Man Suing Todd & Julie Chrisley Over Son's Car Crash Accuses Them of Profiting Off ‘Terrible Situation,’ Slams Effort to Seal Case

Patrick accused Grayson of being a distracted driver. He said Todd & Julie’s son was “not paying attention to the roadway in the moments immediately preceding the rear impact.”

Grayson “failed to act appropriately under the circumstances, which included at a minimum maintaining a safe operating distance from other motor vehicles, maintaining a safe operating speed, and avoiding being distracted by electronic devices within his motor vehicle,” the suit alleged.

After the crash, Grayson was rushed to the hospital.

Todd and Julie asked the court to dismiss all claims against their family.

For months, Patrick and the family fought over subpoenas he issued to Verizon and AT&T over their phone records. He asked for call and text logs for the day before to 18 days after the crash.

The family argued the request was “a clear effort to harass them.”

Eventually, they reached an agreement over the records. Patrick will be allowed to seek records from November 12 to 15. Grayson’s records will be turned over directly to Patrick but Todd & Julie’s phone logs will be reviewed by their attorney before being produced.

Now, RadarOnline.com has learned Todd & Julie — along with their children — believe the entire case should be sealed.

In a motion, Todd & Julie’s lawyer said, “Defendants are national television personalities who are requesting that this Court seal the court record in this matter to protect their privacy, especially in light of [Julie] and [Todd’s] appeals of their recent criminal convictions.”

Their lawyer argued that the case “concerns matters of private concern or of little legitimate public interest; and disclosure would result in serious embarrassment or other specific harm.”

Further, their lawyer claimed information about Todd & Julie’s personal finances, their criminal convictions, and personal cell phone records “may result in serious embarrassment or exploitation of Defendants’ personal privacy.”

Patrick vigorously opposed the request. He said the Chrisley family had failed to present a valid reason to seal the case.

He argued that sealing the record would make no sense, especially since the criminal cases are not sealed.

“The irony of these arguments is that the Defendants have exploited the facts of this case to remain relevant by making statements to media outlets, they’ve posted about the facts of the case on various social media platforms and publicly discussed the facts of the case on podcasts,” his lawyer said. He pointed out they all spoke about the incident on their various podcasts.

“For parties who suddenly want privacy — after seeking public attention at every opportunity — they sure have an odd way of going about it. Alternatively, maybe the Defendants want to control the public narrative surrounding the case by getting their version of events publicly and then seeking this Court to seal any counter narrative that may otherwise come out.”

He added, “If the Defendants were truly concerned with something embarrassing coming out from the case at bar they would not have utilized their platforms to remain relevant, profit from an otherwise terrible situation, or seek public sympathy by alleging they are the victims.”