You know Kitson as the L.A. boutique that counts Nicky Hilton as both a supplier and a customer. The shop gets regular shout outs from the likes of Lindsay, Nicole, Jessica, and Paris, sealing its cultural relevance. You also know Kitson as store owned by Fraser Ross, who decided to capitalize on all the celebrity foot traffic and jump into the paparazzi business with Sunset Photo and News LLC — flanked by Jill Ishkanian, the former Us Weekly staffer now at the center of a federal investigation looking into whether she hacked her former employer's computers.

So, as you can tell, there's already bad blood between Kitson and the Wenner Media tabloid. And, as of yesterday, there's even more: Kitson filed a lawsuit against the gossip rag, alleging Janice Min & Co. violated written and oral agreements not to badmouth each other. And look at that — we've exclusively got the court documents.

Back in February, the bad blood between Kitson and Us – stemming from Ross hosting a book party for west coast exec editor Ken Baker, who supposedly didn't give enough editorial play in return – was settled with a $13,620 payment and a signed agreement between Ross and Us that the neither side was "to make, or knowingly cause to be made any statement or communication written or oral with the intention of (a) disparaging or otherwise impugnin the business or management of any of the Paries … (b) damaging the personal or business reputation of any of the parties … or (c) interfering with, impairing or disrupting the normal business operations of any of the Parties."

Turns out that was all a bunch of hooey, at least according to Kitson's lawsuit. The store claims the magazine went out of its way to crop Kitson goods out of photos it used (like a blue Kitson bag in Issue 593); listed the store's phone number (a number Us "knew or should have known is not answered") instead of its website, as is common practice for other retailers; and did not credit Kitson as the location where photos were taken that the magazine published, when it credited locations in other photos.

And Ross isn't done yet. He's also claiming Us engages in unfair business practices, allowing editors to plug their own goods (like staffer Suzanne Marchese's Fleur de Lis clothing) for free (the horror!); allowing editors to plug their own causes (like, ahem, Ken Baker's Head To Hollywood charity) without mention of the conflict of interest (double horror!); and editors demanding free merchandise from retailers under the threat that, if they don't send the goods, they'll never appear in the magazine again (triple threat, booyah!).

In the end, Kitson is assessing damages (read: lost business) at $10,000 per week. Which means Jann is gonna have to bring out the checkbook again, or Janice will have to make a little room in its "Get Insert-Celebrity-Here's Look!" pages for Kitson. (It's worth noting, meanwhile, that Kitson remains an advertiser in Us, at least as recently as the Sept. 4 Issue 603.)

After the jump: All the legal docs you've been waiting for.

Related: LA Shop Owners Want a Hand in the Paparazzi Jar

Click each image for a larger version in a pop-up window.