another NCHA member regarding the other member’s actions, including taking advantage of the elderly, providing false or erroneous invoices to an NCHA member by a trainer, running an illegal business or training operation within the confines of the NCHA as defined by the State of Organization or Operation, providing false documentation to an NCHA committee during an appeal or suspension committee hearing, the loss of a customer’s horse due to abuse by the trainer or the trainer’s agent or assign including, but not limited to, employees, contractors or subcontractors, or charging exorbitant fees for other services, such as double dipping customers for travel or hauling expenses, should receive a lifetime suspension, without preferential treatment or exception.”

 

The trainers are basically unregulated by the above problems.  I hear these complaints all the time and instigating these rules could bring back some of the many well-heeled members who have left the NCHA…..and get rid of some the bad actors or unscrupulous trainers contributing to the demise of the membership numbers.

Glory Ann Kurtz

Read More

☛ Is NCHA Acting as a Non-Profit? 9-17-18

Posted by on Sep 17, 2018 in BREAKING NEWS, CUTTING NEWS, FROM THE EDITOR, HORSE ORGANIZATIONS, LAWSUITS & INDICTMENTS, WHO, WHAT & WHERE | 2 comments

 

IS THE NCHA ACTING AS A NON-PROFIT?

 

KEY ASPECTS OF A NON PROFIT ARE ACCOUNTABILITY, TRUSTWORTHINESS, HONESTY AND OPENNESS

 

By Glory Ann Kurtz
Sept. 18, 2018

A non-profit organization, also known as a non-business entity or non-profit institution, is dedicated to furthering a particular social cause or advocating for a shared point of view. In economic terms, it is an organization that uses its surplus of the revenues to further achieve its ultimate objective, rather than distributing its income to the organization’s shareholders, leaders, or members. Non-profits are tax exempt or charitable, meaning they do not pay income tax on the money that they receive for their organization. They can operate in religious, scientific, research or educational settings.

The key aspects of nonprofits are: accountability, trustworthiness, honesty, and openness to every person who has invested time, money, and faith into the organization.

 

Nonprofit organizations are accountable to the donors, funders, volunteers, program recipients, and the public community. Public confidence is a factor in the amount of money that a nonprofit organization is able to raise. The more nonprofits focus on their mission, the more public confidence they will have, and as a result, more money for the organization. The activities a nonprofit is partaking in can help build the public’s confidence in nonprofits, as well as how ethical the standards and practices are.

 

Nonprofits are required to submit their financial statements and other information — including the salaries of directors, officers, and key employees — to the IRS. (For information on who is considered a key employee, see IRS Form 990 and its instructions.)

 

The IRS and nonprofits themselves are required to disclose the information on Form 990 to anyone who asks.Nonprofits must allow public inspection of these records during regular business hours at theirprincipal offices. However, many people won’t even need to ask — a number of websites make Forms 990 available for the searching, including the Foundation Center at http://fdncenter.org and GuideStar at www.guidestar.org.

 

People can also request information from the IRS by writing a letter, including the name of the organization, the year, and the type of tax return requested, and send it to:

Commissioner of Internal Revenue
Attn: Freedom of Information Reading Room
1111 Constitution Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20224

 

NCHA FINANCES:

Even though the NCHA is a non-profit, their finances seem to be headed downhill, which is requiring the association to try to raise more money, of course from the members. They are currently raising their membership dues to $145 per year. Unfortunately this is not how you balance the books. This only runs  people out of the horse industry!  In other words, the members suffer because of mismanagement.

 

During their Aug. 6-8 Executive Committee meeting, it was pointed out that they need to get a better handle on cash flow; accounts receivables are solid but the timing of payment needs to be recognized in order that there are no cash flow shortfalls. For example, NCHA is still awaiting the reimbursement from the MERP fund for the 2017 Futurity. There isn’t a question of whether NCHA will receive the funds, it’s simply a matter of when the funds will be disbursed by MERP (Texas’ Major Event Reimbursement Program).

 

A discussion ensued regarding a method for NCHA to fund the current cash flow shortage citing three options: the liquidation of investments, requesting from our bankers, Frost Bank, a margin loan against our investments or opening a line of credit.

 

Cutting down on their internal costs was not a choice! Rather charging the members and their employees more for their services was their choice!

 

As a part of this cash shortage, the NCHA passed a motion to charge the box seat holders from last year $1,890.00, to this year $5,000.00 for same seats, boxes with 8 seats to $5,500. This increase would include box seats for all three Triple Crown events: Futurity, Super Stakes and Summer Spectacular.

 

It was also passed that all vendors currently outside the Will Rogers Coliseum for all Triple Crown events, be moved inside the John Justin Building with the exception of horse spas and cleaning trailers.

 

The NCHA is also exploring methods to reduce the amount of money NCHA spends on very costly benefits on an annual basis for employees by a change of the insurance plan design, change of carriers, wellness incentives, cost-sharing plans, etc.

 

Also it was passed that there would be increases in the various levels of NCHA membership. Life Membership will no longer to offered as of August 7, 2018. For 2019 memberships, all members will pay $145 and will include Amateur and non-pro members but that amount will not include trainer’s fees. Amateur and Non-Pro fees will be $25. Trainer fees will be $125 with PAC, $25 without PAC in addition to membership fee.  It was later passed that a fee of $145 would include the cost of the trainer’s card or non-pro/amateur card. Existing life members with amateur and non-pro fee will be $25 annually. Existing Life Non-Pro fee will be $400.

 

All new memberships are free for one year and include online Chatter only. All former members who have been members for 3 years will also receive a one-year free membership that includes the Chatter online only. It was later reviewed and when the numbers were run, it would mean approximately $30,000 to $35,000 NCHA would not recognize on an annual basis. My question: “Had the numbers never been run before?”

 

As of 2019, one printed Chatter will be sent per household and printed rulebooks will be sent to current affiliates trainers, judges, certified secretaries and amateurs/non-pros, the goal being to print fewer copies. All others can request a copy. My question is: How will the members know and adhere to the rules if they don’t get a rulebook? How about putting a copy on their website for members to copy.

 

A discussion ensued regarding a method for NCHA to fund the current cash flow shortage citing three options: the liquidation of investments, requesting from our bankers, Frost Bank, a margin loan against our investments or opening a line of credit.

 

Discussion for other ways to save money was to reduce the number of Chatter issues published, as well as immediately reducing the number of issues of the Chatter sent to each household. Moving the payment of fees by members and vendors by ACH, i.e., the direct debiting of a member’s checking account. James V. Burris advised the Executive Committee that there are both positive and negatives to ACH payment methods.

 

Reducing the NCHA staff was also brought up; however, a it was stated that a thorough audit must be made by the various departments in the NCHA business office to identify items that can be eliminated immediately thereby reducing expenses as well as explore areas in the budget that may be reducing going forward. My question: “Why did they wait so long?”

 

Finance committee member, Steve Smith, said he would take the message back to the Finance Committee that they need to have a better handle on cash flow and structured budgeting process.

 

However, when it came to lowering costs of the events, which included the costs of the number of awards provided for NCHA events, they produced several options: (ie) reducing the number of buckles awarded, only giving them to the Top 10 and allow other finishers to purchase a buckle from Gist at the NCHA negotiated reduced rate; reducing the number of cattle per cutter by ¼ of cows in a go-round, bringing the total to a ½ cow reduction, which would reduce cattle costs by $200,624 (it was moved to reduce the cattle in each go round by an additional ¼ cow; thereby bringing the total reduction to ½ cow per go-round). The discussion was tabled until the Limited Age Event Committee had an opportunity to discuss this matter with the Executive Committee later.

 

Some additional costs were discussed, with some passing. The Amateur Committee recommended that there be a 5/6-year-old gelding Unlimited and Amateur classes at $535, with $450 going to the jackpot, $50 to office charge and $35 for processing fee. Motion passed.

 

The motion was passed recommending adding a gelding class to the 5/6 at ALL NCHA Triple Crown events, as a class within a class – no prizes or buckles, CASH ONLY.

 

The cost of the Rulebook was brought up and passed, with the cost of the 2018 edition being $11,461 for printing 10,000 and mailing out 8,183. Of that amount  $2,965 was for postage. NCHA copies to affiliates, amateurs, non-pros and judges, 4,500 amateurs, 1,000 affiliates, secretaries and judges total approximately 2,600. It was moved that effective with the 2019 rulebook year, 2,500 rulebooks be printed for distribution only to secretaries, judges and affiliates and they review how many are left at the end of the year, with the stipulation that if anyone calls NCHA requesting a copy, the staff will print off a copy and mail it to them.

As I mentioned previously, how about putting rulebook on their website so they can be downloaded by members?

 

John Rutherford agreed to Chair a Subcommittee on NCHA management, operations and financial efficiency. The subcommittee will be comprised of Kevin Knight, Joan Hayworth, Jan Gandy and Alvin ?  to help facilitate the completion of this study. The EC agreed to table taking further action regarding the proposed sub-committee until a new Executive Director was in place.

 

In closing, I would like to inform my readership that I’m currently waiting for the NCHA’s 2016 to 2017 IRS tax filing which is currently missing on GuideStar.org. As soon as I receive this document I’ll resume my audit of the NCHA as well as its income versus their operating expenses.

 

My question is, “Is the NCHA really acting as a Non-Profit?”

 

To read complete results of the NCHA Executive Committee, click below:

1-ec-meeting-minutes-august-8-18

Click below for “What Is A Non-Profit?”

2-What is a Non Profit_

Read More

☛ Lee Dale dies at age 82 8-16-18

Posted by on Aug 16, 2018 in BREAKING NEWS, CUTTING NEWS, FROM THE EDITOR, INDUSTRY NEWS, WHO, WHAT & WHERE | 1 comment

JOY LEE DALE PASSES AWAY AT AGE 82

 

LEE WAS ONE OF THE ORIGINAL SALE CATALOG PUBLISHERS AND CO-OWNED A SALE COMPANY

 

By Glory Ann Kurtz
Aug. 16, 2018
Corrected Aug. 17, 2018

 

It was a sad day for me today when I got the phone call that Joy Lee Dale had passed away at the Senior Care home in Decatur, Texas. She was 82 and would have been 83 on Sept. 25 when it would have been her birthday. She had been paralyzed and in a nursing home for the past 20-plus years following a stroke.

 

I know there are a lot of ole’ timers who love cutting and also knew and loved Lee that would want to know that she passed away this morning. If you have any personal, fun stories about Lee, please send them to me and I will post them.

 

I met Lee when I was editor of Quarter Horse News and she was involved in the sale horse business. She and her husband, Dub Dale, both loved and rode cutting horses and had been in the sale horse business; however, when he left and the sale closed down, she decided to publish sale horse catalogs – which she had been doing all along for their sales.

 

She was one of only a very few people who were producing horse sale catalogs with pages with full pedigrees at the time – and she did it using a small, old computer, gathering information from cutting horse events. She sent me the information and I typed the cutting horse pedigree sheets for her.

 

After she suffered a stroke that left her with her entire left side paralyzed, she was in a nursing home in Justin. However, after her sister, Susie, died and they gave me her power of attorney, I moved her to Senior Care in Decatur, which was much newer, nicer and next to the hospital. I could then see her more often as I went to the hospital for water aerobics three days a week.

 

Lee and her best friend, Ann Neely, were top sales ladies at a Windy Ryon’s Western store on Fort Worth’s Northside (now called Cavenders). They were top sales women because they had so much personality and knew so many people.  However, Ann also passed away several years ago while sleeping in a chair in her home.

 

I was fortunate to know Lee for years and had her medical power of attorney. However, I was devastated today when I received the news that she had passed away this morning. I am in Colorado for the summer and am making arrangements from here.

 

Since Lee has no living relatives, I’m the only one left to make a decision, I have made arrangements to have her cremated and I will be putting half her ashes on her sister’s grave and sprinkling the rest on my horse pasture in Grandview. She always loved horses and I’ll feel good that I still have her close. I think she would be okay with that decision. I hope I’m right!

 

 

 

 

 

Read More

☛ Have the Dufurrenas already broken their suspensions? 7-30 -18

Posted by on Jul 30, 2018 in BREAKING NEWS, COW HORSE NEWS, CUTTING NEWS, FROM THE EDITOR, HORSE NEWS, HORSE ORGANIZATIONS, INDUSTRY NEWS, LAWSUITS & INDICTMENTS, REINING NEWS, WHO, WHAT & WHERE | 10 comments

HAVE ED AND BRANDON DUFURRENA ALREADY BROKEN THEIR NCHA SUSPENSION RULES?

 

IS THE NCHA AIDING THEM DURING DERBY?

 

By Glory Ann Kurtz
July 30, 2018

It’s only been 11 days since NCHA Executive Director Lewis Wray sent out an e-mail to the membership of the NCHA saying “Ed Dufurrena and his son, Brandon, and daughter Rieta, have each been suspended from the NCHA for 150 days and fined due to their improprieties within the association. Ed Dufurrena was also fined $10,000 for aiding and abetting Rieta in violating NCHA non-professional rules and an additional fine of $10,000 for aiding and abetting Brandon Dufurrena in violating NCHA non-professional rules. He will be on membership probation for a period of three years following the end of his membership suspension. Pursuant to the NCHA rules, those results will be published in the Chatter. “

 

A look at the 2018 NCHA RULE BOOK regarding a member being suspended:

 

  1. Any person who has been suspended by the NCHA will not be allowed to participate in any way (as owner or agent of a horse, contestant, or as a helper mounted or on foot) in an NCHA- approved or sponsored cutting horse contest.A suspended person may only attend an NCHA approved or sponsored cutting horse contest as a spectator seated in the stands.Any horse that is owned in whole or part by a suspended person or that has a suspended person as its agent will not be allowed to enter or compete in an NCHA approved or sponsored cutting horse contest. In the event a suspended person violates this rule, an additional six (6) months will be added to his suspension.The rider of any horse which is ineligible to enter or compete in an NCHA approved or sponsored cutting horse contest under this rule will be subject to a six (6) month suspension.

I received numerous e-mails from individuals watching the event, saying that Dufurrena was allowed on the arena floor during the NCHA Super Stakes Open Derby being held at the Will Rogers Coliseum, and was helping turn back and they had a video!  After checking into it, I was told the video was posted on Facebook. Since I am not a Facebook follower, I personally did not see that and have no evidence of that. Announcer Tom Holt later told me that he had watched carefully and had never seen Dufurrena turn back. However, I was also told that Dufurrena was in the practice pen on horseback helping a client, when he was removed by a policeman.  When he was removed NCHA President Phil Rapp took his place helping the client. However, the rule says “a suspended person may only attend an NCHA approved or sponsored cutting horse contest as a spectator seated in the stands.

 

Horse Ownership:

Also, since the above rule says, “Any horse that is owned in whole or part by a suspended person or that has a suspended person as its agent will not be allowed to enter or compete in an NCHA approved or sponsored cutting horse contest. In the event a suspended person violates this rule, an additional six (6) months will be added to his suspension.”

 

In order for this collusion to work for the Duffurenas to not conflict with this NCHA rule, Ed and Shona Dufurrena would have to get a divorce. Example, by virtue of the fact that Texas law marital law states a 50-50 property ownership between husband and wife; therefore by placing these horses in Shona Duffurena’a name, Ed, who is suspended, is in violation of this rule, as is Shona. Also, the NCHA is in violation of its own rule by allowing it to happen in the first place.

According to the draw sheet, Shona Dufurrena had three horses entered in the Open Division of the Derby. However, upon checking AQHA ownership records, I found that all three of these horses were actually owned by Brandon Dufurrena, who is under suspension, rather than Shona.

 

Those three horses include Draw No. 82, Mizpah Cat, shown on the drawn sheet as being owned by Shona but but according to the AQHA Ownership Summary was owned by Brandon and ridden by Tom Dvorak in the first go-round. The pair scored a 216, advancing to the second go-round.

Mizpah Cat ownership

 

Cherry Chapstick, Draw No. 158, shown owned by Shona on draw sheet, yet AQHA Ownership Summary says owned by Brandon.

Cherry Chapstik

 

Razzbery Beret, Draw No. 210, shows owned by Shona on draw sheet; AQHA Ownership Summary says owned by Brandon.

Razzbery Beret

 

I don’t understand why the NCHA Derby show management doesn’t escort Ed Dufurrena out of the show ring when he is turning back for someone and refuse to allow Mizpah Cat, Cherry Chapstick and Razzbery Beret to show!

 

Will Ed and Brandon both get an additional six months added to their suspensions as the NCHA Rules state???

 

Only time will tell if the NCHA or show management is brave enough to enforce their rules.  If not, I’m afraid their membership numbers will continue to suffer – even at a faster pace than it has in the past.

 

 

 

 

 

Read More

☛ Has the horse industry become numb to corruption? 7-29-18

Posted by on Jul 29, 2018 in BREAKING NEWS, COW HORSE NEWS, CUTTING NEWS, FROM THE EDITOR, HORSE LAWSUITS, HORSE NEWS, HORSE ORGANIZATIONS, INDUSTRY NEWS, REINING NEWS, WHO, WHAT & WHERE | 32 comments

PRELUDE TO FINALITY

 

HAS THE HORSE INDUSTRY BECOME NUMB TO CORRUPT AND ABUSIVE HORSE TRAINERS AND MEMBERS?

 

By Glory Ann Kurtz
July 29, 2018

 

It appears, the American Horse Industry has become so numb to corrupt and abusive horse trainers and members, that acceptance of illogical, immoral, unorthodox and “in some cases” illegal action has become the norm, rather than the exception.

 

Case-In-Point: It’s been my experience that 501(C)(3) non-profit equine corporations are more interested in establishing “user friendly” rule violations than they are in establishing “hard rules” to exclude criminal violators and those with criminal histories – except when it comes to horse abuse. Fraudulent and illegal business practices by a member, especially horse trainers who are also advertisers in a horse publication, are often overlooked or put off in favor of recurring and contributing revenue by the offender.

 

In historical comparison, it seems the equine industry, more specifically, the 501 (c) 3 nonprofits, don’t have the wisdom or foresight to exclude undesirables from the industry, nor do the 501(C)(3) nonprofits have rules in place to address fraudulent activities among its members engaged in this type of abhorrent business practice. Instead, of establishing rules to address illegal, immoral, fraudulent and unorthodox acts – more specifically abhorrent business practices – the nonprofits, instead, opt for the criminal and civil courts to preside over disputes arising between members. Notwithstanding, and even upon conviction, the offender usually isn’t banned from the organization, with the nonprofit citing, “we don’t have a rule that covers, immoral behavior, except when it comes to horse abuse.”  How about “making one before more members get fleeced and leave the industry!”

 

This exact analogy is demonstrated in the Minshall’s vs Ed Dufurrena and Dos Cats Partnerslawsuit whereby open court records indicate the Minshalls were injured in a business dealing with Ed Dufurrena and they proved fraudulent advertising on behalf of Auspicious Cat’s HERDA designation, i.e., Auspicious Cat was advertised as HERDA Negative when, in-fact, AQHA records prove the stallion is HERDA Positive. In the HERDA trial, Dufurrena was assigned 60 percent responsibility by the jury as the Minshall foal was born with HERDA. For his trouble, Dufurrena was sued and engaged in an “out-of-court” settlement. Today, Ed Dufurrena is still a member of the American Quarter Horse Association.

 

Furthermore, in the Vogels vs Dufurrena lawsuit, Dufurrena’s practice of using AQHA-owned Quarter Horse papers in lawsuits surfaced again. More specifically, in the Dufurrena-Vogel settlement agreement, which was “approved by the lawyers on both sides of the case,” resulted in a Vogel payout of $1.2 million to Dufurrena. Verbiage in the settlement agreement includes a request verification by Dufurrena for the Vogel’s to agree to the accuracy of the AQHA ownership and registration papers – as written. My research proved the AQHA horse ownership, transfer and registration papers, which coincidentally are the same AQHA registration papers Dufurrena submitted to the NCHA, were anything but correct.

 

Notwithstanding, my research concluded the AQHA registration papers are absent of the “Dos Cats Partners” transfer, i.e.: 1) the horses included in the Dufurrena/Vogel handwritten March 25, 2011 “Dos Cats Partners” agreement, were never transferred into the AQHA 2006 Dufurrena “Dos Cats Partners” registry and 2) in some instances, Ed Dufurrena’s name never appeared on the horses’ AQHA registration papers, for which he stated to the National Cutting Horse Association that he “acquired all rights to” in his letter to the NCHA.  By Dufurrena bypassing the AQHA horse transfer and registration requirements altogether, he eliminatedthis organization of their rightful registration and transfer fees, as indicated in the AQHA rulebook, being necessary.

 

Using analytical reasoning, it can be deduced that instead of receiving protection from the nonprofit, members, (including injured members) are left to fend for themselves among the unchartered and shark-infested waters of the American horse industry. Usually, the end result is a very expensive legal learning process.

 

The curious nature of this event is that the AQHA owns the papers for each registered American Quarter Horse. Surely, they would be offended if an individual included their papers and DNA testing results in a fraudulent scheme as well as being included in an “unconscionable settlement agreement.” But as far as I know, the AQHA has done nothing about it!

 

Furthermore, the second non-profit feeling the sting of Ed Dufurrena’s unorthodox business practice, is the National Cutting Horse Association (NCHA). However, I must applaud this organization for taking decisive action to “right-the-wrong,” so to speak, with the suspension and fining of Ed Dufurrena, Rieta Dufurrena, and Brandon Dufurrena for violating NCHA rules. However, many NCHA members are upset by the short length of the suspension, as they feel the suspensions should have been lifetime.

 

However, the foregoing aren’t isolated cases. It’s just being used as an example. Over the years, other questionable individuals have surfaced and been identified but the elite equine magazines usually elect not to produce an article to alert the horse community of such practices, as well as identifying the offender, simply due to the illogical reasoning: “The offender may also be an advertiser.” This non-engagement and not taking a proactive stand, by the 501(C)(3) nonprofits, generally results in a profound adverse impact on the horse industry, especially after a lengthy and expensive litigation process by the Plaintiff that usually results in the individual(s) leaving the horse industry disillusioned, sometimes broke and never returning.

 

In my opinion, it behooves the 501(C)(3) Nonprofit to undertake a proactive stand and establish proactive rules to exclude individuals conducting such abhorrent acts, if for nothing else but to protect their financial interests and its members. However, absence of specific rules to counter these types of abhorrent acts generally places the nonprofit, in the appearance, “of being in a position of complicity,” while the honest membership are at a decisive disadvantage. The end result is an enrichment of the court system and lawyers – all of whom are eager to engage in a dispute, as well as a depletion of the member’s bank account, and which probably could have been avoided by the expulsion of a specific individual member who is practicing abhorrent business practices in the equine industry.

 

To further illustrate how one individual’s unorthodox actions affected a litany of individuals, the following lawsuits were brought about by Ed Dufurrena’s actions while he is engaged in an unregistered dba (doing business as) an assumed namein Texas, i.e., Ed Dufurrena Cutting Horses.  In Texas, specific laws govern the registration of a dba, as well as imposing fines and penalties for the violator. The specific penalty and fine for engaging in an unregistered dba business name is one (1) year in jail and a $4,000.00 fine for conducting business in Texas with an unregistered dba or “assumed name.”

 

Since Dufurrena has self-admitted, in his letter to the NCHA, to the use of three – separate dba’s, i.e. “Ed Dufurrena Cutting Horses,” “Dos Cats Partners” and “Dos Cats,” it’s conceivable this Texas statute provides for three years in jail and $12,000 in fines and penalties, also, due to the fact, each dba or assumed name is unregistered with the Texas Secretary of State as well as the Cooke County Clerks Office.

 

Additionally, this specific statute also states that “an individual can defend an action brought against him or her, but while unregistered, the same individual cannot maintain an action against anyone resulting from the unregistered business activities.” 

 

Again, Dufurrena is impacted and placed in a precarious legal situation of the “double edge sword” type. For example, on one hand, he’s fined and faces penalties for operating and conducting an unregistered business in Texas from inception and he can be countersued for bringing legal action against an individual while being unregistered.

 

Lastly, in addition to the lawsuits in the foregoing, I was able to locate two other lawsuits brought against individuals by Dufurrena Cutting Horses, while being in the capacity of an unregistered Texas business entity: Ed Dufurrena Cutting Horses.

 

The following lawsuits are named accordingly and for the record are two more partnerships devised by Dufurrena. The one individual sustaining two lawsuits because of Dufurrena is Butch Redish. He is one of the individuals sued by the Minshall’s in the “Dos Cats Partners” lawsuit and he was also sued by Dufurrena on behalf of the “Parking My Assets” partnership lawsuit.

 

  1. Ed Dufurrena Cutting Horses vs Butch Redish. CV 1200760. Filed in the Justice Court, Precinct 1, Cooke County, Texas.

 

  1. Ed Dufurrena Cutting Horses vs John Claudon. CV 1200759. Filed in the Justice Court, Precinct 1, Cooke County, Texas.

 

For the record, there are common denominators existing in the Dufurrena business dealings and lawsuits, including inflated and irreconcilable invoicing, three unregistered dba’s or “assumed name” Texas business entities, and “FRAUD,” which can be alleged in each lawsuit brought against him.

 

Isn’t it time for the 501(C)(3) nonprofits to take a stand to protect the equine industry against egregious actions committed by individuals whose purpose is to take advantage of others in the industry by using illegal and fraudulent practices?

Read More

☛ Response to Ed Dufurrena letter 6-21-18

Posted by on Jun 21, 2018 in BREAKING NEWS, COW HORSE NEWS, CUTTING NEWS, FROM THE EDITOR, HORSE NEWS, HORSE ORGANIZATIONS, INDUSTRY NEWS, WHO, WHAT & WHERE | 14 comments

Glory Ann Kurtz
9301 fm 2258
Grandview, Texas 76050
Glory.kurtz@gmail.com

 

 

To Whom it May Concern:

 

The following is my rebuttal to a letter from Ed Dufurrena to the National Cutting Horse Association (NCHA) that openly, fraudulently, egregiously and maliciously falsely accused my website www.allaboutcutting.netor www.allaboutcutting.com, as a “tabloid” and a “rumor mill”. For the record, Dufurrena’s letter was sent to me by a third party, explaining that the letter herein was sent to the (NCHA) in advance of his July 9, 2018. @ 10:00 a.m. hearing, as part of his defense.

 

 On June 19, 2018, I received a copy of an open letter to the National Cutting Horse Association dated June 14, 2018: referencing accusations against Ed, Brandon, and Rieta Dufurrena.  The author of the letter is identified as Ed Dufurrena, and  addressed to the Officers and Directors of the National Cutting Horse Association (NCHA); 260 Bailey Avenue, Fort Worth, Texas. Ed Dufurrena’s letter is five pages in length and allegedly describes a time line – more specifically “Dufurrena’s version of a time line – of transpiring events emanating from his business associations with Eugene and Janie Vogel.”  The letter can be viewed by clicking on the following link:

 

1-Ed Dufurrena Ltr to NCHA Board 06.14.18

2-Ed Dufurrena Ltr Exhibits 06.14.18

 

Mr. Dufurrena’s first paragraph proves the legitimacy of the title of this rebuttal when he states, “The Dufurrena family has been falsely accused and prejudged in the tabloid media website of Glory Ann Kurtz. The false information scattered from the rapidly grinding rumor mill has skewed the facts beyond recognition. I challenge every member of the National Cutting Horse Association’s governing body to become educated with the facts and make fair and just decisions based on the evidence.  I challenge you to stop this attack that is forcing us to defend ourselves against frivolous accusations that will escalate and expand outside of our own governance.”

 

Ed Dufurrena, for the record, your pitiful description of my online magazine allaboutcutting.com or allaboutcutting.netas a tabloid, is abhorrent.  Equally and for the record, I’m an investigative journalist, not a tabloid writer. The articles crafted by me are inclusive of linked relevant documented facts, unlike your letter to the NCHA which is lacking in truthful chronological reporting as it is derived from your “selective inclusion” process. As such, your rendition is absent of a litany of relevant facts in this matter.

 

Clearly, your letter is well crafted to induce a quickly scribed “response document” to defend myself against Mr. Dufurrena’s unfounded, inaccurate, inconsistent and injurious allegations included in this letter to the NCHA, as well as attempting to bolster a capricious defense for use in his upcoming hearing with the NCHA by deflecting blame, from himself to me.

 

However, and after careful examination and consideration to determine Dufurrena’s willful and knowing intent in this matter, I was able to conduct a thorough research of my previously covered lawsuits involving Ed Dufurrena, as well as the legal outcomes of each, which are duly recorded in legal court documents.  Pursuant to reviewing the records of my online magazine allaboutcutting.com I confirmed that I had written and produced three articles involving Ed and Shona Dufurrena, more specifically:

 

  1. An article entitled, “Lawsuit against stallion owners, vet regarding HERDA, 8-4-16.Shawn, Lisa, and Lauren Minshall sue for fraud regarding HERDA designation of Auspicious Cat.”

a. THE LAWSUIT:  Federal Court filings in the Eastern District of Texas, Sherman Division, lists a lawsuit entitled Shawn and Lisa Victoria Minshall and Lauren Victoria Minshall vs. Ed Dufurrena, Ed Dufurrena Cutting Horses, Anthony and Dufurrena, Hartman Equine Reproduction Center (HERC), and Dos Cats Partners dated Oct. 30, 2015.

b. 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 in an advertisement, prior to the breeding, stating the sire was HERDA negative or HERDA N/N. A copy of this advertisement is provided in court documents therein.

c. Shawn and Lisa Victoria Minshall reside in Hillsburgh, Ontario, Canada, and Lauren Victoria Minshall resides in Pine Grove, Ky. Ed Dufurrena and Ed Dufurrena Cutting Horses are in Gainesville, Texas, and according to their website, Hartman Equine Reproduction Center (HERC) have two locations in Whitesboro, Texas and Marietta, Okla.

d. Dos Cats Partners is a general partnership and includes the following current members and/or former members, identified by Defendants as being involved at all material times: Ed Dufurrena, Shona Dufurrena, Karen Claycomb, Tom Donaghe, Linda Donaghe, Gary Craighead, Barbra Hanselman, Michael Nolan, Tracy A. Agrall, Butch Redish and Blair Vissar.

i. The significance of this lawsuit is that the members of the Dos Cats Partners listed in the foregoing, doesn’t include the members of the Dos Cats Partners formulated on March 25, 2011 under the same Dos Cats Partners namewhich also includes Ed Dufurrena, but a different set of members, more specifically: the “Vogels,” but it does include the same horse: “Auspicious Cat.

ii. Essentially, according to court records appearing in two separate law suits, (e.g., the“Minshall” lawsuit and the later “Vogel” lawsuit, Ed Dufurrena had two active Dos Cats Partnersat the same time period, with different named investors and both sets of investors owning vested interests in the same horse: “Auspicious Cat.”However, the members of the first “Dos Cats Partners” were sued in the foregoing lawsuit and according to court documents reached an “out-of-court” settlement with the Plaintiffs.  Further, there’s no mention of the“Vogel’s” name appearing in the “Minshall” lawsuit – whatsoever.

 

iii. However and for the record, Ed Dufurrena acknowledges the fact of two separate Dos Cat Partnersin his letter to the NCHA, (e.g., “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 Vogels 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.  I used it like an assumed name, or “d.b.a.”  Once the Vogels no longer owned 49 percent, I kept the horse under the same name.”

 

Wherefore, and for the record, Dufurrena doesn’t include the date he bought out the first “Dos Cats Partners” as he so readily did in the foregoing paragraph; referencing the “Vogels.”

iv. Also, Dufurrena’s hapless rendition doesn’t explain the correct and factual events pertaining to the “Dos Cats Partners,” recorded in court documents during this same time period and accurately delineated in the foregoing. This court recorded information, contained in two separate lawsuits filed against Dufurrena, i.e., “Minshall” and “Vogel” are absent; as is the “out –of-court settlement” between “Dos Cats Partners,” included in the “Minshall” lawsuit with the “Dos Cats Partners,” which excludes the “Vogels” in the “out-of-court” settlement during the “Minshall” lawsuit.

v. Hypothetically, if the original “Dos Cats Partners” owned a vested interest share in “Auspicious Cat” and the “Vogels” owned a 49 percent vested an interest share in “Auspicious Cat”, with Dufurrena owning a 51 percent share with the “Vogel’s,” how much of a percentage interest share did the original “Dos Cats Partners” members receive?  It doesn’t take a mathematical genius to figure this one out!

 

One way to verify these investors’ percentage information is to have Dufurrena supply the NCHA with any and/or all recorded documents pertaining to the names of the investors in each separate “Dos Cats Partners”, the dates of the open and closing of the partnership, the included horses therein, the ownership percentage of each recorded partner (per horse) and the date each partnership was dissolved. This should keep Dufurrena’s time line accurate.

 

  1. The second article authored, by me, was on October 10, 2017 and is entitled: “Ed Dufurrena In Court Again!!.For more information please click on the following link:

 

3-dufurrena in court again

 

  1. The third article authored by me, was on May 2, 2018 and is entitled: “Would The Real Dos Cats Partners, Please Stand Up.”For more information please click on the following link:

 

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

 

As with all my articles referencing litigation, each article is accompanied and supported by authentic court documents, as in this case and not in tabloid fashion as asserted by Dufurrena in his pathetic defense deflection letter to the NCHA.

 

Notwithstanding, another omission by Dufurrena in his letter to the NCHA concerns his not having a crystal ball when is comes to picking horses. For the record, Dufurrena fails to include in his letter to the NCHA that AQHA records show Stevie Rey Von was sold to him by his son Brandon Dufurrena during the 2015 NCHA Futurity. Since Ed Dufurrena was the rider of the horse at the Futurity, did he find a crystal ball? Or did he have a mystical premonition that he was winning money at the NCHA Futurity; Dufurrena was in the Futurity finals on Stevie Rey Von.

 

Stevie Rey Von

 

A forensic audit of the books of the complete Dufurrena operation, including an analysis of tax returns and bank accounts should establish whether or not this was a legitimate sale (as stated on the AQHA transfer documents) by a transfer of funds from Ed Dufurrena to Brandon Dufurrena. It would also establish legitimacy of the two separate “Dos Cats Partners”, as self-confessed by Dufurrena in his letter to the NCHA.

 

Either way the cookie crumbles in this matter, I’m just an investigative journalist who has developed a knack over my many years in the industry of reporting the truth, backed up by documentation without “cherry picking,”as Dufurrena has done in this matter. A review of any issued checks, by either party, to include front and back banking information should clear up any discrepancies an individual may have as to the legitimacy of any financial transactions occurring during a specific time period, and evidenced as a “SALE” on the AQHA transfer documents.

 

Lastly, Ed Dufurrena asserts that the rumor mill –  a specific reference about allaboutcutting.com and myself – implicated Dufurrena in the sale of Stevie Rey Von to Alvin Fults. Once again, the truth escapes Ed Dufurrena in his allegation.

 

Mr. Dufurrena, one word of advice. A person should always take responsibility for their own actions; not falsely accuse someone else in the process.

 

At no time has this type of information ever been disseminated by either my online magazine or myself. Good try Dufurrena, but no cigar!  The court documents in each article speak for themselves!

 

 

Thank you for your time.

 

Sincerely,

 

 

 

Glory Ann Kurtz, Editor and Owner

Allaboutcutting.net and Allaboutcutting.com

Read More