You know what? I am tired of reporting on Thomas Ravenel‘s bizarre antics regarding the current child custody case. You know who else is tired of it? Bravo. And Uber. Kathryn Dennis. And most likely most of us.
Thomas Ravenel is full of stupid motions in his court cases and he recently included Bravo in one of them. Click that link to see all the weird allegations against Kathryn Dennis and this one for the Bravo stupidity regarding filming Southern Charm.
Bravo responded in what The Blast refers to as a scathing response:
“If Ravenel actually wants to stem the public flow of information about this custody dispute, then his recourse is to stop his own public mudslinging in the pleadings he has filed in this case, stop posting photos and videos of his children on the Internet, join Dennis’s request to seal this Court’s records, and/or seek to restrain Dennis from discussing the case.”
The network and the producers claim to have already tried to resolve this action by agreeing to not air previously unaired images of the children on future episodes of the show [Southern Charm] without Ravenel’s consent – and they have no intent to do so in the upcoming season of the show.
The filing goes on to state that it appears to Bravo that Thomas Ravenel seems to want to be the only party to the custody hearing that can discuss the case publicly despite Kathryn wanting the hearings to be sealed for the privacy of the children. Bravo is requesting that Thomas pay their legal fees.
Uber Frivolous Litigation
And then there is the subpoena Thomas Ravenel’s attorneys sent to Uber requesting 18 months of historical records of Kathryn Dennis’s Uber usage. Presumably this is expected to show that she is out at bars when she has the children. I am sure she is. Southern Charm films all over the place. Parents are also allowed to go out with friends when they have their children in the home. She can most certainly hire a babysitter. It’s not like she leaves them all alone locked in a closet if she does in fact go out.
Uber has refuse to provide those records stating they are not the proper venue to subpoena for the records as such a search would cause an undue burden on them to collect and provide. Instead, if he wants the records, he can subpoena them from Kathryn Dennis who has easy access to all of her records via her Uber app.
This makes perfect sense to me.
However, according to documents obtained by Daily Mail, it looks like a judge has granted Thomas’ request and Uber will be required to appear in person at a hearing at an unnamed time.
Does anyone any major problems with this Order To Show Cause? Because I see several.
- The defendant is not named on the order. The defendant for this order is supposed to be Uber D/B/A Rasier, LLC. instead the defendant is listed as Bravo and Haymaker. Someone’s attorney was busy cranking out nonsense, they didn’t bother to change the information, OR Thomas Ravenel provided this document to Daily Mail and it has been doctored. Or perhaps Uber was listed as a second defendant somewhere further down the line, but the listing of the docket number where it is likely rules out that possibility.
- The date and location of the hearing that Uber is being compelled to attend is not provided.
- The judge whose signature appears to be on the Order to Show Cause is Judge Timothy H. Pogue who is a family judge in upstate South Carolina in the 12th judicial district. Was he filling in? Has he relocated? Thomas and Kathryn’s case is within the 9th Judicial District. It looks like Judge Pogue did preside over hearings in Charleston on January 31 and February 1st but there was nothing on the docket for that week pertaining to this case. Why wasn’t a hearing date and time scheduled?
And in horrendously poor judgment by Daily Mail, they failed to black out Kathryn’s cell phone number in the publication of the subpoena sent to Uber. (Exhibit A).
I am going to hope one of my many attorneys who read here email me an explanation about all of this. I have been looking at this all day and it is weird and confusing to me.
Basically, Thomas is a douchebag and his attorneys are loving all of the billable hours filing ridiculous motions. I looked to see if I could find a connection between this judge and Ravenel and as of yet I have not.