No. 05-14-01312-CV 

In the 

COURT OF APPEALS 

FIFTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

DALLAS, TEXAS 

Chan IL Pak 

Appellant 

V. 

AD Villarai, LLC, The Ashley Nicole Williams Trust, 

and Villas on Raiford Carrollton Senior Housing, LLC. 

Appellees 

On Appeal from the 

101st Judicial District Court of Dallas County, Texas. 

APPELLEE'S STATEMENT OF RULE 49.2 OPTION 

Appellees and Cross-Appellants AD Villarai, L.L.C., The Ashley Nicole 

Williams Trust, and Villas on Raiford Carrollton Senior Housing, L.L.C. ("Villas"), 

following Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 49.2, hereby exercise their option not 

to file a full response, unless the Court so requests. 

This option is exercised because the Appellant's Motion for Rehearing, filed 

June 5, 2018, raises no new arguments. Specifically, Mr. Pak again repeats his 

STATEMENT OF RULE 49.2 OPTION Page 1 of 4 

G:\Q\AN23-4 Anderson -Chan Lawsuit\Appeal 14-01312\DRAFTS\Response 06-06-18.docx 

ACCEPTED

05-14-01312-CV

FIFTH COURT OF APPEALS

DALLAS, TEXAS

6/7/2018 12:16 PM

LISA MATZ

CLERK

 FILED IN 5th COURT OF APPEALS DALLAS, TEXAS 6/7/2018 12:16:43 PM LISA MATZ Clerk
argument that no corporate action can ever be taken against him by Villas, unless he 

consents to that action, despite the unopposed findings that he has committed a prior 

material breach of the Villas Company Agreement1 and that violating members can 

be removed from Villas based upon the vote of the "remaining members"2 meaning 

the members other than Mr. Pak. These arguments have already been raised and 

addressed by the parties and by the Court. For example, see Mr. Pak's argument I. 

in his Appellant's Brief: "This court cannot interpret the company agreements to 

exclude any requirements that Chan Pak consent to his own expulsion." Chan Pak' s 

Amended Appellant Brief, December 1, 201 7, at p. 66. A large portion of the Motion 

for Rehearing again addresses that Article 5 .11 of the Company Agreement and 

Texas Business and Commerce Code Section 101.359, allowing corporate entities 

to function by signed written consents, are somehow inapplicable here. (Motion for 

Rehearing pp. 16-24.) The same arguments were presented in the Amended 

Appellant's Brief of December 1, 2017 at pages 61-64. 

The Motion for Rehearing also fails to clearly identify any new or different 

argument or any specific aspect of the Court's Judgment and Opinion which is being 

challenged. It has failed to meet the standards that a motion for rehearing "must 

clearly state the points relied on for the rehearing." Tex. App. Proc. Rule 49.1. 

1 Conclusion of Law 5 

2 Pltfs' Tr. Exs. 2 and 8, each at Article 8.6(e), and Findings of Fact 12 and 63. 

STATEMENT OF RULE 49.2 OPTION Page 2 of 4 

G:\Q\AN23-4 Anderson -Chan Lawsuit\Appeal 14-01312\DRAFTS\Response 06-06-18. docx 
Appellees pray that the motion for rehearing be denied without requiring 

further response. In the alternative, Appellees pray that this Court advise Appellees 

to file a full response to the motion for rehearing, and for such other and further relief 

to which Appellees show themselves justly entitled. 

Co-counsel: 

David M. Pruessner 

State Bar No. 16364500 

Law Offices of David M. Pruessner 

4111 Joshua Lane 

Dallas, Texas 75287 

(214) 543-6827 

Fax: (972) 716-1899 

STATEMENT OF RULE 49.2 OPTION Page 3 of 4 

Respectfully submitted, 

By: William F. LePage 

William F. LePage 

State Bar No. 12216800 

Peter C. D' Apice 

State Bar No. 05377783 

STUTZMAN, BROMBERG, 

ESSERMAN & PLIFKA, P.C. 

2323 Bryan Street, Suite 2200 

Dallas, Texas 75201 

Telephone: (214) 969-4900 

Telecopy: (214) 969-4999 

lepage@s bep-law. com 

COUNSEL FOR CROSS APPELLANTS 

AND APPELLEES AD VILLARAI, LLC, 

THE ASHLEY NICOLE WILLIAMS 

TRUST AND VILLAS ON RAIFORD 

CARROLLTON SENIOR HOUSING, 

LLC 

G:\Q\AN23-4 Anderson -Chan Lawsuit\Appeal 14-01312\DRAFTS\Response 06-06-18.docx 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

This is to certify a true and correct copy of the above response has been served 

electronically through the State's electronic manager to Chan Pak on this the 7th day 

of June, 2018. 

STATEMENT OF RULE 49.2 OPTION Page 4 of 4 

Isl William F. LePage 

William F. LePage 

G:\Q\AN23-4 Anderson -Chan Lawsuit\Appeal 14-01312\DRAFTS\Response 06-06-18.docx