Request,Application: LOU RATHBURN vs. PROFESSIONAL BANK NAet al

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

						
                                
Preview
                                Cause No. DC-10- O -(lob94Y

 

LOU RATHBURN IN THE DISTRICT COURT.
s
Plaintiff . f
oo Ba FP
Vs DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS hy

SAFEGUARD SECURITY HOLDINGS
INC. & R. MICHAEL LAGOW

Defendants 134h.¢ JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

APPLICATION FOR PRE-JUDGMENT GARNISHMENT

1. Parties. Plaintiff is Lou Rathbum, a resident of Midlothean Texas. Defendants are
Safeguard Security Holdings, Inc., a Texas Corporation, and R. Michael Lagow, a
resident of Dallas County, Texas. The Garnishec is PROFESSIONAL BANK, N.A., a
banking corporation that does not maintain an agent for service of process. Accordingly,
pursuant to Civil Practice and Remedies Code §17.028, process may be served on a
branch manager of any branch of said bank or the bank president. Therefore, process
may be served on its branch manager at 2101 Abrams Road, Dallas, Texas.

2. Facts. Plaintiff has reason to believe that Gamnishee has property belonging to
defendants Safeguard Security Holdings Inc and R. Michael Lagow. Defendants do not
posses property in Texas subject to execution sufficient to satisfy the debt. This
gamishment is not sought to injure defendants or Gamishce. Defendants are indebted to
Plaintiff for a liquidated sum due on a promissory note. That sum is $56,341.42. Said
sum is now all duc and owing, and defendants are in default under the note. In addition,
defendants are liable to Plaintiff for attorney fees.

3. Affidavit, Plaintiff is entitled to a writ of gamishment before judgment on the
grounds stated in the attached affidavit. The affidavit is incorporated by reference in this
application.

4. Conditions Precedent. All conditions precedent have been performed or have
occurred
5. Authority Plaintiff secks this relief pursuant to Texas Civil Practice and Remedies

—————————————————————————————E——
Application for Writ of Garnishment Page 1Code §63.003, ef. seg.

6. Prayer. Plaintiff prays that a writ of gamishment issue before judgment and that
Plaintiff be granted all! further relief to which Plaintiff may be entitled.

Respectfully submitted,

 
   

LAW OFFICES KENNETH S .HARTER

State Bar ID 09155300
1620 E. Beltline Rd.
Carrollton, Tx. 75006
(972) 242-8887

FAX (972) 446-7976

—_—_—__—_—_
Application for Writ of GarnishmentCause No. DC-10-

LOU RATHBURN § IN THE DISTRICT COURT
§
Plaintiff §
§
Vs § DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS
§
SAFEGUARD SECURITY HOLDINGS = §
INC. & R. MICHAEL LAGOW §
§
Defendants § JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT
AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF APPLICATION
FOR WRIT OF GARNISHMENT
State of Texas

County of Dallas

BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority appeared KENNETH S. HARTER, whose identity
is known to me, and who, upon being duly sworn upon his oath:

My name is Kenneth S. Harter. I am above the age of 18, and all facts stated herein are
within my personal knowledge and are true and correct.

I am an attorney at law duly licensed to practice before all the courts of the state of
Texas. I am the attorney for Plaintiff LOU RATHBURN in this matter.

Defendants are indebted to Plaintiff in the sum of $56,341.42. This sum is liquidated and
now all due and owing. ‘This debt is just, due and unpaid. Within my knowledge,
Defendants do not possess property in Texas subject to execution sufficient to satisfy the
debt. This garnishment is not sought in injure Defendant.

Plaintiff has discovered that Defendant SAFEGUARD SECURITY SYSTEMS, INC. is
being sued in federal court wherein substantial damages are being sought; and that Defendant
LAGOW has recently suffered a substantial money judgment against him in the 1 16" District
Court of Dallas County, Texas. Accordingly, I am extremely concerned that no assets will be
available to satisfy a judgment in this case if this Application is not granted. In addition,
there have been instances where the checks tendered to Plaintiff by Defendant in partial
payment of this note have not been good. As a result, Plaintiff is concerned that Defendant’s
business may not be viable.

ccc
Affidavit in Support of Application for Writ of GarnishmentPlaintiff does not seek to harm either of the Defendants or the Garnishee by bringing this
action. Plaintiff merely seeks to enforce her rights and assure full payment on the obligation
due to her. Accordingly, Plaintiff prays that this court allow,the garnishment of Defendants’
property in the sum of $56,341.42”

   
   
   
  
  

Further affiant sayeth not.

   

Kerheth S. Harter

hua Lora

Notary Public

 

    
 

 

Affidavit in Support of Application for Writ of Garnishment