Motion for Entry of Default in DENLEY ANN BISHOP vs. BRADY HOWELL| Trellis.Law

On March 03, 2020 a Motion,Ex Parte was filed involving a dispute between Bishop, Denley Ann, and Howell, Brady, for PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY in the District Court of Dallas County.

Preview
FILED
9/17/2020 8:24AM
FELICIA PITRE
DISTRICT CLERK
DALLAS CO.,TEXAS
DEPUTY
Darling Tellez

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF DALLAS COUNTY TEXAS
Dallas County - 116th District Court

Plaintiff

DENLEY ANN BISHOP
V. Case No. DC20-03959

Defendant

BRADY HOWELL

MOTION TO MOVE FOR DEFAULT-PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ENTRY OF
DEFAULT
AND FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT
(Legal Malpractice)

TO THE HONORABLE DALLAS COUNTY DISTRICT COURT JUDGE TONYA PARKER:
NOW COMES the plaintiff, and moves for entry of default and for default

judgment. Defendants’ answer was due 0n August 19, 2020, the citation was issued 0n July 30,
2020 and he had twenty days t0 respond and has not been ﬁled. In support, Plaintiff respectfully
shows the following:

SUMMARY
The Defendants in this case have defaulted. Therefore, Plaintiff requests

that this Court grant the judgment prayed for in her Original Petition.1 As stated

in the Original Petition, Plaintiff prays for the following relief:

WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff in this action demand:

A. Issuance of a default of the judgement due to the failure of the attorney to comply
With the request by this court to ﬁle an answer in a timely manner.
B. Judgment against Defendants for an amount equal t0 Plaintiff’s damages suffered due
to his negligence. The plaintiff has suffered damages as a result of the defendant's
breach in the amount 0f $350,000. By holding himself out as an attorney but not
representing the best interest 0f his client he deceived the plaintiff over and over.
C. As a direct and proximate result 0f the defendant’s negligence and 0f malpractice 8
and fraudulent inducement, plaintiff suffered actual damages 0f $300,000. The
plaintiff has suffered damages as a result 0f the defendants' neglect 0f their duty in the
amount of $ 200,000.
D. The plaintiff has suffered damages as a result 0f the defendants' breach 0f their duty
0f care in the amount 0f $ 500,000. These damages are excessive and very serious if

not criminal. Fee Forfeiture. In Burrow V. Arce, 997 S.W.2d 229 (TeX. 1999), the
Texas Supreme Court held that a client may seek the remedy 0f fee forfeiture in a suit
against an attorney for breach of ﬁduciary duty, Whether the client suffered actual
damages from the conduct. The Burrow court held that fee forfeiture was an equitable
remedy, and as such the trial court would decide whether fee forfeiture was
appropriate and, if so, how much of the fees would be forfeited. The Burrow court
listed a number of factors for trial courts t0 consider in the fee forfeiture analysis, and
limits fee forfeiture t0 instances 0f "clear and serious" Violations 0f duty. There
appears t0 be a proximate cause also. A person of regular intelligence could
determine that these actions are negligent. Causation. 1.Proximate Cause. As in
traditional negligence cases, the plaintiff in a legal malpractice case must prove that
the alleged malpractice was the proximate cause 0f injury. Proximate cause consists
0f two elements: (1) cause in fact and (2) foreseeability. McClure V. Allied Stores of
Tex., Inc., 608 S.W.2d 901, 903 (Tex. 1980). "Cause in fact means that the act 0r
omission was a substantial factor in bringing about the injury and without which no
harm would have occurred." McClure V. Allied Stores 0f Tex., Inc., 608 S.W.2d 901,
903 (Tex. 1980). The cause in fact requirement has also been referred t0 as the "but
for" test, because the plaintiff must show that the injury would not have occurred "but
for" the alleged breach of duty. But the Texas Supreme Court has made clear that a
"but for" showing alone is not enough; t0 qualify as cause in fact the negligence must
also have been a substantial factor in bringing about the plaintiff” s harm. Union Pump
C0. V. Allbritton, 898 S.W.2d 773, 775 (Tex. 1995). The foreseeability element of
proximate cause requires proof that the defendant, as a person 0f ordinary
intelligence, should have anticipated the danger to others by his negligent act. See,
e.g.,Dyer V. Shafer, Gilliland, Davis, McCollum & Ashley, Inc., 779 S.W.2d 474,
478
E. These premises considered, the plaintiff requests judgment against the defendants
jointly and severally in the amount 0f $ 500,000, plus an award 0f costs, interest, and
such other relief that the Court may deem appropriate.
F. The Plaintiff request injunctive relief from the court against the order terminating her

parental rights and request this court t0 set aside the termination as requested per the

administrative judge David Evans.

II.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED
1. Copy of Court docket the record in Cooke County
2. Copy 0f Transcript proving the judge did not know 0f Oklahoma
jurisdiction.
Copy of emails from the attorney.
:5.“

Copy 0f CASA report never refutted by the attorney, n0 answer
ﬁled, n0 meeting with the Plaintiff.
ITIO Bishop Initial Permanency Hearing Order 6-22-17
Housing Appointment Letter
9°89.“

Oklahoma Court Order
Order Releasing Attorney
Statements from Mr. Bishop regarding Oklahoma Jurisdiction
.Evidence of Cahoots With other lawyers and social workers
1 1.Copy 0f unsigned Temporary Order by Brady Howell and Petitioner
12. MOTION TO DISMISS ATTORNEY IN OPPOSITION TO LOWER COURT
JUDGE’S ORDER DENLEY ANN BISHOP, moves to Dismiss Attorney
13. Notes Prepared per Brady Howell describing the wrongdoing in the case.

14. Copies of Transcript showing religious discrimination
15. Copies 0f Transcript proving attorney failing t0 object
16. Expert Witness By Another Attorney Amanda Coffee stating Malpractice
17. Statement by Cherokee Tribe Oklahoma
18. Evidence of Civil Conspiracy by all attorneys involved
19. Expert Testimony from Religious Freedom Attorney Liberty Council
20. Expert Testimony from Religious Freedom Attorney Rutherford Institute

21. Testimony from Oklahoma DHS workers, Steven Garvin and Abby Davis
22. Testimony from attorney With Texas Homeschool Coalition
23. Testimony from Texas CPS workers Oak Cliff Texas Ofﬁce
24. Statements made by the attorney to the merits of the case
25. Accounting 10g of unreturned phone calls

26. Accounting 10g 0f money spent needlessly to secure custody
27. Testimony of counselor at Gillespie counseling testifying t0 trauma suffered
28. Testimony of Pamela Greene counselor at Pathways Counseling First Baptist Dallas

29. Police report regarding fraud and civil conspiracy

III.

DEFENDANT HAS DEFAULTED
Plaintiff is Hilary Denley Ann Bishop, who brings this suit individually. The Defendant

is Brady Howell. On March 5, 2020, Plaintiff sued Defendants for legal malpractice in

state court in Dallas County, Texas. On that day, Plaintiff filed
“Plaintiff’s Original Petition for Legal Malpractice” in the 116th Judicial District

Court in Dallas, Texas. (Complaint, App. 5-15.)

On July 30, 2020, the defendant was served With a Citation and a copy of

Plaintiff’s Original Petition for Legal Malpractice. (See, Notice, 17-81.) Copies of the

returns are contained Within Defendants’ Notice 0f Removal. (Notice, Id. at 41-75.)

CiV. P. 81(2) provides that the Answer must be filed 0n the latest of (a) 20 days

after receiving a copy of the initial pleading (July 30, 2020). Therefore, the Answer

deadline was June 20, 2020 and as of today September 14, 2020 an answer was not

filed.

Furthermore, the defendant is neither minors, incompetent persons, nor in

military service. Therefore, Plaintiff requests the Court 0r its clerk t0 enter default.

IV.
PLAINTIFF IS ENTITLED TO A DEFAULT JUDGMENT THAT
WOULD NOTIFY THE DEFENDANT OF THE DEFAULT JUDGMENT

A. DEFAULT SHOULD BE GRANTED

1. PARTIES

On July 17, 2020, Denley Bishop filed this action under the Texas Rules 0f
Procedure 0n behalf of herself, TeX. CiV. Prac. & Rem. Code § 41.003, dealing With
filing a legal malpractice claim due to malice and evil. The Plaintiff was
represented by the defendant in a child protection case in Texas during a parental
termination case. The Plaintiff was under the understanding that he would just be
representing her to have the case sent back t0 Oklahoma. Then, Whatever
happened after that was up t0 the Oklahoma court.

The defendant practices as a family attorney in Dallas County, Texas. He agreed t0
take this case after being appointed by Judge Janelle Havercamp. The Plaintiff
requested that he either send the case back t0 Oklahoma 0r have another attorney
appointed and he refused t0 Withdraw after she made numerous requests for a new
lawyer.

2. THE VIOLATION OF LEGAL RESPONSIBILTY
The defendant entered a legal contract with the plaintiff stating that he would be
able t0 have her children returned to her and t0 Oklahoma, 0n February 22, 2017.
During this time he stated that the judge did not agree t0 return the children to
Oklahoma When in fact, this information was suppressed from the judge and he lied
to the plaintiff regarding motions that were filed about Oklahoma and verdicts
rendered by the judge in the case.

There was a serious breach 0f contract in this case. An attorney is a fiduciary 0f his
client, and the attorney owes the client a duty 0f utmost good faith. As part of this
duty, the attorney has several obligations t0 the client. For example, the attorney
must place the interests 0f the client above the interests 0f the attorney; the
attorney must make full and fair disclosure about the representation; and the
attorney cannot take advantage 0f his position t0 gain a profit at the expense 0f his
client. This man did exactly this.

There was negligence misrepresentation committed by this attorney too. He knew
that the Plaintiff would not know that the judge never ruled, nor that she never
knew 0f Oklahoma, so he lied to her. He took complete advantage 0f the plaintiff
since she was at his mercy since she never went t0 law school. This was not only
unethical but illegal too. This attorney could lose his law license 0r more. Attorneys
may occasionally be liable t0 non-clients if the attorney makes a false
misrepresentation that the attorney knows W111 be relied upon by the non-client.

The breach 0f duty gave rise t0 a claim for legal malpractice, the client Will show
that the lawyer failed to comply With the applicable standard of care, the duties and
omission of act. In general terms, an attorney breach the duty of care When the
lawyer acted in such a fraudulent way that an ordinarily prudent lawyer would not
have done. And he fails t0 do numerous actions an ordinarily prudent lawyer would
have done under the same 0r similar circumstances. “Cause in fact means that the
act 0r omission was a substantial factor in bringing about the injury and Without
Which n0 harm would have occurred.” McClure V. Allied Stores 0f TeX., Inc., 608
S.W.2d 901, 903 (TeX. 1980) As a result 0f the defendants' breach, the plaintiff has
been damaged in that he lost custody 0f her children, lost her job as an employee
and accountant, suffered trauma and her husband had a mental breakdown and her
family has been broken and they have all suffered trauma. The Plaintiff told the
attorney that the biggest concern to her was that the social worker removed the
children due t0 the mother being a Christian. The attorney told the mother that he
would address this issue right away but more than anything he was just going t0
transfer the case back to Oklahoma so there would not need t0 be a large concern
for the religious discrimination. The mother did not really understand that.
However, the issue 0f jurisdiction and returning the children to Oklahoma soon also
became mute. He did nothing. He told Ms. Bishop that she need not worry, they
were going t0 have a jurisdiction hearing right away and the children and her would
be returned t0 Oklahoma. The original hearing was t0 be a hearing to return the
children to Oklahoma. However, this was circumvented too. Legal malpractice is a
tort cause of action based 0n negligence. See Cosgrove V. Grimes, 774 S.W.2d 662,
664 (TeX. 1989). The attorney breach his duty by dropping the case when he in fact
had a duty t0 appeal the case for the plaintiff. He refused t0 file a notice 0f appeal
0n her behalf, risking the appropriate documents t0 be filed by the deadline dates.
This action was a clear breach 0f his duty and caused damages t0 the Plaintiff
because the attorney Mary Ann Beaty in Dallas stated that all the attorney had t0
was file and appeal in Tarrant county and request the case t0 be reverse and
remanded t0 Oklahoma. This caused the plaintiff t0 lose custody 0f her children.
The determination 0f proximate cause is usually a question 0f fact. See E1 Chico
Corp. V. Poole, 732 S.W.2d 306, 313—14 (TeX. 1987). This is true in legal malpractice
actions as well. In cases 0f appellate legal malpractice, however, the determination
0f causation requires determining Whether the appeal in the underlying action
would have been successful. Id. The plaintiff must show that but for the attorney’s
negligence the client would have prevailed 0n appeal. See Jackson V. Urban,
Coolidge, Pennington & Scott, 516 S.W.2d 948, 949 (TeX. CiV. App.—Houston [lst
Dist.] 1974, writ ref’d n.r.e.). The rationale for requiring this determination is that,
if the appeal would not have succeeded and the trial court judgment would have
been affirmed, the attorney’s negligence could not have caused the plaintiff any
damage. Id. On the other hand, if the appeal would have succeeded in reversing the
trial court’s judgment and obtaining a more favorable result, then the plaintiff
sustained damage because 0f the attorney’s negligence. Millhouse V. Wiesenthal,
775 S.W.2d 626, 627 (TeX. 1989). In cases involving appellate legal malpractice, the
question 0f Whether an appeal would have been successful depends 0n an analysis 0f
the law and the procedural rules. As the Millhouse court noted, because this
requires a review 0f the trial record and the briefs in order t0 determine whether
the trial court committed reversible error, “a judge is clearly in a better position” t0
do this than is a jury. Id. at 628. Therefore, Where the issue of causation hinges 0n
the possible outcome of an appeal, the question 0f causation is to be resolved by the
court as a question of law. Id.; Klein V. Reynolds, Cunningham, Peterson & Cordell,
923 S.W.2d 45, 47 (TeX. App.—H0uston [lst Dist.] 1995, n0 writ). The causation
element focuses 0n Whether the attorney’s negligence had any real effect 0n the
client’s case. The traditional rule is that the plaintiff must prove that, but for the
attorney’s breach 0f duty, the plaintiff would have prevailed in the underlying case.
Grider V. Mike O’Brien, P.C., 260 S.W.3d 49, 55 (TeX. App.—Houst0n) In this case
the children would have been returned day one at the first hearing if the attorney
would not have lied t0 his client. He stated that there was nothing to worry about
the children would be returned to Oklahoma after the first hearing. Instead he
worked in collusion With the other attorneys t0 suppress that information.

The question is going t0 hinge 0n Whether another attorney would have done the
same. The ultimate inquiry is “Whether the attorney exercised that degree 0f care,
skill and diligence as lawyers of ordinary skill and knowledge commonly possess
and exercise.” Isaacs V. Schleier, 356 S.W.3d 548, 556 (TeX. App.—Texarkana 2011
In the situation at par if another attorney did this same thing, they would more
than likely be disbarred.

The Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act regulates most business activities in
Texas, including the conduct of attorneys. For a client to prevail 0n a DTPA claim,
the client must prove (1) that he was a "consumer" as defined in the DTPA and (2)
that the attorney took some action that violated the statute and caused the client
damage. The attorney took action that violated the statute by committing
unconscionable acts and it caused damage to the plaintiff by her loosing her
children. He lied t0 her regarding Oklahoma jurisdiction, he knew that Oklahoma
had jurisdiction and that the judge in Oklahoma was requesting that the case be
returned, and the children be returned t0 Oklahoma. He stated that the judge in
Texas was ignoring the judge’s calls from Oklahoma.

The DTPA provides a list 0f over twenty types 0f conduct that are forbidden. The
items most applicable t0 claims against attorneys are the prohibitions against (1)
making statements that the attorney's services may have benefits that they d0 not
have; (2) making statements that the attorney's services are of a particular quality
0r standard When they are not; (3) representing that an agreement has rights,
remedies, 0r obligations When it does not; (4) failing to disclose information
concerning the services which was known at the time of the services if the failure
was intended t0 induce the client into entering a transaction he would not have
entered had the information been disclosed; and (5) engaging in any action that is

unconscionable. Lying to a client and the court is an unconscionable act that is
illegal and a cause for disbarment. This is action is also fraudulent.

There is a serious fraud case against this attorney and all the attorneys involved.
Attorneys may also be sued for committing fraud 0n their clients. An attorney
commits fraud if he makes a misrepresentation that he knows is false With the
intent that the client act 0n it and the client eventually acts 0n it. An attorney may
also commit fraud by failing to disclose or concealing facts if the attorney knows the
client is unaware 0f the facts and the attorney intends to induce the client into
taking some action by concealing the facts. When an attorney breaches his fiduciary
duty or violates the Deceptive Trade Practices Act, the attorney's conduct often
constitutes fraud. The attorney not only committed malpractice by not filing the
necessary papers t0 have the case transferred t0 Oklahoma but suppressed evidence
about Oklahoma in order to defraud the judge. This is not only malpractice, but it is
criminal too. This fraud committed 0n the court was done intentionally. The
attorney told the plaintiff that he would file the necessary motions t0 have the
children returned to Oklahoma. However, he never filed the necessary papers or
motions t0 have the children returned even though Oklahoma DHS and the judge in
Oklahoma requested that the children be returned. The attorney intentionally
deceived Mrs. Bishop. The attorney stated that he would secure Oklahoma
jurisdiction by filing the necessary papers t0 secure Oklahoma jurisdiction. During
the appeal, this attorney intentionally suppressed evidence about Oklahoma so the
appeals court would not know about Oklahoma. The attorney intentionally
defrauded the plaintiff making her think that the judge knew that they were from
Oklahoma when in fact he never even told the judge. The plaintiff was left outside

the courtroom so she would not know what really was going 0n. Then she was told
that he filed motions about Oklahoma jurisdiction When he did not. He told her
that the judge rendered verdicts that she did not render. He told her that he filed
motions about Oklahoma jurisdiction that he never filed.

Evidence 0f Civil Conspiracy by all attorneys involved. Conspiracy is an agreement
between two 0r more people t0 accomplish a criminal act 0r a legal act through
criminal means. Texas has a Civil cause 0f action for civil conspiracy if:

o Two 0r more people form an association,

o The association is for an unlawful objective,

o The two or more people agree or understand the objective and the manner to
achieve the unlawful objective,

o The two or more people commit an unlawful act in furtherance of the
conspiracy, and

o You are injured as a result.

Civil conspiracy is a tort, or civil wrong. A private person is the one who sues and is
awarded damages if they are injured by a conspiracy. Civil conspiracy only exists
When you are injured as a result of an unlawful act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
The plaintiff was injured by loss 0f custody 0f her Children by the result of the civil
conspiracy of all five 0f these lawyers involved, including Brady Howell. those who
injure you as a result 0f their unlawful act in furtherance 0f a conspiracy are jointly
and severally liable for your damages. That means that any 0f the conspirators are
liable for all your damages, independent 0f the other conspirators. The plaintiff
must also prove that the conspirators had an intention t0 commit an unlawful 0r
tortious act. Intent t0 deceive and to commit this unlawful and tortious act was
proven When he lied t0 the plaintiff about motions filed and verdicts rendered about
Oklahoma.

A civil conspiracy 0r collusion is an agreement between two 0r more parties t0
deprive a third party 0f legal rights 0r deceive a third party t0 obtain an illegal
0bjective.[1] A conspiracy may also refer t0 a group 0f people Who make an
agreement t0 form a partnership in which each member becomes the agent or
partner 0f every other member and engage in planning or agreeing t0 commit some
act. It is not necessary that the conspirators be involved in all stages 0f planning or
be aware of all details. Any voluntary agreement and some overt act by one
conspirator in furtherance 0f the plan are the main elements necessary t0 prove a
conspiracy. A conspiracy may exist Whether legal means are used to accomplish
illegal results, 0r illegal means used t0 accomplish something legal. "Even When n0
crime is involved, a civil action for conspiracy may be brought by the persons Who
were damaged." Illegal means was used t0 accomplish something legal. The
lawyers suppressed evidence about Oklahoma because they knew that the court in
Oklahoma was just going to return the children, so they lied. The attorneys all

knew about Oklahoma and lied to the plaintiff and her husband. The attorney for
the state James Saint told the plaintiff’s husband that he was not allowed t0 file
any motions about Oklahoma When he showed up t0 court with the motions from his
Oklahoma attorney. The attorney Emmanuel Alberto lied t0 Mr. Bishop and told
him that if he paid an additional $5,000 he could secure Oklahoma jurisdiction
When in fact, he took the money and never filed any motion about Oklahoma
jurisdiction. He also suppressed all evidence about Oklahoma jurisdiction. They all

worked together t0 suppress information about the Cherokee Tribe also. They all

had a conference call in Tahlequah Oklahoma While the parents were at the tribe,
the tribe requested a continuance and then they suppressed all the information t0
the court regarding ICWA laws and how the children were Cherokee. This
conspiracy by all five attorneys t0 the court continued all the way t0 the appeals
court. The attorney would need to request that the appeals court reverse and
remand the case t0 Oklahoma, but instead lied to the appeals court and suppressed
evidence about Oklahoma so they would not know. An abatement hearing was
issued after the Plaintiff filed a letter stating the misconduct 0f the court.

Legal malpractice is not the only cause of action under which a client can recover
from [their] attorney.” Goffney V. Rabson, 56 S.W.3d 186, 190 (TeX. App.—H0ust0n
[14th Dist.] 2001, pet. denied) (citing Kahlig V.Boyd, 980 S.W.2d 685, 688 (TeX.
App.—San Antonio 1998, pet. denied». “When the facts 0f a case support
claims against a lawyer for something other than professional negligence,” the
claims may be allowed. Murphy V. Gruber, 241 S.W.Sd 689, 695 (TeX. App.—Da11as
2007, pet. denied) (citing Latham V. Castillo, 972 S.W.2d 66, 68, 71 (TeX. 1998)
(allowing pursuit of Deceptive Trade Practices Act (DTPA) cause of action for
attorney’s allegedly unconscionable action in representing he was actively
prosecuting client. In the law 0f tort, the legal elements necessary t0 establish a
civil conspiracy are substantially the same as for establishing a criminal conspiracy,
i.e. there is an agreement between two 0r more natural persons t0 break the law at
some time in the future 0r t0 achieve a lawful aim by unlawful means. The criminal
law often requires one of the conspirators t0 take an overt step to accomplish the
illegal act t0 demonstrate the reality 0f their intention t0 break the law, Whereas in
a civil conspiracy, an overt act towards accomplishing the wrongful goal may not be
required.

The attorney had a responsibility t0 his client and he clear failed t0 uphold his part
0f this agreement therefore, the plaintiff is requesting that the court grant this
motion for default.

3. PLAINTIFF IS ENTITLED TO PROCEED FOR A DEFAULT
JUDGMENT
A default judgment can be generally deﬁned as a judgment entered by the trial court, at the

plaintiff” s request, based 0n a defendant’s failure t0 appear and ﬁle an answer within the time
allowed by law. TEX. R. CIV. P. 107, 238, 239; see also Fontenot V. Hanus, N0. 03-05-00551-
CV, 2007 WL 2330719, at *1 (Tex. App.—Austin Aug. 17, 2007, no pet.) (default judgment

improper against plaintiff who failed to appear for trial; case should have been dismissed
instead). Texas law does not authorize a defendant to take a default judgment against a plaintiff

0n the merits of its suit. State V. Herrera, 25 S.W.3d 326, 327 (Tex. App.—Austin 2000, n0 pet).

A defendant must ﬁle an answer t0 a lawsuit by 10:00 a.m. 0n the ﬁrst Monday following the
expiration 0f twenty (20) days from the date 0f service 0f the petition, unless that Monday is a
legal holiday. TEX. R. CIV. P. 4, 99.

A. Failure to Timely Answer to complaint. For a plea of privilege, t0 be effective, must be ﬁled
by the defendant prior to any other appearance, With the exception of a special appearance. The
attorney must therefore ﬁle the plea 0f privilege before the answer, and any subsequent answer
must be speciﬁcally conditioned upon the plea of privilege. If a plea of privilege is overruled and
n0 answer is 0f record, the plaintiff may secure a default judgment. In Guaranty Bank V.

Thompson 83 the appellant's plea 0f privilege constituted an appearance in the case for all

purposes once the plea was overruled, and the absence 0f an answer allowed the default to be
taken. Brady Howell has not even opened the email With the original complaint from the clerk’s

ofﬁce. He has not even opened the email from the clerk and Texas Eﬁle.
A default judgment should favor a plaintiff s ability t0 enforce all rights granted under the statute
that are properly pled. In this case, the Petition, Which was originally ﬁled in state court, is

styled as “Plaintiff” s Original Petition for Legal Malpractice.”

B. A DEFAULT SHOULD BE ENTERED FOR THE CLASS IN THE AMOUNT

OF $500,000.

Plaintiff requests a monetary judgment of $500,000 be entered on behalf of the Petitioner. This
estimate includes $200,000 for breach of duty and $300,000 in actual damages. There is no
amount of money to measure the amount 0f time the parents have been separated from their

children due to this lawyer’s negligence and fraudulent actions. The years are extensive and
should have been settled the very ﬁrst day When the children should have been returned t0

Oklahoma. There was a direct fee loss for the additional amount itcost t0 hire seven lawyers to
ﬁx his mistake. For instance, the lawyer missed a ﬁling deadline, lied to the court to coverup
jurisdiction so the Petitioner had t0 hire additional attorneys in Oklahoma and Texas t0 ﬁx his
fraudulent actions. An injured client can, however, seek attorney’s fees as far as those fees apply
t0 correcting or rectifying the situation generated for the client arising from the previous
attorney’s misconduct. The Petitioner had t0 pay over $25,000 more dollars to attorneys to
correct the mistakes 0f his fraudulent actions. And now itWill cost her additional fees, in which
she is seeking the cost of the fee as part of your damages. The plaintiff is suing for lost wage.
The lawyer has mistreated her through his negligence, and itcaused her t0 miss work, forced her
t0 leave her job as an accountant, and she entitled to lost wages. She had t0 take time off work t0
correct 0r mitigate their lawyer’s error. The plaintiff had to quit her job in order to ﬁle the
necessary paperwork, meet With numerous attorneys, attend numerous hearings for a period of
three years. This involved spending time resolving the issue, ﬁling a legal malpractice lawsuit,
and working with new lawyers. The plaintiff suffered lost earning potential. This lawyer’s
negligence or actions directly affected her earning ability. She is entitled t0 damages up to the

amount that you would have earned had your lawyer not acted negligently. The petitioner could
have earning over $65,000 a year as a staff accountant at a CPA ﬁrm if she were not forced t0
quit working t0 work on this case. The petitioner was forced t0 quit work in Oklahoma t0 travel
to Dallas Texas three times a week for Visitations, counseling appointments and t0 work the case

plan. The petitioner had t0 represent herself at the appellate level, write briefs, write petitions
for review at the Supreme Court level, the United States Court level and the Federal Court level.
She had t0 take time off from work to work With the district attorney’s ofﬁce, the tribe and to
travel from Oklahoma to Dallas Texas to do this. The petitioner is still having to do this work
since she has not found an attorney t0 settle this case. So, the case has gone 0n since 2016 and
we are now in the year 2020, therefore, there are damages for four years at $65,000 which totals
$260,000. The petitioner was in the process 0f sitting for her law school test and her CPA exam
until this happened. She was studying for her law school test t0 enter law school and she was
studying for her CPA exam. The current wages for a CPA is $94,000 and for a tax lawyer
$150,000. Therefore, the difference in lost earning potential is $29,000 and $55,000 for the four
years, Which totals, $171,000. In addition, the emotional trauma from losing her children is
unmeasurable. This emotional distress is excessive. The emotional trauma on her is long lived
and unrepairable. Not only did the lawyer’s malpractice Violate her trust, but additional factors
might exist that make the situation emotionally distressing. The Petitioner suffered emotional
damages of $200,000.

CONCLUSION

For these reasons, Plaintiff asks the Court to grant this motion and render a judgment against
Defendant Brady Howell. The Court should also grant such other and further relief to which

Plaintiff is justly entitled, like the injunctive relief t0 have the children returned t0 the parents

and Oklahoma.

Respectfully submitted,

@321? gowgé

Denley Bishop

Pro-Se

Denley Bishop

306 N. 12th Street

Duncan, Oklahoma 73533

(580) 860-2429

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that 0n this date, September 14, 2020, I served the foregoing 0n counsel 0f

record for all Defendant Via the Court’s ECF Filing System.

/s/ Denlev Ann Bishop
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.

Envelope ID: 46312863

Case Info

Judge

PARKER, TONYA Track Judge’s New Case

Case No.

(Subscribe to View)

Document Filed Date

September 17, 2020

Case Filing Date

March 03, 2020

County

Parties

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Motion,Ex Parte: DENLEY ANN BISHOP vs. BRADY HOWELL

Preview

Related Topics

Case Info

Parties