IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FOURTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN ...

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FOURTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR DUVAL COUNTY, FLORIDA

STATE OF FLORIDA, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS,

Plaintiff,

v.

BROOK ANTHONY ROQUE, ANTHONY RENE ROQUE, GLENDA CHESTER ROQUE, KASSAUNDRA ANN BUTTRAM, and MICHELLE LEE ECHOLS, d/b/a as Five Star Bulldogs, Grand Bulldogs, Matrix Bulldogs, Brook's Bullies, and Remarkabull,

Case No.: __________________________ Division: ___________________________

Defendants.

COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, DAMAGES, CIVIL PENALTIES, OTHER STATUTORY RELIEF, AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL The Plaintiff, State of Florida, Office of the Attorney General, Department of

Legal Affairs (the "OAG"), by and through the undersigned counsel, sues the Defendants, Brook Anthony Roque, Anthony Rene Roque, Glenda Chester Roque, Kassaundra Ann Buttram, and Michelle Lee Echols d/b/a as Five Star Bulldogs, Grand Bulldogs, Matrix Bulldogs, Brook's Bullies, and Remarkabull (collectively the "Defendants"), and alleges: 1. This is an action to stop the illegal importation, breeding, and sale of bulldog

puppies. 2. The Defendants have falsely represented to consumers and government officials the

health and age of hundreds of bulldog puppies thereby endangering the wellbeing of the puppies and other dogs with whom they have come in contact. 3. The Defendants have wrongfully profited at the expense of consumers from the sale of bulldog puppies that were not legally eligible for sale.

1

4. The Defendants have engaged, and continue to engage, in a scheme to deceive the public at the expense of illegally bred and imported English bulldog puppies.

Jurisdiction and Venue 5. This is an action for injunctive and declaratory relief, costs, damages, attorney's

fees, penalties, and other available statutory relief, pursuant to the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act ("FDUTPA"), Chapter 501, Part II, Florida Statutes (2013), the Florida Criminal Code, section 828.29, Florida Statutes (2013), and the Uniform Commercial Code--Sales (the "UCC"), Chapter 672, Part III, Florida Statutes (2013). 6. This Court has subject-matter jurisdiction pursuant to the provisions of FDUTPA. 7. The award for injunctive relief, civil penalties, and other equitable relief is within the jurisdiction of this Court pursuant to FDUTPA. ? 501.207, Fla. Stat. (2013); ? 501.2075, Fla. Stat. (2013); ? 501.2077, Fla. Stat. (2013). 8. All actions material to this complaint occurred within four (4) years as of the filing of this action, for purposes of FDUTPA, the Florida Criminal Code, and the UCC. ? 501.207(5), Fla. Stat. (2013); ? 95.11(3), Fla. Stat (2013). 9. The Defendants reside in Jacksonville, Florida and the alleged statutory violations occurred in Jacksonville, Florida; thus, venue is proper in the Circuit Court of the Fourth Judicial Circuit, in and for Duval County, Florida. ? 47.011, Fla. Stat. (2013).

The OAG 10. The OAG is an "enforcing authority" of FDUTPA and as the statutory violations

have affected two or more judicial circuits, the OAG is authorized to bring this action. ? 501.203(2), Fla. Stat. (2013). The State Attorney's Office has also waived jurisdiction in writing to the OAG. ? 501.203(2), Fla. Stat. (2013); Ex. A, State Attorney's Waiver. 11. The statutory violations have affected at least one Florida consumer.

2

12. The OAG investiged the alleged matters and Attorney General Pamela Jo Bondi determined that this enforcement action against the Defendants serves the public interest. ? 501.207(2), Fla. Stat.; Ex. B, Determination of Public Interest. The OAG's Investigation

13. The OAG commenced its investigation into Brook Roque's bulldog puppy business when John Dolores, a field supervisor with the Jacksonville Office of Animal Care and Protective Services ("JACPS"), contacted the OAG. Officer Dolores made the OAG aware of multiple consumer complaints made to JACPS about the health and pedigree of bulldog puppies sold to consumers by Brook Roque and his bulldog breeding and importing business.

14. Mr. Dolores delivered copies of these consumer complaints to Amy Sams, Senior Financial Investigator and Supervisor of Investigations for the North Florida Region.

15. According to Mr. Dolores, in his 13 years of experience in animal protective services, Brook Roque ranked in the top 2 of the worst breeders/importers he ever encountered.

16. Once the OAG became aware of the nature of the Defendants' business, the OAG and Investigator Sams commenced an independent investigation into the Defendants and their business practices.

17. During the course of the OAG's investigation, the OAG obtained sworn statements from Florida consumers who were injured by Brook Roque's practices. These consumers included Milena Vireilha, a Tampa resident, and Sherri Swilley, a Green Cove Springs resident, both of whom filed complaints against the Defendants with the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services ("DACS").

3

18. The OAG investigation revealed that starting in 2007, Defendants concocted a scheme to defraud the public and unjustly enrich themselves through the sale of bred and imported English bulldog puppies.

19. Over the course of five (5) years, Defendants have sold approximately 700 bulldogs each ranging in price from $1,500 to $2,300.

20. The Defendants' estimated income from five (5) years of selling puppies is between $1,050,000 and $1,610,000. The business continues to operate as of the date of filing this complaint.

21. The Defendants' scheme was orchestrated by at least five individuals including Brook Anthony Roque, Anthony Rene Roque (Brook Roque's father), Glenda Chester Roque (Brook Roque's mother), Kassaundra Ann Buttram, and Michelle Lee Echols, all of whom are residents of Jacksonville, Florida. At various times they operated under different business names, including Five Star Bulldogs, Grand Bulldogs, Matrix Bulldogs, and Remarkabull. On some occasions they did not use a business name. The Defendants' online advertising & solicitations

22. The Defendants masqueraded as wholesome and caring family breeders who were raising their English bulldog puppies to be healthy, well-socialized dogs for their future homes. In actuality, Defendants lined their pockets while they consistently and systemically placed profits over animal welfare, ultimately endangering the health and welfare of the dogs they sold to unsupecting consumers.

23. The Defendants advertised and offered for sale English bulldog puppies online. Their online presence portrayed the Defendants as family breeders that hand raised their dogs. Defendants advertised that their dogs were current on their vaccinations and would come with a health certificate, health guarantee, pedigree, and were AKC-registrable; all these assertions turned out to be false. Additionally, the

4

Defendants advertised dogs for sale that were younger than eight (8) weeks of age; this is unlawful.1 24. The Defendants advertised English bulldog puppies for sale online on various websites such as , , , , , , and . 25. In 2011, Ms. Vireilha searched for a bulldog puppy by visiting a third-party website. The site linked her to where she saw a picture of a little girl sitting on the floor with a bunch of puppies. The information on the website indicated that the Defendants were the breeders and that the dogs were bred in a family home. Ms. Vireilha noted that the pictures of the dogs on the website looked like nice professional photos with the puppies next to a ball or sitting on a chair. The consumer called the phone number listed on the website, spoke with Kassaundra Buttram and arranged a visit to see the available puppies in Jacksonville. 26. Also in 2011, Ms. Swilley visited and noted that there were pictures of bulldogs and happy families as well as testimonials from prior customers sharing positive feedback. Ms. Swilley filled out a contact page with her information, and Kassaundra Buttram responded by e-mail. 27. On December 11, 2011, in an e-mail communication with Ms. Swilley, Kassaundra Buttram stated that the puppies she had available for sale had been to the veterinarian, were deemed to be very healthy, and had been raised in her home. Kassaundra Buttram informed Ms. Swilley that for a price of $1,600, she would sell her an AKC-registrable bulldog puppy with breeding rights.

1 "A person may not transport into the state for sale or offer for sale within the state any dog or cat that is less than 8 weeks of age." ? 828.29(4), Fla. Stat.

5

 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download