Preview
• •
CAUSE No. l 53-232668-08
VIRGINIA 0. KINSEL, et al., §
§
Plaintiffs, §
§
V. §
§
JANE 0. LINDSEY, et al., §
§
Defendants. § 153RD JUDICIAL DISTRICT
MOTION FOR JUDGMENT NON OBSTANTE VEREDICTO
COME NOW, Plaintiffs, Virginia 0. Kinsel, et al., in the above styled and numbered cause
and file this their Motion for Judgment Non Obstante Veredicto and in support would respectfully
show the court the following:
d of Question #56 from the
I.
jury
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
Plaintiffs move for Judgment Non Obstante Veredicto with regard to subparts b, c, and
charge because the jury could not refuse, in the face of
/
uncontroverted testimony, to award Plaintiffs zero for attorney fees that Plaintiffs may incur
should this case be appealed. Plaintiffs request that the Court grant Plaintiffs' Motion and
enter judgment awarding Plaintiffs their reasonable and necessary attorneys' fees for the
appellate process in accordance with the uncontroverted evidence put forth at trial.
II. FACTS
I. On November 16, the jury returned its verdict in the above-styled and numbered cause.
2. Question #56 on the jury charge states as follows:
"What is a reasonable fee for the necessary services of Plaintiffs' attorneys, stated in
dollars and cents? Answer with an amount for each of the following:
a. For representation in the trial court.
Answer: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
r:,.1'-1
• I,..•
'' ~
' •• • ~ i•: -j:
:• I '
b. For representation through appeal to the court of appeals.
Answer: - - - - - - - - -
Plaintiffs' Motion for Judgment Non Obstante Veredicto
c. For representation at the petition for review stage in the Supreme Court of Texas.
Answer: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
d. For representation through oral argument and the completion of proceedings in the
Supreme Court of Texas
Answer: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _"
3. The jury answered subpart a with $800,000.00, but subparts b, c, and d with zero ("0"). 1
III. ARGUMENT AND AUTHORITIES
4. A trial court may disregard a jury's negative finding and substitute its own affirmative finding
if the evidence conclusively establishes the affirmative finding. Brown v. Bank ofGalveston, Nat 'I
Ass'n, 930 S.W.2d 140,145 (Tex.App.-Houston [14thDist.]1996),ajJ'd, 963 S.W.2d511, 515-16
(Tex.1998). A jury cannot simply refuse to award attorneys' fees if any were properly proven.
McMillin v. State Farm Lloyds, 180 S.W.3d 183, 210 (Tex. App.-Austin 2005, pet. denied). A zero
award of attorneys' fees is only proper if the evidence (I) fails to prove (a) that an attorney's services
were provided, or (b) the value of the services provided; or (2) affirmatively showed that no
attorney's services were needed or that any services provided were of no value. !d. at 209-210.
5. Uncontroverted testimony by an interested witness may establish a right to attorneys' fees
as a matter oflaw. !d. at 210. Where trial counsel's testimony concerning attorneys' fees is clear,
positive and direct, and uncontroverted, it is taken as true as a matter of law, especially true when
the opposing party had the means and opportunity to disprove the testimony and failed to do so. Jd
(citing Ragsdale v. Progressive Voters League, 801 S.W.2d 880, 882 (Tex.1990)). In such instances,
appellate courts will reverse a denial or minimization of attorneys' fees and render judgment for
attorneys' fees in the amount proved. See Ragsdale, 801 S.W.2d at 882; Recognition
1
The Plaintiffs are not seeking judgment non obstante veredicto with regard to subpart a.
Plaintiffs' Motion for Judgment Non Obstante Veredicto Page 2 of6
Communications Inc. v. American Auto. Ass 'n, Inc., 154 S.W.3d 878,891 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2005,
pet. denied); Cafe's Clean Scene Carwash, Inc. v. Hubbard, 76 S.W.3d 784, 786-88
(Tex.App.-Houston[14th Dist.]2002, no pet.).
6. At trial, Plaintiffs offered the testimony of attorneys J. Lyndell Kirkley and Lindy D. Jones
to establish the reasonable and necessary amount of attorneys' fees that Plaintiffs would incur should
Plaintiffs need representation through appeal to the court of appeals, at the petition for review stage
in the Supreme Court of Texas, and through oral argument and the completion of proceedings in the
Supreme Court of Texas. The uncontroverted testimony established that the reasonable and
necessary attorney fees for representation through appeal to the court of appeals would be
$75,000.00, that the reasonable and necessary attorney fees at the petition for review stage in the
Supreme Court of Texas would be $50,000.00, and that the reasonable and necessary attorney fees
through oral argument and the completion of proceedings in the Supreme Court of Texas would be
$25,000.00. Mr. Kirkley and Mr. Jones's testimony was clear, positive and direct, and
uncontroverted. Defendants had the means an opportunity to disprove the testimony and to call their
own expert with regard to attorney's fees, but did not do so. Nor did the Defendants even attempt
to contest or discredit Mr. Jones or Mr. Kirkley's testimony on cross examination as to the
reasonable and necessary attorneys' fees in the event of an appeal.
7. The uncontroverted testimony of Mr. Jones and Mr. Kirkley establishes a right to attorneys'
fees as a matter of law. See McMillin at 210. In light of this testimony, the jury cannot refuse to
award Plaintiffs attorneys' fees. See Id. This Court must disregard the jury's negative finding with
regard to attorneys' fees for appeal to the court of appeals and beyond and instead substitute the
affirmative finding that is conclusively established by the uncontroverted testimony ofMr. Jones and
Plaintiffs' Motion for Judgment Non Obstante Veredicto Page 3 of6
Mr. Kirkley. See Brown at 145. With regard to Question #56, subparts b, c, and d, the Court must
grant Plaintiffs' Motion for Judgment Non Obstante Veredicto and enter judgment that the
reasonable and necessary attorney fees for representation of the Plaintiffs through appeal to the court
of appeals would be $75,000.00, that the reasonable and necessary attorney fees at the petition for
review stage in the Supreme Court of Texas would be $50,000.00, and that the reasonable and
necessary attorney fees through oral argument and the completion of proceedings in the Supreme
Court of Texas would be $25,000.00.
IV. PRAYER
Wherefore, Plaintiffs pray that after hearing Plaintiffs' Motion for Judgment Non Obstante
Veredicto, the Court grant such Motion, and enter a judgment stating that the uncontroverted
testimony established that the reasonable and necessary attorney fees for representation of the
Plaintiffs through appeal to the court of appeals would be $75,000.00, that the reasonable and
necessary attorney fees at the petition for review stage in the Supreme Court of Texas would be
$50,000.00, and that the reasonable and necessary attorney fees through oral argument and the
completion of proceedings in the Supreme Court of Texas would be $25,000.00, and for all other
relief, at law or in equity, to which Plaintiffs have shown themselves justly entitled.
Respectfully submitted,
I Kirkley
Texas State Bar No. 11523000
B. Dan Berryman
Texas State Bar No. 00793338
Sean R. Looney
Plaintiffs' Motion for Judgment Non Obstante Veredicto Page 4 of6
Texas State BarNo. 24050949
KIRKLEY & BERRYMAN, L.L.P.
100 N. Forest Park Blvd., Suite 220
Fort Worth, Texas 76102
Telephone: 817.335.3311
Facsimile: 817.335.7733
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Virginia 0. Kinsel, et. al.
and
Mr. Lindy Jones
State Bar No. 10925500
Jones, Allen & Fuquay, L.L.P.
8828 Greenville Avenue
Dallas, Texas 76243-7143
Telephone: 214.343.7400
Facsimile: 214.343.7455
ATTORNEY FOR J. FRANK KINSEL, JR
i/J Certificate of Conference
On the'- day of December, 2012, Counsel for Plaintiffs contacted Counsel for the
Defendants to discuss the merits of this motion. A reasonable effort was made to reach an agreement
with regard to the matters set forth in this motion, but the effort failed. Therefore it is presented to
the Court for determination.
Plaintiffs' Motion for Judgment Non Obstante Veredicto Page 5 of6
Certificate of Service
This is to certify that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing instrument was
served in accordance with the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure on this the 66- day of
't#cr._l-.S , 20 I?-, on all counsel of record:
Via Hand Delivery Via First Class Mail
Marshall M. Searcy, Jr. Mr. Scott Kinsel
Frank P. Greenhaw IV Scott C. Kinsel P.C.
KELLY, HART & HALLMAN, L.L.P. 8708 South Congress, B200
201 Main Street, Suite 2500 Austin, Texas 787 45
Fort Worth, Texas 76102
Attorney for Defendants Jackson Walker Via First Class Mail
L.L.P. and Keith Branyon Ms. Frances Garza, ProSe (via first class mail
only)
Via Hand Delivery 5435 FM 541
William L. Kirkman McCoy, Texas 78113
Ms. Susanna Johnson
BOURLAND & KIRKMAN, L.L.P. Via First Class Mail
201 Main Street, Suite 1400 Ms. Ida Castillo, Pro Se (via first class mail
Fort Worth, Texas 76102 only)
Attorneys for Defendants Jane Lindsey and 5437 FM 541
Robert Oliver McCoy, Texas 78113
Via First Class Mail
Ms. Alison H. Moore
THOMPSON, CoE, COUSINS, & IRONS, L.L.P.
700 North Pearl Street
25'• Floor, Plaza of the Americas
Dallas, Texas 75201
Attorney for Defendant, Terry Whiddon
Counsel for Plaintiffs
Plaintiffs' Motion for Judgment Non Obstante Veredicto Page 6 of6
KIRKLEY & BERRYMAN, L.L.P.
100 N. FOREST PARK BLVD., SUITE 220
FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76102
J. Lyndell Kirkley Sean R. Looney
Kirkley@kbblawyers.com TELEPHONE: 817.335.3311 sloone>@.kbblawyers.com
B. Dan Berryman FACSIMILE: 817.335.7733 Ana. I. Forcum
berryman@kbblawyers.com aforcum@kbblawyers.com
Karin Knowles Cagle www.kbblawyers.com Edward Johnson
kcagle@kbblawyers.com ejohnson@kbblawyers.com
-1
:::c ~
December 6, 2012 0
93:
Via Hand Delivery ~~
;::!()) I
Ms. Sharon Byrd ~~ cr.
Clerk, 153'd District Court n· -o
71h Floor ~~ 3
::n- r-
401 West Belknap ::xr ..
Fort Worth, Texas 76196 Cl 0
fT1 (X)
::0
RE: Cause Number 153-232668-08, in the 153'd District Court of Tarrant County,
Texas; Kinsel, et al. v. Lindsey, et al.
Dear Ms. Byrd:
Enclosed for filing are the original and one (I) copy each of (I) Plaintiffs' Motion for
Judgment Non Obstante Veredicto, (2) Plaintiffs' Motion to Remove the Trustees of The Lesey
B. Kinsel Trust and Appoint a Successor Trustee, and (3) Plaintiffs' Motion for Reconsideration
of Motion To Rec~rust Funds Improperly Paid From The Lesey B. Kinsel Trust. Please file
the originals and ~ _!ile-marked copy to the presenting courier. ~
By copy of this letter, all counsel of record have been forwarded a true and correct copy
of the above described document as indicated below.
Thank you for you for your assistance in this matter.
Yours very truly,
KIRKLEY & BERRYMAN, L.L.P.
1216/12 Letter to Clerk
cc: Client
Via Hand Delivery
Mr. Marshall M. Searcy Jr.
KELLY, HART & HALLMAN, L.L.P.
201 Main Street, Suite 2500
Fort Worth, Texas 76102
Attorney for Defendants Jackson Walker L.L.P. and Keith Branyon
Via Hand Delivery
Mr. William L. Kirkman
BOURLAND & KIRKMAN, L.L.P.
201 Main Street, Suite 1400
Fort Worth, Texas 76102
Attorney for Defendants Jane Lindsey and Robert Oliver
Via First Class Mail
Mr. Lindy Jones
JONES ALLEN & FUQUAY, L.L.P.
8828 Greenville Avenue
Dallas, Texas 75243-7143
Attorney for Plaintiff J. Frank Kinsel, Jr.
Via First Class Mail
Mr. Scott C. Kinsel
Scorr C. KINSEL, P.C.
8708 South Congress A venue
Suite 8200
Austin, Texas 78745
Attorney for Intervenor Joe Bob Kinsel Jr.
Via First Class Mail
Ms. Alison Moore
THOMPSON COE, COUSINS, & IRONS L.L.P.
700 North Pearl Street
25th Floor, Plaza of the America
Dallas, Texas 75201
Attorney for Defendant, Terry Whiddon
Via First Class Mail
Ms. Frances Garza, Pro Se
5435 FM 541
McCoy, Texas 78113
Via First Class Mail
Ms. Ida Castillo, Pro Se
5437 FM 541
McCoy, Texas 78113
1216/12 Letter to Clerk 2
Preview
• • CAUSE No. l 53-232668-08 VIRGINIA 0. KINSEL, et al., § § Plaintiffs, § § V. § § JANE 0. LINDSEY, et al., § § Defendants. § 153RD JUDICIAL DISTRICT MOTION FOR JUDGMENT NON OBSTANTE VEREDICTO COME NOW, Plaintiffs, Virginia 0. Kinsel, et al., in the above styled and numbered cause and file this their Motion for Judgment Non Obstante Veredicto and in support would respectfully show the court the following: d of Question #56 from the I. jury PRELIMINARY STATEMENT Plaintiffs move for Judgment Non Obstante Veredicto with regard to subparts b, c, and charge because the jury could not refuse, in the face of / uncontroverted testimony, to award Plaintiffs zero for attorney fees that Plaintiffs may incur should this case be appealed. Plaintiffs request that the Court grant Plaintiffs' Motion and enter judgment awarding Plaintiffs their reasonable and necessary attorneys' fees for the appellate process in accordance with the uncontroverted evidence put forth at trial. II. FACTS I. On November 16, the jury returned its verdict in the above-styled and numbered cause. 2. Question #56 on the jury charge states as follows: "What is a reasonable fee for the necessary services of Plaintiffs' attorneys, stated in dollars and cents? Answer with an amount for each of the following: a. For representation in the trial court. Answer: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ r:,.1'-1 • I,..• '' ~ ' •• • ~ i•: -j: :• I ' b. For representation through appeal to the court of appeals. Answer: - - - - - - - - - Plaintiffs' Motion for Judgment Non Obstante Veredicto c. For representation at the petition for review stage in the Supreme Court of Texas. Answer: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ d. For representation through oral argument and the completion of proceedings in the Supreme Court of Texas Answer: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _" 3. The jury answered subpart a with $800,000.00, but subparts b, c, and d with zero ("0"). 1 III. ARGUMENT AND AUTHORITIES 4. A trial court may disregard a jury's negative finding and substitute its own affirmative finding if the evidence conclusively establishes the affirmative finding. Brown v. Bank ofGalveston, Nat 'I Ass'n, 930 S.W.2d 140,145 (Tex.App.-Houston [14thDist.]1996),ajJ'd, 963 S.W.2d511, 515-16 (Tex.1998). A jury cannot simply refuse to award attorneys' fees if any were properly proven. McMillin v. State Farm Lloyds, 180 S.W.3d 183, 210 (Tex. App.-Austin 2005, pet. denied). A zero award of attorneys' fees is only proper if the evidence (I) fails to prove (a) that an attorney's services were provided, or (b) the value of the services provided; or (2) affirmatively showed that no attorney's services were needed or that any services provided were of no value. !d. at 209-210. 5. Uncontroverted testimony by an interested witness may establish a right to attorneys' fees as a matter oflaw. !d. at 210. Where trial counsel's testimony concerning attorneys' fees is clear, positive and direct, and uncontroverted, it is taken as true as a matter of law, especially true when the opposing party had the means and opportunity to disprove the testimony and failed to do so. Jd (citing Ragsdale v. Progressive Voters League, 801 S.W.2d 880, 882 (Tex.1990)). In such instances, appellate courts will reverse a denial or minimization of attorneys' fees and render judgment for attorneys' fees in the amount proved. See Ragsdale, 801 S.W.2d at 882; Recognition 1 The Plaintiffs are not seeking judgment non obstante veredicto with regard to subpart a. Plaintiffs' Motion for Judgment Non Obstante Veredicto Page 2 of6 Communications Inc. v. American Auto. Ass 'n, Inc., 154 S.W.3d 878,891 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2005, pet. denied); Cafe's Clean Scene Carwash, Inc. v. Hubbard, 76 S.W.3d 784, 786-88 (Tex.App.-Houston[14th Dist.]2002, no pet.). 6. At trial, Plaintiffs offered the testimony of attorneys J. Lyndell Kirkley and Lindy D. Jones to establish the reasonable and necessary amount of attorneys' fees that Plaintiffs would incur should Plaintiffs need representation through appeal to the court of appeals, at the petition for review stage in the Supreme Court of Texas, and through oral argument and the completion of proceedings in the Supreme Court of Texas. The uncontroverted testimony established that the reasonable and necessary attorney fees for representation through appeal to the court of appeals would be $75,000.00, that the reasonable and necessary attorney fees at the petition for review stage in the Supreme Court of Texas would be $50,000.00, and that the reasonable and necessary attorney fees through oral argument and the completion of proceedings in the Supreme Court of Texas would be $25,000.00. Mr. Kirkley and Mr. Jones's testimony was clear, positive and direct, and uncontroverted. Defendants had the means an opportunity to disprove the testimony and to call their own expert with regard to attorney's fees, but did not do so. Nor did the Defendants even attempt to contest or discredit Mr. Jones or Mr. Kirkley's testimony on cross examination as to the reasonable and necessary attorneys' fees in the event of an appeal. 7. The uncontroverted testimony of Mr. Jones and Mr. Kirkley establishes a right to attorneys' fees as a matter of law. See McMillin at 210. In light of this testimony, the jury cannot refuse to award Plaintiffs attorneys' fees. See Id. This Court must disregard the jury's negative finding with regard to attorneys' fees for appeal to the court of appeals and beyond and instead substitute the affirmative finding that is conclusively established by the uncontroverted testimony ofMr. Jones and Plaintiffs' Motion for Judgment Non Obstante Veredicto Page 3 of6 Mr. Kirkley. See Brown at 145. With regard to Question #56, subparts b, c, and d, the Court must grant Plaintiffs' Motion for Judgment Non Obstante Veredicto and enter judgment that the reasonable and necessary attorney fees for representation of the Plaintiffs through appeal to the court of appeals would be $75,000.00, that the reasonable and necessary attorney fees at the petition for review stage in the Supreme Court of Texas would be $50,000.00, and that the reasonable and necessary attorney fees through oral argument and the completion of proceedings in the Supreme Court of Texas would be $25,000.00. IV. PRAYER Wherefore, Plaintiffs pray that after hearing Plaintiffs' Motion for Judgment Non Obstante Veredicto, the Court grant such Motion, and enter a judgment stating that the uncontroverted testimony established that the reasonable and necessary attorney fees for representation of the Plaintiffs through appeal to the court of appeals would be $75,000.00, that the reasonable and necessary attorney fees at the petition for review stage in the Supreme Court of Texas would be $50,000.00, and that the reasonable and necessary attorney fees through oral argument and the completion of proceedings in the Supreme Court of Texas would be $25,000.00, and for all other relief, at law or in equity, to which Plaintiffs have shown themselves justly entitled. Respectfully submitted, I Kirkley Texas State Bar No. 11523000 B. Dan Berryman Texas State Bar No. 00793338 Sean R. Looney Plaintiffs' Motion for Judgment Non Obstante Veredicto Page 4 of6 Texas State BarNo. 24050949 KIRKLEY & BERRYMAN, L.L.P. 100 N. Forest Park Blvd., Suite 220 Fort Worth, Texas 76102 Telephone: 817.335.3311 Facsimile: 817.335.7733 Attorneys for Plaintiffs Virginia 0. Kinsel, et. al. and Mr. Lindy Jones State Bar No. 10925500 Jones, Allen & Fuquay, L.L.P. 8828 Greenville Avenue Dallas, Texas 76243-7143 Telephone: 214.343.7400 Facsimile: 214.343.7455 ATTORNEY FOR J. FRANK KINSEL, JR i/J Certificate of Conference On the'- day of December, 2012, Counsel for Plaintiffs contacted Counsel for the Defendants to discuss the merits of this motion. A reasonable effort was made to reach an agreement with regard to the matters set forth in this motion, but the effort failed. Therefore it is presented to the Court for determination. Plaintiffs' Motion for Judgment Non Obstante Veredicto Page 5 of6 Certificate of Service This is to certify that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing instrument was served in accordance with the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure on this the 66- day of 't#cr._l-.S , 20 I?-, on all counsel of record: Via Hand Delivery Via First Class Mail Marshall M. Searcy, Jr. Mr. Scott Kinsel Frank P. Greenhaw IV Scott C. Kinsel P.C. KELLY, HART & HALLMAN, L.L.P. 8708 South Congress, B200 201 Main Street, Suite 2500 Austin, Texas 787 45 Fort Worth, Texas 76102 Attorney for Defendants Jackson Walker Via First Class Mail L.L.P. and Keith Branyon Ms. Frances Garza, ProSe (via first class mail only) Via Hand Delivery 5435 FM 541 William L. Kirkman McCoy, Texas 78113 Ms. Susanna Johnson BOURLAND & KIRKMAN, L.L.P. Via First Class Mail 201 Main Street, Suite 1400 Ms. Ida Castillo, Pro Se (via first class mail Fort Worth, Texas 76102 only) Attorneys for Defendants Jane Lindsey and 5437 FM 541 Robert Oliver McCoy, Texas 78113 Via First Class Mail Ms. Alison H. Moore THOMPSON, CoE, COUSINS, & IRONS, L.L.P. 700 North Pearl Street 25'• Floor, Plaza of the Americas Dallas, Texas 75201 Attorney for Defendant, Terry Whiddon Counsel for Plaintiffs Plaintiffs' Motion for Judgment Non Obstante Veredicto Page 6 of6 KIRKLEY & BERRYMAN, L.L.P. 100 N. FOREST PARK BLVD., SUITE 220 FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76102 J. Lyndell Kirkley Sean R. Looney Kirkley@kbblawyers.com TELEPHONE: 817.335.3311 sloone>@.kbblawyers.com B. Dan Berryman FACSIMILE: 817.335.7733 Ana. I. Forcum berryman@kbblawyers.com aforcum@kbblawyers.com Karin Knowles Cagle www.kbblawyers.com Edward Johnson kcagle@kbblawyers.com ejohnson@kbblawyers.com -1 :::c ~ December 6, 2012 0 93: Via Hand Delivery ~~ ;::!()) I Ms. Sharon Byrd ~~ cr. Clerk, 153'd District Court n· -o 71h Floor ~~ 3 ::n- r- 401 West Belknap ::xr .. Fort Worth, Texas 76196 Cl 0 fT1 (X) ::0 RE: Cause Number 153-232668-08, in the 153'd District Court of Tarrant County, Texas; Kinsel, et al. v. Lindsey, et al. Dear Ms. Byrd: Enclosed for filing are the original and one (I) copy each of (I) Plaintiffs' Motion for Judgment Non Obstante Veredicto, (2) Plaintiffs' Motion to Remove the Trustees of The Lesey B. Kinsel Trust and Appoint a Successor Trustee, and (3) Plaintiffs' Motion for Reconsideration of Motion To Rec~rust Funds Improperly Paid From The Lesey B. Kinsel Trust. Please file the originals and ~ _!ile-marked copy to the presenting courier. ~ By copy of this letter, all counsel of record have been forwarded a true and correct copy of the above described document as indicated below. Thank you for you for your assistance in this matter. Yours very truly, KIRKLEY & BERRYMAN, L.L.P. 1216/12 Letter to Clerk cc: Client Via Hand Delivery Mr. Marshall M. Searcy Jr. KELLY, HART & HALLMAN, L.L.P. 201 Main Street, Suite 2500 Fort Worth, Texas 76102 Attorney for Defendants Jackson Walker L.L.P. and Keith Branyon Via Hand Delivery Mr. William L. Kirkman BOURLAND & KIRKMAN, L.L.P. 201 Main Street, Suite 1400 Fort Worth, Texas 76102 Attorney for Defendants Jane Lindsey and Robert Oliver Via First Class Mail Mr. Lindy Jones JONES ALLEN & FUQUAY, L.L.P. 8828 Greenville Avenue Dallas, Texas 75243-7143 Attorney for Plaintiff J. Frank Kinsel, Jr. Via First Class Mail Mr. Scott C. Kinsel Scorr C. KINSEL, P.C. 8708 South Congress A venue Suite 8200 Austin, Texas 78745 Attorney for Intervenor Joe Bob Kinsel Jr. Via First Class Mail Ms. Alison Moore THOMPSON COE, COUSINS, & IRONS L.L.P. 700 North Pearl Street 25th Floor, Plaza of the America Dallas, Texas 75201 Attorney for Defendant, Terry Whiddon Via First Class Mail Ms. Frances Garza, Pro Se 5435 FM 541 McCoy, Texas 78113 Via First Class Mail Ms. Ida Castillo, Pro Se 5437 FM 541 McCoy, Texas 78113 1216/12 Letter to Clerk 2