On January 25, 2017 a
RESPONSE
was filed
involving a dispute between
0800989127 Wb Llc,
and
Nguyen , Huong Le,
1960 Family Practice Pa,
Cypress Creek Er Pllc,
Cypress Creek Er Of Harmony Pllc,
Providence Hospital Of North Houston Llc,
Vein Away Llc,
Tmms Holdings Llc,
for DEBT/CONTRACT (GEN LIT )
in the District Court of Travis County.
Preview
1/29/2018 1:10 PM
Velva L. Price
District Clerk
Travis County
CAUSE NO. D-1-GN-17-000347 D-1-GN-17-000347
Hector Gaucin-Tijerina
e
0800989127 WB, LLC § IN THE DISTRICT COURT
ic
Plaintiff, §
Pr
§
v. § 419th JUDICIAL DISTRICT
§
L.
HUONG LE NGUYEN, §
1960 FAMILY PRACTICE, P.A., §
a
CYPRESS CREEK ER, PLLC, §
lv
CYPRESS CREEK ER OF HARMONY §
Ve
PLLC, PROVIDENCE HOSPITAL OF §
NORTH HOUSTON LLC, VEIN §
AWAY, LLC, and TMMS HOLDINGS §
k
LLC §
er
Defendants. § TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS
Cl
PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO QUASH
TO THE HONORABLE COURT: ct
tri
Plaintiff 0800989127 WB, LLC files this Response to Defendants’ Motion to Quash and
D is
in support respectfully shows as follows:
.
Co
1. The Rules provide that depositions cannot simply be quashed as to time and place without
alternative dates being provided. See Tex. R. Civ. P. 192.6(a) (“If a person seeks protection
is
regarding the time and place of discovery, the person must state a reasonable time and place for
av
Tr
discovery with which the person will comply.”) (emphasis added).
2. Defendants have failed provide reasonable alternative dates for these depositions, even
y
op
alternatives outside the discovery period (and have refused to extend the deposition deadline). See
c
Tex. R. Civ. P. 199.2(a) (oral depositions may be taken outside the discovery period by agreement
l
ia
of the parties); see also Ex. 2 to Response to Mtn. for Continuance: Email Thread Between H.
fic
Vahl and C. Raney.
of
3. Rather than seek to schedule these depositions in good faith, Defendants have used their
Un
motion to quash (and motion for continuance) to prevent Plaintiff from taking any additional
depositions at all, presumably so that Defendants can make a better case for continuance.
e
Defendants’ approach has made the scheduling of remaining depositions even more difficult.
ic
Pr
Nevertheless, there is still time to take these remaining depositions without continuing the trial
date, even if no lawyer except Defendants’ lead counsel appears on Defendants’ behalf.
L.
4. Given that Defendants effectively prevented Plaintiff from taking depositions within the
a
lv
discovery period through their motion to quash, Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court grant
Ve
leave to conduct depositions beyond the current deadline up through February 12, 2018. See Tex.
k
R. Civ. P. 199.2(a) (oral depositions may be taken outside the discovery period with leave of
er
Cl
court); see also Mtn. to Extend the Deposition Deadline (Jan. 18, 2018).
ct
5. Plaintiff further requests that the Court order counsel for Defendants to immediately inform
tri
counsel for Plaintiff all dates and times that Defendants are available to take or defend depositions
is
in this case up through February 12, 2018, as well as all dates and times that Defendants’ corporate
D
representative(s) are available to be deposed during that period, to allow Plaintiff to notice these
.
Co
depositions on dates that counsel for Defendants and Defendants’ representatives are available.
is
6. Plaintiff additionally requests any other relief to which it may be justly entitled.
av
Tr
Date: January 29, 2018 Respectfully submitted,
TAYLOR DUNHAM AND RODRIGUEZ LLP
y
301 Congress Avenue, Suite 1050
op
Austin, Texas 78701
512-473-2257 telephone
c
512-478-4409 facsimile
l
ia
fic
By: /s/ Hannah M. Vahl
David E. Dunham
of
State Bar No. 06227700
Email: ddunham@taylordunham.com
Un
Isabelle M. Antongiorgi
State Bar No. 24059386
Plaintiff’s Response to Defendants’ Motion to Quash Page 2
Email: ima@taylordunham.com
Hannah M. Vahl
e
State Bar No. 24082377
ic
Email: hvahl@taylordunham.com
Pr
COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF
L.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
a
lv
This is to certify that on this the 29th day of January, 2018, a copy of the foregoing
Ve
document was served on the following as indicated:
VIA ELECTRONIC FILING SERVICE:
k
Christopher M. Raney
er
Email: craney@gordonrees.com
Cl
GORDON & REES LLP
1900 West Loop South, Suite 1000
ct
Houston, Texas 77027
Telephone: (713) 961-3366
tri
Facsimile: (713) 961-3938
is
ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS
D
/s/ Hannah M. Vahl
.
Co
Hannah M. Vahl
is
av
Tr
y
op
c
l
ia
fic
of
Un
Plaintiff’s Response to Defendants’ Motion to Quash Page 3
Document Filed Date
January 29, 2018
Case Filing Date
January 25, 2017
Category
DEBT/CONTRACT (GEN LIT )
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
1/29/2018 1:10 PM Velva L. Price District Clerk Travis County CAUSE NO. D-1-GN-17-000347 D-1-GN-17-000347 Hector Gaucin-Tijerina e 0800989127 WB, LLC § IN THE DISTRICT COURT ic Plaintiff, § Pr § v. § 419th JUDICIAL DISTRICT § L. HUONG LE NGUYEN, § 1960 FAMILY PRACTICE, P.A., § a CYPRESS CREEK ER, PLLC, § lv CYPRESS CREEK ER OF HARMONY § Ve PLLC, PROVIDENCE HOSPITAL OF § NORTH HOUSTON LLC, VEIN § AWAY, LLC, and TMMS HOLDINGS § k LLC § er Defendants. § TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS Cl PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO QUASH TO THE HONORABLE COURT: ct tri Plaintiff 0800989127 WB, LLC files this Response to Defendants’ Motion to Quash and D is in support respectfully shows as follows: . Co 1. The Rules provide that depositions cannot simply be quashed as to time and place without alternative dates being provided. See Tex. R. Civ. P. 192.6(a) (“If a person seeks protection is regarding the time and place of discovery, the person must state a reasonable time and place for av Tr discovery with which the person will comply.”) (emphasis added). 2. Defendants have failed provide reasonable alternative dates for these depositions, even y op alternatives outside the discovery period (and have refused to extend the deposition deadline). See c Tex. R. Civ. P. 199.2(a) (oral depositions may be taken outside the discovery period by agreement l ia of the parties); see also Ex. 2 to Response to Mtn. for Continuance: Email Thread Between H. fic Vahl and C. Raney. of 3. Rather than seek to schedule these depositions in good faith, Defendants have used their Un motion to quash (and motion for continuance) to prevent Plaintiff from taking any additional depositions at all, presumably so that Defendants can make a better case for continuance. e Defendants’ approach has made the scheduling of remaining depositions even more difficult. ic Pr Nevertheless, there is still time to take these remaining depositions without continuing the trial date, even if no lawyer except Defendants’ lead counsel appears on Defendants’ behalf. L. 4. Given that Defendants effectively prevented Plaintiff from taking depositions within the a lv discovery period through their motion to quash, Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court grant Ve leave to conduct depositions beyond the current deadline up through February 12, 2018. See Tex. k R. Civ. P. 199.2(a) (oral depositions may be taken outside the discovery period with leave of er Cl court); see also Mtn. to Extend the Deposition Deadline (Jan. 18, 2018). ct 5. Plaintiff further requests that the Court order counsel for Defendants to immediately inform tri counsel for Plaintiff all dates and times that Defendants are available to take or defend depositions is in this case up through February 12, 2018, as well as all dates and times that Defendants’ corporate D representative(s) are available to be deposed during that period, to allow Plaintiff to notice these . Co depositions on dates that counsel for Defendants and Defendants’ representatives are available. is 6. Plaintiff additionally requests any other relief to which it may be justly entitled. av Tr Date: January 29, 2018 Respectfully submitted, TAYLOR DUNHAM AND RODRIGUEZ LLP y 301 Congress Avenue, Suite 1050 op Austin, Texas 78701 512-473-2257 telephone c 512-478-4409 facsimile l ia fic By: /s/ Hannah M. Vahl David E. Dunham of State Bar No. 06227700 Email: ddunham@taylordunham.com Un Isabelle M. Antongiorgi State Bar No. 24059386 Plaintiff’s Response to Defendants’ Motion to Quash Page 2 Email: ima@taylordunham.com Hannah M. Vahl e State Bar No. 24082377 ic Email: hvahl@taylordunham.com Pr COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF L. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE a lv This is to certify that on this the 29th day of January, 2018, a copy of the foregoing Ve document was served on the following as indicated: VIA ELECTRONIC FILING SERVICE: k Christopher M. Raney er Email: craney@gordonrees.com Cl GORDON & REES LLP 1900 West Loop South, Suite 1000 ct Houston, Texas 77027 Telephone: (713) 961-3366 tri Facsimile: (713) 961-3938 is ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS D /s/ Hannah M. Vahl . Co Hannah M. Vahl is av Tr y op c l ia fic of Un Plaintiff’s Response to Defendants’ Motion to Quash Page 3