Preview
CAUSE NO, 2016-34111
WASSER LOGISTICS HOLDINGS, LLC
Plaintiff,
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF
MARTIN KROESCHE, INDIVIDUALLY
AND DERIVATIVELY ON BEHALF OF
WASSAR LOGISTICS HOLDINGS, LLC,
Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiff
And HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS
AND DERIVATIVELY ON BEHALF OF
WASSAR LOGISTICSHOLDINGS, LLC
Intervenor/Third-Party Plaintiff
v.
PETER SHAPER, COURTLAND
LOEFFLER, GLENN MASSEY,
GEORGE DEMPSEY, GENESIS PARK,
JRBS ENTERPRISES, LTD., and
GRISHAM CAPITAL, LLC
Third Party Defendants §
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
STEVE SCHONEFELD, INDIVIDUALLY §
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
3
333°" JUDICIAL DISTRICT
PLAINTIFF AND THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR PROTECTION
COME NOW, Plaintiff, Wassar Logistics Holdings, LLC, (“Wassar”) and Third-
Party Defendants, PETER SHAPER, COURTLAND LOEFFLER, GLENN MASSEY,
GEORGE DEMPSEY, GENESIS PARK, JRBS ENTERPRISES, LTD., and GRISHAM
CAPITAL, LLC, and file this Motion for Protection from Third-Party Plaintiffs, Martin
Kroesche and Steven Schoenfeld, subpoenas tc Paul Hobby, Steve Gibson, Mike Cornett, Quest
IRA, Inc., Kutzpah Corporation, and Seis Holdings, LLC., and would show the Court as follows:
L INTRODUCTION
1, On June 26, 2018, Third-Party Plaintiffs served their six Notices of Deposition on
Written Questions on Paul Hobby, Steve Gibson, Mike Cornett, Quest TRA, Inc., KutzpahCorporation, and Seis Holdings, LLC., (“the Notices”).' Although the notices were filed with the
Court, Defense counsel was not served with the subpoenas, which is not surprising as they are an
attempt to circumvent the discovery process and inappropriately contact Third-Party Defendants
and Plaintiff's direct investors.
2. Specifically, Seis Holdings, LLC sits on the board of FloTrend, the Plaintiff in
this matter. Steve Gibson and Paul Hobby are founding/managing partners in Genesis Park, a
Third-Party Defendant, and investors in FloTrend, Mike Cornett is a direct investor in FloTrend.
Kutzpah Corporation is an investor of FloTrend. Quest, IRA is Third-Party Defendant, George
Dempsey’s investment account.
3. Additionally, all of the Depositions on Written Questions are seeking the same
thing...a valuation of Wassar Logistics Holdings, LLC and/or FloTrend, which we have toid
counsel multiple times does not exist. By conducting a fishing expedition with Plaintiff and
Third-Party Defendants’ investors, Kroesche and Schonefeld are abusing the discovery process,
jeopardizing those relationships, harassing anc annoying Plaintiff and Third-Party Defendants,
and grossly invading a host of personal investment relationships between the parties,
4. Protection from this by the Court is therefore required.
TI. ARGUMENTS & AUHTORITIES
A. MOTION FOR PROTECTION
5. “A person commanded to appear at a deposition...to produce and permit
inspection and copying of the designated documents and things, and any other person affected by
the subpoena, may move for a protective order under Rule 192.6(b)...before the time specified
for compliance[.]” Tex.R.Civ.P. 176.6(e) (emphasis added). Rule 192.6(b) , in turn states:
' See Exs, A-F,To protect the movant ftom undue burden, unnecessary expense, harassment,
annoyance, or invasion of personal, constitutional, or property rights, the court
may made any order in the interest of justice and may-—among other things—
order that:
(1) the requested discovery not be sought in whole or in part;
(2) the extent or subject matter of discovery be limited;
(3) the discovery not be undertaken at the time or place specified;
(4) the discovery be undertaken only by such method or upon such terms and
conditions or at the time and place directed by the court;
(5) the results of the discovery be sealed or otherwise protected, subject to the
provisions of Rue 76a.
Tex. R. Civ. P. 192.6(b)
6. Because the subpoenas are likely to invade the investors’ confidential personal
account records, as it requests documents related to their due diligence, it will also harm the
relationship with Plaintiff and Third-Party Defendants, as the request are overbroad, invasive,
harassing, and not reasonable calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. We
seek the Court’s protection under Rule 176.6 and Rule 192.6.
7. Further the requests are vastly overbroad, as they request “al! documents,” as well
as being duplicative, as they again seck “all of FloTrends financial records.” Plaintiff and Third-
Party Defendants have produced over 6,500 pages of records, not including the Quickbooks
“qbb” backup file that Kroesche and Schonefeld requested, which contains all of FloTrends
financials.
8. Based on the above, the Court must grant protection under Rule 176.6 and Rule
192.6.HH, CONCLUSION & PRAYER
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiff and Third-Party Defendants
respectfully request that this Honorable Court grant its Motion for Protection, issue a Protective
Order that the requested discovery not be allowed in whole or in part, any other and further
telief, either at law or in equity, to which they may show themselves to be justly entitled.
Respectfully submitted,
LITCHFIELD CAVO, L.L.P.
Andrew T. McKinney TV
State Bar No. 13716800
mekinney@litchfieldcavo.com
Erin H. Pikoff
State Bar No. 24012788
pikoff@litchfieldcavo.com
One Riverway, Suite 1000
Houston, Texas 77056
Telephone: (713) 418-2000
Facsimile: (713) 418-2001
ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS
TRENETH BAKER, M.D. and
KELSEY-SEYBOLD MEDICAL
GROUP, PLLCCERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing instrument was served upon
the parties listed below by facsimile on the _ day of June, 2018.
Paul S. Kirklin
The Kirklin Law Firm, P.C.
12600 N. Featherwood Dr., Suite 225
Houston, Texas 77034
Counsel for Plaintiff
Erin H. Pikoff
Erin H. Pikoff
Preview
CAUSE NO, 2016-34111 WASSER LOGISTICS HOLDINGS, LLC Plaintiff, IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF MARTIN KROESCHE, INDIVIDUALLY AND DERIVATIVELY ON BEHALF OF WASSAR LOGISTICS HOLDINGS, LLC, Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiff And HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS AND DERIVATIVELY ON BEHALF OF WASSAR LOGISTICSHOLDINGS, LLC Intervenor/Third-Party Plaintiff v. PETER SHAPER, COURTLAND LOEFFLER, GLENN MASSEY, GEORGE DEMPSEY, GENESIS PARK, JRBS ENTERPRISES, LTD., and GRISHAM CAPITAL, LLC Third Party Defendants § § § § § § § § § STEVE SCHONEFELD, INDIVIDUALLY § § § § § § § § § § § 3 333°" JUDICIAL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF AND THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR PROTECTION COME NOW, Plaintiff, Wassar Logistics Holdings, LLC, (“Wassar”) and Third- Party Defendants, PETER SHAPER, COURTLAND LOEFFLER, GLENN MASSEY, GEORGE DEMPSEY, GENESIS PARK, JRBS ENTERPRISES, LTD., and GRISHAM CAPITAL, LLC, and file this Motion for Protection from Third-Party Plaintiffs, Martin Kroesche and Steven Schoenfeld, subpoenas tc Paul Hobby, Steve Gibson, Mike Cornett, Quest IRA, Inc., Kutzpah Corporation, and Seis Holdings, LLC., and would show the Court as follows: L INTRODUCTION 1, On June 26, 2018, Third-Party Plaintiffs served their six Notices of Deposition on Written Questions on Paul Hobby, Steve Gibson, Mike Cornett, Quest TRA, Inc., KutzpahCorporation, and Seis Holdings, LLC., (“the Notices”).' Although the notices were filed with the Court, Defense counsel was not served with the subpoenas, which is not surprising as they are an attempt to circumvent the discovery process and inappropriately contact Third-Party Defendants and Plaintiff's direct investors. 2. Specifically, Seis Holdings, LLC sits on the board of FloTrend, the Plaintiff in this matter. Steve Gibson and Paul Hobby are founding/managing partners in Genesis Park, a Third-Party Defendant, and investors in FloTrend, Mike Cornett is a direct investor in FloTrend. Kutzpah Corporation is an investor of FloTrend. Quest, IRA is Third-Party Defendant, George Dempsey’s investment account. 3. Additionally, all of the Depositions on Written Questions are seeking the same thing...a valuation of Wassar Logistics Holdings, LLC and/or FloTrend, which we have toid counsel multiple times does not exist. By conducting a fishing expedition with Plaintiff and Third-Party Defendants’ investors, Kroesche and Schonefeld are abusing the discovery process, jeopardizing those relationships, harassing anc annoying Plaintiff and Third-Party Defendants, and grossly invading a host of personal investment relationships between the parties, 4. Protection from this by the Court is therefore required. TI. ARGUMENTS & AUHTORITIES A. MOTION FOR PROTECTION 5. “A person commanded to appear at a deposition...to produce and permit inspection and copying of the designated documents and things, and any other person affected by the subpoena, may move for a protective order under Rule 192.6(b)...before the time specified for compliance[.]” Tex.R.Civ.P. 176.6(e) (emphasis added). Rule 192.6(b) , in turn states: ' See Exs, A-F,To protect the movant ftom undue burden, unnecessary expense, harassment, annoyance, or invasion of personal, constitutional, or property rights, the court may made any order in the interest of justice and may-—among other things— order that: (1) the requested discovery not be sought in whole or in part; (2) the extent or subject matter of discovery be limited; (3) the discovery not be undertaken at the time or place specified; (4) the discovery be undertaken only by such method or upon such terms and conditions or at the time and place directed by the court; (5) the results of the discovery be sealed or otherwise protected, subject to the provisions of Rue 76a. Tex. R. Civ. P. 192.6(b) 6. Because the subpoenas are likely to invade the investors’ confidential personal account records, as it requests documents related to their due diligence, it will also harm the relationship with Plaintiff and Third-Party Defendants, as the request are overbroad, invasive, harassing, and not reasonable calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. We seek the Court’s protection under Rule 176.6 and Rule 192.6. 7. Further the requests are vastly overbroad, as they request “al! documents,” as well as being duplicative, as they again seck “all of FloTrends financial records.” Plaintiff and Third- Party Defendants have produced over 6,500 pages of records, not including the Quickbooks “qbb” backup file that Kroesche and Schonefeld requested, which contains all of FloTrends financials. 8. Based on the above, the Court must grant protection under Rule 176.6 and Rule 192.6.HH, CONCLUSION & PRAYER WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiff and Third-Party Defendants respectfully request that this Honorable Court grant its Motion for Protection, issue a Protective Order that the requested discovery not be allowed in whole or in part, any other and further telief, either at law or in equity, to which they may show themselves to be justly entitled. Respectfully submitted, LITCHFIELD CAVO, L.L.P. Andrew T. McKinney TV State Bar No. 13716800 mekinney@litchfieldcavo.com Erin H. Pikoff State Bar No. 24012788 pikoff@litchfieldcavo.com One Riverway, Suite 1000 Houston, Texas 77056 Telephone: (713) 418-2000 Facsimile: (713) 418-2001 ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS TRENETH BAKER, M.D. and KELSEY-SEYBOLD MEDICAL GROUP, PLLCCERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing instrument was served upon the parties listed below by facsimile on the _ day of June, 2018. Paul S. Kirklin The Kirklin Law Firm, P.C. 12600 N. Featherwood Dr., Suite 225 Houston, Texas 77034 Counsel for Plaintiff Erin H. Pikoff Erin H. Pikoff