Mount Pleasant lawyer Todd Levitt thought “Todd Levitt 2.0” wasn’t good for his image. Zachary Felton, a 21-year-old Mount Pleasant senior, believes Levitt has made himself a public figure and therefore ripe for parody.

Now, the two are duking it out in Isabella County Trial Court over the First Amendment and its protection of social media as free speech.

The case will be heard between Ghazey Aleck, Levitt’s legal representative, and Gordon Bloem, a criminal defense lawyer and fixed-term faculty member representing Felton. The two parties will meet in a motion hearing at 1:15 p.m. on Sept. 15. Judge Paul H. Chamberlain will preside over the hearing.

Felton is accused of portraying Levitt in a false light, intentional infliction of emotional distress and libel. He is also accused of intentional interference with business relations, business defamation and unfair competition, according to the court documents.

According to the complaint filed by Levitt and his lawyer on June 2, the parody Twitter account, “Todd Levitt 2.0,” was a “directed attack … commenced for no apparent reason other than to inflict irreparable harm to (Levitt’s) reputation.”

Bloem drafted a response to Levitt’s complaint filed June 27, writing that the “request for equitable relief fails as he comes to the court with unclean hands.”

Bloem also wrote that Levitt destroyed evidence by deleting his Twitter account and engaged in intimidating behavior toward potential witnesses. Bloem claims that Levitt created a fake award to promote himself and misstated a material fact by implying he lost his status as a fixed-term faculty member at CMU over the parody.

Claims of harassment through media attention

Levitt and his lawyer filed a memorandum with the court on July 14. The memorandum states that Levitt felt “threatened, unsafe, intimidated, stalked and (has) to look over (his) shoulder everywhere (he goes).”

According to the memorandum, Levitt claims that he has received harassment through the publication of articles on various media outlets, including VICE.com and Central Michigan Life.

“(Felton) actually contacted freelance writer Justin Glawe, who works for the controversial news company VICE.com, in an attempt to convince Glawe to write a negative story about the victim,” reads the memorandum. “This led to multiple writers, including Glawe and a CM-Life (sic) editor, contacting the victim on separate occasions about a potential damaging story. This is yet another example of (Felton) causing unconsented (sic) contact with the victim.”

Angie Felton, mother of the defendant, dropped off a packet of information to the Central Michigan Life office in early May. The packet included the Twitter guidelines for parody accounts and detailed existing parody accounts made to poke fun at other CMU officials. She told CM Life she also gave this information to Mount Pleasant police.

Levitt also claimed that the parody account and harassment caused him to quit his teaching position in the marketing and hospitality services administration department. Levitt claimed the account damaged his reputation with students.

However, the lawyer resigned from his teaching position in March. The Twitter account’s first tweet went live April 15, nearly a month after his resignation.

Recording surfaces of altercation between parties

Levitt is convinced that he has to “look over (his) shoulders everywhere (he goes).” This assertion came after an audio clip was posted to social media sites SoundCloud.com and reddit.com. The two-minute clip contained audio of a confrontation outside Levitt’s Bellows Street office between the lawyer and Felton’s father, James Felton, the chair of the finance and law department. The recording also includes Kenneth Sanney, a faculty member in the finance and law department.

Sanney filed a police report on June 12, the same day of the confrontation, alleging harassment by Levitt. CM Life requested a copy of the report from the Mount Pleasant Police Department through the Freedom of Information Act, a state law that allows citizens access to public records. No charges were filed.

Levitt claims that he was not aware that the two faculty members were recording their conversation. He also claims that the audio is a violation of Michigan’s recording laws.

However, the two professors did have the right to record the conversation, said Jeff Browne, Mount Pleasant police’s public information officer, in a July 21 case supplement to the report.

“At that point in time, it could not be eavesdropping due to the fact it was in a public place,” Browne wrote. “I explained to Mr. Levitt as long as one party is aware of the recording then the other party does not have to be aware of the recording.”

Michigan is an all-party state, which means all parties in the area need to be informed that they are being recorded. However, this only applies to a “private place.” This does not include public areas like the sidewalk outside of the office on Bellows Street.

CM Life obtained the audio clip from SoundCloud.com. It was made available by the owner of the clip, a user named “MtPleezeyDeepThroat.” The recording has since been removed from both websites.

“People can’t stand you. People think you’re an arrogant piece of (expletive),” Levitt said to Sanney on the recording. “Students say you’re an arrogant piece of (expletive) you (expletive). What? Do you want to hit me? What you got, Ken?”

Levitt demanded that the two leave his storefront, to which Sanney replied “I’m not going anywhere (expletive) face. You’re the one stepping up in my space. You’re an (expletive) clown.”

Furthering Levitt’s argument that it was an attempt to ruin his reputation, Sanney can be heard at the end of the recording saying: “Did you get all that?”

Bloem using student grades as part of defense

In the June 27 response to the suit issued by Bloem, Levitt’s grades are cited as a defense for a tweet from the parody account.

“Buying me a drink at Cabin karaoke will get you extra credit, but it’s not like that matters because you’re guaranteed an A in the syllabus,” read the tweet.

Levitt’s grades from six semesters spanning 2011-2013 were cited as evidence that his grades issued to students were higher than most in the department.

“The Plaintiff has given 277 A’s, 8 (sic) A-’s, 14 B+’s, 27 B’s, 1 (sic) B- and no grades lower than the B- and thus the tweet was substantially true or was rhetorical hyperbole,” Bloem wrote in his response.

Manuel Rupe, CMU’s general counsel, said the aggregated data could be used outside of CMU because it is not subject to the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, or FERPA.

FERPA protects students’ educational records. These records include financial records, individual course grades and other vital information that could identify a student.

“Aggregated student data is very different,” he said. “(Course grades) would just be totaled up. That aggregated data is not subject to FERPA because it’s not part of a student’s educational record.”

As the case gets closer to a motion hearing date, Levitt said he has approached various local media outlets to have his side of the story heard.

Bloem maintains that his client has done no wrong and is seeking financial restitution for, at the very least, his client’s attorney fees.

Levitt v. Felton’s motion hearing is set for 1:15 p.m. Sept. 5