# In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

_____________________ NO. 14
- 15
- 00747
- CV

_____________________ W. GARRY WALDROP DDS, INC. D/B/A LIFETIME DENTAL CARE, Appellant
V.
GREGORY PHAM, JOHN MA AND RAYMOND DAO, Appellees
. From Cause No. 201521720; 151st Judicial District Court Harris County, Texas
BRIEF OF APPELLANT W. GARRY WALDROP DDS, INC. D/B/A LIFETIME DENTAL CARE

ZIMMERMAN, AXE LRAD, MEYER, STERN & WISE, P.C.
Jennifer S. Wilson State Bar No. 21697500 3040 Post Oak Blvd., Suite 1300 Houston, Texas 77056 713.552.1234 713.963.0859 (FAX) E- mail: jwilson@zimmerlaw.com
A TTORNEYS FOR W. GARRY WALDROP DDS, INC. D/B/A LIFETIME DENTAL CARE ACCEPTED 14-15-00747-CV FOURTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

HOUSTON, TEXAS 12/30/2015 12:07:20 PM CHRISTOPHER PRINE

CLERK

### ii 

# IDENTITY OF PARTIES AND COUNSEL In order that members of this Court may determine disqualification and recusal under Rule 38.1(a) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, Real Parties In Interest certify that the following is a complete list of parties, attorneys and other parties who may have an interest in the outcome of this proceeding:
Defendant /Appellant: W. Garry Waldrop DDS, Inc. d/b/a Lifetime Dental Care c /o Jennifer S. Wilson Zimmerman, Axelrad, Meyer, Stern & Wise, P.C. 3040 Post Oak Blvd., 1300 Houston, Texas 77056 713.552.1234 713.963.0859 (FAX)
Plaintiffs/ Appellees: Gregory Pham, John Ma and Raymond Dao Ned Gill, III Gill, R e vack, Samaan & Muller, LLP 6575 West Loop South, Suite600 Bellaire, Texas 77401 713.271.8282 713.271.2112 (FAX) Presiding Judge: Honorable Mike Engelhart 151 st Judicial District Court of Harris County 201 Caroline, 1 1 th Floor Houston, Texas 77002 713.368.6222

/s/ Jennifer S. Wilson Jennifer S. Wilson

### iii 

# TABLE OF CONTENTS

IDENTITY OF PARTIES AND COUNSEL
................................ ........................ ii INDEX OF AUTHORITIES
................................ ................................ ................... v I. ISSUES PRESENTED
................................ ................................ ....................... 1 Issue No. 1: Lifetime has the right to a restricted appeal.
............................... 1 Issue No. 2: The Trial Court erred i n entering judgment against Lifetime because the record shows that that there was not strict compliance with the Texas Rul es of Civil Procedure governing service of citation.
......................... 1 Issue No. 3: The Trial Court erred in entering judgment against Lifetime because the record shows that the evidence was legally or alternatively factually insufficient to support an award of damages.
................................ .... 2 Issue No. 4: The Trial Court erred in entering judgment against Lifetime because the record shows that the evidence was legally or alternatively factually insufficient to support an award of attorneys’ fees.
.......................... 2 II. STATEMENT OF THE CASE
................................ ................................ ........ 2 III. STATEMENT OF FACTS
................................ ................................ ............... 3 IV. SU MMARY OF THE ARGUMENT
................................ ............................... 4 V. STANDARD OF REVIEW
................................ ................................ ............... 4 VI. ARGUMENT AND AUTHORITIES
................................ .............................. 4 Issue No. 1 Restated: Lifetime has the right to a restricted appeal.
............ 4 Issue No. 2 Restated: The Trial Court erred in entering judgment against Lifetime because the record shows that that there was not strict compliance with the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure governing service of citation.
.......... 6 Issue No. 3 Restated: The Trial Court erred in entering judgment against Lifetime because the record shows that the evidence was legally or alternatively factually insufficient to support an award of damages.
........... 10 Issue No. 4 Restated: The Trial Court erred in entering judgment against Lifetime because the record shows that the evidence was legally or alternatively factually insufficient to support an award of attorneys’ fees.
. 15

### iv 

# VII. CONCLUSION
................................ ................................ ........................ 16 VIII. PRAYER
................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 16 APPENDIX
................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 19

### v 

# INDEX OF AUTHORITIES
CASES Aetna Ins. Co. v. Klein, 325 S.W.2d 376 (Tex. 1959)

................................ ............. 12 Alexander v. Lynda’s Boutique, 134 S.W.3d 845 (Tex. 2004)

.............................. 5 , 6 B&W Sup. v. Beckman, 305 S.W.3d 10 (Tex. App.

– Houston [1 st 

# Dist.] 2009, pet. denied)

................................ ................................ ................................ .. 11 Bannigan v. Market Street Developers, Ltd., 766 S.W.2d 591 (Tex. App.

– Dallas 1989, no writ)

................................ ................................ ............................ 10 Barker CATV Const., Inc. v. Ampro, Inc., 989 S.W.2d 789 (Tex. App.

– Houston [1 st 

# Dist.] 1999, no pet.)

................................ ................................ ............ 9 Benefit Planners, L.L.P. v. RenCare, Ltd., 81 S.W.3d 855 (Tex. App.

– San Antonio 2002, pet. denied)

................................ ................................ ..................... 7 Brown

- McKee, Inc. v. J.F. Bryan & Assocs., 522 S.W.2d 958 (Tex. App.

– Texarkana 1975, no writ)

................................ ................................ ........................ 7 Cain v. Bain, 709 S.W.2d 175 (Tex. 1986)

................................ ............................. 11 Cates v. Pon, 663 S.W.2d 99 (Tex. Civ. App.

– Houston [14 th 

# Dist.] 1983, writ ref’d n.r.e. )

................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 6 Chesney v. Buddrus, 1988 WL 34838, at *1 (Tex. App.

– Houston [1 st 

# Dist.] April 14, 1988, no writ) (not designated for publication)

................................ ....... 9 City of Keller v. Wilson, 168 S.W.3d 802 (Tex. 2005)

................................ ............ 10 Dallas Railway and Terminal Co. v. Bankston, 51 S.W.2d 304 (Tex. 1932)

......... 12 Genender v. USA Store Fixtures, LLC, 451 S.W.3d 916 (Tex. App.

– Houston [14 th 

# Dist. 2014, no pet.)

................................ ................................ ......... 16 General Elec. Co. v. Falcon Ridge Apartments, Joint Venture, 811 S.W.2d 942 (Tex. 1991)

................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 5 Hercules Concrete Pumping Serv. v. Bencon Mgmt. & Gen. Contracting Corp., 62 S.W.3d 308 (Tex. App.

– Houston [1 st 

# Dist.] 2001, pet. denied)

...................... 7 Industrial Models, Inc. v. SNF, Inc., 2014 WL 3696104, at *4 (Tex. App.

– Fort Worth, July 24, 2014, no pet.)

................................ ................................ ......... 9 Intercontinental Group P’ship v. KB Home Lone Star L.P., 295 S.W.3d 650 (Tex. 2009)

................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 15 Jackson v. Gutierrez, 77 S.W.3d 898 (Tex. App.

– Houston [14 th 

# Dist.] 2002, no pet.)

................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 14 Lytle v. Cunningham, 261 S.W.3d 837 (Tex. App.

– Dallas 2008, no pet.)

.............. 8

### vi 

# Marquis Acquisitions, Inc. v. Steadfast Ins., 409 S.W. 3d 808 (Tex. App.

– Dallas 2013, no pet.)

................................ ................................ ............................. 11 Mays v. Pierce, 203 S.W.3d 564 (Tex. App.

– Houston [14 th 

# Dist.] 2006, pet. denied)

................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 14 Nelson v. Najm, 127 S.W.3d 170 (Tex. App.

– Houston [1 st 

# Dist.] 2003, pet. denied)

................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 11 Norman Commc’ns v. Tex. Eastman Co., 955 S.W.2d 269 (Tex. 1997) (per curiam)

................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 6 North Carolina Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Whitworth, 124 S.W.3d 714 (Tex. App.

– Austin 2003, pet. denied)

................................ ................................ ........................ 7 Ortiz v. Avante Ville at Corpus Christi, Inc. , 926 S

. W

. 2d 608 (Tex. App.

– Corpus Christi 1996, writ denied )

................................ ................................ .......... 8 Pace Corp. v. Jackson, 284 S.W.2d 340 (Tex. 1955 )

................................ .............. 13 Polansky v. Berenji, 393 S.W.3d 362 (Tex. App.

– Austin 2012, no pet.)

.............. 15 Primate Constr., Inc. v. Silver, 884 S.W.2d 151 (Tex. 1994)(per curiam)

............... 6 Prudential Ins. Co. of America, Inc. v. Black, 572 S.W.2d 379 (Tex. Civ. App.

— Houston [14th Dist.] 1978, no writ)

................................ ................................ ...... 12 Qadurra v. Indo

- European Foods, Inc. 141 S.W.3d 882 (Tex. App.

– Dallas 2004, pet. denied)

................................ ................................ ...................... 14 Ramsey v. Jones Enterprises., 810 S.W.2d 902 (Tex. App.

– Beaumont 1991, writ denied)

................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 12 Santex Builders, LLC v. Guefen Constr., LLC, 2009 WL 4810286, at *4 (Tex. App.

– Houston [14 th 

# Dist.], December 15, 2009, no pet.)

........................ 10 Scucchi v. Woodruff, 503 S.W.2d 356 (Tex. Civ. App.

– Fort Worth 1973, no writ)

................................ ................................ ................................ .................... 9 Union Pacific R. Corp. v. Legg, 49 S.W.3d 72 (Tex. App.

– Austin 2001,

no pet.)

................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 10 Upham v. Boaz Well Serv., Inc., 357 S.W.2d 411 (Tex. Civ. App.

–

Fort Worth 1962, no writ)

................................ ................................ ....................... 9 Uvalde Country Club v. Martin Linen Supply Co., Inc., 690 S.W.2d 884 (Tex. 1985)

................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 6 , 8 Verlander Enter, Inc. v. Graham, 932 S.W.2d 259 (Tex. App.

– El Paso 1996, no writ)

................................ ................................ ................................ .................... 9 Wachovia Bank v. Gilliam, 215 S.W.3d 848 (Tex. 2007)

................................ ......... 6

### vii 

# Whitaker v. Rose , 218 S.W.3d 216 (Tex. App.

– Houston [14 th 

# Dist.] 2007, no pet.)

................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 14 White v. Bath, 825 S.W.2d 227 (Tex. App.

– Houston [14 th 

# Dist.] 1992, writ denied)

................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 12 Wilson v. Dunn, 800 S.W.2d 833 (Tex. 1990)

................................ ......................... 10

RULES Tex. R. App. P. 26.1(c) and 30

................................ ................................ .................. 5 Tex. R. App. P. 30

................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 5 T EX



# . R. A PP



# . P. 9.4( i )

................................ ................................ ................................ 18 Tex. R. Evid. 1002

................................ ................................ ................................ ... 12

STATUTES Tex. Civ. Pr. & Rem. Code § 38.001 (1) and (8)

................................ ..................... 15 Tex. Civ. Pr. & Rem. Code § 38.001 et seq

................................ ............................. 15 Tex. Civ. Pr. & Rem. Code § 38.002(2)

................................ ................................ .. 16

### viii 

# ABBREVIATIONS AND RECORD REFERENCES

“C.R.” followed by a number refers to the Clerk’s Record filed in this case. “Supp. C.R.” refers to a document which has been requested but not yet signed by the Court, and which may be contained within a Supplemental Clerk’s Record.
“R.R.” followed by a page number refers to that certain page of the Reporter’s Record taken on June 29, 2015

.

### 1 

# In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

_____________________ NO. 14
- 15
- 00747
- CV

_____________________ W. GARRY WALDROP , DDS, INC. D/B/A LIFETIME DENTAL CARE, Appellant
V. GREGORY PHAM, JOHN MA AND RAYMOND DAO, Appellees. From Cause No. 201521720; 151st Judicial District Court Harris County, Texas

BRIEF OF APPELLANT W. GARRY WALDROP DDS, INC. D/B/A LIFETIME DENTAL CARE

TO THE HONORABLE FOURTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS:
COMES NOW W. GARRY WALDROP , DDS, INC. D/B/A LIFETIME DENTAL CARE (“Lifetime” ) , Appellant herein , and files its Brief.
I. ISSUES PRESENTED

Issue No. 1: Lifetime has the right to a restricted appeal.
Issue No. 2: The Trial Court erred in entering judgment against Lifetime because the record shows that that there was not strict compliance with the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure governing service of citation.

### 2 

# Issue No. 3: The Trial Court erred in entering judgment against Lifetime because the record shows that the evidence was legally or alternatively factually insufficient to support an award of damages.
Issue No. 4: The Trial Court erred in entering judgment against Lifetime because the record shows that the evidence was legally or alternatively factually insufficient to support an award of attorneys’ fees.
II. STATEMENT OF THE CASE The underlying action was brought by Gregory Pham, John Ma and Raymond Mao (“Plaintiffs”) , the Appellees herein, against W. Garry Waldrop, DDS, Inc. d/b/a Lifetime Dental Care (“Lifetime”) , the Appellant

. The suit alleged fraud and breach of contract arising from an employment relationship between the Plaintiffs and Lifetime. ( C.R. at 3

- 8 ). No answer was filed by Lifetime and on July 1, 2015, after conducting an evidentiary hearing, t he trial court granted default judgment against Lifetime in the aggregate amount of $1 11,100 .00, plus pre
- judgment and post

- judgment interest
and attorneys’ fees. ( C.R. at 19

- 20)

. Lifetime did not participate in any proceeding before the trial court prior to the entry of the default judgment on July 1, 2015. Further, Lifetime did not file any post

- judgment motions or request for findings of fact and conclusions of law. (See docket omissions (Supp. C.R. at 8

- 10 ).

### 3 

# On September 1 , 2015, Lifetime timely filed its notice of restricted appeal with the district clerk. (C.R. at 23

- 25 )

. III. STATEMENT OF FACTS Upon f iling of the underlying action by Plaintiffs, Citation was issued to Lifetime requesting service on Lifetime at Lifetime’s principal office at 970 South Fry Road, Kay, Texas 77450. (C.R. at 9). The citation was issued on April 15,
2015 and was received by Plaintiffs’ private process server on April 17, 2015. (C.R. at 9). The return of service indicate that service was accomplished by delivery to “W. Garry Waldrop, DDS, d/b/a Lifetime Dental Care, defendant, in person,” on April 20, 2015. (C.R. at 9).
O n May 19 , 2015, Plaintiffs filed their Motion for Default Judgment (C.R. at
10

- 16) and on June 29, 2015, the trial court conducted an evidentiary hearing. Plaintiffs each testified that they had entered into a written agreement with Lifetime, that they we re to receive twenty

- five percent (25%) of production and that they had not been paid. (R.R. at 7, 8, 10, 12). Appellee Pham testified that his damages were $58,343.00

. (R.R. at 8). Appellee Ma testified that his damages

were $19,462.00

. (R.R. at 10). Appellee D a o testified that his damages were $26,759.00

. (R.R. at 12, 13). Plaintiffs’ attorney, Ned Gill, III, testified that the attorneys’ fees incurred by Appellee Pham were $1,600.00 ; the attorneys’ fees incurred by Appellee Ma

### 4 

# were $1,600.00 and the attorneys’ fees incurred by Appellee Dao were $1,600.00

. (R.R. at 14).
IV. SUMMARY OF THE AR GU MENT The judgment entered by the trial court was invalid because the record shows that there was not strict compliance with the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure governing service of citation. In addition, the record further indicates that Appellees’ claim for br each of contract was factually or legally insufficient to support an award of damages in that the trial court incorrectly considered hearsay evidence of written agreements upon which Appellees’ claims are based. The record further shows that Appellees’ da mages were at a min imum based upon speculation and were not properly supported by evidence appropriately segregating the categories of damages. Further, the pleadings and evidence were either legally or factually insufficient to support an award of attorn eys’ fees.
V. STANDARD OF REVIEW This is a restricted appeal and, as such, the review is based upon error appearing on the face of the record. No presumption exists in favor of the actions
in the trial court.
VI. ARGUMENT AND AUTHORITIES

Issue No. 1 Restated: Lifetime has the right to a restricted appeal.

### 5 

# A restricted appeal is a procedural device available to a party who did not participate, either in person or through counsel, in a proceeding that resulted in a judgment against the party. Tex. R. App. P. 30 . It constitutes a direct attack on a default judgment. Id.; Gen eral Elec. Co. v. F alcon Ridge Apartments , Joint Venture, 811 S.W.2d 942, 943 (Tex. 1991 )

. A party filing a restricted appeal must
demonstrate th e following elements: ( 1) appellant appealed within six months of the date the judgment was rendered; (2) the appellant was a party to the suit; (3) the appe lla nt did not participate in the hearing that resulted in the judgment complained of; (4) the appellant did not timely file a post

- judgment motion, request for findings of fact and conclusions of law or a notice of appeal by the time permitted by Rule 26.1(c) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure; and (5) error appears on the face of the record. See, Tex. R. App. P. 26.1(c) and 30 ; Alexander
v. L y nda’s Boutique, 134 S.W.3d 845, 848 (Tex. 2004)

. In this case, Lifetime appealed within six months after the July 1, 2015 default judgm ent was entered by filing its Notice of Restricted Appeal on September 2, 2015. Lifetime was a party to the underlying suit and did not participate in the default judgment hearing that resulted in judgment being entered against it. (R.R. 2, 4 ). Lifetime did not file any post

- judgment motions or request findings of fact or conclusions of law. ( Supp. C.R. at 8

- 10 ). Error appears on the

### 6 

# face of the record as will be more fully briefed and discussed below. There is no dispute that Lifetime mee ts all requirements for a restricted appeal.

Issue No. 2 Restated : The Trial Court erred in entering judgment against Lifetime because the record shows that that there was not strict compliance with the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure governing service of citation. If proper service in compliance with the T exas Rules of Civil Procedure is not affirmatively show n , there is error on the face of the record. Primate Constr., Inc. v. Silver, 884 S.W.2d 151, 153 (Tex. 1994)(per curiam) . For purposes of the restricted appeal, the face of the record consists of all of the p apers on file, including the reporter’s record, at the time that judgment is entered. No extrinsic evidence may be considered. Norman Commc’ns v. Tex. Eastman Co., 955 S.W.2d 269, 270 (Tex. 1997)(per curiam) ; ) ; Alexander v. Lynda’s Boutique, 134 S.W.3d
at 848

- 49. When a default judgment is challenged by restricted appeal, there are no presumptions in favor of valid s ervice. Wachovia Bank v. Gilliam, 215 S.W.3d 848 (Tex. 2007) ; Uvalde Country C lub v. Martin Linen Supply Co., Inc., 690
S.W.2d 884, 885 (Tex. 1985) ; Cates v. Pon, 663 S.W.2d 99, 102 (Tex. Ci v. App.

– Houston [14 th 

# Dist.] 1983 , writ ref’d n.r.e

. ) Service of process was deficient in this case and the error is apparent from the face of the record because the return of
citation reflects del ivery on a person or entity other than W. Garry Waldrop, its registered agent as stated in Plaintiffs’ Original Petition. Instead, the return shows

### 7 

# service on “W. Garry Waldrop, DDS (d/b/a Lifetime Dental Care), defendant, in person,” which leads to confu sion over whether service was attempted on the corporate entity, which is doing business as Lifetime Dental Care, or W. Garry Waldrop, the individual, who is not doing business as Lifetime Dental Care. In either case, the return does not affirmatively sho w that the person served was the
defendant or was an individual authorized to accept service on be half of the corporate defendant. In addition, there is a fatal discrepancy between the corporate
defendant to whom the citation was issued and the name of the purported
“defendant” identified in the return. Th e return, therefore, is invalid. Benefit Planners, L.L.P. v. Ren C are, Ltd., 81 S.W.3d 855, 861 (Tex. App.

– San Antonio 2002, pet. denied) (a return that does not identify the defendant corporation as the entity served is invalid); Hercules Concrete Pumping Serv. v. Bencon Mgmt. & Gen. Contracting Corp., 62 S.W.3d 308, 310

- 11 (Tex. App.

– Houston [1 st 

# Dist. ] 2001, pet. denied) (the return did not give the complete and correct name of the defendant); North Carolina Mut . Life Ins. Co. v. Whitworth, 124 S.W.3d 714, 720 (Tex. App.

– Austin 2003, pet. denied) (return omitted “Life” from defendant’s name); Brown

- McKee, Inc. v. J.F. Bryan & Assocs., 522 S.W.2d 958, 959 (Tex. App.

– Texarkana 1975, no writ) (return did not identify the defendant as a corporation as it was identified in the petition and citation).

### 8 

# Moreover, where the citation states one name to receive service but the record reflects that the citation was served on a person or entity with a different name, the service of process if fatally defective. In this case, citation was issued to W. Garry Wa ldrop DDS Inc. (d/b/a Lifetime Dental Care) and was served on W. Garry Waldrop DDS, with no indication of corporate existence. Uvalde Country Club v. Martin Linen Supply Co., 690 S.W.2d at 885 (delivering citation to “Henry Bunting” ineffective when petition alleges that registered agent is “Henry B unting, Jr.”); Lytle v. Cunningham, 261 S.W.3d 837, 840

- 41 (Tex. App.

– Dallas 2008, no pet.) (holding service invalid when citation identifies “Mr. Chris Lytle” but return indicates delivery on “Christopher Lytle”). While the failure to include the corporate designation “Inc.” has been held not to invalidate service , 1 

# the return in this cannot be fixed merely by inserting the corporate designation after the name of the party served, W. Garry Waldrop DDS, defendant, because there is no further indication that process was served on an individual with the capacity to accept the petition and citation on behalf of the corporation. This omission distinguishes the
instant case from the factual circ umstances in Ortiz v. Avante Ville at Corpus Christi, Inc. , 926 S

. W

. 2d 608 (Tex. App.

– Corpus Christi 1996, writ denied ) , where the citation and return of service specifically stated that service was to be effected upon the corporate defendant by servic e on “Pat Wiggins Operations

1 

## See Ortiz v. Avante Villa at Corpus Christi, Inc., 926 S.W.2d 608, 612 (Tex. App.

– Corpus Christi 1996, writ denied).

### 9 

# Specialist.” No such information is contained in the return of service in this case.
T he C ourt is left with the puzzle of who was actually served, the corporation

– and, if so, what individual with authority to accept service was served

- or the individual

– who is not a party ? Because the record does not affirmatively demonstrate that Plaintiffs’ Original Petition and citation was served on an individual with aut hority to accept them on behalf of the corporate defendant, Plaintiffs’ attempted service is
invalid and of no effect. Barker CATV Const., Inc. v. Ampro, Inc., 989 S.W.2d 789, 791 (Tex. App.

– Houston [1 st 

# Dist.] 1999, no pet.) ; Verlander Enter, Inc. v

. Graham, 932 S.W.2d 259, 261 (Tex. App.

– El Paso 1996, no writ)

. Further, there is no statement in the record that establishes compliance with Rule 108, which requires a sworn statement from the process server that he or she is disinterested in the suit. This omission is fatally defective and mandates reversal of the default judgment. Chesney v. Buddrus, 1988 WL 34838, at *1 (Tex. App.

– Houston [1 st 

# Dist.] April 14, 1988, no writ) (not designated for publication) ; Upham v. Boaz Well Serv., Inc., 357 S.W.2d 411, 412

- 13 (Tex. Civ. App.

– Fort Worth 1962, no writ) ; Scucchi v. Woodruff, 503 S.W.2d 356, 357

- 59 (Tex. Civ. App.

– Fort Worth 1973, no writ) ; Industrial Mod els, Inc. v. SNF, Inc., 2014 WL 3696104, at *4 (Tex. App.

– Fort Worth, July 24, 2014, no pet. )

. Strict compliance is determined by whet h er the exact procedural
requ irements have been met, not whe ther the intended party received notice of the

### 10 

# lawsuit. Union Pac ific R. Corp. v. Legg, 49 S.W.3d 72, 77 (Tex. App.

– Austin 2001, no pet.)

. Even actual notice without proper service is not sufficient to

co n vey jurisdiction on the trial court to render default judgment against Lifetime

. Wilson v. Dunn, 800 S.W.2d 833, 836

- 37 (Tex. 1990) ; Santex Builders, LLC v. Guefen Constr., LLC, 2009 WL 4810286, at *4 (Tex. App.

– Houston [14 th 

# Dist.],
Decembe r 15, 2009, no pet.)

. Because Plaintiffs did not strictly comply with the rules relating to the issuance of citation, the manner and mode of service and the return of process, the default judgment against Lifetime cannot be sustained. Bannigan v. Market Street Developers, Ltd., 766 S.W.2d 591, 592 (Tex. App.

– Dallas 1989, no writ)

.
Issue No. 3 Restated : The Trial Court erred in entering judgment against Lifetime because the record shows that the evidence was legally or alternatively factually insufficient to support an award of damages. In a legal sufficiency challeng e , the appellate court must sustain the challenge if the record s ho ws one of the following (1) a complete absence of a vital fact; (2) rules of law or ev idence bar the court from giving w e ight to the only evidence offered to prove a vital fact; (3) the evidence offered to prove a vital fact is no more than a scintilla; or (4) the evidence conclusively establishes the opposite
of the vital fact. City of Keller v. Wilson, 168 S.W.3d 802, 810 (Tex. 2005)

. In a restricted appeal, the sufficiency of the evidence may be challenged on the face of the record. In reviewing a factual insufficiency of the record, the appellate court

### 11 

# conducts a ne utral review of all of the evidence. Cain v. Bain, 709 S.W.2d 175, 176 (Tex. 1986) . An appellate court reverses for factual insufficiency only if the ruling is so against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence as to be manifestly erroneous or unjust. Nelson v. Najm, 127 S.W.3d 170, 174 (Tex. App.

– Houston [1 st 

# Dist.] 2003, pet. denied)

. In order to recover on an action for breach of contract, the plaintiff must provide competent evidence of the following:

a. There is a valid, enforceable contract.
b. The plaintiff is a proper party to sue for breach of contract.

c. The plaintiff performed, tendered performance of, or was excused from performing its contractual obligations.
d. The defendant breached the contract.

e. The defendant’s breach caused the plaintiff injury. B&W Sup. v. Beckman, 305 S.W.3d 10, 16 (Tex. App.

– H ouston [1 st 

# Dist.] 2009, pet. denied) ; Marquis Acquis itions, Inc. v. Steadfast Ins., 409 S.W. 3d 808, 813

- 14 (Tex. App.

– Dallas 2013, no pet.)

. Each of the plaintiffs in this case testified at the default judgment hearing that he had entered into a written contract with
Lifetim e. (R.R. at 7, 10, 1 2). Yet no copy of any written agreement appears in the record, either attached to Plaintiffs’ Original Petition as an exhibit or introduced

### 12 

# into evidence at the hearing on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Default Judgment. (C.R. at
3

- 8),(R.R. at 1

- 37). Where, as here, the testimony offered concerns the contents of a writing, the best evidence rule comes into play. Tex. R. Evid. 1002 . Plaintiffs each testified to terms of payment cont ained in the written agreement each had with Lifetime , yet no written contract appears in the record

. T he best evidence of the terms of compensation and payment contained in the written agreements is the document itself and the trial court erred in admitting hearsay evidence of the Plaintiffs offered to prove the contents of those agreements. Aetna Ins. Co. v. Klein, 325 S.W.2d 376, 379

- 80 (Tex. 1959) ; White v. Bath, 825 S.W.2d 22 7 , 231 (Tex. App.

– Houston [14 th 

# Dist.] 1992, writ denied) ; Prudential Ins. Co. of America, Inc. v. Black, 572 S.W.2d 379, 380 (Tex. Civ. App.

— Houston [14th Dist.] 1978, no writ) ; Ramsey v. Jones Enter prises ., 810 S.W.2d 902, 905 (Tex. App.

– Beaumont 1991, writ denied)

. Moreover, there is a general rule that incompetent evidence, even when admitted without objection, has no probative force and will not s upport a judgment. Prude ntial Ins. Co. of America, Inc., 572 S.W. 2d at 379, citing with approval Dallas Railway and T erminal Co. v. Bankston, 51 S.W.2d 304, 309 (Tex.
1 932)

.

### 13 

# The absence of competent proof of a critical element of Plaintiffs’ breach of
contract claim

– the existence of a valid, enforceable contract

- appears on the record and merits reversal of the trial court’s judgment.
Lifetime further contends that the evidence was either legally or factually insufficient evidence to support the award of damages to the Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs’ Original Petition clearly states that at the time it was filed Plaintiffs were uncertain whether they had be e n paid all compensation to which they allege they were entitled and further state s that damages will be based, at least in part, on “information known or expected to be known during the course of the case.” (C.R.

at 4, ¶6; 6, ¶12 ). The reporter’s record certainly does not indicate whether the
Plaintiffs , testifying individually as to their alleged damages, were stating an amount that was known as of the date of testimony or whether their testimony on this issue was rank speculation. (R.R. at 7, 8,10, 12, 1 3)

. While Plaintiffs are not foreclosed from a remedy for the lack of the ability to provide mathematical certainty as to the value of their damages, they are required to show that certainty of the fact of damages. Pace Corp

. v. Jackson, 284
S.W.2d 340, 348 (Tex. 1955 ) . T here is no such evidence, even minimal, in the
record. Moreover, there was no testimony offered by the Plaintiffs that they had performed or tendered performance of any services pursuant to their written

### 14 

# contracts. The only evidence on the record that might be construed as some support for this element is the allegation in Plainti ffs’ Original Petition that “Plaintiffs provided the services as agreed.” (C.R. at 5) Such a conclusory statement is hardly proof of performance

. Plaintiffs have pleaded for damages consisting of (1) loss of income and (2) financial loss. (C.R. at 6, ¶13 ). The measure of damages for breach of contract is normally compensation for a party’s expectation interest in the contract, or “benefit of the bargain” damages. Mays v. Pierce, 203 S.W.3d 564, 577 (Tex. App.

– Houston [14 th 

# D ist.] 2006, pet. denied) ; Qadurra v. Indo

- European Foods, Inc. 141 S.W.3d 882, 888

- 89 (Tex. App.

– Dallas 2004, pet. denied)

. However, “loss of income” and “financial loss,” although arguably including benefit of the bargain damages, may also include loss o f production, loss of market value , loss of investment and loss of business reputation

. There is no attempt by the Plaintiffs in their testimony to segregate each damage element and the trial court did not specify the damage elements it was awarding. There is, therefore, no way for this Court to determine if the trial court has awarded damages for which no evidence

wa s offered or damages that are not allowed by law . Therefore, this Court must reverse the damage award and remand for a new trial. See Whitaker v. Rose , 218 S.W.3d 216, 224 (Tex. App.

– Houston [14 th 

# Dist.] 2007 , no pet.) ; Jackson v. Gutierrez, 77 S.W.3d 898, 903

- 4 (Tex. App.

– Houston [14 th 

# Dist.] 2002, no pet

. )

.

### 15 

# Issue No. 4 Restated: The Trial Court erred in entering judgment against Lifetime because the record shows that the evidence was legally or alternatively factually insufficient to support an award of attorneys ’ fees. Texas law does not allow recovery of attorneys’ fees unless author ized by

statute or contract. Polansky v. Berenji, 393 S.W.3d 362, 368 (Tex. App.

– Austin 2012, no pet.)

. I n order to recover attorneys’ fees, a party must plead with specificity the basis for their recovery. Absent express language in a contract or a codified right i n a statue, the trial court has no inherent authority to award attorneys’ fees. Intercontinental Group P ’ship v. KB Home Lone Star L.P., 295 S.W.3d 650 (Tex. 2009)

. Plaintiffs’ Original Petition does not designate a basis for the award of attorneys’ fees, whether they are being sought pursuant to a provision in the a bsent written contracts between Plaintiffs and Lifetime or whether they are being sought pursuant to Tex. Civ. Pr. & Rem. Code § 38.001 et seq . The pl eadings, therefore, do not provide a legal basis for an award of attorneys’ fees. Nor have Plaintiffs established a right to attorneys’ fees pursuant to statute. Although Chapter 38 of the T exas Civil Practice and Remedies Code allows for the recovery of attorneys’ fees for (1) rendered services, or (2) if the claim is for an oral or written contract, there was no proof offered by the Plaintiffs that they had rendered or tendered performance of services. Tex. Civ. Pr. & Rem. Cod e § 38.001 (1) and (8)

. Further, the factual and legal insufficiency of the evidence regarding

### 16 

# Plaintiffs’ claims for damages render their c laims for attorneys’ fees

- which are necessarily dependent upon a sustainable award of damages

- erroneous and merits reversal of the trial court judgment. Chapter 38 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code specifies the bases for recovering atto rneys’ fees in the absence of an express contractual provision or other statutory authority. Presentment of a claim to the opposing party is required. Tex. Civ. Pr. & Rem. Code § 38.002(2) . The record does not reflect that presentment of Plaintiffs’ claims to Lifetime was made. Genender v. USA Store Fixtures, LLC, 451 S.W.3d 916, 924

- 28 (Tex. App.

– Houston [14 th 

# Dist. 2014, no pet.)

. VII. CONCLUSION
For the reasons stated herein, Lifetime respectfully requests that the Court reverse the trial court’s judgment and remand this matter to the trial court for a new trial, and for such other and further relief at law and in equity to which it is
entitled. Further, the Appellant prays that all cost incurred related to this appeal be granted against the Appellees.
VIII. PRAYER WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, W. Garry Waldrop , DDS, Inc.
d/b/a Lifetime Dental Care , requests that this Court reverse the trial court judgment

### 17 

# and remand the case to the trial court , and for such other relief to which Lifetime may be entitled. Respectfully submitted,
Z IMMERMAN 

# , A XELRAD 

# , M EYER 

# , S TERN 

# & W ISE 

# , P.C.

B y : /s/ Jennifer S. Wilson Jennifer S. Wilson S t a te B a r No. 21697500 3040 Post Oak Blvd., Suite 1300 Houston, T e x a s 77056 713.212.2674 (Direct) 713.552.1234 (Main) 713.212.2790 (Direct Facsimile) jwilson@zimmerlaw.com

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this 30 th day of January, 2016, a true and correct copy of Appellant’s Brief was served by eFile Texas Website upon the following
counsel of record : Mr. Ned Gill, III Gill, Revack, Samaan & Muller, LLP 6575 West Loop South, Suite 600 Bellaire, Texas 77401 Attorneys for Appellees /s/ Jennifer S. Wilson Jennifer S. Wilson

### 18 

# CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE The undersigned certifies that Appellant’s Brief complies with the type and volume requirements pursuant to Rule 9 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure:

• This Brief contains 3, 3 60 words, excluding the portion of the Brief exempted under T EX



# . R. A PP



# . P. 9.4( i ) ;

• This Response has been prepared using Microsoft Word 2010 word

processing software. The typeface is a proportionally spaced typeface using Times New Roman 14 point font (except for footnotes which use a 12 point font)

/s/ Jennifer S. Wilson Jennifer S. Wilson

### 19 

# In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

_____________________ NO. 14
- 15
- 00747
- CV

_____________________ W. GARRY WALDROP DDS, INC. D/B/A LIFETIME DENTAL CARE, Appellant
V. GREGORY PHAM, JOHN MA AND RAYMOND DAO, Appellees. From Cause No. 201521720; 151st Judicial District Court Harris County, Texas

APPENDIX

1. Final Judgment C.R. 19

- 20
2. Return of Citation C.R. 9
3. Plaintiffs’ Original Petition C.R. 3

- 8
4. Plaintiffs’ Motion for Default Judgment C.R. 10

- 16
5. Relevant Excerpts from Hearing on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Default Judgment, June 29, 2015 R.R. 1

- 24
6. Trial Court Docket Sheet Supp. C.R. 8

- 10
7. Notice of Appeal C.R. 23

- 25

### 20 

# 8. Tex. R. App. Proc. 30
9. Tex. R. App. Proc. 26.1(c)

### 6/29/20151 1:23 LM AM Chris Daniel

- District 

### Clerk Harris County Envelope No. 5858 153 By: VERONICA GONZALEZ Fifed: 6/29/2015 1 1:23 U4 AM



### Pgs-2 

## NO. 2015-21720 DC 

## GREGORY PHAM, JOHN 

## MA And 

## RAYMOND DAO 

## Plaintiffs, § 

## IN THE DISTRICT 

## COURT 5 

## § § 

## V. § 151 ST 

## JUDICIAL 

## DISTRICT § W, 

## GARRY WALDROP, ODS, 

## INC. d/fo/a 

## LIFETIME DENTAL CARE 

## Defendant § § 

## HARRIS COUNTY, 

## TEXAS 

## §



## At the 

## hearing on 

## this cause, 

## Plaintiffs appeared 

## through their 

## attorney of 

## record. 

# Defendant although duly 

## cited to 

## appear and 

## answer 

## herein, has 

## failed to 

## file an 

# answer within the 

## time allowed by 

## law



## The 

## Court has 

## considered the 

## pleadings and 

## records on 

## file 

## in 

## this cause 

## and the. evidence and 

## is 

## of the opinion 

## that judgment 

## should be 

## rendered for Plaintiffs.



## It is accordingly 

## ADJUDGED that GREGORY PHAM, Plaintiff, 

## recover from 

## W. GARRY WALDROP, DOS, 

## INC., 

# d/b/a LIFETIME DENTAL CARE, 

## Defendant, an independent 

## JUDGMENT for

## 1 $ 

## 58.343 

# ...... as the 

## principal amount 

## due to 

## GREGORY PHAM; 

## 2 

# £ 2,917



# _ as 

# interest on 

## lire principal amount 

## to the date 

## of judgment;



## 1,600 as 

## reasonable and necessary attorney’s 

## fees; 

## 3. 

# i
4, 

## all 

## taxable 

## costs of court; 

## 5. 

## post-judgment interest at the rate 

## of 

## five percent 

## per 

## year 

## on 

## the total 

## judgment from the date 

## of 

## judgment 

# until paid.

It 

## is accordingly 

## ADJUDGED that JOHN 

## MA, 

## Plaintiff, 

## recover from 

## W. GARRY WALDROP, DOS, INC. 

## d/b/a 

## LIFETIME DENTAL CARE, Defendant, 

## an independent 

## JUDGMENT for

## 1. S 19,462 

## as the 

## principal amount due 

## to 

## JOHN MA,
2. $ 1,462 

## as 

## interest on 

## the principal 

## amount to 

## the date of 

## judgment; Page t 

## of 2

## as attorney's 

## fees; 

## 3. A, a![ 

## taxable costs 

## of court;



## post-judgment 

## interest at 

## the rate 

## of five percent 

## per year 

## on 

## the total judgment 

## from the date 

## of 

## judgment until paid,

5

it is 

## accordingly ADJUDGED 

## that RAYMOND DAO, 

## Plaintiff, 

## recover from 

## W. 

## GARRY WALDROP, 

## DDS, 

## INC.. d/b/a 

# LIFETIME DENTAL CARE, 

## Defendant, 

## an independent 

## JUDGMENT for$ 

## 26,755 

# ....... as the 

## principal amount 

## due to 

## RAYMOND DAO; 

## 1.
2. $ 

### 2,157 

## as interest 

## on the 

## principal amount 

## to the date 

## of judgment; 3, 

## $ 

## 1,600 

# ..... as attorney's fees;
4. 

## all taxable 

## costs 

## of court;



## post-judgment interest at 

## the rate of 

## five percent 

## per 

## year 

## on the total judgment 

## from 

# the date of 

## judgment 

## until paid,

it 

## is 

# ORDERED that each 

## of 

## Plaintiffs' Judgments are 

## independent 

## of 

## the other and 

## each shall have 

## an independent right to 

## have all writs 

## of execution and other 

## process necessary 

## to enforce 

## their respective 

## judgments,

5,



## This 

## Final Judgment finally 

## disposes 

## of 

## all parties 

## and all 

## claims and 

## is appealable,



## SIGNED on Signed: 

## 7/1/2015 7 

## JUDGE 

## PRESIDING

Page 

## 2 of 

## 2CAUSE NO. 2 0152:172 0 ul 

# * s C-J 

# i

’v. RECEIPT NO
, 0.00 CIV TR 

### # '73121915 

# ********** S PLAINTIFF: PHAM, GREGORY 

## J vs „ in The 

### Judicial District Court 

### of 

### Harris County, Texas 15 1ST DISTRICT COURT 

### Houston. TX



# _

151st 

# t 3 DEFENDANT: W GARRY WALDROP DDE INC 

### (D/B/A LIFETIME DENTAL CAR 

### E

CITATION 

# jjj THE STATE OF TEXAS 

## B County of 

### Harris



# 2 

# f Time: TO: W GARRY WALDROP DDS INC 

### (D/B/A LIFETIME DENTAL CARE) 570 SOUTH FRY ROAD 

## 9 

## 122 Hflrrla £ KATY TX 77450 0urity, 

### TolElli 

### By. c

<J(>
Attached 

### is a copy of PLAINTIFF 

## * S ORIGINAL PETITION
This 

### instrument was 

### filed on 

### the 15 

### fh day 

### of April, 2 

### 015. in 

### the above cited cause number and court. The 

### instrument attached describes the claim 

### against 

### you.

YOU HAVE BEEN SUED, You may 

### employ an attorney. 

### If you 

### or 

### your attorney do 

### not 

### file a 

### written answer 

### with the 

### District Clerk who issued this citation 

### by 1Q:0D 

### a.m. on the 

### Monday next 

### following tho 

### expiration of 20 

### days after 

### you were served 

### this citation and 

### petition,
a default 

### judgment may be 

### taken against you,
TO OFFICER SERVING: This 

### citation was issued on 15th 

### day 

### of April, 201S, 

### under my 

### hand and seal of 

### said court. 

# /'tf 

# H4»*<r A. %r v 

# / 

# g V 

# . VCrÿlRls fiSNIEL, District Cleric 

### i 5 

## _j\—



# \ County, Texas 

## 600*;ÿ=. Caroline Houston, Texas 77002 

# V4N Box 

### 4651, 

### Houston, Texas 77210) 

# .....

GENERATED BY: CHAMBERS, WANDA RENE 

## ULW/ /l 077 704 N. Issued at request pfi 

### GILL, NED III 6575 WEST LOOP 

### SOUTH, SUITE BELLAIRE, TX 77401 Tel: (713) 271- S 282 Bar No. ; 7921400 

## OFFICER/ AUTHOR 1 2 ED PERSON RETURN


### of 

# A(?nl 4 

# oo , 

# 36

. .M. Game to hand at 

### o 1 clock 

# , on the 

# FrMÿ?iaa.<AJ

_ 

# /r ,H.i on the 

### day of 

# /vDf 

# C r 

### by delivering 

# toVi
true 

### copy of 

### this citation 

## together with the 

### a c 

### company ing 

# J 

# 'V 1 2uVvV 

# £=£ [) 

# h 

# VkJifVr G ir

### attached thereto andi endorsed 

### on said 

### copy of the Citation the date of 

### delivery. To 

### certify which l 

### affix my 

### hand officially 

### this 

# f day of 

# fi\pn f Executed

. 

### a t (address) 

### in 

# npA I v.tt Am S o 

## * clock County 

### at efendant, 

### in per BOIL, 

### a 

### copy 

## (iesÿ'of the



# . avc

- |T' 

# Evpneg

_ of 

# j-ÿVfis Fee : $
County, Texas 

# OliUtC By 

# linn i<SlMn'n£yÿ

_ Seput-y 

# rW2 Affiant 

# UTt On this 

### day, 

## , known to me to be 

### the person 

### whose signature 

### appears on the 

### foregoing return, personally appeared 

# . After 

### being by 

### me duly 

### sworn, 

## he/ she stated that 

### this citation was executed 

### by 

## him/her in the 

### exact 

### manner 

### recited on the 

### return. 

# Apr 

# ’ L SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED BEFORE ME, on 

### this 

# 3.1
, 

# 3pl5



# . dny of

Notary 

### Public 

# itOife KHANGif 

## ETTSO MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 1 

### Pabfuaiy 4 1 , BD16 RECORDER'S 

### MEMORANDUM This 

### HBtomedl brfpw ante lime d'mafling W.IVT.CIH.f4;i5r2D15 12:02:29 PM Chris Oaÿet

- District Clerk Harris County Emafope No. 469711 1 By: Sherry 1 Dowaft Filed: 4/1 5/201 & 12:D2;29 PM 

# 201 5-21 720 

# /Court: 151

NOIN THE DISTRICT 

## COURT GREGORY 

## PHAM, JOHN 

## MA and RAYMOND DAO 

# * § 

## §



# . JUDICIAL DESTRICT V, 

## § 

# 5 HARRIS COUNTY, 

## TEXAS W, 

## GARRY WALDROP, DOS, 

## INC. § 

## d/b/a 

## LIFETIME DENTAL CARE 

### §



## PLAINTIFFS* ORIGINAL 

## PETITION

70 

## THE HONORABLE 

## JUDGE OF 

## SAfD COURT:



## Comes 

## now Plaintiffs, 

## GREGORY PHAM, 

## JOHN MA and RAYMOND 

# DAOs by 

## and through 

## their attorney 

## of record, 

## Ned QiAi, 

## III; and files 

## this their Original 

## Petition complaining 

## of the uniawfut acts 

## of W, 

## GARRY WALDROP, DOS, INC; 

## d/b/a 

## LIFETIME DENTAL CARE and, 

## tor 

## cause of 

## action, 

## would respectfully 

## show the Court: Discovery 

## Control 

## Plan


# - Level 

## 2 

# 1 Il ls GREGORY PHAM, 

## JOHN 

## MA and 

# RAYMOND DAO!s intent that discovery


## in 

## this 

## case be conducted under T£X, R, 

## CiV. P. 190-3, discovery 

## control plan


# - ievei 

## 2. 

## Parties and 

## Service
2. 

## GREGORY 

## PHAM is 

## an 

# individual who resides in Houston, 

## Hams County, Texas, 

## JOHN 

## MA is 

## an 

## individual who resides 

## in Houston, 

## Hama County, Texas, 

## RAYMOND 

# DAO is an 

## individual who resides in 

## Houston, 

## Harris County, Texas



## 3- Defendant, W, 

## GARRY WALDROP, 

## DD$, INC. ri/hfe 

## LIFETIME DENTAL 

# CARE fe a 

## tor profit 

## Texas Corporation, 

### doing 

## business 

## in the City 

## of Katy, Hams 

## County, Texas and may be 

## served with proceÿ 

### by 

## serving 

# its registered agent 

## as 

## listed

Page 

## 1 

## offi

## with the 

## State of 

## Texas: 

## W> GARRY WALDROP at 

## 902 Frostwood, 

## No. 186, Houston, 

## Texas 77024 

## or anywhere 

## the registered 

## agent 

## or a corporate 

## officer 

## may be located. Jurisdiction end Venue 4, 

## This Court 

## has jurisdiction 

## over the Defendant 

## because W. 

## GARRY WALDROP, DDS, 

## ING. d/h/a 

## LIFETIME DENTAL CARE 

## is a 

## Texas Corporation 

## doing 

## business 

## in the City 

## of Katy, 

## County of 

## Harris and State of Texas, 

## The Court 

## has 

## jurisdiction 

## over the controversy 

## because the subject matter 

## in controversy 

## is 

## within the jurisdictional limits 

## of 

## this court

5, 

## Venue is 

## proper in Harris County, 

## Texas, 

## because the events 

## underlying 

## this lawsuit occurred 

## in Harris County, 

## Texas* Factual 

## Background
6. 

## The Plaintiffs were 

## employed as 

## contract 

## dentists for 

# W. GARRY WALDROP, 

## DDS, Inc, 

# d/b/a 

# LIFETIME DENTAL CARE {hereinafter "WALOROF}. 

## The parties 

## entered into agreements; 

## wherein WALDROP agreed 

## with each 

## Plaintiff 

## that each Plaintiff wouid receive 

## compensation for 

## services provided 

## under 

# the agreement, 

## equaling 

## 25 

## percent or 

## more >of 

## those 

## revenues collected for 

### the 

## services of 

## the Plaintfff

## dentist 

## It is Plaintiffs' Information 

## and belief 

## that 

## Plaintiffs were 

## not paid in fuH 

## the
amounts 

## agreed upon 

## by the 

### parties, 

# if is 

## further Plaintiffs1 information 

## and 

## belief that 

## Defendant engaged iri 

## allowing 

## discounts or fabricating 

## discounts to 

## patients 

## fh an 

## effort


## to 

## conceal collections, thereby 

## reducing 

## the 

## amount 

## WALDROP wouid he obligated


## under the 

### agreements 

## to pay 

# Piaintiff-dentists. Claim for 

## FRAUD against W, 

## GARRY 

## WALDROP, DDS, 

## iNC. d/b/a 

## LIFETIME DENTAL CARE.


## 7. W, 

## GARRY WALDROP, 

## DDS, 

## INC. 

## d/b/a 

## LIFETIME DENTAL CARE Page 2 

## of £

## concealed 

## or 

# failed to disclose certain feds 

### to the 

## Plaintiffs; W. GARRY WALDROP, 

## PPG; INC, 

# mm LIFETIME: DENTAL 

## CARE 

## had 

## a d 

## dy to 

## disclose certain facts to 

## Pfelhflffs, these 

# fads were 

# material and W, 

## GARRY WALDROP, 

## DDS, 

## INC: d/b/a


## LIFETIME DENTAL 

## QARE knew 

## or was 

## ignorant or did not 

## have 

## an 

## opportunity to 

## discover the facts, or 

### W. 

## GARRY WALDROP, 

## DOS, INC. 

## dtota 

## LIFETIME DENTAL CARE was 

## deliberately silent when 

## It had 

## a duty to 

## speak. 

## Plaintiffs were Injured 

## from Defendant's 

## conduct. Claim for BREACH OF CONTRACT against



## W. GARRY WALDROP, 

## DDS, 

## INC. 

# mm LIFETIME 

# DENTAL CARE.


## 8. 

## GREGORY PHAM, 

## JOHN MA 

## and 

# RAYMOND DAO 

# where ell contract employees 

## for W. 

## GARRY WALDROP, Dpfc 

## INC. 

# dfc/a 

# LIFETIME DENTAL CARE. 

# WALDROP agreed to 

## pay 

## compensation 

## for services provided to 

## WALDROP by 

# GREGORY PHAM, 

## JOHN MA 

## and 

# RAYMOND DAO. Piainiiffs 

## provided 

## the 

## services 

## as agreed, bpt 

# WALDROP 

# failed So 

## pay td 

## RainSffs 

## the full 

## amount of 

### compensation 

## as 

## agreed. 

## As a result 

# of said 

# breach of 

# eontraoh Plaintiffs have incurred 

## damages 

## and/or 

# financlanoss: Conditions 

## Precedent

£L 

## All 

## conditions precedent 

## required of 

## claimants under the 

## taw have been performed 

## and/or 

## have occurred. Attorney 

## Fees

1C. GREGORY 

## PHAM, 

## JOHN 

## MA and RAYMOND 

## DAO re-aliege 

## and incorporate 

## herein, by referenceÿ 

## the 

## same as if My copied 

## and set 

# forth at 

## length, the factual allegations set out 

## in the 

## Petition.

Page $ 

## of S

## tl. 

## GREGORY PHAM, JOHN 

## MA and 

## RAYMOND DAO are entitled to attorney
fees 

## incurred 

## in the prosecution of 

## this 

## suit, and 

## m the 

## event of 

## a successful 

## appeal of 

## the 

## judgment, 

# GREGORY PHAM, JOHN 

## MA and 

## RAYMOND 

# DAO are entitled to attorney 

## fees for 

## the appeal, 

## Damages



## 12. 

## By reason erf 

## the above 

# and foregoing, 

## GREGORY 

# PHAM. JOHN 

## MA and 

## RAYMOND DAO have been damaged 

## in the 

## sum: of 

## up 

## to hut 

## no 

# more than the 

## maximum Jurisdictional 

## limits of 

## this Court. This 

## amount 

## Is based on the 

## current status 

## of 

## the 

## case and 

## the 

## information known 

## or expected to 

## be 

## known during the 

## course of 

## the

case, 

## GREGORY PHAM, 

## JOHN 

## MA and RAYMOND DAO 

## reserve the 

## right; to 

## adjust 

## this amount 

## as the damages ate 

### developed

## it. As a 

## direct or proximate 

## result: of 

## the 

## occurrence made the basis 

## of 

## diis lawsuit, 

## GREGORY PHAM, 

## JOHN 

## MA- and 

## RAYMOND DAO 

## were caused to 

## suffer damage, loss 

## and injury, 

## in addition 

# GREGORY PHAM, 

# JOHN MA and 

# RAYMOND DAO. 

## have suffered;-

(a) 

## Loss of 

## income; fb) 

## Finandajioss; interest 

## 14, 

# GREGORY PHAM, 

## JOHN 

## MA and RAYMOND DAO 

# 'Would request 

## prejudgmeht 

## and post-judgment 

## interest 

## at the 

# maximum legal 

## rate compounded daily


## oh 

## both the principal 

## and all penalties 

## from defendants. 

# Amendments

Page 4 of 

## 6

# m GREGORY PHAM, 

## JOHN 

## MA and 

## RAYMOND DAO 

## spedfioaily reserve the 

## right 

## to amend and plead 

## such other 

## and different points 

## as further discovery 

## is made: 

## in 

## this 

## cause of action* 

## dory 

## Trial Demand

16, 

## GREGORY 

# PHAM. JOHN MA and 

## RAYMOND DAO hereby 

## make their demand for 

## trial by jury. Prayer 

## for 

## Relief

17. WHEREFORE, 

## PREMISES CONSIDERED, 

# GREGORY PHAM, 

# JOHN MA and RAYMOND DAO 

## prey 

## that 

# Defendant W. GARRY WALDROP, 

## DDS, 

## fNC. d/bm 

## LiFETiMEi DENTAL CARE 

## be duty 

## cited to 

## appear and 

## answer herein; 

## and that, 

## upon 

## a 

## ftml 

## trial of 

## this cause, 

## that GREGORY PHAM, 

## JOHN 

# MA and RAYMOND DAO

recover;



## a. judgment against 

## Defendant for 

# the damages 

## as set forth above, in ah smpurti 

## within the jurisdictional 

## limits of 

## this Gourt octhe 

## maximum 

## amount stated hereih;



# h interest pn 

## the judgment 

## at the legal 

## rate 

## Norn 

# date of judgment 

# until paid 

# in full;


# a prejudigment 

## interest from the date of 

## the 

# incident to 

## the data of Judgment 

## on the; damagesas ajowed 

## bylaw;



# 4 exemplary damages;


## e. costs 

## of court; 

# f. 

# reasonable and necessary attorney 

## fees; 

## and

Page'S pfe

## g. such other and 

## further relief, 

## both 

## general and 

## s pedal, at 

## law or in 

## equity, to 

## which GREGORY 

## PHAM, JOHN 

## MA and RAYMOND DAO 

## may 

## show himself 

## to be justly 

## entitled. Respectfully 

## submitted, GILL REVACK SAMAAN & 

## MULLER, LLP 

## 6575 

## West Loop South, 

## Suite 600 

## Bellaire, 

## Texas 77401 

## Tel: (713) 

## 271-8282 

## Fax: (713) 

## 271-2112



# £ By:. NED GILL, 

### M 

## State Bar No. 

## 07921400 Attorney 

## for Plaintiffs GREGORY 

### PHAM, 

## JOHN 

## MA and RAYMOND 

## DAO

Page 

## 6 of 

## 65ÿ1 a'2015 2:15-42 PM Chris Daniel

- Dlslriol Clerk Harris Coenly EnvalopE JJo. 5341703 By: JIMMY RODRIGUEZ Fifed; 5/1 a'2G15 2:15:42 PM 

## NO. 

## 2015-31720 

# IN THE DISTRICT COURT GREGORY PHAM, 

## JOHN 

## MA 

# And RAYMOND DAO 

## Plaintiffs, § 

## § 

## § § 

# 151ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT V, 

## § W, 

# GARRY WALDROP, 

## DDS, INC. 

## d/b/a 

## LIFETIME DENTAL CARE Defendant. § § 

# HARRIS COUNTY, 

## TEXAS §



## MOTION FOR 

## DEFAULT JUDGMENT

NOW 

# COMES GREGORY PHAM, 

## JOHN MA 

## and RAYMOND DAO, 

## hereinafter 

## Plaintiffs, and 

## file 

## this Motion for Default Judgment, 

## and in support hereof, 

## shows the 

## court the 

## following:



## 1
„ 

## Plaintiffs filed suit agamst 

## Defendant, W, 

## GARRY WALDROP, 

## DDS, 

## INC. D/B/A 

# LIFETIME 

# DENTAL CARE on April 15, 

## 2015, seeking damages 

## for fraud 

## and breach of contract,



## 2. Defendant, 

## W. GARRY WALDROP, 

## DDS, 

## INC. D/B/A 

# LIFETIME DENTAL CARE, 

## was served with 

# citation on April 

## 1 7, 2015. 

## Defendant, W. 

# GARRY WALDROP, 

## DDS, 

## INC. D/8/A 

## LIFETIME DENTAL CARE, 

## has failed to 

## appear 

## or file 

## an answer within 

## the time 

## allowed by 

## law and has wholly 

## made default. 

## The citation with 

## proof 

## of 

## service of 

# Defendant has been 

## on 

## file 

## with the clerk 

# of the 

## court ten days, 

## exclusive of 

## the day 

## of filing 

# and the 

## day of judgment.

3, 

## The 

## following documents 

## are attached 

## to this 

## Motion:

1 , 

## Certificate of 

## Last Known 

## Maiimg Address 

## 2. 

# Non military 

## Affidavit WHEREFORE, 

## premises 

## considered, 

## Plaintiffs pray 

## that the Court enter 

## judgment against 

## Defendant, W. 

# GARRY WALDROP, 

## DDS, 

## INC. D/B/A 

## LIFETIME DENTAL CARE; 

## that Plaintiffs 

## recover costs 

## expended in 

## filing 

## this suit; 

## that 

## Plaintiffs 

## recover prejudgment 

## and postjudgment interest; 

## and that Plaintiffs 

## have 

## such other and 

## further relief at 

## law or 

## in equity 

## to 

## which Plaintiffs may 

## be justly 

## entitled.
Respectfully 

## submitted, 

## GILL REVACK SAMAAN 

## & 

## MULLER, 

## LLP Page 1 of 

## 2

## 6575 

## West Loop South, 

## Suite 

## 600 Beiiaire, 

## Texas 77401 

## Tel (713)271-8282 

## Fax. (713) 

# 271-21ÿ

/ 

## By: 

# J NED GILL, til 

## Texas Bar No, 

## 07921400 

## Email: n 

## ed g 

## i i j 

## 3 

## j® q 

### rsleg 

## aL co 

## m Attorney 

## for Plaintiffs

Pago 

## t of 25/19/2015 2:15-42 PM Chris Daniel

- DIslricL Clerii Hamis County Envelope Na. 5341703 By: JtMMY RODRIGUEZ Filed; 5/19/2015 2:15:42 PM 

## NO. 

## 2015-21720 

## GREGORY PHAM, JOHN 

## MA 

## And RAYMOND DAO Plaintiffs, § IN THE 

## DISTRICT COURT § § § V, 

## 151ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT § W, 

## GARRY WALDROP, 

## DPS, 

## INC. d/b/a 

## LIFETIME DENTAL CARE Defendant 

## § § § 

## HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS



## NONMILITARY 

## AFFIDAVIT

BEFORE 

# MEr the undersigned authority, 

## on this day personally 

## appeared 

## NED GILL, 

## III, who 

## swore on oath that the 

## following 

## facts are true;



## "My name is 

## NED GILL, 

## III. I 

## am over 18 years 

## of age, 

## of sound 

## mind, and fully competent to 

## make this affidavit, 

## i 

## have personal 

## knowledge of 

## the facts 

## stated herein and they 

## are 

## a I! 

## true and correct.



## NTo the best of my belief 

## and knowledge, 

## W. GARRY WALDROP, 

## DDS, 

## INC., 

## d/b/a 

## LIFETIME DENTAL CARE 

## is 

## not currently 

## in military 

## service and has not 

## been 

## in military service 

## since this suit 

## was filed.”

SIGNED on 

## 1 

# /

/ 

# / Respectfully submitted,
GILL REVACK SAMAAN & 

## MULLER, LLP 6575 

## West 

## Loop South, 

## Suite 

## 600 Betlaire, 

## Texas 7/401 

## Tel. (713} 

## 271-8282 

# Fax. (713) 271,2.} 12

:ÿÿÿ 

## By: 

## NED GILL, 

## III Texas Bar No. 0792 1400 

## Email: 

## nedgili3@orsiegai.com Attorney 

## for Plaintiffs

Page 1 

## of 2

# SWORN TO 

# BEFORE ME on 

# OV/ÿ,14 d&i*!

.

* 

# V.)



# =ÿbjjik2£e ’>TYyi 

# ,uC) Notary 

## Public, State of 

# te REBECCA SMITH 

# jÿdLÿ'Q 1UY 

### COMMISSION EXPIRES



## JANUARY 20, 

### 2019 

## xn >



## Page 2 

## of 2

# 11 

# 1 1 S 

## 5 

# f 

# * till Sts# 

# \! 

# I|

— .io 

### z 

## * 

# ill If 

# 811 t 

# is 

# p||f|

O 

## J I I 5 

### |

- Q K v 

## * 

# !»!*§!

i £ 

# f £ | 

# {gill 

# 15 

# ** > i? 

# r O d-. Or t/1 Cfl <! CL. 

### *** ® ® 

## z: z j 

## s. a 

## 3 3 

# 1

1 

# S G> 

## IF 

# > 

# s 

# £ 

# 1=1 ? 

# *;E § i 

# a ! : ; 

# i 

# K Eli

: 

# s is £ ! 

### 3 

# % m : 

### fi 

# I J



# I i ;:V; .•,••:• 

### ... 

### !s> 3_ 

# it 

# I* 

# I ;;



### 5 i 

# 1 o 

### i 

### ¥ 

## 1 

## a CM it? 

# H h 

# « a> 

## 3* 

## : 

# i £ 

# | $ m 

# J I j f-' ; (.i 

# I. T? m ft 

### & ; 

### O 

### % ! ; 

### rr 

## £ & 

# 1 

# ill if 

# i £ iL: 2) 

# % < 

## s i ~ 

## £ m ! 

### i i 

# gÿfjf 

# J s v 

# 1 

# 1 } 

# 1 1 1 

# f s 

# :: 

# ilill 1 g n 

# f 5 

## | $ 

## S 3 

# f | | 

## ? 

# i s 

# i 

# 1 S T, 

### : : 

# I •i 

### o : s 

# I

<ÿ> 

### 5 : |



# ® 

# !! S' Co 0

i 

# £ 1
— . 

## i 

# r t 

# !l a Cl 

### : O



# i 3 :| 

## jf 

# £ 

# J £ 

# | S 

# II



# I 

# S i Gj tFl 5 S 

### ST > 

# 11 I: 

# I! I 3 

## e. s 

### 3 3 

## "fi 5 

### :g 

## s 

# i 

# ii i- . 

# 81 i 

# sr >* 

# # : ; ; 

# 8 D ! 

# il 3 ! 

# 1 

# 1 i 

# » !I *«&«ÿ? 

# ll 5 

# 6 g. o i 

## i 

# | 1 i 

# I :"J 5. -ÿI ' 

### p 

# u i I 

# il ! 

## it

i $ 

## I 1 i 

### is l ft 

# ii £ 

# s :Jr 

### : 

# I



# ! 

# il

J Jo g frZ 

## J‘S':|
m sii 

### y c. 

## E? S 

# If 5 

# I I *i 

# J 

# II ft 

# I I 

# | 

# ! I f if 

# iiiii I 

# 81**1 

# 1 1 

# 1 f 

# f

. 8|UI i 

# iifii 1 1 

# 1 S 

# I g 5 o 

# i 2 m O .-ÿ_ÿ x 

### * 

## " 

# 1 1 § 

# f | 3? 4ff S- i 

### 9 

# I ill i ft 

### i I 

# b 8

is 

# I i 

## § ii5 i 

# I 2-i y. 

# I ! i ! 3 

# Ii i 

# !H i 

# i i : i

: : 

# ii : 

### : .; 

## 1 : : 

### i | ! 

### W ; 

# I

' 

### : 

## U 

# :: f ! 

# if i i is g 

# I- : :



### ? 

## : 5 

# I : ’

' 

# ! 

# *

- B ! ! 

### : i

: : 

### 8 

## 9 ! 

### ? 

### s 

## : : ft > In s 

## s I

-5/19/2015 3:21:59 PM Chris Daniel

- Dislricl Clerk Harris Counly Envelope No. 5344962 By: JIMMY RODRIQUEZ Filed; 5/19/2015 3:21:59 PM 

## NO. 

## 2015-21720
IN THE 

## DISTRICT COURT GREGORY PHAM, 

## JOHN 

## MA And RAYMOND 

## DAO Plaintiffs, § 

## § § 151 ST JUDICIAL 

## DISTRICT § 

## V. § W, 

## GARRY WALDROP, DOS, INC. 

## mid LIFETIME DENTAL CARE Defendant, 

## § 

## § 

## HARRIS COUNTY, 

## TEXAS §



## NOTICE OF 

## HEARING



## PLEASE 

## TAKE NOTICE that 

## a 

## hearing 

## has been set on 

## the Motion for Default 

## Judgment for 

## June 29, 

## 2015 

## at 

## S:00 

## a.m. in 

## the 151st Judicial 

## District Court 

## of Harris 

## County, 

## Texas. 

## Respectfuliysubmitted, GILL, 

## REVACK, 

## SAMAAN & 

## MULLER, 

## LLP 6575 

## West Loop 

## South, Suite 

## 600 

## Bella 

## ire, 

## Texas 77401 

## Tel. (713)271 

## "8282 

## Fax (713)271-21 

## 12

By; NED GILL, 

## Ell 

## Texas Bar No 07921400 Nedglll3@grsle.aai.com 

## Attorney for 

## Plaintiffs

Page 

## 1 

## of 15/19/2015 2:15:42 PM Chris Daniel

- Dislricl Clerk Harris Courtly Envelope No. 5341 703 By: JIMMY RODRIGUEZ Filed: 5/19/2015 2:15:42 PM 

### NO, 

## 201 5-21720
GREGORY 

## PHAM, 

## JOHN MA And 

## RAYMONO DAO Plaintiffs, 

## IN 

## THE DISTRICT COURT § 

## § § 

## V. § 

## 151 ST JUDICIAL 

## DISTRICT § W, 

## GARRY WALDROP. DDS, INC. 

## d/b/a 

## LIFETIME DENTAL CARE Defendant 

## § § § HARRIS 

## COUNTY, 

## TEXAS

PLAINTIFFS’ 

## CERTIFICATE OF LAST KNOWN 

## MAILING ADDRESS



## I 

## CERTIFY that 

## the 

## last known 

## mailing address 

## of 

## Defendant 

## W. GARRY 

## WALDROP, DDS, INC., 

## d/b/a 

## LIFETIME DENTAL CARE, 

## against 

## whom judgment 

## is taken in 

## the 

## above-entitled and -numbered cause, 

## is 970 South Fry Road, 

## Katy, 

## Texas 77450.


## Respectfully 

## submitted, GILL REVACK 

## SAMAAN & 

## MULLER, 

## LLP 6575 

## West Loop South, Suite 

## 600 Bellatre, 

## Texas 77401 Tel, 

## (713) 

## 271-8282 Fax. 

## (713) 

# 271-2122
By: NED 

## GILL, III 

## Texas Bar No. 

## 07921400 

## Email: nedqil]3@qr$fecta[. 

## com 

## Attorney for 

## Plaintiff s

## 1 

## REPORTER'S RECORD
2 

## VOLUME 1 OF 1 VOLUME
3 

## CAUSE NO. 2015-21720
4 

## COURT OF APPEALS CASE NO. 14-15-00747-CV
5 GREGORY PHAM, JOHN MA, ) IN THE DISTRICT COURT 6 and RAYMOND DAO, ) Plaintiffs , ) 7 ) VS. ) HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS 8 ) W GARRY WALDROP, DDS, INC., ) 9 DBA LIFETIME DENTAL CARE, ) Defendant. ) 151ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT 10
11
12
13 

## *********************************
14 

## MOTION FOR DEFAULT
15 

## *********************************
16
17 

## On the 29th day of June , 2015, the
18 

## following proceedings came on to be heard in the
19 

## above-entitled and numbered cause before the Honorable
20 

## Mike Engelhart, Judge Presiding, held in Houston,
21 

## Harris County, Texas.
22 

## Proceedings reported by Certified
23 

## Shorthand Reporter and Machine
24 

## Shorthand/Computer-Aided Transcription.
25

GREGORY PHAM, ET AL VS. W GARRY WALDROP, DDS, INC. 06/29/2015 MOTION FOR DEFAULT 

## Carolyn Ruiz Coronado, CSR, RPR

## 2

1 

## A P P E A R A N C E S
2 

## Mr. Ned Gill, III 3 

## State Bar No. 07921400 nedgill3@grslegal.com 4 

## GILL REVACK SAMAAN & MULLER, LLP 6575 West Loop South, Suite 600 5 

## Bellaire, Texas 77401 Telephone: (713) 271-8282 6 Telecopier: (713) 271-2112 COUNSEL FOR THE PLAINTIFFS 7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

GREGORY PHAM, ET AL VS. W GARRY WALDROP, DDS, INC. 06 / 29 /201 5 MOTION FOR DEFAULT Carolyn Ruiz Coronado, CSR, RPR

## 3

1 

## VOLUME 1 OF 1 VOLUME
2 

## MOTION FOR DEFAULT
3 

## CHRONOLOGICAL INDEX
4 

## JUNE 29, 2015 PAGE
5 Appearances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
6 Chronological Index . . . . . . . . . . . .

. 3
7 Alphabetical Witness Index . . . . . . . . . . 4
8 Proceedings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
9 PLAINTIFFS' WITNESSES DIRECT CROSS
10 Pham , Gregory By M r . Gill 6 11 Ma, John 12 By M r . Gill 9
13 Dao , Raymond By M r. Gill 11 14 Gill, III, Ned 15 By Mr. Gill 13
16 Plaintiffs Rest
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
17 Court's Findings

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
18 Adjourned . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16
19 Court Reporter's Certificate . . . . . . . . 17
20 Word Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
21 (No exhibits)
22
23
24
25

GREGORY PHAM, ET AL VS. W GARRY WALDROP, DDS, INC. 06 / 29 /201 5 MOTION FOR DEFAULT Carolyn Ruiz Coronado, CSR, RPR

## 4

1 

## VOLUME 1 OF 1 VOLUME
2 

## MOTION FOR DEFAULT
3 

## ALPHABETICAL WITNESS INDEX
4 WITNESSES DIRECT CROSS
5 Dao, Ray m ond By Mr. Gill 11 6 Gill, III, Ned 7 By Mr. Gill 13
8 Ma, John By Mr. Gill 9 9 Pham, Gregory 10 By Mr. Gill 6
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

GREGORY PHAM, ET AL VS. W GARRY WALDROP, DDS, INC. 06 / 29 /201 5 MOTION FOR DEFAULT Carolyn Ruiz Coronado, CSR, RPR

## 5

1 

## P R O C E E D I N G S
2 

## 0 6/29/2015 (At the bench, on the record)
3 

## THE COURT: This is 2015-21720, Pham,
4 

## P-H-A-M, versus W Garry, with two R 's, Waldrop,
5 

## W-A-L-D-R-O-P , DDS, Inc. We're here for what I'm
6 

## guess ing is a prove-up of a final de fault judgment.
7 

## MR. GILL: Yes, Judge.
8 

## THE COURT: Final meaning it would
9 

## resolve all the claims and all the parties.
10 

## MR. GILL: All the claims, controversies
11 

## and parties.
12 

## THE COURT: All right. Nice and slow
13 

## and loud because Carolyn is taking down what you say.
14 

## Counsel, would you tell us who you are and who you
15 

## represent
. 16 

## MR. GILL: My name is Ned Gill , III
. I
17 

## represent the Plaintiffs in the case. That's Gregory
18 

## Pham, P-H-A-M ; John Ma, M-A ; and Raymond Dao, D

- A

- O.
19 

## THE COURT: All right. And these are
20 

## the three gentlemen that are here today?
21 

## MR. GILL: That's correct, Judge.
22 

## THE COURT: All right. I assume they're
23 

## gentlemen

. The Court should not assume such things

. 24 

## (Laughing)
25 

## THE COURT: All right. Would you please

GREGORY PHAM, ET AL VS. W GARRY WALDROP, DDS, INC. 06 / 29 /201 5 MOTION FOR DEFAULT Carolyn Ruiz Coronado, CSR, RPR

## 6

1 

## raise your right hand so I can swear you in. They're
2 

## doing so . 3 

## (Oath administered to the witnesses)
4 

## THE COURT: All right. All three have
5 

## answered in the affirmative

. Very good . Mr. Gill.
6 

## MR. GILL: Yes, sir.
7 

## THE COURT: Who do you wish to call
8 

## first?
9 

## MR. GILL: I'm going to call Plaintiff
10 

## number one, Gregory Pham.
11 

## THE COURT: All right. Mr. Pham, listen
12 

## carefully to the questions

. Only answer the question
13 

## that you are asked

. And please answer nice and loud
14 

## and slow so Carolyn can take down what you're saying.
15 

## Okay?
16 

## THE WITNESS: Okay.
17 

## THE COURT: Please proceed.
18 

## MR. GILL: Thank you, Judge.
19 

## GREGOR Y PHAM , 20 

## having been first duly sworn, testified as follows:
21 

## DIRECT EXAMINATION
22 

## BY MR. GILL:
23 

## Q. Mr. Pham, state your name for the record and
24 

## spell your last name . 25 

## A. Gregory Pham , P as in Paul , H

- A -M
.

GREGORY PHAM, ET AL VS. W GARRY WALDROP, DDS, INC. 06 / 29 /201 5 MOTION FOR DEFAULT Carolyn Ruiz Coronado, CSR, RPR

## 7

1 

## Q. And are you the Plaintiff in the case , in
2 

## Cause N umber 2015

- 21720 ?
3 

## A. Yes.
4 

## Q. And are you familiar with the Defendant in
5 

## the case?
6 

## A. Yes.
7 

## Q. And what is your relationship with the
8 

## Defendant?
9 

## A. I was an employer -- employee with the
10 

## Waldrops

. 11 

## Q. And are you a licensed den tist?
12 

## A. Yes.
13 

## Q. Are you in good standing with the State of
14 

## Texas?
15 

## A. Yes.
16 

## Q. And did you have an agreement with the
17 

## Defendant in the case to provide a dental service to
18 

## him?
19 

## A. Hi s patient, yes.
20 

## Q. And do you know the terms of that agreement?
21 

## A. It's 25 percent of production.
22 

## Q. Okay. Was that a written or verbal contract
23 

## with the Defendant?
24 

## A. A written contract.
25 

## Q. Okay. And did he pay you all the amount

GREGORY PHAM, ET AL VS. W GARRY WALDROP, DDS, INC. 06 / 29 /201 5 MOTION FOR DEFAULT Carolyn Ruiz Coronado, CSR, RPR

## 8

1 

## that were due to you under that agreement?
2 

## A. No.
3 

## Q. And do you know the amount that he was
4 

## in sufficient in paying you?
5 

## A. Yes.
6 

## Q. And could you tell the Court what that
7 

## amount was?
8 

## A. It's $58,343.
9 

## Q. Are you asking this Court to grant you a
10 

## judgment in the amount of $58,343 against the
11 

## Defendant in this case?
12 

## A. Yes.
13 

## Q. And to pursue the judgment in this case , did
14 

## you have to hire an attorney?
15 

## A. Yes.
16 

## Q. Did you hi re me to represent you in pursuing
17 

## this judgment?
18 

## A. Yes.
19 

## Q. And did you believe it was necessary for you
20 

## to hire me to pursue this judgment?
21 

## A. Yes.
22 

## MR. GILL: Judge , I'll pass this witness
23 

## and ask that I may call the next witness.
24 

## THE COURT: Okay

. Very good

. Sure

. 25 

## Who do you wish to call next?

GREGORY PHAM, ET AL VS. W GARRY WALDROP, DDS, INC. 06 / 29 /201 5 MOTION FOR DEFAULT Carolyn Ruiz Coronado, CSR, RPR

## 9

1 

## MR. GILL: John Ma.
2 

## THE COURT: All right. Please change
3 

## place s and please remember my instruction to speak
4 

## loud and slow

. 5 

## J OHN MA,
6 

## having been previously duly sworn, testified as
7 

## follows:
8 

## DIRECT EXAMINATION
9 

## BY MR
. GILL :
10 

## Q. Mr. Ma, could you state your full name for
11 

## the court reporter and spell your last name, please.
12 

## A. Y es. John Ma

. Last name is M

- A.
13 

## Q. Are you a Plaintiff in Cause N umber
14 

## 20 1 5- 2 1720?
15 

## A. Yes.
16 

## Q. Do you know the Defendant in this case?
17 

## A. Yes.
18 

## Q. What is your relationship to the Defendant
19 

## in this case?
20 

## A. He i s my employer.
21 

## THE COURT: Slow down

. You're doing
22 

## fine

. I need you to slow down just a little.
23 

## MR. GILL: Sorry, Judge.
24 

## Q. (By Mr. Gill ) What is your relationship to
25 

## the Defendant in this case?

GREGORY PHAM, ET AL VS. W GARRY WALDROP, DDS, INC. 06 / 29 /201 5 MOTION FOR DEFAULT Carolyn Ruiz Coronado, CSR, RPR

## 10

1 

## A. He was my employer.
2 

## Q. And how were you so employed with the
3 

## Defendant in this case?
4 

## A. I was an associate den tist at his practice.
5 

## Q. And did you have an agreement with the
6 

## den tist in this case for you to get paid?
7 

## A. Yes.
8 

## Q. And do you know the terms of that agreement?
9 

## A. Yes
. It was 25 percent of any production
10 

## completed at the office.
11 

## Q. Was that a written agreement?
12 

## A. Yes.
13 

## Q. And do you know the amount of money he
14 

## actually paid you and the amount of money he actually
15 

## should have paid you?
16 

## A. Yes.
17 

## Q. And what is the difference in that amount?
18 

## A. $19,462.
19 

## Q. Are you asking this Court to grant you a
20 

## judgment against the Defendant for $19,462?
21 

## A. Yes.
22 

## Q. To pursue that judgment , did you have to
23 

## hire an attorney in that case?
24 

## A. Yes.
25 

## Q. Did you hire me to help you pursue this

GREGORY PHAM, ET AL VS. W GARRY WALDROP, DDS, INC. 06 / 29 /201 5 MOTION FOR DEFAULT Carolyn Ruiz Coronado, CSR, RPR

## 11

1 

## judgment?
2 

## A. Yes.
3 

## Q. Did you think it was necessary for you to
4 

## hire an attorney to pursue that judgment?
5 

## A. Yes.
6 

## MR. GILL: Judge , at this time I will
7 

## pass this witness and call another witness.
8 

## THE COURT: Very good

. Who do you wish
9 

## to call?
10 

## MR. GILL: Raymond Dao.
11 

## THE COURT: All right. Mr. Dao, same
12 

## instruction , right? Nice and loud.
13 

## RAYMOND DAO , 14 

## having been previously duly sworn, testified as
15 

## follows:
16 

## DIRECT EXAMINATION
17 

## BY MR
. GILL :
18 

## Q. Mr . Dao , c ould you state your full name for
19 

## the court reporter, spelling your last name, please.
20 

## A. Raymond Dao, D

- A

- O.
21 

## Q. Are you a Plaintiff in Cause Number
22 

## 2015

- 21720?
23 

## A. Yes.
24 

## Q. And are you familiar with the Defendant in
25 

## this case?

GREGORY PHAM, ET AL VS. W GARRY WALDROP, DDS, INC. 06 / 29 /201 5 MOTION FOR DEFAULT Carolyn Ruiz Coronado, CSR, RPR

## 12

1 

## A. Yes.
2 

## Q. Did you -- tell the Court what you r
3 

## relationship with the Defendant was?
4 

## A. I was an associate den tist at his practice.
5 

## Q. And did you have an agreement with the
6 

## Defendant on amount of money that he would pa y you as
7 

## an associate den tist?
8 

## A. Yes.
9 

## Q. And was that agreement in writing?
10 

## A. Yes.
11 

## Q. And do you know the terms of that agreement?
12 

## A. Yes.
13 

## Q. And could you state briefly for the Court
14 

## what the terms was?
15 

## A. 25 percent of production.
16 

## Q. Do you know the amount of production that
17 

## you incurred and the amount that he paid you?
18 

## A. Yes.
19 

## Q. And do you know the amount that he should
20 

## have paid you?
21 

## A. Yeah.
22 

## Q. Is there a difference?
23 

## A. Yes.
24 

## Q. And could you tell the Court the difference
25 

## in that amount?

GREGORY PHAM, ET AL VS. W GARRY WALDROP, DDS, INC. 06 / 29 /201 5 MOTION FOR DEFAULT Carolyn Ruiz Coronado, CSR, RPR

## 13

1 

## A. $26,759.
2 

## Q. Are you asking the Court to grant you a
3 

## judgment against Mr. Waldrop , the Defendant in this
4 

## case , in the amount of $26,759?
5 

## A. Yes.
6 

## Q. Did you have to hire an attorney to pursue a
7 

## judgment in th at case?
8 

## A. Yes.
9 

## Q. And did you h ire me to pursue that judgment?
10 

## A. Yes.
11 

## Q. Do you believe hiring me was necessary to
12 

## pursue that judgment?
13 

## A. Yes.
14 

## MR. GILL: I have no other questions , 15 

## Judge

. I would like to call myself for attorney 's
16 

## fees.
17 

## THE COURT: Okay. Switch place s , 18 

## please

. 19 

## DIRECT EXAMINATION
20 

## MR. GILL: My name is Ned Gill , III.
21 

## I'm a licensed attorney in the state of Texas

. I've
22 

## been practicing for over 24 year s . I practice in
23 

## Harris County, Fort Bend County , Liberty County , other
24 

## counties

. I practice primarily civil law s, criminal
25 

## laws, and family law

.

GREGORY PHAM, ET AL VS. W GARRY WALDROP, DDS, INC. 06 / 29 /201 5 MOTION FOR DEFAULT Carolyn Ruiz Coronado, CSR, RPR

## 14

1 

## I have been hired by these three
2 

## Plaintiffs in the case to pursue a judgment against
3 

## the Defendant in this case

. I have been paid
4 

## approximately $8,000 to pursue five judgments in this
5 

## case . But these are three Plaintiffs in the case

. 6 

## And for these three Plaintiffs in the
7 

## case I anticipate that it was necessary for me to
8 

## incur approximately $1,600 for each of these
9 

## particular Plaintiffs in the case

. 10 

## I believe the time I spent on this case
11 

## was necessary to get a judgment in this case and I
12 

## believe an award of attorney 's fees against the
13 

## Defendant in this case and in favor of the Plaintiffs
14 

## of $1,600 each is reasonable and necessary . 15 

## THE COURT: Okay

. Anything further ?
16 

## PLAINTIFFS REST
17 

## MR. GILL: That's all , Judge

. We rest.
18 

## THE COURT: All right

. Very good

. Then
19 

## I will -- I find that the Defendant has -- let me
20 

## double

- check something

. 21 

## C OURT'S FINDINGS
22 

## THE COURT: All right

. I find that the
23 

## Defendant W Garry Waldrop, DDS, Inc., D B A Lifetime
24 

## Dental Care , has failed to appear despite having been
25 

## served with citation and process .

GREGORY PHAM, ET AL VS. W GARRY WALDROP, DDS, INC. 06 / 29 /201 5 MOTION FOR DEFAULT Carolyn Ruiz Coronado, CSR, RPR

## 15

1 

## And I find in favor of the Plaintiffs in
2 

## the amounts stated , including actual damages , 3 

## pre judgment interest , the attorney 's fees request ed by
4 

## Mr. Gill , and all taxable costs of court , as well as
5 

## postjudgment interest at the rate of 5 percent from
6 

## the date after judgment until collected

. 7 

## If you would make the change in this
8 

## proposed judgment , take out the number for cost of
9 

## court on each of the thre e Plaintiffs and just write
10 

## it as Number F our , all taxable costs of court , I would
11 

## appreciate that

. And the rest of the language looks
12 

## okay

. 13 

## On the postjudgment interest language , 14 

## if you could make it clear that it ' s interest at the
15 

## rate of 5 percent per year on the total judgment

. It
16 

## doesn't say postjudgment interest

. Just include the
17 

## word " postjudgment " so that it's clear it starts
18 

## accruing -- 19 

## MR. GILL: Got it , Judge.
20 

## THE COURT: -- after the judgment

. 21 

## And then you have the language in there
22 

## that it's final

. If you would make in the title of
23 

## the judgment if you would put the word " final " up here
24 

## as well

. Anytime you have a final -- I mean, every
25 

## judgment is either final or partial, right ? So it is

GREGORY PHAM, ET AL VS. W GARRY WALDROP, DDS, INC. 06 / 29 /201 5 MOTION FOR DEFAULT Carolyn Ruiz Coronado, CSR, RPR

## 16

1 

## very helpful to the clerks if you make it clear up
2 

## here which it is so they don't have to scour the
3 

## judgment looking for that language.
4 

## So if it's interlocutory, mark it as
5 

## interlocutory

. If it's final , mark it final.
6 

## MR. GILL: I will , Judge

. Do you want
7 

## me to e-file that ?
8 

## THE COURT: And if you would e-file
9 

## that , that would be great
. That way I could
10 

## electronically sign it.
11 

## MR. GILL: Perfect. I will, Judge.
12 

## THE COURT: All right. I'll make a
13 

## note. Is there anything else?
14 

## MR. GILL: That's all , Judge.
15 

## THE COURT: All right. Very good.
16 

## Congratulations, gentlemen. Good luck to you.
17 

## MR. GILL: Thank you , Your Honor
. 18 

## THE COURT: Now the hard part begins.
19 

## (Laughing)
20 

## (Recessed)
21
22
23
24
25

GREGORY PHAM, ET AL VS. W GARRY WALDROP, DDS, INC. 06 / 29 /201 5 MOTION FOR DEFAULT Carolyn Ruiz Coronado, CSR, RPR

## 17

1 THE STATE OF TEXAS )
2 

## COUNTY OF HARRIS )
3 

## I, Carolyn Ruiz Coronado, Official Court Reporter in and for the 151st Civil District Court of Harris 4 

## County, State of Texas, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing contains a true and correct 5 

## transcription of all portions of evidence and other proceedings requested in writing by counsel for the 6 

## parties to be included in this volume of the Reporter's Record, in the above-styled and numbered 7 

## cause, all of which occurred in open court or in chambers and were reported by me. 8 

## I further certify that this Reporter's Record of 9 

## the proceedings truly and correctly reflects the exhibits, if any, admitted, tendered in an offer of 10 

## proof or offered into evidence.
11 

## I further certify that the total cost for the preparation of this Reporter's Record is $ 180.00 and 12 

## will be paid by Zimmerman, Axelrad, Meyer, Stern & Wise, P. C. 13
14 

## WITNESS MY OFFICIAL HAND this the 8 th day of
15 

## September , 2015.
16 /s/Carolyn Ruiz Coronado Carolyn Ruiz Coronado, Texas CSR#7113 17 Expiration Date: 12/31/2016 Official Reporter, 151st Civil District Court 18 Harris County, Texas 201 Caroline, Houston, Tx 77002 19 

## (713) 398-3548
20
21
22
23
24
25

GREGORY PHAM, ET AL VS. W GARRY WALDROP, DDS, INC. 06 / 29 /201 5 MOTION FOR DEFAULT Carolyn Ruiz Coronado, CSR, RPR

## 18

1 

## WORD INDEX
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

GREGORY PHAM, ET AL VS. W GARRY WALDROP, DDS, INC. 06 / 29 /201 5 MOTION FOR DEFAULT Carolyn Ruiz Coronado, CSR, RPR- 0 -

0 7 9 2 1 4 0 0 [ 1 ] 2 : 3

- 1 -

1 , 6 0 0 [ 2 ] 1 4 : 8 , 1 4 1 4 - 1 5 - 0 0 7 4 7 - C V [ 1 ] 1 : 4 1 5 1 S T [ 1 ] 1 : 9 1 5 1 s t [ 2 ] 1 7 : 3 , 1 7 1 8 0

. 0 0 [ 1 ] 1 7 : 1 1 1 9 , 4 6 2 [ 2 ] 1 0 : 1 8 , 2 0

- 2 -

2 0 1 5 [ 4 ] 1 : 1 7 ; 3 : 4 ; 5 : 2 ; 1 7 : 1 5 2 0 1 5 - 2 1 7 2 0 [ 5 ] 1 : 3 ; 5 : 3 ; 7 : 2 ; 9 : 1 4 ; 1 1 : 2 2 2 0 1 6 [ 1 ] 1 7 : 1 7 2 6 , 7 5 9 [ 2 ] 1 3 : 1 , 4 2 7 1 - 2 1 1 2 [ 1 ] 2 : 6 2 7 1 - 8 2 8 2 [ 1 ] 2 : 5 2 9 t h [ 1 ] 1 : 1 7

- 3 -

3 9 8 - 3 5 4 8 [ 1 ] 1 7 : 1 9

- 5 -
5 8 , 3 4 3 [ 2 ] 8 : 8 , 1 0

- 6 - 6 5 7 5 [ 1 ] 2 : 4

- 7 -

7 1 1 3 [ 1 ] 1 7 : 1 6 7 7 0 0 2 [ 1 ] 1 7 : 1 8 7 7 4 0 1 [ 1 ] 2 : 5

- 8 -

8 , 0 0 0 [ 1 ] 1 4 : 4

- A -

a b o v e [ 1 ] 1 7 : 4 a b o v e - e n t i t l e d [ 1 ] 1 : 1 9 a b o v e - s t y l e d [ 1 ] 1 7 : 6 a c c r u i n g [ 1 ] 1 5 : 1 8 a c t u a l [ 1 ] 1 5 : 2 a c t u a l l y [ 2 ] 1 0 : 1 4 A d j o u r n e d [ 1 ] 3 : 1 8 a d m i n i s t e r e d [ 1 ] 6 : 3 a d m i t t e d [ 1 ] 1 7 : 9 a f f i r m a t i v e [ 1 ] 6 : 5 a f t e r [ 2 ] 1 5 : 6 , 2 0 a g a i n s t [ 5 ] 8 : 1 0 ; 1 0 : 2 0 ; 1 3 : 3 ; 1 4 : 2 , 1 2 a g r e e m e n t [ 9 ] 7 : 1 6 , 2 0 ; 8 : 1 ; 1 0 : 5 , 8 , 1 1 ; 1 2 : 5 , 9 , 1 1 A L P H A B E T I C A L [ 1 ] 4 : 3 A l p h a b e t i c a l [ 1 ] 3 : 7 a m o u n t [ 1 3 ] 7 : 2 5 ; 8 : 3 , 7 , 1 0 ; 1 0 : 1 3 , 1 4 , 1 7 ; 1 2 : 6 , 1 6 , 1 7 , 1 9 , 2 5 ; 1 3 : 4 a m o u n t s [ 1 ] 1 5 : 2 a n o t h e r [ 1 ] 1 1 : 7 a n s w e r [ 2 ] 6 : 1 2 , 1 3 a n s w e r e d [ 1 ] 6 : 5 a n t i c i p a t e [ 1 ] 1 4 : 7 A n y t h i n g [ 1 ] 1 4 : 1 5 a n y t h i n g [ 1 ] 1 6 : 1 3 A n y t i m e [ 1 ] 1 5 : 2 4 A P P E A L S [ 1 ] 1 : 4 a p p e a r [ 1 ] 1 4 : 2 4 A p p e a r a n c e s [ 1 ] 3 : 5 a p p r e c i a t e [ 1 ] 1 5 : 1 1 a p p r o x i m a t e l y [ 2 ] 1 4 : 4 , 8 a s k e d [ 1 ] 6 : 1 3 a s k i n g [ 3 ] 8 : 9 ; 1 0 : 1 9 ; 1 3 : 2 a s s o c i a t e [ 3 ] 1 0 : 4 ; 1 2 : 4 , 7 a s s u m e [ 2 ] 5 : 2 2 , 2 3 a t t o r n e y [ 5 ] 8 : 1 4 ; 1 0 : 2 3 ; 1 1 : 4 ; 1 3 : 6 , 2 1 a t t o r n e y ' s [ 3 ] 1 3 : 1 5 ; 1 4 : 1 2 ; 1 5 : 3 a w a r d [ 1 ] 1 4 : 1 2 A x e l r a d [ 1 ] 1 7 : 1 2

- B - b e c a u s e [ 1 ] 5 : 1 3 b e e n [ 7 ] 6 : 2 0 ; 9 : 6 ; 1 1 : 1 4 ; 1 3 : 2 2 ; 1 4 : 1 , 3 , 2 4 b e f o r e [ 1 ] 1 : 1 9 b e g i n s [ 1 ] 1 6 : 1 8 b e l i e v e [ 4 ] 8 : 1 9 ; 1 3 : 1 1 ; 1 4 : 1 0 , 1 2 B e l l a i r e [ 1 ] 2 : 5 b e n c h [ 1 ] 5 : 2 B e n d [ 1 ] 1 3 : 2 3 b r i e f l y [ 1 ] 1 2 : 1 3

- C -

c a l l [ 7 ] 6 : 7 , 9 ; 8 : 2 3 , 2 5 ; 1 1 : 7 , 9 ; 1 3 : 1 5 c a m e [ 1 ] 1 : 1 8 C A R E [ 1 ] 1 : 9 C a r e [ 1 ] 1 4 : 2 4 c a r e f u l l y [ 1 ] 6 : 1 2 C a r o l i n e [ 1 ] 1 7 : 1 8 C a r o l y n [ 5 ] 5 : 1 3 ; 6 : 1 4 ; 1 7 : 3 , 1 6 C A S E [ 1 ] 1 : 4 c a s e [ 2 4 ] 5 : 1 7 ; 7 : 1 , 5 , 1 7 ; 8 : 1 1 , 1 3 ; 9 : 1 6 , 1 9 , 2 5 ; 1 0 : 3 , 6 , 2 3 ; 1 1 : 2 5 ; 1 3 : 4 , 7 ; 1 4 : 2 , 3 , 5 , 7 , 9 , 1 0 , 1 1 , 1 3 C A U S E [ 1 ] 1 : 3 C a u s e [ 3 ] 7 : 2 ; 9 : 1 3 ; 1 1 : 2 1 c a u s e [ 2 ] 1 : 1 9 ; 1 7 : 7 C e r t i f i c a t e [ 1 ] 3 : 1 9C e r t i f i e d [ 1 ] 1 : 2 2 c e r t i f y [ 3 ] 1 7 : 4 , 8 , 1 1 c h a m b e r s [ 1 ] 1 7 : 7 c h a n g e [ 2 ] 9 : 2 ; 1 5 : 7 C H R O N O L O G I C A L [ 1 ] 3 : 3 C h r o n o l o g i c a l [ 1 ] 3 : 6 c i t a t i o n [ 1 ] 1 4 : 2 5 C i v i l [ 2 ] 1 7 : 3 , 1 7 c i v i l [ 1 ] 1 3 : 2 4 c l a i m s [ 2 ] 5 : 9 , 1 0 c l e a r [ 3 ] 1 5 : 1 4 , 1 7 ; 1 6 : 1 c l e r k s [ 1 ] 1 6 : 1 c o l l e c t e d [ 1 ] 1 5 : 6 c o m p l e t e d [ 1 ] 1 0 : 1 0 C o m p u t e r - A i d e d [ 1 ] 1 : 2 4 C o n g r a t u l a t i o n s [ 1 ] 1 6 : 1 6 c o n t a i n s [ 1 ] 1 7 : 4 c o n t r a c t [ 2 ] 7 : 2 2 , 2 4 c o n t r o v e r s i e s [ 1 ] 5 : 1 0 C o r o n a d o [ 3 ] 1 7 : 3 , 1 6 c o r r e c t [ 2 ] 5 : 2 1 ; 1 7 : 4 c o r r e c t l y [ 1 ] 1 7 : 9 c o s t [ 2 ] 1 5 : 8 ; 1 7 : 1 1 c o s t s [ 2 ] 1 5 : 4 , 1 0 c o u l d [ 7 ] 8 : 6 ; 9 : 1 0 ; 1 1 : 1 8 ; 1 2 : 1 3 , 2 4 ; 1 5 : 1 4 ; 1 6 : 9 C O U N S E L [ 1 ] 2 : 6 C o u n s e l [ 1 ] 5 : 1 4 c o u n s e l [ 1 ] 1 7 : 5 c o u n t i e s [ 1 ] 1 3 : 2 4 C O U N T Y [ 2 ] 1 : 7 ; 1 7 : 2 C o u n t y [ 6 ] 1 : 2 1 ; 1 3 : 2 3 ; 1 7 : 4 , 1 8 C O U R T [ 2 6 ] 1 : 4 , 5 ; 5 : 3 , 8 , 1 2 , 1 9 , 2 2 , 2 5 ; 6 : 4 , 7 , 1 1 , 1 7 ; 8 : 2 4 ; 9 : 2 , 2 1 ; 1 1 : 8 , 1 1 ; 1 3 : 1 7 ; 1 4 : 1 5 , 1 8 , 2 2 ; 1 5 : 2 0 ; 1 6 : 8 , 1 2 , 1 5 , 1 8 C o u r t [ 1 2 ] 3 : 1 9 ; 5 : 2 3 ; 8 : 6 , 9 ; 1 0 : 1 9 ; 1 2 : 2 , 1 3 , 2 4 ; 1 3 : 2 ; 1 7 : 3 , 1 7 c o u r t [ 6 ] 9 : 1 1 ; 1 1 : 1 9 ; 1 5 : 4 , 9 , 1 0 ; 1 7 : 7 C O U R T ' S [ 1 ] 1 4 : 2 1 C o u r t ' s [ 1 ] 3 : 1 7 c r i m i n a l [ 1 ] 1 3 : 2 4 C R O S S [ 2 ] 3 : 9 ; 4 : 4

- D -

D - A - O [ 2 ] 5 : 1 8 ; 1 1 : 2 0 d a m a g e s [ 1 ] 1 5 : 2 D a t e [ 1 ] 1 7 : 1 7 d a t e [ 1 ] 1 5 : 6 D E F A U L T [ 3 ] 1 : 1 4 ; 3 : 2 ; 4 : 2 d e f a u l t [ 1 ] 5 : 6 D e f e n d a n t [ 1 9 ] 1 : 9 ; 7 : 4 , 8 , 1 7 , 2 3 ; 8 : 1 1 ; 9 : 1 6 , 1 8 , 2 5 ; 1 0 : 3 , 2 0 ; 1 1 : 2 4 ; 1 2 : 3 , 6 ; 1 3 : 3 ; 1 4 : 3 , 1 3 , 1 9 , 2 3 D E N T A L [ 1 ] 1 : 9 D e n t a l [ 1 ] 1 4 : 2 4 d e n t a l [ 1 ] 7 : 1 7 d e n t i s t [ 5 ] 7 : 1 1 ; 1 0 : 4 , 6 ; 1 2 : 4 , 7 d e s p i t e [ 1 ] 1 4 : 2 4 d i f f e r e n c e [ 3 ] 1 0 : 1 7 ; 1 2 : 2 2 , 2 4 D I R E C T [ 6 ] 3 : 9 ; 4 : 4 ; 6 : 2 1 ; 9 : 8 ; 1 1 : 1 6 ; 1 3 : 1 9 D I S T R I C T [ 2 ] 1 : 5 , 9 D i s t r i c t [ 2 ] 1 7 : 3 , 1 7 d o e s n ' t [ 1 ] 1 5 : 1 6 d o i n g [ 2 ] 6 : 2 ; 9 : 2 1 d o u b l e - c h e c k [ 1 ] 1 4 : 2 0 d o w n [ 4 ] 5 : 1 3 ; 6 : 1 4 ; 9 : 2 1 , 2 2 d u l y [ 3 ] 6 : 2 0 ; 9 : 6 ; 1 1 : 1 4

- E -

e - f i l e [ 2 ] 1 6 : 7 , 8 e a c h [ 3 ] 1 4 : 8 , 1 4 ; 1 5 : 9 e i t h e r [ 1 ] 1 5 : 2 5 e l e c t r o n i c a l l y [ 1 ] 1 6 : 1 0 e l s e [ 1 ] 1 6 : 1 3 e m p l o y e d [ 1 ] 1 0 : 2 e m p l o y e e [ 1 ] 7 : 9 e m p l o y e r [ 3 ] 7 : 9 ; 9 : 2 0 ; 1 0 : 1 E n g e l h a r t [ 1 ] 1 : 2 0 e v e r y [ 1 ] 1 5 : 2 4 e v i d e n c e [ 2 ] 1 7 : 5 , 1 0 E X A M I N A T I O N [ 4 ] 6 : 2 1 ; 9 : 8 ; 1 1 : 1 6 ; 1 3 : 1 9 e x h i b i t s [ 2 ] 3 : 2 1 ; 1 7 : 9 E x p i r a t i o n [ 1 ] 1 7 : 1 7

- F -

f a i l e d [ 1 ] 1 4 : 2 4 f a m i l i a r [ 2 ] 7 : 4 ; 1 1 : 2 4 f a m i l y [ 1 ] 1 3 : 2 5 f a v o r [ 2 ] 1 4 : 1 3 ; 1 5 : 1 f e e s [ 3 ] 1 3 : 1 6 ; 1 4 : 1 2 ; 1 5 : 3 F i n a l [ 1 ] 5 : 8 f i n a l [ 7 ] 5 : 6 ; 1 5 : 2 2 , 2 3 , 2 4 , 2 5 ; 1 6 : 5 f i n d [ 3 ] 1 4 : 1 9 , 2 2 ; 1 5 : 1 F I N D I N G S [ 1 ] 1 4 : 2 1 F i n d i n g s [ 1 ] 3 : 1 7 f i n e [ 1 ] 9 : 2 2 f i r s t [ 2 ] 6 : 8 , 2 0 f i v e [ 1 ] 1 4 : 4 f o l l o w i n g [ 1 ] 1 : 1 8f o l l o w s [ 3 ] 6 : 2 0 ; 9 : 7 ; 1 1 : 1 5 f o r e g o i n g [ 1 ] 1 7 : 4 F o r t [ 1 ] 1 3 : 2 3 F o u r [ 1 ] 1 5 : 1 0 f r o m [ 1 ] 1 5 : 5 f u l l [ 2 ] 9 : 1 0 ; 1 1 : 1 8 f u r t h e r [ 3 ] 1 4 : 1 5 ; 1 7 : 8

- G -

G A R R Y [ 1 ] 1 : 8 G a r r y [ 2 ] 5 : 4 ; 1 4 : 2 3 g e n t l e m e n [ 3 ] 5 : 2 0 , 2 3 ; 1 6 : 1 6 G I L L [ 2 4 ] 2 : 4 ; 5 : 7 , 1 0 , 1 6 , 2 1 ; 6 : 6 , 9 , 1 8 , 2 2 ; 8 : 2 2 ; 9 : 1 , 9 , 2 3 ; 1 1 : 6 , 1 0 , 1 7 ; 1 3 : 1 4 , 2 0 ; 1 4 : 1 7 ; 1 5 : 1 9 ; 1 6 : 6 , 1 1 , 1 4 , 1 7 G i l l [ 1 6 ] 2 : 2 ; 3 : 1 0 , 1 2 , 1 3 , 1 4 , 1 5 ; 4 : 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 1 0 ; 5 : 1 6 ; 6 : 5 ; 9 : 2 4 ; 1 3 : 2 0 ; 1 5 : 4 g o i n g [ 1 ] 6 : 9 G o o d [ 1 ] 1 6 : 1 6 g o o d [ 6 ] 6 : 5 ; 7 : 1 3 ; 8 : 2 4 ; 1 1 : 8 ; 1 4 : 1 8 ; 1 6 : 1 5 g r a n t [ 3 ] 8 : 9 ; 1 0 : 1 9 ; 1 3 : 2 g r e a t [ 1 ] 1 6 : 9 G R E G O R Y [ 2 ] 1 : 5 ; 6 : 1 9 G r e g o r y [ 5 ] 3 : 1 0 ; 4 : 9 ; 5 : 1 7 ; 6 : 1 0 , 2 5 g r s l e g a l

. c o m [ 1 ] 2 : 3 g u e s s i n g [ 1 ] 5 : 6

- H -

H - A - M [ 1 ] 6 : 2 5 H A N D [ 1 ] 1 7 : 1 4 h a n d [ 1 ] 6 : 1 h a r d [ 1 ] 1 6 : 1 8 H A R R I S [ 2 ] 1 : 7 ; 1 7 : 2 H a r r i s [ 4 ] 1 : 2 1 ; 1 3 : 2 3 ; 1 7 : 3 , 1 8 h a v i n g [ 4 ] 6 : 2 0 ; 9 : 6 ; 1 1 : 1 4 ; 1 4 : 2 4 h e a r d [ 1 ] 1 : 1 8 h e l d [ 1 ] 1 : 2 0 h e l p [ 1 ] 1 0 : 2 5 h e l p f u l [ 1 ] 1 6 : 1 h e r e [ 4 ] 5 : 5 , 2 0 ; 1 5 : 2 3 ; 1 6 : 2 h e r e b y [ 1 ] 1 7 : 4 h i r e [ 8 ] 8 : 1 4 , 1 6 , 2 0 ; 1 0 : 2 3 , 2 5 ; 1 1 : 4 ; 1 3 : 6 , 9 h i r e d [ 1 ] 1 4 : 1 h i r i n g [ 1 ] 1 3 : 1 1 H o n o r [ 1 ] 1 6 : 1 7 H o n o r a b l e [ 1 ] 1 : 1 9 H o u s t o n [ 2 ] 1 : 2 0 ; 1 7 : 1 8

- I -

I ' l l [ 2 ] 8 : 2 2 ; 1 6 : 1 2 I ' v e [ 1 ] 1 3 : 2 1 i n c l u d e [ 1 ] 1 5 : 1 6 i n c l u d e d [ 1 ] 1 7 : 6 i n c l u d i n g [ 1 ] 1 5 : 2 i n c u r [ 1 ] 1 4 : 8 i n c u r r e d [ 1 ] 1 2 : 1 7 I N D E X [ 3 ] 3 : 3 ; 4 : 3 ; 1 8 : 1 I n d e x [ 3 ] 3 : 6 , 7 , 2 0 i n s t r u c t i o n [ 2 ] 9 : 3 ; 1 1 : 1 2 i n s u f f i c i e n t [ 1 ] 8 : 4 i n t e r e s t [ 5 ] 1 5 : 3 , 5 , 1 3 , 1 4 , 1 6 i n t e r l o c u t o r y [ 2 ] 1 6 : 4 , 5 i n t o [ 1 ] 1 7 : 1 0 I t ' s [ 2 ] 7 : 2 1 ; 8 : 8 i t ' s [ 5 ] 1 5 : 1 4 , 1 7 , 2 2 ; 1 6 : 4 , 5

- J -
J O H N [ 2 ] 1 : 5 ; 9 : 5 J o h n [ 5 ] 3 : 1 1 ; 4 : 8 ; 5 : 1 8 ; 9 : 1 , 1 2 J u d g e [ 1 3 ] 1 : 2 0 ; 5 : 7 , 2 1 ; 6 : 1 8 ; 8 : 2 2 ; 9 : 2 3 ; 1 1 : 6 ; 1 3 : 1 5 ; 1 4 : 1 7 ; 1 5 : 1 9 ; 1 6 : 6 , 1 1 , 1 4 j u d g m e n t [ 2 2 ] 5 : 6 ; 8 : 1 0 , 1 3 , 1 7 , 2 0 ; 1 0 : 2 0 , 2 2 ; 1 1 : 1 , 4 ; 1 3 : 3 , 7 , 9 , 1 2 ; 1 4 : 2 , 1 1 ; 1 5 : 6 , 8 , 1 5 , 2 0 , 2 3 , 2 5 ; 1 6 : 3 j u d g m e n t s [ 1 ] 1 4 : 4 J U D I C I A L [ 1 ] 1 : 9 J U N E [ 1 ] 3 : 4 J u n e [ 1 ] 1 : 1 7

- K -

k n o w [ 8 ] 7 : 2 0 ; 8 : 3 ; 9 : 1 6 ; 1 0 : 8 , 1 3 ; 1 2 : 1 1 , 1 6 , 1 9

- L -

l a n g u a g e [ 4 ] 1 5 : 1 1 , 1 3 , 2 1 ; 1 6 : 3 L a s t [ 1 ] 9 : 1 2 l a s t [ 3 ] 6 : 2 4 ; 9 : 1 1 ; 1 1 : 1 9 L a u g h i n g [ 2 ] 5 : 2 4 ; 1 6 : 1 9 l a w s [ 2 ] 1 3 : 2 4 , 2 5 L i b e r t y [ 1 ] 1 3 : 2 3 l i c e n s e d [ 2 ] 7 : 1 1 ; 1 3 : 2 1 L I F E T I M E [ 1 ] 1 : 9 L i f e t i m e [ 1 ] 1 4 : 2 3 l i k e [ 1 ] 1 3 : 1 5 l i s t e n [ 1 ] 6 : 1 1 l i t t l e [ 1 ] 9 : 2 2 l o o k i n g [ 1 ] 1 6 : 3 l o o k s [ 1 ] 1 5 : 1 1 L o o p [ 1 ] 2 : 4 l o u d [ 4 ] 5 : 1 3 ; 6 : 1 3 ; 9 : 4 ; 1 1 : 1 2 l u c k [ 1 ] 1 6 : 1 6

- M -

M a c h i n e [ 1 ] 1 : 2 3m a k e [ 5 ] 1 5 : 7 , 1 4 , 2 2 ; 1 6 : 1 , 1 2 m a r k [ 2 ] 1 6 : 4 , 5 m e a n [ 1 ] 1 5 : 2 4 m e a n i n g [ 1 ] 5 : 8 M e y e r [ 1 ] 1 7 : 1 2 M i k e [ 1 ] 1 : 2 0 m o n e y [ 3 ] 1 0 : 1 3 , 1 4 ; 1 2 : 6 M O T I O N [ 3 ] 1 : 1 4 ; 3 : 2 ; 4 : 2 M U L L E R [ 1 ] 2 : 4 m y s e l f [ 1 ] 1 3 : 1 5

- N -

n a m e [ 9 ] 5 : 1 6 ; 6 : 2 3 , 2 4 ; 9 : 1 0 , 1 1 , 1 2 ; 1 1 : 1 8 , 1 9 ; 1 3 : 2 0 n e c e s s a r y [ 6 ] 8 : 1 9 ; 1 1 : 3 ; 1 3 : 1 1 ; 1 4 : 7 , 1 1 , 1 4 n e d g i l l 3 [ 1 ] 2 : 3 n e e d [ 1 ] 9 : 2 2 n e x t [ 2 ] 8 : 2 3 , 2 5 N i c e [ 2 ] 5 : 1 2 ; 1 1 : 1 2 n i c e [ 1 ] 6 : 1 3 n o t e [ 1 ] 1 6 : 1 3 N u m b e r [ 4 ] 7 : 2 ; 9 : 1 3 ; 1 1 : 2 1 ; 1 5 : 1 0 n u m b e r [ 2 ] 6 : 1 0 ; 1 5 : 8 n u m b e r e d [ 2 ] 1 : 1 9 ; 1 7 : 6

- O - O a t h [ 1 ] 6 : 3 o c c u r r e d [ 1 ] 1 7 : 7 o f f e r [ 1 ] 1 7 : 9 o f f e r e d [ 1 ] 1 7 : 1 0 o f f i c e [ 1 ] 1 0 : 1 0 O F F I C I A L [ 1 ] 1 7 : 1 4 O f f i c i a l [ 2 ] 1 7 : 3 , 1 7 O k a y [ 7 ] 6 : 1 5 , 1 6 ; 7 : 2 2 , 2 5 ; 8 : 2 4 ; 1 3 : 1 7 ; 1 4 : 1 5 o k a y [ 1 ] 1 5 : 1 2 O n l y [ 1 ] 6 : 1 2 o p e n [ 1 ] 1 7 : 7 o t h e r [ 3 ] 1 3 : 1 4 , 2 3 ; 1 7 : 5 o v e r [ 1 ] 1 3 : 2 2

- P -

P - H - A - M [ 2 ] 5 : 4 , 1 8 P

. C

. [ 1 ] 1 7 : 1 2 P A G E [ 1 ] 3 : 4 p a i d [ 7 ] 1 0 : 6 , 1 4 , 1 5 ; 1 2 : 1 7 , 2 0 ; 1 4 : 3 ; 1 7 : 1 2 p a r t [ 1 ] 1 6 : 1 8 p a r t i a l [ 1 ] 1 5 : 2 5 p a r t i c u l a r [ 1 ] 1 4 : 9 p a r t i e s [ 3 ] 5 : 9 , 1 1 ; 1 7 : 6 p a s s [ 2 ] 8 : 2 2 ; 1 1 : 7 p a t i e n t [ 1 ] 7 : 1 9 P a u l [ 1 ] 6 : 2 5 p a y i n g [ 1 ] 8 : 4 p e r c e n t [ 5 ] 7 : 2 1 ; 1 0 : 9 ; 1 2 : 1 5 ; 1 5 : 5 , 1 5 P e r f e c t [ 1 ] 1 6 : 1 1 P H A M [ 2 ] 1 : 5 ; 6 : 1 9 P h a m [ 8 ] 3 : 1 0 ; 4 : 9 ; 5 : 3 , 1 8 ; 6 : 1 0 , 1 1 , 2 3 , 2 5 p l a c e s [ 2 ] 9 : 3 ; 1 3 : 1 7 P l a i n t i f f [ 4 ] 6 : 9 ; 7 : 1 ; 9 : 1 3 ; 1 1 : 2 1 P L A I N T I F F S [ 3 ] 2 : 6 ; 3 : 9 ; 1 4 : 1 6 P l a i n t i f f s [ 1 0 ] 1 : 6 ; 3 : 1 6 ; 5 : 1 7 ; 1 4 : 2 , 5 , 6 , 9 , 1 3 ; 1 5 : 1 , 9 P l e a s e [ 2 ] 6 : 1 7 ; 9 : 2 p l e a s e [ 6 ] 5 : 2 5 ; 6 : 1 3 ; 9 : 3 , 1 1 ; 1 1 : 1 9 ; 1 3 : 1 8 p o r t i o n s [ 1 ] 1 7 : 5 p o s t j u d g m e n t [ 4 ] 1 5 : 5 , 1 3 , 1 6 , 1 7 p r a c t i c e [ 4 ] 1 0 : 4 ; 1 2 : 4 ; 1 3 : 2 2 , 2 4 p r a c t i c i n g [ 1 ] 1 3 : 2 2 p r e j u d g m e n t [ 1 ] 1 5 : 3 p r e p a r a t i o n [ 1 ] 1 7 : 1 1 P r e s i d i n g [ 1 ] 1 : 2 0 p r e v i o u s l y [ 2 ] 9 : 6 ; 1 1 : 1 4 p r i m a r i l y [ 1 ] 1 3 : 2 4 p r o c e e d [ 1 ] 6 : 1 7 P r o c e e d i n g s [ 2 ] 1 : 2 2 ; 3 : 8 p r o c e e d i n g s [ 3 ] 1 : 1 8 ; 1 7 : 5 , 9 p r o c e s s [ 1 ] 1 4 : 2 5 p r o d u c t i o n [ 4 ] 7 : 2 1 ; 1 0 : 9 ; 1 2 : 1 5 , 1 6 p r o o f [ 1 ] 1 7 : 1 0 p r o p o s e d [ 1 ] 1 5 : 8 p r o v e - u p [ 1 ] 5 : 6 p r o v i d e [ 1 ] 7 : 1 7 p u r s u e [ 1 0 ] 8 : 1 3 , 2 0 ; 1 0 : 2 2 , 2 5 ; 1 1 : 4 ; 1 3 : 6 , 9 , 1 2 ; 1 4 : 2 , 4 p u r s u i n g [ 1 ] 8 : 1 6

- Q -

q u e s t i o n [ 1 ] 6 : 1 2 q u e s t i o n s [ 2 ] 6 : 1 2 ; 1 3 : 1 4

- R -

r a i s e [ 1 ] 6 : 1 r a t e [ 2 ] 1 5 : 5 , 1 5 R A Y M O N D [ 2 ] 1 : 6 ; 1 1 : 1 3 R a y m o n d [ 5 ] 3 : 1 3 ; 4 : 5 ; 5 : 1 8 ; 1 1 : 1 0 , 2 0 r e a s o n a b l e [ 1 ] 1 4 : 1 4 R e c e s s e d [ 1 ] 1 6 : 2 0 R E C O R D [ 1 ] 1 : 1 R e c o r d [ 3 ] 1 7 : 6 , 8 , 1 1 r e c o r d [ 2 ] 5 : 2 ; 6 : 2 3r e f l e c t s [ 1 ] 1 7 : 9 r e l a t i o n s h i p [ 4 ] 7 : 7 ; 9 : 1 8 , 2 4 ; 1 2 : 3 r e m e m b e r [ 1 ] 9 : 3 r e p o r t e d [ 2 ] 1 : 2 2 ; 1 7 : 7 R e p o r t e r [ 3 ] 1 : 2 3 ; 1 7 : 3 , 1 7 r e p o r t e r [ 2 ] 9 : 1 1 ; 1 1 : 1 9 R E P O R T E R ' S [ 1 ] 1 : 1 R e p o r t e r ' s [ 4 ] 3 : 1 9 ; 1 7 : 6 , 8 , 1 1 r e p r e s e n t [ 3 ] 5 : 1 5 , 1 7 ; 8 : 1 6 r e q u e s t e d [ 2 ] 1 5 : 3 ; 1 7 : 5 r e s o l v e [ 1 ] 5 : 9 R E S T [ 1 ] 1 4 : 1 6 R e s t [ 1 ] 3 : 1 6 r e s t [ 2 ] 1 4 : 1 7 ; 1 5 : 1 1 R E V A C K [ 1 ] 2 : 4 r i g h t [ 1 5 ] 5 : 1 2 , 1 9 , 2 2 , 2 5 ; 6 : 1 , 4 , 1 1 ; 9 : 2 ; 1 1 : 1 1 , 1 2 ; 1 4 : 1 8 , 2 2 ; 1 5 : 2 5 ; 1 6 : 1 2 , 1 5 R u i z [ 3 ] 1 7 : 3 , 1 6

- S -
S A M A A N [ 1 ] 2 : 4 s a m e [ 1 ] 1 1 : 1 1 s a y i n g [ 1 ] 6 : 1 4 s c o u r [ 1 ] 1 6 : 2 S e p t e m b e r [ 1 ] 1 7 : 1 5 s e r v e d [ 1 ] 1 4 : 2 5 s e r v i c e [ 1 ] 7 : 1 7 S h o r t h a n d [ 2 ] 1 : 2 3 , 2 4 s h o u l d [ 3 ] 5 : 2 3 ; 1 0 : 1 5 ; 1 2 : 1 9 s i g n [ 1 ] 1 6 : 1 0 S l o w [ 1 ] 9 : 2 1 s l o w [ 4 ] 5 : 1 2 ; 6 : 1 4 ; 9 : 4 , 2 2 s o m e t h i n g [ 1 ] 1 4 : 2 0 S o r r y [ 1 ] 9 : 2 3 S o u t h [ 1 ] 2 : 4 s p e a k [ 1 ] 9 : 3 s p e l l [ 2 ] 6 : 2 4 ; 9 : 1 1 s p e l l i n g [ 1 ] 1 1 : 1 9 s p e n t [ 1 ] 1 4 : 1 0 s t a n d i n g [ 1 ] 7 : 1 3 s t a r t s [ 1 ] 1 5 : 1 7 S T A T E [ 1 ] 1 7 : 1 S t a t e [ 3 ] 2 : 3 ; 7 : 1 3 ; 1 7 : 4 s t a t e [ 5 ] 6 : 2 3 ; 9 : 1 0 ; 1 1 : 1 8 ; 1 2 : 1 3 ; 1 3 : 2 1 s t a t e d [ 1 ] 1 5 : 2 S t e r n [ 1 ] 1 7 : 1 2 s u c h [ 1 ] 5 : 2 3 S u i t e [ 1 ] 2 : 4 S u r e [ 1 ] 8 : 2 4 s w e a r [ 1 ] 6 : 1 S w i t c h [ 1 ] 1 3 : 1 7 s w o r n [ 3 ] 6 : 2 0 ; 9 : 6 ; 1 1 : 1 4

- T -

t a k e [ 2 ] 6 : 1 4 ; 1 5 : 8 t a k i n g [ 1 ] 5 : 1 3 t a x a b l e [ 2 ] 1 5 : 4 , 1 0 T e l e c o p i e r [ 1 ] 2 : 6 T e l e p h o n e [ 1 ] 2 : 5 t e l l [ 4 ] 5 : 1 4 ; 8 : 6 ; 1 2 : 2 , 2 4 t e n d e r e d [ 1 ] 1 7 : 9 t e r m s [ 4 ] 7 : 2 0 ; 1 0 : 8 ; 1 2 : 1 1 , 1 4 t e s t i f i e d [ 3 ] 6 : 2 0 ; 9 : 6 ; 1 1 : 1 4 T E X A S [ 2 ] 1 : 7 ; 1 7 : 1 T e x a s [ 7 ] 1 : 2 1 ; 2 : 5 ; 7 : 1 4 ; 1 3 : 2 1 ; 1 7 : 4 , 1 6 , 1 8 T h a n k [ 2 ] 6 : 1 8 ; 1 6 : 1 7 T h a t ' s [ 4 ] 5 : 1 7 , 2 1 ; 1 4 : 1 7 ; 1 6 : 1 4 T h e n [ 1 ] 1 4 : 1 8 t h e n [ 1 ] 1 5 : 2 1 t h e r e [ 3 ] 1 2 : 2 2 ; 1 5 : 2 1 ; 1 6 : 1 3 t h e s e [ 5 ] 5 : 1 9 ; 1 4 : 1 , 5 , 6 , 8 t h e y [ 1 ] 1 6 : 2 T h e y ' r e [ 1 ] 6 : 1 t h e y ' r e [ 1 ] 5 : 2 2 t h i n g s [ 1 ] 5 : 2 3 t h i n k [ 1 ] 1 1 : 3 T h i s [ 1 ] 5 : 3 t h i s [ 2 7 ] 8 : 9 , 1 1 , 1 3 , 1 7 , 2 0 , 2 2 ; 9 : 1 6 , 1 9 , 2 5 ; 1 0 : 3 , 6 , 1 9 , 2 5 ; 1 1 : 6 , 7 , 2 5 ; 1 3 : 3 ; 1 4 : 3 , 4 , 1 0 , 1 1 , 1 3 ; 1 5 : 7 ; 1 7 : 6 , 8 , 1 1 , 1 4 t h r e e [ 6 ] 5 : 2 0 ; 6 : 4 ; 1 4 : 1 , 5 , 6 ; 1 5 : 9 t i m e [ 2 ] 1 1 : 6 ; 1 4 : 1 0 t i t l e [ 1 ] 1 5 : 2 2 t o d a y [ 1 ] 5 : 2 0 t o t a l [ 2 ] 1 5 : 1 5 ; 1 7 : 1 1 T r a n s c r i p t i o n [ 1 ] 1 : 2 4 t r a n s c r i p t i o n [ 1 ] 1 7 : 5 t r u e [ 1 ] 1 7 : 4 t r u l y [ 1 ] 1 7 : 9

- U -

u n d e r [ 1 ] 8 : 1 u n t i l [ 1 ] 1 5 : 6

- V -

v e r b a l [ 1 ] 7 : 2 2 v e r s u s [ 1 ] 5 : 4 V e r y [ 5 ] 6 : 5 ; 8 : 2 4 ; 1 1 : 8 ; 1 4 : 1 8 ; 1 6 : 1 5 v e r y [ 1 ] 1 6 : 1 V O L U M E [ 6 ] 1 : 2 ; 3 : 1 ; 4 : 1 v o l u m e [ 1 ] 1 7 : 6

- W -

W - A - L - D - R - O - P [ 1 ] 5 : 5 W A L D R O P [ 1 ] 1 : 8 W a l d r o p [ 3 ] 5 : 4 ; 1 3 : 3 ; 1 4 : 2 3 W a l d r o p s [ 1 ] 7 : 1 0 w a n t [ 1 ] 1 6 : 6 W e ' r e [ 1 ] 5 : 5 w e l l [ 2 ] 1 5 : 4 , 2 4w e r e [ 3 ] 8 : 1 ; 1 0 : 2 ; 1 7 : 7 W e s t [ 1 ] 2 : 4 w h i c h [ 2 ] 1 6 : 2 ; 1 7 : 7 w i l l [ 5 ] 1 1 : 6 ; 1 4 : 1 9 ; 1 6 : 6 , 1 1 ; 1 7 : 1 2 W i s e [ 1 ] 1 7 : 1 2 w i s h [ 3 ] 6 : 7 ; 8 : 2 5 ; 1 1 : 8 W I T N E S S [ 3 ] 4 : 3 ; 6 : 1 6 ; 1 7 : 1 4 W i t n e s s [ 1 ] 3 : 7 w i t n e s s [ 4 ] 8 : 2 2 , 2 3 ; 1 1 : 7 W I T N E S S E S [ 2 ] 3 : 9 ; 4 : 4 w i t n e s s e s [ 1 ] 6 : 3 W O R D [ 1 ] 1 8 : 1 W o r d [ 1 ] 3 : 2 0 w o r d [ 2 ] 1 5 : 1 7 , 2 3 W o u l d [ 1 ] 5 : 2 5 w o u l d [ 1 0 ] 5 : 8 , 1 4 ; 1 2 : 6 ; 1 3 : 1 5 ; 1 5 : 7 , 1 0 , 2 2 , 2 3 ; 1 6 : 8 , 9 w r i t e [ 1 ] 1 5 : 9 w r i t i n g [ 2 ] 1 2 : 9 ; 1 7 : 5 w r i t t e n [ 3 ] 7 : 2 2 , 2 4 ; 1 0 : 1 1

- Y -

y e a r [ 1 ] 1 5 : 1 5 y e a r s [ 1 ] 1 3 : 2 2 Y o u ' r e [ 1 ] 9 : 2 1 y o u ' r e [ 1 ] 6 : 1 4 Y o u r [ 1 ] 1 6 : 1 7 y o u r [ 1 1 ] 6 : 1 , 2 3 , 2 4 ; 7 : 7 ; 9 : 1 0 , 1 1 , 1 8 , 2 4 ; 1 1 : 1 8 , 1 9 ; 1 2 : 2 - Z -

Z i m m e r m a n [ 1 ] 1 7 : 1 2

## Office of Harris County 

## District Clerk


# - Chris 

## Daniel 

## Page 1 

## of 3

PHAM, 

## GREGORY 

## vs. W 

## GARRY WALDROP DDS INC (D/B/A 

## LIFETIME DENTAL CAR Cause: 201 521720 CDI: 7 

## Court: 1 5 1 

## 11/10/2015 HCDistrictclerk.com



## COST 

## STATMENTS 

## No Cost Statments found.


## TRANSFERS 

## No Transfers found.


## NOTICES No 

## Notices found.


## SUMMARY 

## CASE DETAILS COURT DETAILS Court up' Address 

### 201 

### CAROLINE (Floor. 1 1) 

### HOUSTON. TX 77002 Phone; 7 

### 133686222 

### 4/15/2015 Kile 

### Date 

### Case (Cause) 

### Location Civil Intake 1st 

### Floor Case (Cause) 

### Status 

### Case On Appeal 

# - Civil 

### Case (Cause) Type 

### HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION untPM»Hf«T N.\,/lÿist Selling 

### Date 

### N A 

### Cr. 

## T». CM Judgment For 

### DEFAULT JUDGMENT SIGNED ''vr--

• 

### "•

•• 

### ' ' 

### ' Judgment 

### Date 

### 7/1/2015 Jury 

### Fee Paid 

### Date N/A w*



## APPEALS 

## Action Type* Action Assigned to 14th 

### Court of Appeals 

### 9/1/2015 $0.00 

### 9/1/2015 Court Assignment $0.00 

### S 

### 0,00 Notice 

### of Appeal 

### Has Been Filed Notice 

### of Appeal 

### Has Been Filed Appeal 

### Final Judgment Mandate Issued 

### on Appeal 

### 9/22/201 5 

### S 

### 0.00



# ---- 00«»Av«W<yÿM*lÿ 

### Transcript Completed 

### 9/30/2015 $37.00 A,;/;;' 

### Notice 

### of Appeal 

### Given McMMonWv.. 

### 9/1/2015
.A.-.. 9/1/20)5 $0,00

Transcript Action



### . 

## POST 

## TRIAL WRITS 

## Description Writ 

### of 

### Execution 8/3/2015 

### 8/3/2015 8/10/2015 

### 11/9/2015



## ABSTRACTS 

## Description File Assigned 

## i 7/2/2015



# m http://www.hcdistrictcIerk.com/edocs/public/CaseDetailsPrinting.aspx?Get=80-i-VR0ti6Iqkyr5Io7h9A5... I 

## i/10/2015

## Office of 

## Harris County 

## District Clerk



# - Chris Daniel 

## Page 2 

## of 3

Abstract Requested File Assigned 

### Abstract Requested 

## File Assigned

• '• 

# -- 

# ------- • "• f • •'••• 

### Abstract Requested Abstract Picked UO 

### Abstract Picked 

### UO 7/2/20 1 

### 5 

### 7/2/2015 

### 7/2/2015 7/2/20 

### IS
"> '/S-Ov. 

### 7/2/2015 

### 7/29/2015 7/29/2015

' 

### 7/29/2015 f/jvo "•vz/y/'ÿ/WZ/Wr/W'/' • v/y

yrffWW/Wi'/’W'«'.('. vV

•

. ,v/>s\'A\v.w.' 

### Abstract Picked 

### UO

y.yO.t ::*‘y<J. Y 

## ........ . • " •ÿ•.-.•.y.W.' W- • . 

## ACTIVE PARTIES No active 

## parties 

## found.


## INACTIVE PARTIES 

## Name 

## Post Attorney Jdgm 

## Type

Gll.L, 

### NED 111

.••>.

- PHAM, 

### GREGORY 

### PLAINTIFF



# - CIVIL •>. VAWSrMyV* r.-s.ss.yy.rs.r/sv. 

### DEFENDANT -CIVIL W 

### GAR.RY WALDROP DDS 

### INC (D/B/A 

### LIFETIME DENTAL, CARE) 

### 970 

### SOUTH FRY ROAD, KATY, 

### TX 77450 

## GJ.CL» NED 

### III 

## .... .... 

### DAO, 

### RAYMOND 

### PLAINTIFF


# - CIVIL PLAINTIFF 

### -CIVIL 

### MA. 

### JOHN GILL, 

### NED IU .r.W.,AWy,r.y,, . , 

## JHDGMENT/EVENTS 

## Date Description Order 

## Post 

## Pgs Volume 

## Filing 

## Signed Jdgm /Page Attorney 7/1/2015 

## Person Filing 7/1/2015 DEFAULT JUDGMENT 

### SIGNED 

# m

/.v.-.v.v.v.vv.x'r«vcw rrrrrrrr •r'r‘rr/r 

### DEFENDANT COSTS **«*»ÿ» 

### 0 

### 7/1/2015 4/15/2015 

### ORIGINAL PETITION 

### GILL, 

### NED 

## III GILL, 

### NED Ilf GILL., 

### NED III PHAM, 

### GREGORY DAO, 

### RAYMOND MA, 

### JOHN 0 

### 4/15/2015 

### ORJGINAI 

### PETITION 0 

### 4/15/2015 ORIGINAL 

### PETITION 0

- - 

# I SETTINGS Date 

## Court Post 

## Docket Type 

## Reason

Jdgm 

## Results Comments 

## Requesting Party DEFAULT


# - MOTION FOR Granted 

### SEE O/S 7-1-15 GILL, 

### NED III (TRCP 239) 

# I Law 

### Day 

### Docket 6/29/2015 151 

### 09:00 

### AM

wwlv/w/'y y.Lv.- w-kvwjl/M'y 

## SERVICES Instrument 

## Person Requested Issued 

## Served 

## Returned Received Tracking 

## Deliver

Status 

## Type 

## To 4/15/2015 4/15/2015 4/21/2015 73121918 

### CITATION



## http://wvw.hcdistriciclerk.com/edocs/public/CaseDelailsPrinting.aspx7Get~8CH-VR0ti6Iqkyr51o7h9A5... 1 

## 1/10/2015

## Office of Harris County 

## District Clerk



## - Chris 

## Daniel 

## Page 3 

## of 3

SERVICE ORIGINAL 

### RETURN/EXECUTED PETITION CIV 

### AGCYC1VILIAN 

### SERVICE AGENCY s>' s •• > •• •• 8/3/20 IS 8/10/2015 1 

### 1/9/201 S 11/9/201 5 

### * EXECUTION SERVICE 

### WRIT 

### OF

RETURN/EXECUTED EXECUTION 73155065 ATTORNEY 

### PICK-UP


## DOCUMENTS Number 

## MPbst Date 

# fill Pgs

Document
Fourteenth court of 

### appeals (Abatement Order) 

### Fourteenth court 

### of appeals (Correspondence) 

### W?ww: i 

### 67280496 

### 09/22/2015 7 pMMM 

### 66997309 

### 09/04/2015 I 

### 66862676 Notice of 

### Appeal 09/01/2015 

### 2

Local Rule Notice 

### of and Assignment 

### of Related Case in Appeals 

### Letter to 

### Clerk 

### >66862677 

### 09/01/2015 I 

### 66862678 

### 09/01/2015 2 

### 66862679 Letter to 

### Reporter 

### 09/01/2015 

# r 08/03/2015 I Request 

### for Civil/Family 

### Post Judgment 

### Writs 

### 66457457 Request 

### for Abstract 

### of Judgment 

### 07/02/2015 

### 66075484 

### J ‘&¥S&t5$lF?f999XXttXXX‘/rAY/‘y/'?'‘‘i 

### 07/02/2015 

### 66075485 Request for 

### Abstract 

### of 

### Judgrat8»\, 1

'/ ‘».VPP.V.v Request for 

### Abstract of Judgment 66075486 

### 07/02/2015 $ 

### 66049904 

### DEFAULT JUDGMEN T 

### SIGNED 07/01/2015 

### 2

DEFENDANT 

### COSTS Q7/0I/2015 ty£ÿ//AttYY//YrXfoiXXrXryXX/5i‘rt:r‘X‘ft‘rirYrY/iS'f‘r‘i 

### 66009060 Proposed 

### Final Judgment 

### 06/29/2015 

### 2 

### 05/19/2015# »0d6i 

### 05/19/2015 3 65485098 Motion for Default Judgment

Nonmilitary 

### Affidavit •s 

### 65485099 >65485100 

### PlaintifTs’ Certificate of 

### Last Known Mailing 

### Address 

### 05/19/2015 1

WMmSS9SWQttoM&0Witftmt9i64&i4iMSWG$fC4M<& 65485871 Notice of Hearing



# ..... , 

# ----

,•;• • • Citation 05/19/2015 1 

### 04/21/2015 

### 65141847 ..ÿ 

# __________

.... ... 

# _________

_ ....... _ 

# ___

_____

... 

## ... _..., . 

### 65034468 

### Plaintiffs Original Peilition 

### 04/15/2015 6 

### :

Civil 

### Case 

### Information Sheet : v 

### Civil 

### Process Request >65034470 

### 04/15/2015 

### 2 

### >65034469 04/15/2015 

### 2

Civil 

### Process Request Civil 

### Process Pick-Up 

### Form 65G4I353 04/15/2015 

### 2 65176921 

### 04/15/2015

. 

### I.

! !



### I



## http://www.hcdistrictclerk.com/edocs/public/CaseDetailsPrinting.aspx?Get=80+VR0ti6Iqkyr5Io7h9A5... 1 1/10/20159j"t.'2015 5:01 31 PM Cims Daniel

- Distnci Clerk Harris County Envolopo No. 6753 1 10 By: Phyllis Washington filed: 9.'1.'201 5 5:01 31 PM 

### NO. 

### 2015-21720
GREGORY 

### HI AM, 

## JOHN 

## MA AND RAYMOND DAO § 

### IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF 

## S $ 

### HARRIS 

### COUNTY, TEXAS 

### V. 

## § § W, 

## GARRY WALDROP, UDS, 

## INC. (l/ti/a 

### LIFETIME 

## DENTAL CARE § § 

### 151 ST 

## JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NOTICE OF 

### APPEAL



## Pursuant to 

## Texas Rules 

## of 

## Appellate Procedure 25.1 

## and 26.1(c). 

### W. 

## Garry 

## Waldrop.
DDS. Inc. 

## d/b/a Lifetime 

## Denial Care (“Defendant" 

### or 

## “Appellant'’) 

## files 

## this nolice of appeal lo


### ihe First or 

### Fourteenth Couri of 

## Appeals, Defendant desires to 

## appeal from the 

## judgment
rendered against ll 

## by (his 

### court 

## on luly 

## 1, 

## 2015.

Appellant 

## is a party 

## affected 

## by the trial court’s judgment. 

### Appellant 

## did not 

## participate,
either 

### in 

## person or 

## through counsel, 

### in the 

## hearing resulting in the 

## judgment 

## complained of. In


## addition. Appellant 

## did not 

## timely file a 

## postjudgmenf motion, a 

### request 

## for findings of 

## fact 

## and
conclusions of law or a 

## Rule 26.1(a) 

## notice of 

## appeal. 

## Respectfully 

## submitted,

By;. 

## A/ 

## Jennifer S. 

## Wilson

_ 

## Jennifer S. 

## Wilson Slate 

## Bar No. 21697500 

# 3040 Post 

# Oak Blvd., Suite 

### 1 

# 300 Houston, 

### Texas 77056 

## Telephone: (713) 

## 212-2674 (Direct) 

## Telephone: (713) 

## 552-1234 (Main) 

## Facsimile: (713) 

## 212-2790 (Direct Facsimile)



### 1

## CERTIFICATE OF 

## SERVICE


## I hereby certify 

## that 

## on September 

## 1, 2015, a 

## copy of 

## this Notice of 

## Appeal 

## has been served on 

## counsel for Plaintiffs as 

## follows:


## Mr. Ned Gill, 

## III Gill, 

### Revack, Samaan & 

### Muller, 

### LLP 

## 6575 West 

## Loop South, 

## Suite 600 

### Bellaite, Texas 77401 

## Via 

# Certified Mail No. 9314 

## 8699 0430 

## 0016 2073 

## 74

/s/ 

## Jennifer S. 

## Wilson Jennifer S. 

### Wilson



### 2

### 9/1/2015 

### 5:01 :31 

### PM Chris 

### Daniel 

# - District Clerk 

### Harris County 

### Envelope 

### No: 6753110 

### By: WASHINGTON, PHYLLIS 

### Filed: 9/1/2015 

### 5:01:31 

### PM 

# Local Rule Notice 

# of and 

# Assignment of 

# Related Case 

# in Appeals 

# (sample; file as 

# part 

# of 

# notice of appeal]
As 

## required by the 

# Local Rules Relating to 

# Assignment 

# of Related 

# Cases to 

# and Transfers of 

# Related Cases 

# between the First and Fourteenth Courts of 

# Appeals, I 

# certify 

# that the following 

# related appeal or 

# original proceeding has been 

# previously 

# filed in 

# either the First or 

# Fourteenth Court of Appeals: ;


# W None =



# Caption:
Trial court 

## case 

# number: Appellate court 

## case 

# number:

i


## [S 

# i g 

# n a tu 

## re 

# o f 

# cerHf y 

## i 

# n 

# g attorney 

## or 

# pro se party]

Qg-P 

# V SL O 

## \ 

# 'ST [Date] 

# ;

Note: 

# See 

# Local Rules for 

# the definitions of ‘underlying 

# case,” ‘‘related,” and 

## "previously 

# filed.” 

# : i

i


# i

:



# :

### Page 30 TEXAS RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE
Comment to 2002 change: Rule 29.5 is amended to acknowledge that a trial court may be prohibited by law from proceeding to trial during the pendency of an interlocutory appeal, as for example by section 51.014(b) of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code. Comment to 2008 change: Rule 29.5 is amended to be consistent with Section 51.014(b) of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code, as amended in 2003, staying all proceedings in the trial court pending resolution of interlocutory appeals of class certification orders, denials of summary judgments based on assertions of immunity by governmental officers or employees, and orders granting or denying a governmental unit’s plea to the jurisdiction.


### Rule 30. Restricted Appeals to Court of Appeals in Civil Cases A party who did not participate—either in person or through counsel—in the hearing that resulted in the judgment complained of and who did not timely file a postjudgment motion or request for findings of fact and conclusions of law, or a notice of appeal within the time permitted by Rule 26.1(a), may file a notice of appeal within the time permitted by Rule 26.1(c). Restricted appeals replace writ of error appeals to the court of appeals. Statutes pertaining to writ of error appeals to the court of appeals apply equally to restricted appeals.
Notes and Comments Comment to 1997 change: This is former Rule 45. The appeal by writ of error procedure is repealed. A procedure for an appeal filed within 6 months — called a restricted appeal — is substituted. This rule sets out who may take a restricted appeal. Rules 25.1 and 26.1 set out the method of perfection and the time for perfecting the appeal.


### Rule 31. Appeals in Habeas Corpus,

Bail, and Extradition Proceedings in Criminal Cases 31.1. Filing the Record; Submission When written notice of appeal from a judgment or order in a habeas corpus or bail proceeding is filed, the trial court clerk must prepare and certify the clerk’ s record and, if the appellant requests, the court reporter must prepare and certify a reporter’s record. The clerk must send the clerk’s record and the court reporter must send the reporter’s record to the appellate court within 15 days after the notice of appeal is filed. On reasonable explanation, the appellate court may shorten or extend the time to file the record. When the appellate court receives the record, the court will — if it desires briefs — set the time for filing briefs, and will set the appeal for submission. 31.2. Hearing An appeal in a habeas corpus or bail proceeding will be heard at the earliest practicable time. The applicant need not personally appear, and the appeal will be heard and determined upon the law and the facts shown by the record. The appellate court will not review any incidental question that might have arisen on the hearing of the application before the trial court. The sole purpose of the appeal is to do substantial justice to the parties. 31.3. Orders on Appeal The appellate court will render whatever judgment and make whatever orders the law and the nature of the case require. The court may make an appropriate order relating to costs, whether allowing costs and fixing the amount, or allowing no costs. 31.4. Stay of Mandate (a) When Motion for Stay Required . Despite Rule 18 or any other of these rules, in the following circumstances a party who in good faith intends to seek discretionary review must — within 15 days after the court of appeals renders judgment — file with the court of appeals clerk a motion for stay of mandate, to which is appended the party's petition for discretionary review showing reasons why the Court of Criminal Appeals should review the appellate court judgment: (1) when a court of appeals affirms the judgment of the trial court in an extradition matter and thereby sanctions a defendant's extradition; or (2) when a court of appeals reverses the trial court’s judgment in a bail matter — including bail pending appeal under Code of Criminal Procedure article 44.04(g) — and thereby grants or reduces the amount of bail. (b) Determination of the Motion . The clerk must promptly submit the motion and appendix to the court of appeals, or to one or more judges as the court deems appropriate, for immediate consideration and determination. (1) If the motion for stay is granted, the clerk will file the petition for discretionary review and process the case in accordance with Rule 68.7. (2) If the motion is denied, the clerk will issue a mandate in accordance with the court of appeals' judgment.

30

### Page 26 TEXAS RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE
Rule 34.5(c)(2). The appeal must be dismissed if a certification that shows the defendant has the right of appeal has not been made part of the record under these rules. (e) Clerk's Duties . The trial court clerk must note on the copies of the notice of appeal and the trial court’s certification of the defendant’s right of appeal the case number and the date when each was filed. The clerk must then immediately send one copy of each to the clerk of the appropriate court of appeals and, if the defendant is the appellant, one copy of each to the State's attorney. (f) Amending the Notice or Certification . An amended notice of appeal or trial court’s certification of the defendant’s right of appeal correcting a defect or omission in an earlier filed notice or certification, including a defect in the notification of the defendant’s appellate rights, may be filed in the appellate court in accordance with Rule 37.1, or at any time before the appealing party's brief is filed if the court of appeals has not used Rule 37.1. The amended notice or certification is subject to being struck for cause on the motion of any party affected by the amended notice or certification. After the appealing party’s brief is filed, the notice or certification may be amended only on leave of the appellate court and on such terms as the court may prescribe. (g) Effect of Appeal . Once the record has been filed in the appellate court, all further proceedings in the trial court - except as provided otherwise by law or by these rules - will be suspended until the trial court receives the appellate-court mandate. (h) (h) Advice of Right of Appeal. When a court enters a judgment or other appealable order and the defendant has a right of appeal, the court (orally or in writing) shall advise the defendant of his right of appeal and of the requirements for timely filing a sufficient notice of appeal.
Notes and Comments Comment on 1997 change: This is former Rule 40. In civil cases, the requirement of an appeal bond is repealed. Appeal is perfected by filing a notice of appeal. A notice must be filed by any party seeking to alter the trial court’s judgment. The restricted appeal — formerly the appeal by writ of error — is perfected by filing a notice of appeal in the trial court as in other appeals. The contents of the notice of appeal is prescribed. The notice of limitation of appeal is repealed. In criminal cases, the rule is amended to apply to notices by the State, and to refer to additional statutory requirements for the State’s notice. In felony cases in which the defendant waived trial by jury, pleaded guilty or nolo contendere, and received a punishment that did not exceed what the defendant agreed to in a plea bargain, the rule is amended to make clear that regardless of when the alleged error occurred, an appeal must be based on a jurisdictional defect or a written motion ruled on before trial, or be with the permission of the trial court. Comment to 2002 change: Rule 25.2, for criminal cases, is amended. Subdivision 25.2(a) states the parties’ rights of appeal that are established by Code of Criminal Procedure article 44.01 and by article 44.02, the proviso of which was repealed when rulemaking power was given to the Court of Criminal Appeals. Subdivision 25.2(b) is given the requirement that a notice of appeal be in “sufficient” form, which codifies the decisional law. The requirement in former subdivision 25.2(b)(3) that a plea-bargaining appellant’s notice of appeal specify the right of appeal is replaced by a requirement in subdivision 25.2(d) that the trial court certify the defendant’s right of appeal in every case in which a judgment or other appealable order is entered. The certificate should be signed at the time the judgment or other appealable order is pronounced. The form of certification of the defendant’s right of appeal is provided in an appendix to these rules. If the record does not include the trial court’s certification that the defendant has the right of appeal, the appeal must be dismissed. If a sufficient notice of appeal or certification is not filed after the appellate court deals with the defect (see Rules 34.5(c) and 37.1), preparation of an appellate record and representation by an appointed attorney may cease.


### Rule 26. Time to Perfect Appeal
26.1. Civil Cases The notice of appeal must be filed within 30 days after the judgment is signed, except as follows: (a) the notice of appeal must be filed within 90 days after the judgment is signed if any party timely files: (1) a motion for new trial; (2) a motion to modify the judgment; (3) a motion to reinstate under Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 165a; or (4) a request for findings of fact and conclusions of law if findings and conclusions either are required by the Rules of Civil Procedure or, if not required, could properly be considered by the appellate court; (b) in an accelerated appeal, the notice of appeal must be filed within 20 days after the judgment or order is signed;

26TEXAS RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE Page 27


### (c) in a restricted appeal, the notice of appeal must be filed within six months after the judgment or order is signed; and (d) if any party timely files a notice of appeal, another party may file a notice of appeal within the applicable period stated above or 14 days after the first filed notice of appeal, whichever is later.
26.2. Criminal Cases (a) By the Defendant . The notice of appeal must be filed: (1) within 30 days after the day sentence is imposed or suspended in open court, or after the day the trial court enters an appealable order; or (2) within 90 days after the day sentence is imposed or suspended in open court if the defendant timely files a motion for new trial. (b) By the State . The notice of appeal must be filed within 20 days after the day the trial court enters the order, ruling, or sentence to be appealed.
26.3. Extension of Time The appellate court may extend the time to file the notice of appeal if, within 15 days after the deadline for filing the notice of appeal, the party: (a) files in the trial court the notice of appeal; and (b) files in the appellate court a motion complying with Rule 10.5(b).
Notes and Comments Comment to 1997 change: This is former Rule 41. All times for perfecting appeal in civil cases — including the time for perfecting a restricted appeal — are stated. An extension of time is available for all appeals. The provisions of former Rule 41(c) regarding prematurely filed documents are moved to Rule 27. Nonsubstantive changes are made in the rule for criminal cases.


### Rule 27. Premature Filings 27.1. Prematurely Filed Notice of Appeal (a) Civil Cases . In a civil case, a prematurely filed notice of appeal is effective and deemed filed on the day of, but after, the event that begins the period for perfecting the appeal. (b) Criminal Cases . In a criminal case, a prematurely filed notice of appeal is effective and deemed filed on the same day, but after, sentence is imposed or suspended in open court, or the appealable order is signed by the trial court. But a notice of appeal is not effective if filed before the trial court makes a finding of guilt or receives a jury verdict.
27.2. Other Premature Actions The appellate court may treat actions taken before an appealable order is signed as relating to an appeal of that order and give them effect as if they had been taken after the order was signed. The appellate court may allow an appealed order that is not final to be modified so as to be made final and may allow the modified order and all proceedings relating to it to be included in a supplemental record. 27.3. If Appealed Order Modified or Vacated After an order or judgment in a civil case has been appealed, if the trial court modifies the order or judgment, or if the trial court vacates the order or judgment and replaces it with another appealable order or judgment, the appellate court must treat the appeal as from the subsequent order or judgment and may treat actions relating to the appeal of the first order or judgment as relating to the appeal of the subsequent order or judgment. The subsequent order or judgment and actions relating to it may be included in the original or supplemental record. Any party may nonetheless appeal from the subsequent order or judgment.
Notes and Comments Comment to 1997 change: 

## This rule is new and combines the provisions of former Rules 41(c) and 58.

Rule 28. Accelerated Appeals in Civil Cases 28.1. Accelerated Appeals (a) Types of Accelerated Appeals . Appeals from interlocutory orders (when allowed as of right by statute), appeals in quo warranto proceedings, appeals required by statute to be accelerated or expedited, and appeals required by law to be filed or perfected within less than 30 days after the date of the order or judgment being appealed are accelerated appeals. (b) Perfection of Accelerated Appeal . Unless otherwise provided by statute, an accelerated appeal is perfected by filing a notice of appeal in compliance with Rule 25.1 within the time allowed by Rule

27