Westport Threatens Defamation Lawsuit Amid 70 MILLION Discrimination Complaint

Last week we noted a controversial complaint of discrimination confronting Westport and the reaction was decidedly skeptical.

In order to be fair to BOTH SIDES we also wanted to highlight response that was sent our way and also posted as a comment . . . It's a legal note that not only offers perspective on the dispute but also provides a glimpse of legal consequences that might result from the ongoing argument. 

www.TonysKansasCity.com edited the note just a but for brevity but attempted to stay true to the meaning of the document forwarded our way . . . Check-it . . .

The lawsuit itself is a sham, predicated on falsehoods, misstatements, and intentional fabrications.

The claims against our client—alleging interference with a business opportunity . . . In the Westport area—are entirely baseless and defamatory. No one in the CID had any authority or involvement in the ownership, operation, or leasing decisions regarding this property. Below are key facts that highlight the egregious nature of your false claims:

1. Absence of a Valid Lease:

Mr. Lee does not, and has never, possessed a valid, signed lease for the property. The property owner has confirmed unequivocally that no lease agreement was ever executed with Mr. Lee or any entity associated with him. The purported lease presented in the lawsuit is unsigned by the property owner and constitutes fraudulent evidence.

2. Lack of Control by the Westport CID:

The Westport Community Improvement District (CID) has absolutely no ownership or control over the property. Ownership and operational authority rest solely with private entities. Your assertion otherwise is a gross misrepresentation designed to mislead the court and the public.

3. No Unauthorized Access:

At no point has any member of the Westport CID, including our clients, had keys or any ability to access the property without explicit permission from the owner. Your insinuations to the contrary are baseless and defamatory.

4. Documented History of Violence at the Property:

The previous tenant, Westport Ale House, operated a bottle-service nightclub at this location, which resulted in numerous incidents of violence, including shootings, security breaches, public complaints, and even fatalities. These events have been widely reported by the media and documented extensively by Westport Security and the Kansas City Police Department. Following these events, Westport Ale House ceased operations, and its liquor license was permanently surrendered.

5. Misrepresentation of Business Intentions:

During lease negotiations, the prospective tenant fraudulently misrepresented their business concept as a restaurant. The property owner later discovered that the true intent was to operate a bottle-service entertainment venue, mimicking the same problematic business model that plagued the prior tenant.
##############

Developing . . .