1 Cll'/ESERVE 

FILED 

6/27/2022 12:15 PM 

FELICIA PITRE 

DISTRICT CLERK 

DALLAS CO., TEXAS 

Belinda Hernandez DEPUTY 

CAUSE NO. DC-22-03995 

ROBERTO HINOJOSA 

Plaintiff 

►~ 

DAIRY FARMERS OF AMERICA, INC., 

SOUTHERN FOODS GROUP, LLC 

D/B/A HYGEIA DAIRY AND DEAN 

FOODS COMPANY 

Defendants 

§ IN THE DISTRICT COURT 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 192ND JUDICIAL DISTRICT 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS 

PLAINTIFF'S FIRST AMENDED PETITION 

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT: 

NOw COMES, ROBERTO HINOJOSA, hereinafter referred to by name or as 

Plaintiff, and complains of DAIRY FARMERS OF AMERICA, SOUTHERN FOODS GROUP, 

LLC D/B/A HYGEIA DAIRY AND DEAN FOODS COMPANY hereinafter referred to by 

name or as Defendants, and for cause of action would respectfully show unto the 

Court as follows: 

I. DISCOVERY 

1.1 Plaintiff intends that discovery be conducted under LEVEL 3 of RULE 190.4 of 

the TEXAS RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. 

II. PARTIES 

2.1 Plaintiff ROBERTO HINOJOSA is an individual residing in Corpus Christi, 

Nueces County, Texas. 

2.2 Defendant SOUTHERN FOODS GROUP, LLC D/B/A HYGEIA DAIRY (hereinafter 

referred to as "HYGEIA") is a Delaware limited liability company doing business in 

1 

HINOJOSA RoBERTo- NZR 

EXHIBIT A-3

Case 3:22-cv-01880-X Document 1-4 Filed 08/24/22 Page 1 of 14 PageID 33
Texas under the assumed name HYGEIA DAIRY from its principal place of business 

located at 2711 N. Haskell Ave., Ste. 3400, Dallas, Dallas County, Texas. This 

Defendant has been served and no further service of process is necessary. 

2.3 Defendant DEAN FooDS COMPANY is a foreign for-profit corporation with its 

central business office at 2711 N. Haskell Ave., Ste. 3400, Dallas, Dallas County, 

Texas. This Defendant has been served and no further service of process is necessary. 

2.4 Defendant DAIRY FARMERS OF AMERICA is a foreign corporation with its 

central business office Kansas City,lVlissouri. This Defendant may be served serving 

its registered agent with service of process at: Corporation Services Company, 

211 E. 7th Street, Suite 620, Austin, TX 78701-3218 USA. 

III. SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION, PERSONAL JURISDICTION, AND VENUE 

3.1 Subject matter jurisdiction is proper in this Court because the amount in 

controversy is within the jurisdictional limits of the court in which Plaintiff now sues. 

3.2 This court has personal jurisdiction over the parties because all the parties 

involved are either Texas residents/entities and/or do business in the State of Texas. 

3.3 Venue is proper in Dallas County, Texas, pursuant to § 15.002(a)(3) of the CIVIL 

PRACTICE & REMEDIES CODE because it is the county in which two of the defendants 

operated their principal offices in this state at the time of the event in question. 

3.4 Pursuant to TEXAS RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 47(c)(5), Plaintiff has suffered 

damages in excess of $1,000,000. 

2 

HINOJOSA ROBERTo- NZR 

Case 3:22-cv-01880-X Document 1-4 Filed 08/24/22 Page 2 of 14 PageID 34
IV. FACTS 

4.1 On September 27, 2020, Plaintiff, ROBERTO HINOJOSA was grievously injured 

while working security at a property owned and controlled by Defendants, DAIRY 

FARMERS OF AMERICA, INC., ("DAIRY FARMERS"), SOUTHERN FOOD GROUPS LLC 

D/B/A HYGEIA DAIRY and DEAN FOODS. Due to negligent, reckless, and dangerous 

actions committed by Defendants Hygeia and Dean Foods, HINOJOSA had a 

catastrophic fall on the property which directly caused him injuries. 

4.2 More specifically, the location was owned by and served as HYGEIA DAIRY's 

Corpus Christi operations plant, at which HINOJOSA—through his employer 

SecureCo Security—was hired to perform overnight security. Part of this job entailed 

standard security measures used in the security industry, such as surveying, 

monitoring, and generally securing the HYGEIA property overnight. A different part 

of this job, however, which is not standard security practice in the industry, was to 

ensure that HYGEIA product was kept at adequate temperatures at all times, which 

required that HINOJOSA physically perform periodic check-ups on each of the 

refrigerated trucking units in Hygeia's fleet on the property. Specifically, HINOJOSA 

was told he was to locate a temperature gauge which varied in location by vehicle but 

typically could be found at an elevated position somewhere on the outside of each 

truck's rear box unit, all of which were square in shape, large in size, and difficult to 

climb and inspect. Moreover, this was a particularly dangerous assignment due to 

the fact that the HYGEIA plant had poor, inadequate lighting which made nighttime 

visibility difficult; HINOJOSA was not provided training in how to properly undertake 

3 

HINOJOSA ROBE1tTo- NZR 

Case 3:22-cv-01880-X Document 1-4 Filed 08/24/22 Page 3 of 14 PageID 35
this task; nor was HINOJOSA supplied with any sort of personal protective equipment 

to ensure safe completion of the task. To make matters worse, the evening of 

September 27, 2020 brought with it precipitation throughout the night in the form of 

fog, mist, and occasional rain. 

4.3 As HINOJOSA climbed up on a slick, wet ladder that night to check the 

temperature gauge on one of the refrigeration units pursuant to HYGEIA directive, 

his foot lost traction and he fell several feet down, landing hard on the ground and 

sustaining fracture in his left femur and hipbone. 

4.4 The occurrence made the basis of this suit, reflected above, and the resulting 

injuries and damages were proximately caused by the negligent conduct of the 

Defendants, SOUTHERN FOOD GROUPS LLC D/B/A HYGEIA DAIRY and DEAN FOODS 

COMPANY. 

V. CAUSES OF ACTION AGAINST DEFENDANTS 

SOUTHERN FOOD GROUPS LLC D/B/A HYGEIA DAIRY and DEAN FOODS COMPANY 

A. GENERAL NEGLIGENCE 

5.1 Defendants, HYGEIA and DEAN FOODS, had a duty to exercise the degree of 

care that a reasonably careful person would use to avoid harm to others under 

circumstances similar to those described herein. 

5.2 Defendants, HYGEIA and DEAN FOODS violated the duty which it owed 

Plaintiff ROBERTo HINOJOSA to exercise ordinary care in one or more of the following 

respects: 

a. In tasking a security guard with duties outside the scope of his 

qualifications; 

b. In failing to provide training in the assigned task; 

4 

HINOJOSA RoBEx,To- NZR 

Case 3:22-cv-01880-X Document 1-4 Filed 08/24/22 Page 4 of 14 PageID 36
C. In failing to provide personal protective equipment and/or making 

safety equipment available; 

d. In failing to adequately warn of the potential dangers it which it tasked 

to Hinojosa; 

e. In requiring the use of an unsafe ladder; 

f., In failing to take remedial measures to correct the dangerous condition. 

5.3 Such indifference and failure to act on the part of the Defendants herein 

proximately caused the injuries and other damages suffered by the Plaintiff 

ROBERTO HINOJOSA, as further detailed. 

5.4 Plaintiff ROBERTO HINOJOSA's injuries were proximately caused by 

Defendants HYGEIA and DEAN FOODS negligent, careless and reckless disregard of 

said duty. 

5.5 Each and all of the above acts and/or omissions, whether taken singularly or 

in any combination constitute negligence, negligence per se and gross negligence 

which proximately caused the injuries and other losses as specifically set forth herein, 

all of which Plaintiff ROBERTO HINOJOSA suffered and which Plaintiff ROBERTO 

HINOJOSA will continue to suffer in the future, if not for the remainder of his natural 

life. 

B. PREMISES LIABILITY 

5.6 Plaintiff ROBERTO HINOJOSA was a business invitee to whom Defendants 

owed a duty to exercise reasonable care to protect him from dangerous conditions on 

the property known or discoverable to it. 

5.7 The conditions HINOJOSA was exposed to—slick, slippery equipment, 

substantial fall risks, poor and inadequate lighting--created unreasonable risks to 

the Plaintiff. 

5 

HINOJOSA RosERTo- NZR 

Case 3:22-cv-01880-X Document 1-4 Filed 08/24/22 Page 5 of 14 PageID 37
5.8 These unreasonably dangerous conditions were created by the Defendants, and 

the Defendants knew of the conditions or should have known of them but nevertheless 

failed to warn ROBERTO HINOJOSA or to make the conditions reasonably safe. 

5.9 Indeed, Plaintiff was not aware of the danger beforehand, as the unsafe 

conditions were not open and obvious dangers and Defendants gave no notice to 

Plaintiff of the unreasonably dangerous conditions created by Defendants despite 

their prior knowledge of the conditions. 

5.10 At all times relevant to this lawsuit, the Defendant knew or should have known 

of unreasonably dangerous conditions on its premises and of the foreseeable harm 

that their failure to act posed to the Plaintiff ROBERTO HINOJOSA and those similarly 

situated. 

5.11 Defendants, HYGEIA and DEAN FOODS violated the duty which it owed 

Plaintiff ROBERTO HINOJOSA to exercise ordinary care in the maintenance of its 

premises in one or more of the following respects: 

a. in failing to monitor the conditions of its premises, which a person of 

ordinary prudence would have done under same or similar 

circumstances; 

b. in creating the dangerous condition on its premises; 

C. in failing to timely discover the dangerous condition in question; 

d. _ in failing to timely warn others or provide • notice of the dangerous 

conditions in question; 

e. in failing to adequately secure the dangerous condition, and the area 

within the immediate vicinity of the dangerous condition; 

f. in failing to take immediate remedial measures to correct the 

dangerous condition; 

g. in failing to appropriately safeguard against the appearance of such a 

dangerous condition on its premises; and 

h. in taking improper measures to adequately and appropriately 

safeguard the dangerous condition on its premises. 

6 

HINOJOSA RoBER'ro- NZR 

Case 3:22-cv-01880-X Document 1-4 Filed 08/24/22 Page 6 of 14 PageID 38
5.12 The occurrence made the basis of this lawsuit and the resulting injuries and 

the damages were proximately caused by the negligence of the Defendants, its agents, 

servants, and employees because the Plaintiff ROBERTO HINOJOSA was a business 

invitee to whom the Defendants owed a duty to exercise reasonable care to protect 

him from dangerous conditions on the property known or discoverable to it. 

C. NEGLIGENT ENTRUSTMENT/NEGLIGENT VEHICLE MONITORING/ NEGLIGENT 

NIANAGEMENT/NEGLIGENT CONTRACTING/NEGLIGENT MAINTENANCE/ 

NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION/NEGLIGENT TRAINING 

5.13 Additionally, Defendants, HYGEIA and DEAN FOODS are also negligent in one 

or more of the following respects: 

a. Negligent entrustment; 

b. Negligent vehicle monitoring; 

C. Negligent management; 

d. Negligent contracting; 

e. Negligent training 

f. Negligent maintenance; 

g. Negligent supervision; and 

h. Such additional acts of negligence, which will be established as the 

case progresses 

D. GROSS NEGLIGENCE 

5.14 As set out above, Defendants' actions constitute not only negligence but gross 

negligence. Defendants' acts or omissions when viewed objectively from the actor's 

standpoint, at the time of the occurrence, involved an extreme degree of risk, 

considering the probability and magnitude of the potential harm to others. 

Defendants had actual, subjective awareness of risk involved and nevertheless 

proceeded in conscious indifference to the rights, safety, or welfare of the Plaintiff, or 

others similarly situated. As a result, each of the Defendants' acts and omissions 

7 

HINOJOSA ROBERTo- NZR 

Case 3:22-cv-01880-X Document 1-4 Filed 08/24/22 Page 7 of 14 PageID 39
constitute gross negligence and Plaintiff is entitled to the recovery of exemplary 

damages. 

VI. DAMAGES 

6.1 As a direct and proximate result of the inherently hazardous condition and the 

negligent conduct of the Defendants, Plaintiff ROBERTO HINOJOSA suffered severe 

and catastrophic bodily injuries. 

6.2 These injuries are permanent in nature. These injuries have had a serious 

effect on the Plaintiff ROBERTO HINOJOSA's health and well-being. Some of the 

effects are permanent and will abide with the Plaintiff ROBERTO HINOJOSA for a long 

time into the future, if not for his entire life. These specific injuries and their ill 

effects have, in turn, caused the Plaintiffs physical and mental condition to 

deteriorate generally and the specific injuries and ill effects alleged have caused and 

will, in all reasonable probability, caused the Plaintiff ROBERTO HINOJOSA to suffer 

consequences and ill effects of this deterioration throughout his body for a long time 

in the future, if not for the balance of his natural life. 

6.3 As a further result of the nature and consequences of his injuries, Plaintiff 

ROBERTo HINOJOSA suffered great physical and mental pain, suffering and anguish 

and in all reasonable probability, will continue to suffer in this manner for a long 

time into the future, if not for the balance of his natural life. 

6.4 As a further result of all of the above, Plaintiff ROBERTO HINOJOSA has 

incurred expenses for medical care and attention. These expenses were incurred for 

the necessary care and treatment of the injuries resulting from the incident 

8 

HINOJOSA RoBER'r0- NZR 

Case 3:22-cv-01880-X Document 1-4 Filed 08/24/22 Page 8 of 14 PageID 40
complained of. The charges are reasonable and were the usual and customary 

charges made for such services in the County where they were incurred. 

6.5 As a further result of the injuries sustained by the Plaintiff ROBERTO 

HINOJOSA, there is a reasonable probability that he will require further medical care 

and attention and will incur future reasonable and necessary expenses for his medical 

care and attention. 

6.6 As a consequence of the injuries sustained by the Plaintiff ROBERTO 

HINOJOSA, they have sustained physical impairment and disfigurement. In all 

reasonable probability, this disability will cause him to suffer long into the future, if 

not for the balance of his natural life. 

6.7 As a further consequence of the injuries sustained by the Plaintiff, he has 

suffered loss of wages, and due further to the injuries, he has experienced a loss of 

future wage-earning capacity. 

6.8 By reason of all of the above, Plaintiff ROBERTO HINOJosA has suffered losses 

and damages in a sum within the jurisdictional limits of this Court for which he now 

files suit. 

A. EXEMPLARY DAMAGES 

6.9 Defendants had actual, subjective awareness of the risk involved but, 

nevertheless, proceeded with in conscious indifference to the rights, safety, or welfare 

of the Plaintiff ROBERTO HINOJOSA, and others similarly situated. As a result, each 

of the Defendants' acts and omissions constitute gross negligence and Plaintiff is 

entitled to the recovery of exemplary damages. 

9 

HINOJOSA RoBEx,To- NZR 

Case 3:22-cv-01880-X Document 1-4 Filed 08/24/22 Page 9 of 14 PageID 41
VII. INTEREST 

7.1 Plaintiff ROBERTO HINOJOSA further requests both pre judgment and post 

judgment interest on all their damages as allowed by law. 

VIII. REQ.UEST FOR JURY TRIAL 

8.1 Plaintiff demands that this case be decided by a jury as allowed by TEx. R. CIv. 

P.215. Plaintiff acknowledges payment of the required jury fee. 

IX. NOTICE OFAUTHENTICATION OF DOCUMENTS PURSUANT TO TRCP 193.7 

9.1 Plaintiff hereby provides actual notice to Defendants that Plaintiff will use any 

or every document produced by each and every Defendant in response to written 

discovery, in a pretrial proceeding, or at trial. Pursuant to RULE 193.7 of the TEXAS 

RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, any Defendant's production of a document in response to 

written discovery authenticates the document for use against that Defendant or any 

other Defendant, unless- within ten (10) days or a longer or shorter time ordered by 

the court- Defendant objects to the authenticity of the document, or any part of it, 

stating the specific basis for its objection. An objection must be either on the record 

or in writing and must have a good faith factual and legal basis. An objection made 

to the authenticity of only part of a document does not affect the authenticity of the 

remainder. 

X. PRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE/SPOLIATION NOTICE 

10.1 Plaintiff hereby requests and demands that Defendants preserve and 

maintain all evidence pertaining to any claim or defense related to the incident made 

the basis of this lawsuit, or the damages resulting therefrom, including contracts, 

10 

HINOJOSA ROBE1tTo- NZR 

Case 3:22-cv-01880-X Document 1-4 Filed 08/24/22 Page 10 of 14 PageID 42
lists of donors, emails, minutes of ineetings, memoranda, correspondence, financial 

records, diagrams, maps, photographs, videotapes, audiotapes, recordings, invoices, 

checks, files, facsimiles, voicemails, text messages, calendar entries, log books, or 

information related to the reference claim. Failure to maintain such items shall 

constitute a"spoliation" of the evidence. 

PRAYER 

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiff ROBERTO HINOJOSA requests 

that Defendants be cited to appear and answer, and on final trial hereafter, that 

Plaintiff ROBERTO HINOJOSA have judgment against Defendants in an amount 

within the jurisdictional limits of this Court, together with all pre-judgment and postjudgment interest as allowed by law, costs of Court, and for such other and further 

relief to which Plaintiff ROBERTO HINOJOSA may be justly entitled by law and equity, 

including, but not limited to: 

1. Physical pain in the past; 

2. Physical pain which, in all likelihood, he will experience in the future; 

3. Mental anguish in the past; 

4. Mental anguish which, in all likelihood, he will experience in the future; 

5. Past medical expenses; 

6. Medical expenses that in all likelihood, will be incurred in the future; 

7. Physical impairment in the past; 

8. Physical impairment, that in all likelihood, will be experienced in the 

future; 

9. Physical disfigurement; 

10. Lost wages in the past; 

11. Loss of earning capacity that in all likelihood, will be experienced in the 

future; 

12. Loss of consortium; 

13. Pre-judgment interest; 

14. Post judgment interest; and 

15. Exemplary damages. 

11 

HINOJOSA RoBEx,To- NZR 

Case 3:22-cv-01880-X Document 1-4 Filed 08/24/22 Page 11 of 14 PageID 43
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, 

DESOUZA INJURY LAWYERS 

3201 CHERRY RIDGE DR., SUITE C-300 

SAN ANTONiO, TEXAS 78230 

210/ 714-4215 — PHONE 

210/496-0060 — FACSIMILE 

BY:/S/Jason F. DeSouza 

JASON F. DESOUZA 

STATE BAR NO.: 24073255 

jason@jfdlawfirm.com

BY:/S/Nathan Z. Robinson 

NATHAN Z. ROBINSON 

STATE BAR NO.: 24072306 

snathan@ifdlawfirm.com

ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFFS 

12 

HINOJOSA ROBERTO- NZR 

Case 3:22-cv-01880-X Document 1-4 Filed 08/24/22 Page 12 of 14 PageID 44
Automated Certificate of eService 

This automated certificate of service was created by the efiling system. 

The filer served this document via email generated by the efiling system 

on the date and to the persons listed below. The rules governing 

certificates of service have not changed. Filers must still provide a 

certificate of service that complies with all applicable rules. 

Jason DeSouza 

Bar No. 24073255 

jason@jfdlawfirm.com

Envelope I D: 65797506 

Status as of 7/1 /2022 10:58 AM CST 

Associated Case Party: ROBERTO HINOJOSA 

Name BarNumber Email , . TimestampSubmitted Status 

Jason DeSouza jason@jfdlawfirm.com 6/27/2022 12:15:32 PM SENT 

Nathan Robinson nathan@jfdlawfirm.com 6/27/2022 12:15:32 PM SENT 

Case Contacts 

Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status 

Jason DeSouza scheduling@jfdlawfirm.com 6/27/2022 12:15:32 PM SENT 

Michelle Roberson michelle@jfdlawfirm.com 6/27/2022 12:15:32 PM SENT 

Case 3:22-cv-01880-X Document 1-4 Filed 08/24/22 Page 13 of 14 PageID 45
$8,060 

0 

US POSTAGE 

N 

o 

FIRST-CLASS

FROM 78230

JUL 20 2022 ~ 

stamps.

endicia 

David Martinez 

4843 Newcome 

San Antonio Tx 78229 

7020 0640 0001 0930 8309 

siAia~l~e'i~el"ta~i~i"~~8i0~IIII~Ii'e~as~lo"Allla~ll~~~~1~1~Bl~sl 

®AIRY FARMERS ®F AMERICA, INC 

Attn: Corporation Service Company 

211 E 7TH ST STE 620 

AUSTIN TX 78701-3218 

tl}I : ;:;a311~~`'~f~tlsi'~~'~~ ₹jj3~FjF7#~;s;s#le~Eil~s'i~;~`t 

Case 3:22-cv-01880-X Document 1-4 Filed 08/24/22 Page 14 of 14 PageID 46