COMPLAINT IN REMOVED ACTION FOR APPLICATION FOR

JUDGMENT ON WRIT OF GARNISHMENT UNDER TEXAS LAW Page 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH DIVISION

TRIPLE S SPORTS AND 

ENTERTAINMENT GROUP LIMITED

§

§

§

§

Garnishor, §

§

v. §

§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:22-CV-00861-P

CHRISTOPHER STEVEN KIRCHNER

Defendant/Judgment Debtor

and

MERRILL LYNCH, PIERCE, FENNER & 

SMITH, INCORPORATED

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

Garnishee. §

COMPLAINT IN REMOVED ACTION FOR APPLICATION FOR

JUDGMENT ON WRIT OF GARNISHMENT UNDER TEXAS LAW1

1. Triple S Sports and Entertainment Group Limited (“Garnishor” or “Triple S”) by 

and through its attorneys in fact, ROWLETT HILL COLLINS LLP, previously made application 

under Texas law for the issuance of a writ of garnishment against MERRILL LYNCH, PIERCE, 

FENNER & SMITH INCORPORATED (“Garnishee”) in Cause # 153-335874-22 in the 153rd

1 This Complaint was prepared and filed to comply with the Court’s Order [Doc. # 7] directing Garnishee

to file an Amended Complaint to conform its previous state court Petition to Federal Court pleading style and 

requirements. As previously plead in Garnishor’s Motion for Remand or, Alternatively, Motion for Judgment [Doc. 

#8], Garnishee contends this proceeding was improperly removed to federal court and should be remanded. This

Complaint is filed subject to Garnishee’s pending Motion for Remand or, Alternatively, Motion for Judgment and is 

not intended, nor should it be read, to be a request for a “new” Writ of Garnishment or any other relief beyond that 

sought in its Motion for Judgment should the Court deny Garnishee’s Motion for Remand. As explained more fully 

in its Alternative Motion for Judgment, the Garnishor has answered that it holds funds/accounts subject to the Writ 

of Garnishment issued by the state court and, pursuant to Texas law, there is no further litigation required than for 

the appropriate court to enter judgment ordering the delivery of those funds/accounts to Garnishor and, if necessary, 

the sale of securities held in those accounts followed by payment of those proceeds to Garnishor. 

Case 4:22-cv-00861-P Document 10 Filed 10/19/22 Page 1 of 5 PageID 98
COMPLAINT IN REMOVED ACTION FOR APPLICATION FOR

JUDGMENT ON WRIT OF GARNISHMENT UNDER TEXAS LAW Page 2

District Court of Tarrant County, Texas. The Tarrant County District Court issued the Writ and 

the Writ was served on Garnishee and the Defendant/Judgment Debtor, Christopher Steven 

Kirchner (“Kirchner”) against whom Garnishor holds a judgment valued at approximately

$2.1Million including accrued interest. Garnishee, Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, 

Incorporated (“Merrill”) has answered the Writ and admitted holding accounts belonging to 

Kirchner valued at over $252,000.00. See [Doc. #4, Merrill’s Answer to Writ of Garnishment]

(Judicial Notice Requested)

2. Subject to its Motion for Remand, Garnishor Triple S has moved under Texas 

Law in this court, sitting in diversity, for Judgment for the funds/accounts/effects held by 

Garnishee. See [Doc. #8, Motion for Remand or, Alternatively, Motion for Judgment] (Judicial 

Notice Requested)

I. PARTIES

3. Garnishor is a limited liability company organized under the laws of the United 

Kingdom. Triple S holds a Final Judgment against Defendant/Judgment Debtor Christopher 

Steven Kirchner, in the amount of approximately $2.1 Million plus accruing interest. That Final 

Judgment remains valid and is wholly unsatisfied. 

4. Defendant/Judgment Debtor, Christopher Steven Kirchner, is a resident of 

Westlake, Tarrant County, Texas which is located in the federal Judicial District for the Northern 

District of Texas. Mr. Kirchner is a “local Defendant” within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. 

1441(b)(2) which precludes the exercise of diversity jurisdiction in this matter.

5. Garnishee is a foreign financial institution organized under the laws of the state of 

Delaware and registered to do business in Texas. Garnishee has been served with and has 

Case 4:22-cv-00861-P Document 10 Filed 10/19/22 Page 2 of 5 PageID 99
COMPLAINT IN REMOVED ACTION FOR APPLICATION FOR

JUDGMENT ON WRIT OF GARNISHMENT UNDER TEXAS LAW Page 3

answered the Writ of Garnishment issued in this proceeding by the Tarrant County District Court

and has generally appeared for all purposes.

II. JURISDICTION

6. As explained in Garnishor’s Motion for Remand, Garnishor does NOT believe 

this federal court may exercise subject matter jurisdiction over this matter under the diversity of 

jurisdiction statute invoked by Garnishee for, among other reasons, Defendant/Judgment Debtor 

Kirchner is a “local defendant” residing within the area encompassing the judicial district for the 

Northern District of Texas. See [Doc. #8](Judicial Notice Requested).

7. This Court would, if the exercise of diversity jurisdiction is found to be proper, 

have personal jurisdiction over the parties as Garnishor and Garnishee have voluntarily

submitted themselves to jurisdiction in this District and Defendant/Judgment Debtor Kirchner is 

a resident of this District.

III. VENUE

8. If the exercise of diversity jurisdiction is found to be proper in this matter, Venue 

would be proper in this District as the Defendant/Judgment Debtor is a resident of this District

and the state court action that is the subject of this removed case was pending within this District 

in Tarrant County, Texas.

IV. STATEMENT OF THE CASE

9. On August 9, 2022, in this the 153rd Judicial District Court of Tarrant County, 

Texas in cause number 153-334352-22, and styled, Triple S Sports and Entertainment Group 

Limited v. Christopher Steven Kirchner (the “Lawsuit”), this Court entered judgment that

Garnishor recover from Christopher Steven Kirchner, damages in the amount of $2,098,990.67

plus interest at the contractual rate of 5.75% until paid. A true and correct copy of the Judgment 

Case 4:22-cv-00861-P Document 10 Filed 10/19/22 Page 3 of 5 PageID 100
COMPLAINT IN REMOVED ACTION FOR APPLICATION FOR

JUDGMENT ON WRIT OF GARNISHMENT UNDER TEXAS LAW Page 4

is attached hereto as Exhibit A. The judgment is in all things valid, and subsisting, and it is 

wholly unsatisfied. 

10. The state court issued a Writ of Garnishment directed to Garnishee and Garnishee

and the Defendant/Judgment Debtor were duly served with the Writ and related materials 

pursuant to Texas law. 

11. After removing the state court proceeding to this Court, Garnishee answered the

Writ and admitted holding funds/accounts/securities belonging to Kirchner valued at just over 

$252,000.00. See [Doc. 4, Garnishee’s Answer] (Judicial Notice Requested).

12. Garnishor has now moved under Texas law, subject to its Motion for Remand, for 

Judgment on the Writ and Garnishee’s Answer. See [Doc. 8, Motion for Remand or, 

Alternatively, Motion for Judgment] (Judicial Notice Requested).

13. The name and last known post office address of the Defendant/Judgment Debtor, 

Christopher Steven Kirchner (“Kirchner”), is:

Christopher Steven Kirchner

1209 Perdenalas Tr.

Westlake, TX 76262

14. Within Garnishor’s knowledge, the judgment debtor, Christopher Steven 

Kirchner, does not possess property in Texas subject to execution that is sufficient to satisfy the 

above-described judgment.

15. Garnishee has admitted in its Answer to having in hand non-exempt property 

belonging to Kirchner consisting of one or more bank account(s), securities accounts, and other 

assets of Kirchner valued at slightly over $252,000.00.

Case 4:22-cv-00861-P Document 10 Filed 10/19/22 Page 4 of 5 PageID 101
COMPLAINT IN REMOVED ACTION FOR APPLICATION FOR

JUDGMENT ON WRIT OF GARNISHMENT UNDER TEXAS LAW Page 5

16. Garnishor’s application for the Writ issues by the state court was supported by the 

declaration of Stewart Jones, a person having knowledge of the relevant facts. See [Doc. #1-2] 

(Juridical Notice Requested)

V. REQUEST FOR RELIEF

17. WHEREFORE, subject to its Motion for Remand, Garnishor requests the Court 

enter Judgment that Garnishee shall pay to Garnishor the full value of the accounts identified in 

Garnishee’s Answer to the State Court Writ of Garnishment and, if necessary, to sell at current 

market prices and reduce to cash any securities held in the identified accounts and to pay such 

proceeds to Garnishor to satisfy the prior judgment as provided by law, together with all costs of 

court, and such other relief to which Garnishee may be justly entitled. 

Respectfully submitted,

 ROWLETT HILL COLLINS LLP

By: /s/ Donald E. Hill

DONALD E. HILL

State Bar No. 24007364

6060 N. Central Expressway., Suite 500

Dallas, TX 75206

214.800.3492

214.292.1168 (fax)

dhill@rowletthill.com

ATTORNEYS FOR TRIPLE S SPORTS AND 

ENTERTAINMENT GROUP LIMITED

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that the foregoing document was served on counsel for Garnishee, Mr. 

Justin Opitz, via the District Court’s ECF system on the 19th day of October 2022.

___/s/ Donald E. Hill____

Donald E. Hill

Counsel for Garnishor

Case 4:22-cv-00861-P Document 10 Filed 10/19/22 Page 5 of 5 PageID 102