Alex GingoldAmanda GingoldANTI-SLAPPAttorney Joseph FerrisChristopher J. LeavellDonutNV FranchiseDonutNV Franchise FailuresFRANCHISE BULLYINGFRANCHISE LAWSUITSKlehr Harrison Harvey BranzburgSLAPPSPOTLIGHT 1William J. Clements

DonutNV vs. Sean Kelly, UnhappyFranchisee.com (Court Documents)

Court Documents in the ongoing SLAPP* attack conceived, filed and sustained by Doher Joseph Ferris (D. Joseph Ferris) and Klehr, Harrison Harver Branzburg LLP for DonutNV Franchising Inc. Publisher Sean Kelly and franchise watchdog and discussion website UnhappyFranchisee.Com is represented by attorney Brandon Harter, Lancaster Tech Law, with support from Paula Knudson Burky, Reporter’s Committee for Freedom of the Press.

Please Show Your Support: Stop Malicious, Bullying Lawsuits & Those Who File Them!

Signed and certified as true and correct by DonutNV CEO Alex Gingold, the complaint alleges that Kelly, a 38 year franchise industry veteran & publisher of UnhappyFranchisee.com for 20 years, is an extortionist who publishes defamatory content then demands payment from franchisors, including DonutNV. It claims Kelly made the following statements, which they claim are untrue and defamatory: That nearly half DonutNV franchisees are failing, that franchisees lives are being destroyed, that one franchisee was struggling to put presents for her kids under the Christmas tree while Alex & Amanda Gingold were flying to the Bahamas and driving G-Wagons, and that the Gingolds are victims of bad advisors.

The publisher of this site has never spoken to Alex of Amanda Gingold nor received a return email to his many offers to publish clarifications or rebuttals at no charge. In a disingenuously affable phone call from D. Joseph Ferris (“We’re just two guys talking”), Sean Kelly stated directly that he does not take down content for money and the path to good exposure was to address the problems with their franchisees. Except for suggesting they “may have” been victims of bad advice, all of the allegedly defamatory statements were direct quotes from franchisees.

Also read: Free Speech Remains a LIE in Pennsylvania

For our ongoing expose, see The DonutNV Franchise Report (Index)

DateDocumentFile Link
2025.02.03DonutNV ComplaintDonutNV Complaint (42 Pages)
2025.02.04Case assigned to THOMAS B. SPONAUGLE (Judge)
2025.03.03DonutNV Sheriff’s Return of ServiceDonutNV Sheriff’s Return of Service
2025.03.18DonutNV Praecipe For Appearance of EntryDonutNV Praecipe For Appearance of Entry
2025.03.21Erie Insurance Denial of Coverage Due to the Extortion AllegationErie Insurance Denial of Coverage Letter Due to the Extortion Allegation
2025.04.04Defendants Answer with New Matter and Counterclaim

Defendants Answer with New Matter and Counterclaim
2025.04.24PLAINTIFF’S ANSWER TO DEFENDANTS’
NEW MATTER AND COUNTERCLAIM
DonutNV ANSWER TO DEFENDANTS’
NEW MATTER AND COUNTERCLAIM
(9 Pages)
2025-04-28PLAINTIFF’S FIRST SET OF REQUESTS FOR THE
PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS DIRECTED TO DEFENDANTS
DonutNV FIRST SET OF REQUESTS FOR THE
PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS DIRECTED TO DEFENDANTS
(15 Pages)
2025-04-28PLAINTIFF’S FIRST REQUEST FOR
INTERROGATORIES DIRECTED TO DEFENDANTS
DONUTNV FIRST REQUEST FOR
INTERROGATORIES DIRECTED TO DEFENDANTS
(14 Pages)
2025.05.12DEF REPLY TO PLAINTIFF’S NEW MATTER
TO DEFENDANTS’ COUNTERCLAIM
Reply to DonutNV New Matter to Defendant’s Counterclaim
2025.06.18 MOTION PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO STRIKE OBJECTIONS AND COMPEL ANSWERS TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST SET OF REQUESTS MOTION PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO STRIKE OBJECTIONS AND COMPEL ANSWERS TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST SET OF REQUESTS (77 Pages)
2025.06.18MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF MOTION STRIKE OBJECTIONS AND COMPEL ANSWERS TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST SET OF REQUESTS FOR THE PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS DIRECTED TO DEFENDANTS AND PLAINTIFF’S FIRST REQUEST FOR INTERROGATORIES DIRECTED TO DEFENDANTS. FILED BY D. JOSEPH FERRIS, ESQ.MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF MOTION STRIKE OBJECTIONS AND COMPEL ANSWERS TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST SET OF REQUESTS… (10 Pages)
2025-07-15DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS UNDER 42 PA. C.S.A. § 8320.1. CERTIFICATES OF COMPLIANCE AND SERVICEDEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS UNDER 42 PA. C.S.A. § 8320.1. CERTIFICATES OF COMPLIANCE AND SERVICE
2025-07-15BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGSBRIEF IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS
2025.07.15 PROPOSED ORDER FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGSPROPOSED ORDER FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS
2025.07.15 DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER.DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER
2025-07-18PROTECTIVE ORDERPROTECTIVE ORDER
2025-08-04 Plaintiff’s Opposition to Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings
Plaintiff’s Opposition to Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings
2025.08.04 Plaintiff’s Proposed OrderPlaintiff’s Proposed Order (1 Page)
2025.08.04PLAINTIFF’S BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONPLAINTIFF’S BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION (66 Pages)
2025.08.04 PRAECIPE FOR ASSIGNMENT OF DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGSPRAECIPE FOR ASSIGNMENT OF DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS (3 Pages)
2025.08.05PLEADINGS WITH FILE FORWARDED TO JUDGE SPONAUGLE FOR DISPOSITION OF MOTION (Rule 208.3(a))
2025.08.07PRAECIPE TO WITHDRAW PLAINTIFF’S PRAECIPE FOR ASSIGNMENT FILED ON AUGUST 4, 2025PRAECIPE TO WITHDRAW PLAINTIFF’S PRAECIPE FOR ASSIGNMENT FILED ON AUGUST 4, 2025 (3 Pages)
2025.08.11PRAECIPE FOR DISPOSITION OF DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS FILED BY BRANDON S. HARTER, ESQ. PRAECIPE FOR DISPOSITION OF DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS FILED BY BRANDON S. HARTER, ESQ.
2025-08-11REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGSREPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS
2025-08-13NOTICE OF ELECTRONIC FILING GENERATED AND SENT TO CASE PARTICIPANTS WITH EMAIL ADDRESSES SUPPLIED
2025-08-14PLEADINGS WITH FILE FORWARDED TO JUDGE SPONAUGLE FOR DISPOSITION OF MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS (Rule 208.3(a))
2025-08-18Judge Sponaugle OrderJudge Sponaugle Order

6 Month MarkNOTE: Plaintiff’s production to this point is : 240 PagesJudge’s Order: 1 Page

It’s my hope that free speech and anti-SLAPP advocates will admit that we left the job half-done and rally their energy and resources to activate the protections of a bi-partisan law  that’s already in place.

I am available to share my story and what I’ve learned as a target of bullying, threats and lawsuits over the past two decades or to otherwise contribute to efforts to address this issue.

Or if you wish to share YOUR experience as a SLAPP target…

Email me at UnhappyFranchisee[at]Gmail[dot]Com

Sean Kelly, Publisher, SLAPP Defendant

My testimony in support of PA anti-SLAPP legislation in 2014 is still visible on the PA State Republicans website, and here:  Sean Kelly Letter in Support of PA anti-SLAPP Law

*  Here and elsewhere, I refer a previous lawsuit (Golob v. Kelly) as a SLAPP, which reflects a judge’s ruling to that effect.  When I refer to my current lawsuit (DonutNV v. Kelly) no such judicial determination has been made.  My reference to this ongoing lawsuit as a SLAPP reflects my own strongly held opinion that this lawsuit is meritless, was filed primarily to deprive me of my protected right to free expression and would be ruled as such by any competent arbiter.  I’m neither an attorney or a judge nor am I a legal scholar. You may come to your own conclusion by reviewing both the allegations in the complaint and my extensive research and reporting, available here:  The DonutNV Franchise Report (Index)

Tags:  SLAPP, Ani-SLAPP, Pennsylvania anti‑SLAPP, UPEPA Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania free speech law, PA anti‑SLAPP law, PA Uniform Public Expression Protection Act, DonutNV, DonutNV franchise, DonutNV lawsuit, DonutNV v Kelly, Unhappy Franchisee lawsuit, Doher Joseph Ferris, D. Joseph Ferris, Klehr Harrison Harvey Branzberg LLP, attorney William Clements, Christopher J. Leavell, Institute for Free Speech, Reporters Committee for Freedom of Speech, Paula Knudsen Burke, FIRE, ACLU, Brandon Harter, Lancaster Tech Law, PA Supreme Court, Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Sean Kelly, UnhappyFranchisee, Judge Sponaugle, Lancaster Court of Common Pleas

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *