Motion to Amend in TONY EVANS, Sr., et al vs. TASACOM REAL ESTATE, LLC, et al| Trellis.Law

On April 16, 2021 a Answer was filed involving a dispute between Evans, Aretha, Evans, Tony, Sr., Perkins, Monique, Tanksley, Faith, Williams, Deon, and Choudhury , Mmarooful, Diamond Staffing Services, Llc, Hawthorn Suites Franchising, Inc., Jain , Sanjeev, Noshahi, Mohammad Sadiq, Tasacom Real Estate, Llc, Tasacom Technologies Inc, Wyndham Hotel Group, Llc, Wyndham Hotels & Resorts, Inc., for OTHER PERSONAL INJURY in the District Court of Dallas County.

Preview
FILED
6/30/2022 1:47 PM
FELICIA PITRE
DISTRICT CLERK
DALLAS CO., TEXAS
Treva Parker-Ayodele DEPUTY

CAUSE NO. DC-21-04901

TONY EVANS SR., and ARETHA EVANS, IN THE DISTRICT COURT

§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§
Individually and 0n behalf of their minor son,
T.E., deceased, FAITH TANKSLEY on behalf of
minor T.E., III, Individually and on behalf of
His father, T.E., deceased and
DEON WILLIAMS,

Plaintiffs,

v. 162ND JUDICIAL DISTRICT

TASACOM REAL ESTATE, LLC d/b/a
HAWTHORN SUITES DALLAS LOVE FIELD
HAWTHORN SUITES FRANCHISING, INC.,
WYNDHAM HOTELS & RESORTS, INC.,
MOHAMlVIAD SADIQ NOSHAHI,
DIAMOND STAFFING SERVICES, LLC, and
WYNDHAM HOTEL GROUP, LLC,

Defendants. DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

DEFENDANTS TASACOM REAL ESTATE, LLC D/B/A HAWTHORN SUITES
DALLAS LOVE FIELD, MOHAMMAD SADIQ NOSHAHI, AND DIAMOND
STAFFING SERVICES, LLC’S FIRST AMENDED ANSWER
AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE:

Defendants Tasacom Real Estate, LLC d/b/a Hawthorn Suites Dallas Love Field,

Mohammad Sadiq Nashahi and Diamond Stafﬁng Services, LLC, hereinafter referred to below

as “Defendants,” in the above styled and numbered case, ﬁles their First Amended Answer and

Afﬁrmative Defenses and would respectfully show the Court as follows:

I.
GENERAL DENIAL
1.1 Pursuant to Rule 92 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, Defendants deny all

and singular, each and every material allegation contained in Plaintiffs’ Fourth Amended Petition

1
10828309v1
12777.002
and any subsequent petition ﬁled by Plaintiffs and demands stIict proof of the same by a

preponderance of the evidence.

II.
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
Pleading further if the same be necessary, Defendant asserts the following defenses:

2.1 Defendants speciﬁcally invoke the doctrines of contributory negligence,

contribution, comparative responsibility, and proportionate responsibility, as set forth in

Chapters 32 and 33 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code. Each Plaintiff’ s recovery

should therefore be reduced in accordance With the percentage of negligence which the ﬁnder of

fact places on Tony Evans, Sr., Aretha Evans, T.E. or Deon Williams for causing or contributing

to the incident in question. Likewise, each Plaintiff should be barred from recovery should the

ﬁnder of fact place more than 50% of the responsibility for the accident upon each Plaintiff.

Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Section 33.001. At this time, discovery is in its early stage and the

events leading up to the shooting are currently not fully known. In an abundance of caution,

Defendants assert the afﬁrmative defense of contributory negligence on the part of Plaintiffs

Tony Evans, Sr., Aretha Evans, T.E. and Deon Williams as the full facts leading up to the event

or not currently known. Defendants reserve the right to amend this petition once Defendants

have more information as uncovered by the investigation of this by Dallas PD.

2.2 For further answer, if such be necessary, Defendants allege that in accordance

with Section 33.013 of the Texas Civil Practices and Remedies Code, Defendant may not be held

jointly and severally liable for any amount of damages claimed herein unless the percentage of

responsibility of each Defendant, when compared with that of each other defendant, each settling

party, and each responsible third party, is greater than ﬁfty percent (50%). Further, the

responsibility of each party, including Plaintiff, any settling parties, and any responsible third

10828309v1
12777.002
panics, should be submitted to the trier of fact as required by Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code

§33.003.

2.3 Defendants assert their rights under common law and Chapters 32 and 33 of the

Texas Civil Practices and Remedies Code to receive an offset, credit, and/or reduction in

judgment based on any settlement Plaintiff has made or may make with any other person or

entity or for any amounts of money collected from any other person or entity by settlement,

compromise, or agreement or in payment or partial payment of any judgment entered in this

case. In accordance with Chapter 33 of the Civil Practices and Remedies Code, speciﬁcally

CPRC §33.012, Defendant seeks a settlement credit as to all sums paid by any and all settling

paIties. Accordingly, if Plaintiffs are awarded any amount as damages in this cause, the award

must be reduced by the dollar amount of any and all settlements or by a dollar credit determined

by applying the statutory formula credit set forth in §33.012 of the Texas Civil Practice and

Remedies Code.

2.4 Defendants would ﬁlrther show that, in the unlikely event that they are found

liable for medical expenses, any such recovery of medical expenses would be limited pursuant to

Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §4l.0105.

2.5 The sole proximate cause of the injuries or damages alleged in the Petition, if any,
was the negligence and/or tortious conduct of persons or entities other than Defendants, and

therefore Plaintiffs are barred from obtaining a recovery herein against Defendants, or,

alternatively, any such recovery must be reduced in proportion to the negligence and tortious

conduct of others, including all limitations set forth in the Comparative Responsibility Act, Tex.

Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §§ 33.001, et seq., or otherwise under applicable law. Speciﬁcally, it is

10828309v1
12777.002
believed that Keyshawn Harris shot T.E. and Deon Williams. Defendants assert he is solely

responsible for the injuries and damages sought by Plaintiff.

2.6 The incident which is the subject of Plaintiffs’ Petition was neither caused in fact

nor proximately caused by any fault, negligence, act, omission, conduct, or breach of duty

attributable to Defendants.

2.7 The injuries and damages alleged by Plaintiffs were the result of an unforeseeable

intervening and superseding causes for which Defendants cannot be held liable. Speciﬁcally, an

armed assailant, presumably Keyshawn Harris, shot T.E. and Deon Williams which was an

unforeseeable, criminal act.

2.8 Plaintiffs’ alleged injuries and damages, if any exist, were caused in whole or in

part by a new and independent cause.

2.9 Defendants would further show that, in the unlikely event that they are found

liable to Plaintiffs, Defendants are entitled to offset, credit, contribution, and submission of

comparative responsibility as to all potentially responsible parties pursuant to Chapters 32 and 33

of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code.

2.10 Plaintiffs have failed to join one or more indispensable parties necessary for the

proper adjudication of this action.

2.11 Plaintiffs’ claims for economic losses are barred or subject to setoff to the extent

Plaintiffs received, or are entitled to receive, payments outside the scope of the collateral source

rule from non-parties.

2.12 Any right to recovery by Plaintiffs in this action, and any liability on the part of

Defendants, which is expressly denied, is limited in accordance with the provisions of the

applicable wrongful death statutes and common law.

10828309v1
12777.002
2.13 Any applicable limitations on damages, including but not limited to those set forth

in Section 41.008 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, should be applied in this case.

2.14 Defendants speciﬁcally allege that Plaintiffs’ Decedent and Deon Williams were

not invitees nor licensees at the time of the subject incident. Plaintiffs were not registered guests

of the hotel nor were they staying with a registered guest of the hotel.

2.15 Defendants further allege that Plaintiffs have no standing to bring a claim against

Defendants for misrepresentation or under the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices and Consumer

Protection Act, Tex. Bus. & Com. Code § 17.46.

2.16 To the extent that Plaintiffs are attempting to assert a breach of contract claim

against Defendants arising from the Franchise Agreement or any other agreements to which

Plaintiffs are not a party, Plaintiffs cannot establish that they are third-party beneﬁciaries to such

agreement(s) and thus cannot establish that they have any standing to bring such claims against

Defendants.

2.17 Plaintiffs are not entitled to recovery under the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices

and Consumer Protection Act, Tex. Bus. & Com. Code § 17.46, because there was no business

relationship between Defendants and Plaintiffs because Plaintiffs were not registered guests of

the hotel nor were they staying with a registered guest of the hotel.

2.18 Plaintiffs are not entitled to recovery under their claim for misrepresentation,

because there was no business relationship between Defendants and Plaintiffs because Plaintiffs

were not registered guests of the hotel nor were they staying with a registered guest of the hotel.

2.19 Plaintiffs have failed to satisfy all pre-suit requirements for a claim arising under

the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Act, Tex. Bus. & Com. Code §

17.46 as prescribed by statute.

10828309v1
12777.002
2.20 Plaintiffs have failed to allege conduct warranting imposition of exemplary or

punitive damages under applicable Texas law.

2.21 Plaintiffs have failed to allege facts which support the imposition or award of

attorneys’ fees.

2.22 Defendants assert that any award of punitive damages to Plaintiffs is subject to

the limitations and caps imposed by Chapter 41 of the Texas Civil Practices and Remedies Code.

2.23 For further answer, Defendants assert that an award of exemplary damages in this

case would be inconsistent with, and would violate Defendant’s rights under the United States

and Texas Constitutions as follows:

A. An award of exemplary damages would violate Defendant’s right to due process

and equal protection as guaranteed by the 14th Amendment to the United States

Constitution and Article l, Section 19 of the Texas Constitution in that:

1. No provision of Texas law provides any adequate or meaningful standard

or guide for ﬁxing, determining, or reviewing the amount of an award of exemplary damages.

Defendant has no notice of nor means of ascertaining the amount of the penalty that they would

be or might be subject to for the conduct upon which the award is ostensibly to be based;

2. Under the laws of the State of Texas, the determination of Whether to

award exemplary damages is left to the arbitrary discretion of the trier of fact. There is no

adequate or meaningful standard or guide for exercising said discretion;

3. No provision of Texas law provides any adequate or meaningﬁil standard

or guide for determining the nature of the conduct upon which an award of exemplary damages

may be based. Defendant has no notice of nor means of ascertaining the nature of the conduct

for which they might be held subject to an exemplary damages award;

10828309v1
12777.002
4. No provision of Texas law provides adequate procedural safeguards for

the imposition of an award of exemplary damages; and

5. The very concept of exemplary damages, whereby an award is made to a

private plaintiff not by way of compensation, but by way of a windfall incident to punishing a

defendant, represents the taking of property Without due process.

B. An exemplary damages award would Violate the prohibition against excessive

ﬁnes contained in the 8th Amendment to the United States Constitution as embodied in the due

process clause of the 14th Amendment.

2.24 Plaintiffs Tony Evans, Sr. and Aretha Evans are not entitled to recover punitive

damages as no such recovery is allowed under Chapter 71 of the Texas Civil Practices and

Remedies Code.

2.25 Defendants assert that any award of punitive damages to Plaintiff is subject to the

limitations and caps imposed by Chapter 41 of the Texas Civil Practices and Remedies Code.

2.26 According to police records and the deposition testimony of Plaintiff Deon

Williams, Keyshawn Harris is believed to be the person who shot Plaintiffs. Shortly after the

incident occurred, Keyshawn Harris was arrested and indicted by a grand jury on the charges of

the murder of Decedent T.E. and aggravated assault of Plaintiff Deon Williams. Although

Defendants dispute all of Plaintiffs’ allegations, if any of Plaintiffs’ alleged damages are proven,

Defendants allege that Keyshawn Harris’s tortious conduct proximately caused Plaintiffs’

injuries and, in the absence of Keyshawn Harris’s tortious conduct, Plaintiffs would not have

suffered any gunshot injuries. Keyshawn Harris a responsible third-party within the meaning of

the Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 33.011(6) because, if Plaintiffs’ allegations are true and

accurate, Keyshawn Harris proximately caused or contributed to the alleged harm for which

10828309v1
12777.002
recovery of damages are sought by Plaintiffs in this action. Accordingly, Keyshawn Harris

should be designated as a responsible third-party under Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §

33.0040).

III.
JURY DEMAND
3.1 Pursuant to Rule 216 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, Defendants hereby

demand a trial by jury and tenders the required fee.

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Defendants pray that the Plaintiffs take

nothing by their suit and that Defendants have judgment for their costs.

10828309v1
12777.002
Respectfully submitted,

THOMPSON, COE, COUSIN S & IRONS, L.L.P.

By:
Tasha L. Barnes
State Bar No. 00796163
Eva DeLeon
State Bar No. 24074774
Morgan J. Wells
State Bar N0. 24106562
Samantha C. Jeffers
State Bar No. 24120924
701 Brazos Suite 1500
Austin, Texas 78701
(512) 708-8200 — Telephone
(512) 708-8777 — Fax
tbarnes@thompsoncoe.com
edeleon@thompsoncoe.com
mwells@thompsoncoe.com
sieffers@thompsoncoe.com

ATTORNEYS FOR DEF ENDANTS
TASASCOM REAL ESTATE, LLC D/B/A
HAWTHORN SUITES DALLAS LOVE FIELD,
MOHAMMAD SADIQ NOSHAHI AND
DIAMOND STAFFING SERVICES, LLC

10828309v1
12777.002
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

By my signature above, I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has
been delivered on this the 30m day of June, 2022, to the following counsel of record Via e-mail:

Nuru Witherspoon Jason Hopkins
Emily Taylor DLA PIPER LLP w S)
The Witherspoon Law Group, PLLC 1900 N. Pearl St., Suite 2200
5565 Deer Creek, Unit A Dallas, Texas 75201
Dallas, Texas 75228 Jason.hopkins@dlapiper.com
witherspoon@twlglawyers.com
taylor@nvlglawyers.com And
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
Christopher B. Donovan
DLA PIPER LLP (U S)
1000 Louisiana Street, Suite 2800
Houston, Texas 77002
Christopher.b.donovan@dlapiper.com
ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS
HAWTHORN SUITES FRANCHISING,
INC. AND WYNDHAM HOTELS &
RESORTS, INC.

10
10828309v1
12777.002
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.

Kiyomi Armistead on behalf of Eva DeLeon
Bar No. 24074774
KArmistead@thompsoncoe.com
Envelope ID: 65934105
Status as of 6/30/2022 2:17 PM CST
Associated Case Party: TASACOM REAL ESTATE, LLC

Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status
Tasha LBarnes tbarnes@thompsoncoe.com 6/30/2022 1:47:15 PM SENT
Morgan Wells mwells@thompsoncoe.com 6/30/2022 1:47:15 PM SENT
Samantha Jeffers sjeffers@thompsoncoe.com 6/30/2022 1:47:15 PM SENT

Associated Case Party: HAWTHORN SUITES FRANCHISING, INC.

Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status

Christopher BDonovan Christopher.B.Donovan@dlapiper.com 6/30/2022 1:47:15 PM SENT
Jason Hopkins 24059969 jason.hopkins@dlapiper.com 6/30/2022 1:47:15 PM SENT
Ronald DHinds rdhinds@verizon.net 6/30/2022 1:47:15 PM SENT

Case Contacts

Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status
RoseMarie Chambers rose.chambers@dlapiper.com 6/30/2022 1:47:15 PM SENT
NURU WITHERSPOON witherspoon@twlglawyers.com 6/30/2022 1:47:15 PM SENT
Ronald DHinds rdhinds@verizon.net 6/30/2022 1:47:15 PM SENT
Alicia Nixon anixon@reedsmith.com 6/30/2022 1:47:15 PM SENT
Witherspoon Litigation litigation@twlglawyers.com 6/30/2022 1:47:15 PM SENT

Associated Case Party: WYNDHAM HOTELS & RESORTS, INC.

Name

Jason Hopkins

Christopher BDonovan
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.

Kiyomi Armistead on behalf of Eva DeLeon
Bar No. 24074774
KArmistead@thompsoncoe.com
Envelope ID: 65934105
Status as of 6/30/2022 2:17 PM CST
Associated Case Party: WYNDHAM HOTELS & RESORTS, INC.

Ronald DHinds rdhinds@verizon.net 6/30/2022 1:47:15 PM SENT

Associated Case Party: TONY EVANS

Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status
Nuru Witherspoon witherspoon@twlglawyers.com 6/30/2022 1:47:15 PM SENT
Witherspoon Litigation litigation@twlglawyers.com 6/30/2022 1:47:15 PM SENT
Aubrey "Nick" Pittman pittman@thepittmanlawfirm.com 6/30/2022 1:47:15 PM SENT
Emily Taylor taylor@twlglawyers.com 6/30/2022 1:47:15 PM SENT

Associated Case Party: T. E.

Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status
Nuru Witherspoon Witherspoon@twlglawyers.com 6/30/2022 1:47:15 PM SENT
Emily Taylor taylor@twlglawyers.com 6/30/2022 1:47:15 PM SENT
Aubrey "Nick" Pittman pittman@thepittmanlawfirm.com 6/30/2022 1:47:15 PM SENT

Associated Case Party: MOHAMMADSADIQNOSHAHI

Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status
Ronald DHinds rdhinds@verizon.net 6/30/2022 1:47:15 PM SENT
Eva DeLeon edeleon@thompsoncoe.com 6/30/2022 1:47:15 PM SENT

Associated Case Party: ARETHA EVANS

Name
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.

Kiyomi Armistead on behalf of Eva DeLeon
Bar No. 24074774
KArmistead@thompsoncoe.com
Envelope ID: 65934105
Status as of 6/30/2022 2:17 PM CST
Associated Case Party: ARETHA EVANS

Aubrey "Nick" Pittman pittman@thepittmanlawfirm.com 6/30/2022 1:47:15 PM SENT
Emily Taylor taylor@twlglawyers.com 6/30/2022 1:47:15 PM SENT
Nuru Witherspoon Witherspoon@twlglawyers.com 6/30/2022 1:47:15 PM SENT

Case Info

Judge

WYSOCKI, ASHLEY Track Judge’s New Case

Case No.

(Subscribe to View)

Document Filed Date

June 30, 2022

Case Filing Date

April 16, 2021

County

Parties

AURZADA, KEITH M Attorney for the Defendant
BARNES, TASHA L Attorney for the Defendant
CHOUDHURY , MMAROOFUL Defendant
DIAMOND STAFFING SERVICES, LLC Defendant
DONOVAN, CHRISTOPHER BRYAN Attorney for the Defendant
EVANS, ARETHA Plaintiff
EVANS, TONY, Sr. Plaintiff
HAWTHORN SUITES FRANCHISING, INC. Defendant
HINDS, RONALD D Attorney for the Defendant
HOPKINS, JASON M. Attorney for the Defendant
JAIN , SANJEEV Defendant
JEFFERS, SAMANTHA C Attorney for the Defendant
MILES, ANDREA Attorney for the Plaintiff
MURGOR, EVE Attorney for the Defendant
NOSHAHI, MOHAMMAD SADIQ Defendant
PERKINS, MONIQUE Plaintiff
TANKSLEY, FAITH Plaintiff
TASACOM REAL ESTATE, LLC Defendant
TASACOM TECHNOLOGIES INC Defendant
WELLS, MORGAN J Attorney for the Defendant
WILLIAMS, DEON Plaintiff
WITHERSPOON, NURU Attorney for the Plaintiff
WYNDHAM HOTEL GROUP, LLC Defendant
WYNDHAM HOTELS & RESORTS, INC. Defendant
Josimayra Diaz Attorneys for Defendants
Emily Taylor Attorney
Aubrey Pittman Attorney
Devan Dal Col Attorneys for Defendants
Eva DeLeon Attorneys for Defendants
Lisa Blue Attorney
Taylor Reed Attorney
Bradley Purcell Attorney
Benjamin Dunn Attorney
Tasha Barnes Attorney
Parker Dunn Attorney
David Saag Attorney

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

Answer: TONY EVANS, Sr., et al vs. TASACOM REAL ESTATE, LLC, et al

Preview

Case Info

Parties