Preview
FILED
11/3/2022 1:04 PM
FELICIA PITRE
DISTRICT CLERK
DALLAS 00., TEXAS
1 CIT ESERVE Ashley Davenport DEPUTY
DC-22-15312
CAUSE NO.
KEITH WILKINS, § IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF
Plaintiff §
§ DALLAS COUNTY TEXAS
§8th
V. § JUDICIAL DISTRICT
§
LA FRONTERA HOLDINGS, LLC §
Defendant, § JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION
NOW COMES Plaintiff Keith Wilkins complaining of Defendant La Frontera Holdings, LLC
and for cause of action would respectfully show this Honorable Court the following:
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
On April 5, 2022, Plaintiff was working at the Odessa-Ector Power Plant in Odessa, Texas
owned by Defendant (the “Plant”). Plaintiff was sent to the Plant to perform shutdown services as
a valve technician working for his employer, PTW. While performing this work, Plaintiff was sent
from the third floor of the plant to the second floor. Unfortunately, the second floor of the Plant
contained unmarked open hatches throughout the area with no fall protection system. As Plaintiff
stepped off the ladder to the second floor, he fellinto one of these unmarked open hatches. Had
Plaintiff fallen all the way to the ground of the first floor, he likely would have died. He very
narrowly missed that fate. In attempting to stop himself from falling all the way through the hatch
and onto the floor of the first floor below, Plaintiff injured his knees, back, neck, and arms. Plaintiff
immediately reported his injuries to his supervisor.
II. DISCOVERY PLAN
Plaintiff intends to conduct discovery under Level 2 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure.
III. PARTIES
Plaintiff is an individual who lives in Caldwell Parish, Louisiana.
Defendant, La Frontera Holdings, LLC, is a Delaware limited liability company whose sole
member is Vistra Asset Company LLC. Vistra Asset Company LLC is a Delaware Limited
Liability Company whose sole member is Vistra Operations Company, LLC. Vistra Operations
Company, LLC is a Delaware limited liability company whose sole member is Vistra Corp. Vistra
Corp. is a Delaware Corporation whose principal place of business is in Irving, Texas. Accordingly,
Defendant La Frontera Holdings, LLC is a citizen of Delaware and Texas. Defendant, La Frontera
Holdings, LLC may be served through its registered agent, Capitol Corporation Services, Inc., 206 E.
9th Street, Suite 1300, Austin, Texas 78701.
IV. VENUE AND JURISDICTION
Venue and jurisdiction are proper. The relief requested is within the jurisdictional limits
of this Court. Defendant does business in the state of Texas and, as shown above, Defendant is a
citizen of Texas with its principal place of business in Irving, Dallas County, Texas. Additionally,
the events giving rise to Plaintiff’s cause of action occurred in Odessa, Ector County, Texas.
V. CAUSES OF ACTION
A. NEGLIGENCE
Plaintiff incorporates the preceding paragraphs of this Petition as if set forth fully below.
Defendant owed a legal duty to Plaintiff to exercise ordinary care.
Defendant breached this duty of care by failing to do the following:
1) Contributing to an unsafe work site;
2) Failing to recognize and remediate hazards;
3) Participating in and contributing to acts that caused the incident in question;
Page 2 of 5
4) Failing to provide timely assistance, or to ensure other protections were in place;
5) Failing to ensure a comprehensive job safety analysis was completed that identified
and addressed all hazards;
6) Failing to warn of a known hazard;
7) Failing to publish safe work policies and procedures;
8) Promulgating and following unsafe work policies;
9) Creating latent dangers, but failing to warn of same;
10) Failing to close open hatches in the Plant;
l 1) Failing to ensure fall protection systems were in place;
12) Failing to provide adequate and competent personnel, as promised;
13) Failing to have appropriate safety protocols in place at the facility in question to ensure
fall protection systems were in place and hatches were marked and not left open;
l4) Failing to properly enforce policies and procedures regarding;
15) Failing to properly train in fall protection systems and marking and closing hatches;
16) Failing to ensure a safe work area, as promised.
Defendant’s actions constitute negligence and gross negligence. Defendant’s breach of these
duties proximately caused Plaintist injuries.
The acts of negligence committed by Defendant’s agents, servants, and/or employees arose
directly out of and was done in prosecution of the business that they were employed to do by their
employer, who is therefore liable under the doctrine of respondeat superior for the negligent actions
of its employees.
Page 3 of 5
B. GROSS NEGLIGENCE
Plaintiff will further show that the acts and/or omissions of the Defendant, as described
above, when Viewed objectively from the Defendant’s standpoint, involve an extreme degree of
risk considering the probability and magnitude of the potential harm to others. Defendant had
actual subjective awareness of the risk involved, but nevertheless preceded in conscious
indifference to the rights, safety, and/or welfare of the others, including Plaintiff. Defendant knew
or should have known of the risk posed by the negligent actions described above, but failed to
address and remediate them.
As such, Defendant’s actions and omissions constitute gross negligence and malice as those
terms are understood by law.
VI. DAMAGES
Plaintiff seeks damages for physical pain and suffering, past and future; disfigurement and
physical impairment, past and future; mental anguish; medical expenses; and loss of earning
capacity, past and future. Because of the egregious nature of Defendant’s actions, Plaintiff seeks
punitive damages. Plaintiff seek not less than $1,000,000.
VII. REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURE
Pursuant to Tex. R. Civ. P. 194, Plaintiff requests that each Defendant disclose within fifty
(50) days of service of this Request for Disclosure, the information and/or material described in Rule
194.2.
VIII. REQUEST FOR JURY TRIAL
Plaintiff respectfully demands a jury trial and tender the appropriate fee with this petition.
Page 4 of 5
IX. PRAYER
By reason of all the above and foregoing, and on account of the injuries suffered by Plaintiff
as a result of this incident, Plaintiff is entitled to recover from Defendant damages set forth in this
petition, within the jurisdictional limits of this Court. Plaintiff seeks damages in excess of
$1,000,000. Plaintiff also seeks post judgment interest at the maximum legal rate, costs of court,
and any other relief to which Plaintiff may be justly entitled.
Respectfully submitted,
THE BUZBEE LAW FIRM
By: /s/Anth0nv G.Buzbee
Anthony G. Buzbee
State Bar No. 24001820
tbuzbee@txattomeys.com
Michael R. Eddington
State Bar No. 24105835
meddington@txattorneys.com
JP Morgan Chase Tower
600 Travis, Suite 7500
Houston, Texas 77002
Telephone: (713) 223-5 393
Facsimile: (713) 223-5909
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
Page 5 of 5
Preview
FILED 11/3/2022 1:04 PM FELICIA PITRE DISTRICT CLERK DALLAS 00., TEXAS 1 CIT ESERVE Ashley Davenport DEPUTY DC-22-15312 CAUSE NO. KEITH WILKINS, § IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF Plaintiff § § DALLAS COUNTY TEXAS §8th V. § JUDICIAL DISTRICT § LA FRONTERA HOLDINGS, LLC § Defendant, § JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION NOW COMES Plaintiff Keith Wilkins complaining of Defendant La Frontera Holdings, LLC and for cause of action would respectfully show this Honorable Court the following: I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND On April 5, 2022, Plaintiff was working at the Odessa-Ector Power Plant in Odessa, Texas owned by Defendant (the “Plant”). Plaintiff was sent to the Plant to perform shutdown services as a valve technician working for his employer, PTW. While performing this work, Plaintiff was sent from the third floor of the plant to the second floor. Unfortunately, the second floor of the Plant contained unmarked open hatches throughout the area with no fall protection system. As Plaintiff stepped off the ladder to the second floor, he fellinto one of these unmarked open hatches. Had Plaintiff fallen all the way to the ground of the first floor, he likely would have died. He very narrowly missed that fate. In attempting to stop himself from falling all the way through the hatch and onto the floor of the first floor below, Plaintiff injured his knees, back, neck, and arms. Plaintiff immediately reported his injuries to his supervisor. II. DISCOVERY PLAN Plaintiff intends to conduct discovery under Level 2 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. III. PARTIES Plaintiff is an individual who lives in Caldwell Parish, Louisiana. Defendant, La Frontera Holdings, LLC, is a Delaware limited liability company whose sole member is Vistra Asset Company LLC. Vistra Asset Company LLC is a Delaware Limited Liability Company whose sole member is Vistra Operations Company, LLC. Vistra Operations Company, LLC is a Delaware limited liability company whose sole member is Vistra Corp. Vistra Corp. is a Delaware Corporation whose principal place of business is in Irving, Texas. Accordingly, Defendant La Frontera Holdings, LLC is a citizen of Delaware and Texas. Defendant, La Frontera Holdings, LLC may be served through its registered agent, Capitol Corporation Services, Inc., 206 E. 9th Street, Suite 1300, Austin, Texas 78701. IV. VENUE AND JURISDICTION Venue and jurisdiction are proper. The relief requested is within the jurisdictional limits of this Court. Defendant does business in the state of Texas and, as shown above, Defendant is a citizen of Texas with its principal place of business in Irving, Dallas County, Texas. Additionally, the events giving rise to Plaintiff’s cause of action occurred in Odessa, Ector County, Texas. V. CAUSES OF ACTION A. NEGLIGENCE Plaintiff incorporates the preceding paragraphs of this Petition as if set forth fully below. Defendant owed a legal duty to Plaintiff to exercise ordinary care. Defendant breached this duty of care by failing to do the following: 1) Contributing to an unsafe work site; 2) Failing to recognize and remediate hazards; 3) Participating in and contributing to acts that caused the incident in question; Page 2 of 5 4) Failing to provide timely assistance, or to ensure other protections were in place; 5) Failing to ensure a comprehensive job safety analysis was completed that identified and addressed all hazards; 6) Failing to warn of a known hazard; 7) Failing to publish safe work policies and procedures; 8) Promulgating and following unsafe work policies; 9) Creating latent dangers, but failing to warn of same; 10) Failing to close open hatches in the Plant; l 1) Failing to ensure fall protection systems were in place; 12) Failing to provide adequate and competent personnel, as promised; 13) Failing to have appropriate safety protocols in place at the facility in question to ensure fall protection systems were in place and hatches were marked and not left open; l4) Failing to properly enforce policies and procedures regarding; 15) Failing to properly train in fall protection systems and marking and closing hatches; 16) Failing to ensure a safe work area, as promised. Defendant’s actions constitute negligence and gross negligence. Defendant’s breach of these duties proximately caused Plaintist injuries. The acts of negligence committed by Defendant’s agents, servants, and/or employees arose directly out of and was done in prosecution of the business that they were employed to do by their employer, who is therefore liable under the doctrine of respondeat superior for the negligent actions of its employees. Page 3 of 5 B. GROSS NEGLIGENCE Plaintiff will further show that the acts and/or omissions of the Defendant, as described above, when Viewed objectively from the Defendant’s standpoint, involve an extreme degree of risk considering the probability and magnitude of the potential harm to others. Defendant had actual subjective awareness of the risk involved, but nevertheless preceded in conscious indifference to the rights, safety, and/or welfare of the others, including Plaintiff. Defendant knew or should have known of the risk posed by the negligent actions described above, but failed to address and remediate them. As such, Defendant’s actions and omissions constitute gross negligence and malice as those terms are understood by law. VI. DAMAGES Plaintiff seeks damages for physical pain and suffering, past and future; disfigurement and physical impairment, past and future; mental anguish; medical expenses; and loss of earning capacity, past and future. Because of the egregious nature of Defendant’s actions, Plaintiff seeks punitive damages. Plaintiff seek not less than $1,000,000. VII. REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURE Pursuant to Tex. R. Civ. P. 194, Plaintiff requests that each Defendant disclose within fifty (50) days of service of this Request for Disclosure, the information and/or material described in Rule 194.2. VIII. REQUEST FOR JURY TRIAL Plaintiff respectfully demands a jury trial and tender the appropriate fee with this petition. Page 4 of 5 IX. PRAYER By reason of all the above and foregoing, and on account of the injuries suffered by Plaintiff as a result of this incident, Plaintiff is entitled to recover from Defendant damages set forth in this petition, within the jurisdictional limits of this Court. Plaintiff seeks damages in excess of $1,000,000. Plaintiff also seeks post judgment interest at the maximum legal rate, costs of court, and any other relief to which Plaintiff may be justly entitled. Respectfully submitted, THE BUZBEE LAW FIRM By: /s/Anth0nv G.Buzbee Anthony G. Buzbee State Bar No. 24001820 tbuzbee@txattomeys.com Michael R. Eddington State Bar No. 24105835 meddington@txattorneys.com JP Morgan Chase Tower 600 Travis, Suite 7500 Houston, Texas 77002 Telephone: (713) 223-5 393 Facsimile: (713) 223-5909 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF Page 5 of 5