MACKEY ("MACK") ("MACK") GLENPETERSON, GLEN PETERSON, § INTHE DISTRICT IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF COURT OF Individually Individually and as Next and as Next Friend ofRUBY of RUBY § _ PETERSON, PETERSON, DONLESLIE DON LESLIE PETERSON, PETERSON, § Individually Individually and asNext and as Friend Next Friend ofRUBY of RUBY § PETERSON, PETERSON, andLONNY and LONNY P ETERSON, § PETERSON, < Individually Individually and as Next and as FriendooffRUBY Next Friend RUBY § PETERSON, PETERSON, ti r Plaintiffs § · vs. vs. § HARRIS HARRIS COUNTY, COUNTY, TEXAS
CAROLANNE CAROL ANNEMANLEY, MANLEY, DAVID DAVID § PETERSON, PETERSON, SILVERADO SILVERADO SENIORLIVING SENIOR LIVING§ FACILITY, FACILITY, TANAMCMILLON, TANA MCMILLON, DR. DR. § REBECCA REBECCA CLEARMAN, CLEARMAN, andDR.CHRIS and DR. CHRIS § MERKL, MERKL, § Defendants Defendants § 129thJUDICIAL JUDICIAL DISTRICT DISTRICT
ORDER FORSAN CTIONS ORDER FOR SANCTIONS
BEITREMEMBERED BE IT REMEMBERED that September onSeptember that on 18,22014 18, 014came to beconsidered onto came on be considered theMotion the Motion
forSanctions byW.Russ for Sanctions filed by W. Russ Jones, inhiscapacity Jones,in Attomey asCourt-appointed Attorney his capacity as AdLitem Ad Litem for for
RubyS. Ruby S.Peterson andbyJill Peterson and Young, by Jill Young, inher in capacity her capacity as the as Guardian the Court-appointed Guardian AdLitem Ad Litem
forRuby S.Peterson, for Ruby S. andtheCourt, Peterson, and afterreviewing the Court, after reviewingthepleadings, the pleadings, theMotion forSanctions, the Motion for Sanctions,
Plaintiffs' Response Plaintiffs' Response thereto, thereto, andMovant's and Replyto Movant's Reply Plaintiffs' toPlaintiffs' Response, Response, hearing after hearing tthe he
Silverado Appx. 0025 No. 1-15-586-CV 3538 arguments arguments ofcounsel of andafter considering the counsel and theevidence thehearing, atthe evidence offered at hearing, the Courtisisofthe the Court of the
opinion opinion tthat hattheMotion the Motion ffor orSanctions Sanctions should should b beegranted. Specifically, granted. Specifically, theCourt finds the findsthat, that,based based upon tthe upon hetotality totality oftheevidence during of the evidence admitted during the the hearing ontheMotions hearing on forSanctions, the Motions for each Sanctions, each
andalloftheallegations and brought all of the allegations brought byPlaintiffs by against Plaintiffs against Defendants Defendants CarolAnn Carol AnnManley andDavid Manley and David
TroyPeterson, Troy Peterson, acting intheir acting in capacity their capacity agents // attomeys-in-fact as agents as attorneys-in-fact forRuby S.Peterson, for Ruby S. Peterson, did did not, not,
at thetime atthe offiling of time of oftheoffensive pleading the offensive pleading andmotion, and anddo motion, and do not haveevidentiary now,have not now, evidentiary
support; support; norwere nor theyat were they thetime atthe oftheirfiling, time of likelyto their filing, likely to have evidentiary have evidentiary support after support after a
reasonable forfurther reasonable opportunity for investigation. further investigation. Under Under Chapter l0oftheTexas Chapter 10 of the Texas Civil Civil Practice Practice
andRemedies and Code,as Remedies Code, established asestablished intheMotions in forSanctions, the Motions for Sanctions, theallegations complained the allegations complained of of
didnot did haveevidentiary nothave evidentiarysupport support norwere nor theyat were they atthetime ofsigning, the time of likelyto signing, likely haveevidentiary to have evidentiaryl support support aftera reasonable after reasonable opportunity for for further investigation. TheCourt further investigation. The furtherfinds