No. 12-15-00206-CV 

 

In the 

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS 

 

In re Wendell Reeder 

 

Motion to Reconsider Order Granting Temporary Relief 

 

J. Bennett White 

State Bar No. 21309800 

jbw@jbwlawfirm.com

Laura S. Severt 

State Bar No. 24051886 

lsevert@jbwlawfirm.com

J. Bennett White, P.C. 

P.O. Box 6250 

Tyler, TX 75711 

(903) 597-4300 Telephone 

(903) 597-4330 Telephonic 

Attorneys for Respondent 

 

ACCEPTED

12-15-00206-CV

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS

TYLER, TEXAS

8/26/2015 8:29:44 AM

CATHY LUSK

CLERK
No. 12-15-00206-CV 

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE TWELFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

TYLER, TEXAS 

IN RE WENDELL REEDER, Relator 

From the 402nd Judicial District of 

Wood County, Texas 

Motion of J. Bennett White, P.C. To Reconsider Temporary 

Relief 

TO THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS: 

Comes now J. Bennett White, P.C., filing this Motion is order to that the Court 

may reconsider the temporary relief granted in favor of Relator for the reasons set forth 

below. 

The temporary relief sought by Relator is for purely tactical purposes and should 

be reconsidered. Relator’s actions are simply part of a transparent strategy designed 

solely to delay collection of a just debt. 

I. The Urgency Relied upon for Emergency Relief Was Manufactured by 

Relator in Order to Unjustly Exploit this Court 

The case below is for collection of legal fees owed J. Bennett White, P.C. 

(“Respondent”), plaintiff below and a party-in-interest in this proceeding. Relator’s 

initial counsel (“Mayo”) was disqualified on June 23, 2015 because of a former employee 

of the plaintiff and of plaintiff’s counsel where the former employee was already working 

for Mayo at the time he undertook Relator’s representation. At that hearing, Mayo 
informed the Court that he (Mayo) was aware that Relator was already inclined to have 

Mayo’s disqualification reviewed. R. 122 (Tr. pp. 12:25-13:3 “... I understand Mr. 

Reeder is going to ask me to have this decision reviewed, I feel confident.”1

). At that 

hearing, the court below allowed thirty days before Mayo’s disqualification became 

effective. Tr. p. 12:20-24. The court below urged Relator’s counsel to proceed with 

mandamus, “if you feel like that’s what needs to be done.” Tr. p. 12:6-8. 

Inexplicably, Relator waited 58 days – until efforts to continue a pending 

summary judgment hearing failed – before seeking review. Yet, the tragedy sought to be 

averted by emergency temporary relief is the possibility that Relator’s defense could not 

withstand a traditional summary judgment motion. Respondent submits that the 

temporary relief granted Relator should be reconsidered for multiple reasons. 

II. Mandamus Relief to Preserve Relator’s Choice of Counsel Could Have Been 

Brought Well Before Now 

The unexplained delay between Mayo’s disqualification and the filing of Relator’s 

petition for mandamus proves that preserving Relator’s choice of counsel was not of 

paramount importance. Relator commenced this proceeding on August 20, 2015, 58 days 

after the disqualification hearing. This proceeding could easily have been commenced 

during the thirty day interval before Mayo’s disqualification became effective. Relator 

could easily have sought this stay well prior to the date when his response to 

Respondent’s summary judgment motion was due. Instead, Relator waited until the 

summary judgment hearing was imminent so as to unnecessarily and arbitrarily allow the 

 

1

 The transcript mistakenly attributes that comment to the undersigned; however, the speaker 

from page 12, line 25 to page 13, line 3, was actually Keith Mayo, representing Relator. 
urgency to ripen simply to claim an emergency in order to get the immediate attention of 

this Court. Choosing to wait until a threat materializes does not an emergency make. 

III. The Real Reason Relator Seeks Temporary Relief Is To Delay Collection of a 

Just Debt 

Relator’s actions below show that this proceeding is intended solely to obstruct the 

collection of a justly owed debt. On May 1, 2015, Mayo wrote counsel for Respondent to 

inform on his being retained as Relator’s counsel and agreeing to accept service. JBW001. In a response dated May 4, 2015, Mayo was made aware of the conflict presented 

by his employment of a potential fact witness and that his disqualification would be 

sought if he proceeded to answer for Relator. JBW-002. Therefore, Relator cannot claim 

any surprise in that Mayo’s disqualification would be sought, and Relator has had ample 

opportunity to plan for the possibility that substitute counsel could be necessary, along 

with the possibility of having to seek extraordinary relief before this Court. 

 On July 15, 2015, during the period before Mayo’s disqualification became 

effective, counsel for Respondent sent a letter to Mayo in order to address the summary 

judgment hearing that had been scheduled for August 10, 2015. JBW-007. In that letter, 

Mayo was informed that adequate time existed for responding to the summary judgment 

motion and it was requested that he (Mayo) inform Relator’s new attorney not to expect 

that the summary judgment hearing would be reset by agreement. JBW-007. 

On July 23, 2015, Relator’s new counsel (“Walker”) entered an appearance (R. 

0093), filed a motion for continuance of the summary judgment hearing (R. 0095), and 

inquired by email about postponing the summary judgment hearing (JBW-005). The 
motion for continuance implies that Relator desired the deposition of Respondent’s 

principal. R. 0096 (“Defendant is entitled to ..., at a minimum obtain the deposition of 

... White”). By email response later that day, Walker was provided with six possible 

deposition dates prior to the time when Relator’s summary judgment response would be 

due. JBW-005. 

The court below, of its own volition, reset the summary judgment hearing to 

August 25, 2015. R. 0098. Relator’s motion for continuance was heard on August 20, 

2015. R. 0099-0100. On August 18, 2015, Relator’s summary judgment response was 

filed. R. 0103. That response is supported by a two page affidavit by Relator. R. 0115-

116. Relator’s affidavit contends that there were instances when his instructions and 

strategies were not followed, but that no specific instances of any such occasions could 

be provided due to his lack of complete billing records. R. 0115-0116. 

At the hearing on Relator’s motion for continuance, Respondent showed that all 

billing records requested by Relator in order to fully reconcile the account balance had 

been provided on February 4, 2015 and February 5, 2015 (JBW-008, JBW-011), and that 

Respondent and Relator had completely reconciled all account balances, both paid and 

unpaid, by March 26, 2015 (JBW-013, JBW-014), preceding the April 14, 2015 filing of 

Respondent’s original petition. R. 0003. The trial court was provided the July 15th letter 

to Mayo (JBW-007) and the July 23rd offer of deposition dates for Respondent to Walker 

(JBW-005) and was informed that despite Relator’s insistence that discovery was 

essential, to date no attempt had been made to schedule any deposition and no written 
discovery had even been served. Relator’s motion to continue the summary judgment 

hearing was denied. 

Relator has commenced this proceeding strictly to postpone consideration of 

plaintiff’s summary judgment motion by the court below, not to preserve his right to 

counsel of his choice. The affidavit filed by Relator in opposition to Respondent’s 

summary judgment motion is patently insufficient to establish a genuine issue of material 

fact. Relator’s opposition to Respondent’s summary judgment evidence is limited to two 

averments: one is Relator’s unqualified implication that some of the charges are not 

reasonable and necessary; the other is Relator’s suspicion that some of the charges were 

possibly not aligned with his instruction. As to whether the charges are “reasonable and 

necessary,” Relator failed to provide any qualifications that would allow him to render an 

opinion on the reasonableness or necessity of legal services. As to the failure to follow 

“particular instructions and strategies,” Relator did not provide any examples of any 

instructions or strategies that were not followed, nor did he identify any billing entries 

claimed to be inconsistent with any of his instructions or strategies. 

 Accordingly, Relator’s inability to mount a meaningful opposition to 

Respondent’s motion for summary judgment is not an emergency warranting temporary 

relief. The emergency is not that Relator could be deprived of counsel of his choice – 

else the petition would have been brought much earlier; the emergency is that Relator has 

failed to articulate any defense, or to raise any fact issue, in opposition to the claim 

brought against him below, and efforts to delay consideration on the merits below have 

failed. 
IV. Any Temporary Relief Should Be Conditioned On Relator Posting Sufficient 

Bond 

Alternatively, Relator’s sincerity in the relief sought by this proceeding can easily 

be tested. Rule 52.10(b) specifies that any temporary relief granted by this Court may be 

conditioned on the posting of a bond sufficient to protect other parties. Respondent 

submits that any stay of the proceedings below should be conditioned on Relator posting 

bond in the amount of $300,000, which amount should be sufficient to provide for the 

payment of the claim amount, with some allowance for costs, interest, and attorneys’ 

fees. If this proceeding is not simply about avoiding payment of a just debt, then Relator 

should be willing to assure prompt payment for whatever amount is ultimately 

determined to be owed, if any. If Relator is genuinely concerned that his ability to 

withstand summary judgment, or to defend the claim on the merits, depends on Mayo’s 

counsel, then Relator should be willing to protect Respondent with a payment bond to 

facilitate review of Mayo’s disqualification. 

V. Conclusion 

For the reasons set forth in this Motion, Respondent urges that the temporary relief 

previously granted by this Court be reconsidered and, upon such reconsideration, that the 

stay be vacated, allowing the case below to proceed. In the alternative, Respondent 

requests that the stay be modified and conditioned on Relator posting bond in 

Respondent’s favor to secure payment of whatever judgment is rendered in the court 

below, in an amount of up to $300,000. 
Wherefore, premises considered, J. Bennett White, P.C., a party-in-interest, urges 

this Court to reconsider the temporary relief granted herein. J. Bennett White, P.C. 

further requests all such other and further relief to which it may be entitled. 

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, 

 J. BENNETT WHITE, P.C. 

 P. O. Box 6250 

 Tyler, TX 75711 

 Telephone No. (903) 597-4300 

 Telecopier No. (903) 597-4330 

 By: 

 J. BENNETT WHITE

 jbw@jbwlawfirm.com 

 Texas Bar No. 21309800 

 

LAURA S. SEVERT

 lsevert@jbwlawfirm.com 

 Texas Bar No. 24051886 

 ATTORNEYS FOR RESPONDENT 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

 I certify that a true and original copy of the foregoing document has been served by fax 

on this date, August 25, 2015, as follows: 

Fax: 903-595-0796 

Ms. Marisa M. Schouten 

Martin Walker, P.C. 

The Arcadia Theater 

121 N. Spring Street 

Tyler, Texas 75702 

 _____________________________ 

 J. BENNETT WHITE 

 
No. l2-15-00206-CV

In the

T\ryELF'TH COURT OF APPEALS

fn re Wendell Reeder

Appendix of Evidence In Support For Motion to Reconsider

Temporary Relief

J. Bennett White

State Bar No. 21309800

jbw@jbwlawfirm.com

Laura S. Severt

State Bar No. 24051886

lsevert@j bwl awfirm. com

J. Bennett White, P.C.

P.O. Box 6250

Tyler, TX757ll

(903) 597 -4300 Telephone

(903) 597 -4330 Telephonic

Attorneys for Respondent
No. l2-15-00206-CV

TWELFTH

In the

COURT OF APPBALS

In re Wendell Reeder

Affidavit

STATE OF TEXAS

COUNTY OF SMITH

BEFORE ME, the undersigned notary public, on this day personally appeared J. Bennett

White, who being duly sworn by me on his oath deposed and said: (l) he is one of the attorneys

for plaintiff below in the underlying cause (No.2015-184, J. Bennett White, P.C. v. Wendell

Reeder, in the District Court of Wood County, Texas); (2) he has personal knowledge of the

documents prepared, issued, filed, and/or served in the underlying cause; (3) he has reviewed all

documents submitted in conjunction with the motion to reconsider temporary relief; and (4) each

document tendered in support of the motion to reconsider temporary relief is a true and conect

copy of a document prepared, issued, filed, and/or served in connection with the underlying

cause.

I also have personal knowledge of a mistake in the hearing transcript provided as part of

the mandamus Record. R. 122. The statement of counsel beginning on page 12, line 25 and

continuing to page 13, line 3 is attributed to me. I did not make that statement. Mr. Keith Mayo

$

$
made that statement. The transcript should reflect Mr. Mayo as the speaker who presumed Mr.

Reeder would "ask him" to have the disqualification reviewed.

I received Keith Mayo's May l,2015letter. JBW-001. My May 4,2015letter to him

was written in response. JBW-003.

The letter to Keith Mayo dated July 15,2015 was prepared and sent by me. JBW-007.

That letter was provided to Relator's current counsel as an attachment to an email dated July 23,

2015. JBW-005. By emails dated February 4, 2015 and February 5, 2015, all the billing

statements for 2011,2072, and 2013 that were requested by Relator in reconciling his account

balance were provided. JBW-008, JB\ry-0I1. Another email exchange showed that the account

between Relator and Respondent had been fully reconciled by both parties prior to the

commencement of the collection action below. JB\ry-013, JB\ry-014.

In the case below, no written discovery has been served on J. Bennett White, P.C. by

Relator and there have not been any attempts to schedule any depositions.

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFO

ceftify which witness my hand and official

SUSAN KAYGARDNER

Notary Public

STATE OFIEXAS

Comm.

otary Public in and

State of Texas
05/0L/20L5 FRI 12:58 FAx 9037473436 Mayo Mendolia & VÍce Øooz/ ooz

MAYO MENDOLTA & VICE' L.L.P.

ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW

PLAZA IOWER

ll0 N. col-l,F.QF.

sul'rË l0l .I'YLÊR, lEXAS 75702

OFFICE: (903)147'3422

FACSIMILE: QA3l 7 47'3436

rvns,.ntt¡rvlô r!:li$t¡.c0t¡ì

FROM THË DESK OIl:

J. KEIîH MAYO

jkrnt?ìn¡ruvll¡t.conl

May 1,2015

Yja F.a x90-3-s9 7-433.9.

J. Bennett White, P.C.

Attorneys & Counselors

1011 Puritt Place

Tyler, Texas 75743

Re: J, Bennett llthite, P.C. ys. Wenclell Reeeler, ltrASMA, Inc. (General Counsel)'

Clarksvílle Oìl & Gas, Co, (General Coansel).

Dear Bennett:

I have been contacted by Wendell Reeder ïegading the representation of his companies and

him i¡dividually. It is rny understanding that you have fîled a collectio¡rs lawsuit against Mr. Reeder

for outstanding attorney invoices. I have been authorized to accept sewice on behalf of Mr. Reecler

in that particular mâtter.

If Mr. Reede¡ has not afueady been served, please feel free to recall any service efforts and

perfect service by sending the Petition to nre. Thank you for your attentiou to this nratter.

Sincercly,

J. Keith Mayo

JKMlcnf

ROYSB ct'rY, TEXAS

(469) 402.0450

WILLOW PARK,'TEXAS

(8¡?) 546.4r00

JBW - 001
05/0L/2015 FRr 12¡ 58 FAx 9037473436 Mayo Mendolia & vice

TO: J. Bennett White

FROM: Codi Foster, Paralegal

RE¡ \Thite v. Reeder

ROYCE CITy, TEXA,S

(469) 402-0450

øooL / ooz

MAYO MENDOLIA & VICE, L.L.P.

ATTORNÞYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW

PLAZÂTOWÊR

I IO N, COLLEGË AVE,

Su¡rn l0l

'rYLER, l'r¡xlts 75702

'l'ELEPnoNE: 903 -7 47 -3422

F^cslt'tlLE: 903-? 47 -3436

F'.ACSIMIITp, COVER PAGE

P_RLVI l/pc Ep ANp c_p, N{'I ÐEN"T,IAL

DATE: May 1' 2015

PLEASE DELIVER THE F'OLLO\ryING MATERIAL AS SOON AS POSSIBLE¡

FACSIMILENO.: 903-597-4330

')

TOTAL PAGES: ^ Including Cover Page

IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL PAGES, OR IF ANY ARE NOT LEGIBLE,

PLEASE CALL US IMMDDIATELV.

MESSAGE:

THD INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS FACSIMILE MESSAGE IS ATTORNEY PRIVILECED AND

CONFIDDNTIAL INFORMATION INTENDEÐ ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY

NAMED ABOVE. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE TS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, OR THE

EMPLOYEE OR AGENT RBSPONSIBLE TO DDLIVER IT TO THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE

HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMTNATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS

COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. TF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION

IN ERROR, PLEASE IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY US BY TELEPHONE AND RETURN THE ORIGINAL

MESSAGE TO US AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS VIA THE U.S. POSTAL SERVICB. THANK YOU.

WILLO\Y PARK,TEXAS

(8 r 7) 22ó.r 953

JBW - 002
J. BENNETT WHITE 

 jbw@jbwlawfirm.com 

LAURA S. SEVERT 

 lsevert@jbwlawfirm.com 

 

ATTORNEYS & COUNSELORS 

1011 PRUITT PLACE 

TYLER, TEXAS 75703 

(903) 597-4300 

FAX (903) 597-4330 

POST OFFICE BOX 6250 

TYLER, TEXAS 75711-6250 

________ 

TWYLA FIELDS, CP 

CERTIFIED PARALEGAL 

tfields@jbwlawfirm.com 

May 4, 2015

via fax 903-747-3436

Mr. J. Keith Mayo 

Mayo, Mendolia & Vice, L.L.P. 

110 N. College, Suite 101 

Tyler, TX 75702 

RE: Cause No. 2015-184 

J. Bennett White, P.C. v. Wendell Reeder 

Dear Keith, 

 I am in receipt of your letter dated May 1, 2015 concerning your willingness to represent 

Wendell Reeder. Please be informed that if you file an answer or enter any appearance on Mr. 

Reeder’s behalf, I will move to have your firm disqualified as his attorneys. My insistence on 

your disqualification will be due to your recent employment of Jennifer Smith. 

 As you know, Jennifer is a former employee of this firm. With this being a lawsuit for 

collection of the fees owed, she has confidences of both this firm and of our “client.” I submit 

that her employment subjects her to competing loyalties in honoring the client confidences 

gained while working here against her current obligation of loyalty to your firm and clients. I 

submit that for Jennifer to honor our confidences would impair your representation of your 

client. 

 More importantly, as an employee of the plaintiff, Jennifer has first-hand knowledge of 

the correctness of our claim against Mr. Reeder. In fact, a meaningful portion of the fees owed 

are for services provided by her. Based on her personal knowledge of the validity of our claim 

and the potential that she could be called as a witness, our client’s interest would be prejudiced 

by her knowledge that to provide truthful testimony would be detrimental to your firm and your 

client. Accepting representation that would compromise the testimony of a fact witness creates 

an impermissible conflict of interest. Therefore, if you attempt to represent Mr. Reeder, you are 

hereby advised that your representation of him will be opposed. 

 

JBW - 003
Page 2 

 Sincerely, 

 

 J. BENNETT WHITE 

JBW 

 

JBW - 004
8t19t2015

From: JBW To: Jack Walker <jwalker@martinwalkerlaw.com>

Sent: 712312015 6:13PM

Subject: RE: White v. Reeder - MSJ hearing

Jack,

Here's the letter I sent to Keith over a week ago asking that he inform whomever was taking his place that I

would not agree to any continuance of ihe hearing. Also, I am already scheduled for a hearing in Austin on

July 29th and Laura is scheduled for oral argument before the Texarkana court of appeals. I will email Joy

to let her know of my objection to that hearing date. lf your need for a continuance is simply to take my

deposition, I am available Sunday afternoon (July 26th), Monday afternoon (July 27th) - subject to jury duty

Monday morníng, Thursday (July 30th), Friday (July 31st), Saturday (August 1st), or Sunday (August 2nd).

I'll also agree to extending your response date to August 5th -- if that will help.

J. Bennett White

J. Bennett White, P.C.

903.597.4300

903.597.4330 Fax

www.jbwlawfirm.com

-- Original Message--

To: "J bw@jbwlawfìrm. com"' <j bw@j bwlawfi rm. com>

Cc: Shelley Poole <spoole@martinwalkerlaw.com>

From : Jack Wal ker <jwal ker@ ma rti nwalkerlaw. com>

Sent: 7 12312015 11:374M

Subject: White v. Reeder - MSJ hearing

>> Bennett,

>> I am filing an appearance in this case today. Would you be agreeable to a

>> continuance of the MSJ hearing?

>> Jack

>> John F. (Jack) Walker, lll

>> Board Certified-Personal lnjury Trial Law

>> Texas Board of Legal Specialization

>> [ogo]

>> 121 N. Spring Avenue

>> The Arcadia Theater

>> Tyleç Texas 75702

>> Direct (903) 526-1600

>> Fax (903) 595-0796

Page 1

JBW - 005
8119t2015

>> jwalker@martinwalkerlaw.com

>> Confidential Notice: This emaíÍänd,any:atiaiiimènts are confidential.and may be

>> protected by legäl privilege. lfVöq,äie;oi ttie iñtþnded recipient,'be aware thãt any

>> disclosure, copying, dist¡:ibution, oi usèi pffhis e-mail, or any attachment, is prohibited.

>> ln such case, you should destroy this niessâge and kindly notiñy the sender by e-mail.

>> Please advise irnmediately if you,'oi'your employèr, do not consent to internet e-mail

>> for messages of this kind.

Page 2

JBW - 006
J. BnNNnrr ïVurrn, P.C.

ATTORNEYS & COUNSELORS

1011 PRUITT PLACE

TYLER. TEXAS 75703

(903) 597-4300

FAX (903) s97-4330

J. BENNETT WHITE

jbw@jbwleøirm.com

VIRGIL J. JORDAN t

jjordang¡owtawlirm. øm

LAURA S. SEVERT

lseverl@¡bwlawlim.com

t Adm¡ttsd to PÊclice ¡n Texas & lowa

POST OFFICE BOX 6250

TYLER, TÉXAS 7571 1.6250

T\A/YLA FIELDS. CP

CERTIFIED PARALEGAL

meld@lbMawlirm.@m

July 15,2015

via fox 903-747-3436

Mr. J. Keith Mayo

Mayo, Mendolia & Vice, L.L.P.

110 N. College, Suite l0l

Tyler, TX757A2

RE: Cause No.20I5-184

J. Bennett Wltìte. P.C. v. llendell Reeder

Dear Keith,

In reviewing my calendar, I noticed that the hearing on my Motion for Summary

Judgrnent is scheduled for August lOth. I wanted to get this letter to you well in advance of that

deadline so as not to catch you or Mr. Reeder by surprise.

Considering the Court ruled on June 23'd that (absent resolution) you and your firm have

until July 23'd fo withdraw from this matter as attorneys, and considering the fact the summary

judgrnent hearing has also been scheduled since June 23rd, I feel that Mr. Reeder has been given

ample time to retain new counsel and to respond to the summary judgment motion in a timely

manner. Therefore, please be sure Mr. Reeder's new attorney is aware that I am not going to

agree to any requests for extension of the summary judgment response date or continuances of

the hearing.

This letter is being sent so that you, Mr. Reeder, and Mr. Reeder's new counsel are all

aware of my unwillingness to grant any extensions while there is still an adequate time and

ample oppor-tunity for a response to our summary judgment motion to be made in a timely

manner.

Thank you for your attention in this regard. Please call if you have any questions.

. BENNETT WHITE

JBW:sg

JBW - 007
8119t2015

From: Hightail<delivery@yousendit.com>

To: tfields@bwlawfirm.com

Sent: 210412015 3:09PM

Subject: File Delivered: 2012 lnvoices

To: barbara.cogc@yahoo.com

Subject 2012 lnvoices

Message: Barbara,

Please follow this link to download lhe 2012 invoice Wendell was needing. Please call me if you have any

problems with the download.

Thanks,

Susan Gardner

LegalAssistant

903-597-4300

File: 01-20-12.pdt

Size: 29.61 KB

File:02-20-12.pdf

Size: 28.99 KB

File: 03-20-12.pdf

Size:28.41 KB

File:04-20-12.pdf

Size:23.5 KB

File: 05-20-12.pdf

Size: 26.02 KB

Page 1

JBW - 008
8119t2015

File: 06-20-12.pdt

Size:24.42K8

File: 07-20-12.pdt

Size: 28.5 KB

File: 08-20-12.pdt

Size:26.22K8

File: 09-20-12.pdf

Size:28.07 KB

File: 10-20- 12.pdÍ

Size:26.59 KB

File: 11-20-12.pdf

Size: 24.3 KB

. -:'

',.

File:12-20-12.pidf :/ 

, ' 

-..,

Size:23.62 KB

Expires: Content will be available for download until February 18,201513:09 PST

Here's the link to this fite: https://www.hightail.com/downioad/UlRRZHlpSWUSRmJMbjhUQw

Terms of Service: http://www.hightail.com/terms-of-service Privacy Policy :

Page 2

JBW - 009
8119t2015

http://www.hightail.com/aboutus/legal/privacy DMCA Policy: http://www.hightail.com/dmca

Page 3

JBW - 010
8119t2015

From: Hightailcdelivery@yousendit.com>

To: tfields@bwlawfirm.com

Sent 210512015 10:214M SubjecÍ File Delivered: Reeder lnvoices - 20'|.1 and 2Q13

To: barbara. cogc@yahoo. com

Subject: Reeder lnvoices -2l11and 2013

Message: Barbara,

Please follow this link to download the additional invoices Wendell called about this morning. Please call

me if you have any problems with downloading.

Susan Gardner

LegalAssistant

903-597-4300

File: december - 2011.pdf

Size: 25.28 KB

File: november - 2011.pdf

Size: 29.94 KB

File: february - 2013.pdf

Size:26.92 KB

File: march - 2013.pdf

Size:25.11 KB

Expires: Content will be available for download until February 19,2015 08:21 PST

Page 1

JBW - 011
8t19t2015

Here's the link to this file: https://rrvwwhightail.com/download/UlRRZHlvYXkl Ujd2WnNUQw

Terms of Service: http//www.hightail.con/terms-of-service Privacy Policy:

http://wwwhightail.com/aboutus/legal/privacy DMCA Policy: http://www.hightail.com/dmca

Page 2

JBW - 012
8/19/2015

From: JBW

To: barbara.cogc@yahoo.com

Sent: 3/26/2015 4:14AM

Subject: Updated Balance Calculations

Barbara,

I have attached a corrected version of the spreadsheet I faxed on Tuesday. I corrected the duplication you

noticed and added some other corrections.

On the Adversary Proceeding, I somehow missed all the activity between July 2011 and August, 2012.

Attached are lists of the invoices and payments that were initially not included.

I also went ahead and added the recent payments.

On the Total page, I broke down the payments by source according to our records. We are in complete

agreement as to the payments made by Smith & Coffman ($21,911.79). I don't know where you included

the payments made by W. R. Diversified and I don't know if you included the payments made by Gaither or

the expense advance payments that we have been holding in our trust account.

In any event, we account for total payments of $735,627.13 which pays all account balances except for a

handful of Wendell's personal accounts. This reconciles to a final balance of $211,146.85, which is within

$25 of the balance on our current aging ($211,122.54), after crediting the recent payments ($46,274.20).

Although our breakdown is a little different, it seems to me that we are pretty much in line with each other

on the total payment amounts. Please let me know if you have any questions or have identified any other

discrepancies.

J. Bennett White

J. Bennett White, P.C.

903.597.4300

903.597.4330 Fax

www.jbwlawfirm.com

Page 1

JBW - 013
From: J. Bennett White <jbw@jbwlawfirm.com>; 

To: <barbara.cogc@yahoo.com>; 

Subject: Updated Balance Calculations 

Sent: Thu, Mar 26, 2015 9:35:19 AM 

Got your email. Yes, we are in agreement on Smith & Coffman. We are still going through COGC and 

payments made by Wendell and WR Diversified. Will mesh those with this revised info you sent and get 

back with you. 

Barbara 

Barbara, 

I have attached a corrected version of the spreadsheet I faxed on Tuesday. I corrected the duplication 

you noticed and added some other corrections. 

On the Adversary Proceeding, I somehow missed all the activity between July 2011 and August, 2012. 

Attached are lists of the invoices and payments that were initially not included. 

I also went ahead and added the recent payments. 

On the Total page, I broke down the payments by source according to our records. We are in complete 

agreement as to the payments made by Smith & Coffman ($21,911.79). I don't know where you 

included the payments made by W. R. Diversified and I don't know if you included the payments made 

by Gaither or the expense advance payments that we have been holding in our trust account. 

In any event, we account for total payments of $735,627.13 which pays all account balances except for a 

handful of Wendell's personal accounts. This reconciles to a final balance of $211,146.85, which is 

within $25 of the balance on our current aging ($211,122.54), after crediting the recent payments 

($46,274.20). 

Although our breakdown is a little different, it seems to me that we are pretty much in line with each 

other on the total payment amounts. Please let me know if you have any questions or have identified 

any other discrepancies. 

J. Bennett White 

J. Bennett White, P.C. 

903.597.4300 

903.597.4330 Fax 

www.jbwlawfirm.com 

Page 1 of 1

about:blank 8/19/2015

JBW - 014