ACCEPTED

03-14-00518-CV

6228065

THIRD COURT OF APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

7/27/2015 10:07:03 AM

JEFFREY D. KYLE

CLERK

Nos. 03-14-00515-CV & 03-14-00518-CV 

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE THIRD DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN, TEXAS 

SALVA TORE MARGARACI AND ESTATE PROTECTION PLANNING 

CORPORATION, Appellants 

v. 

EDUARDO S. ESPINOSA, IN HIS CAP A CITY AS RECEIVER OF 

RETIREMENT VALUE, LLC, Appellee 

And 

JAMES POE AND SENIOR RETIREMENT PLANNERS, LLC, 

Appellants 

v. 

EDUARDO S. ESPINOSA, IN HIS CAP A CITY AS RECEIVER OF 

RETIREMENT VALUE, LLC, Appellee 

Appeal from the 200th District Court 

Travis County, Texas 

Honorable Judge Gisela Triana 

RESPONSE TO MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE APPEALS 

 FILED IN 3rd COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 7/27/2015 10:07:03 AM JEFFREY D. KYLE Clerk
- 2-

Respectfully submitted, 

ALDRICH PLLC 

Scott Lindsey 

State Bar No. 24036969 

1130 Fort Worth Club Tower 

777 Taylor Street 

Fort Worth, Texas 76102 

Telephone: 817-336-5601 

Facsimile: 817-336-5297 

slindsey@aldrichpllc.com 

ATTORNEYS FOR 

APPELLANTS JAMES POE 

AND SENIOR RETIREMENT 

PLANNERS, LLC 
RESPONSE TO MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE APPEALS 

James Poe and Senior Retirement Planners, LLC, the appellants in Cause 

No. 03-14-00518-CV, file their Response to Appellee Espinosa's Motion to 

Consolidate Appeals as follows: 

Contrary to Espinosa's claim that "the cases were tried together," there was 

no trial involving Appellants Poe and SRP. Also incorrect is Espinosa's claim that 

the "issues are exactly the same" in the Magaraci appeal and the Poe appeal. Only 

one of Poe's three appellate issues is similar to the issue presented by Magaraci. 

The majority of Poe and SRP's appeal bears no similarity to Magaraci's appeal, 

and a cursory review of Poe's and Magaraci's appellate briefs confirms the 

dissimilarity in these appeals. As pointed out by Magaraci, the Poe appeal "raises 

two additional fact-bound issues" that are not involved in Magaraci's appeal. 

Margaraci's Appellants' Brief, at 7. The legal and factual issues are therefore not 

"exactly the same" as alleged by Espinosa, and consolidation does not simplify the 

issues for this Court. It is not enough to simply allege that the appeals should be 

consolidated since they arise from the same litigation. 

The Court has many options short of consolidation that would avoid 

duplicate work or inconsistent results. 

- 3 -
Appellants James Poe and Senior Retirement Planners, LLC pray that the 

Court deny Appellee's motion to consolidate. Appellants further request all other 

relief to which they may be entitled. 

- 4-

Respectfully submitted, 

ALDRICH PLLC 

Scott Lindsey 

State Bar No. 24036969 

slindsey@aldrichpllc.com 

1130 Fort Worth Club Tower 

777 Taylor Street 

Fort Worth, Texas 76102 

Telephone: 817-336-5601 

Telecopier: 817-336-5297 

ATTORNEYS FOR 

APPELLANTS JAMES POE 

AND SENIOR RETIREMENT 

PLANNERS, LLC 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

This is to certify that on this the 271

h day of July, 2015, the foregoing motion 

was filed electronically with the Clerk for the Third Court of Appeals. A copy was 

served by electronic mail upon the following: 

John W. Thomas 

114 W. 7th Street, Suite 1100 

Austin, Texas 78701-3015 

jthomas@gbkh.com 

Timothy A. Hootman 

2402 Pease Street 

Houston, Texas 77003 

Thootman2000@yahoo.com 

Scott Lindsey 

- 5-