Document for Ali Al Rikabi, Mustafa Al Rikabi vs Cecilia Molina, Obed Molina

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

						
                                
Preview
                                NO. 20-CCV-068033

ALI AL RIKABI AND                                                     IN THE COUNTY COURT
MUSTAFA AL RIKABI

VS.                                                                             AT LAW NO. 3

CECILIA MOLINA AND
OBED MOLINA                                                      FORT BEND COUNTY, TEXAS

                            RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO
                    MOTION TO DISSOLVE TEMPORARY INJUNCTION

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:

            COME   NOW,   Plaintiffs ALI AL RIKABI     and MUSTAFA       AL   RIKABI    and file this

Response in Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dissolve Temporary            Injunction and would

respectfully show the Court as follows:

                                                  I

        The Molinas can only move to modify or dissolve a temporary injunction on the grounds of

changed circumstances. See e.g., Murphy v. McDaniel, 20 S.W.3d 873, 877 (Tex.App.- Dallas 2000,

no pet.).    A respondent cannot use a motion to modify or dissolve to relitigate the basis of the

injunction when that basis has not changed. Chase Manhattan Bank v. Bowles, 52 S.W.3d 871, 879

(Tex.App.-Waco 2001, no pet.). Changed circumstances are conditions that either alter the status

quo after the issuance of the injunction or make the injunction unnecessary or improper. Bowles, 52

S.W.3d at 879.

                                                 Il.

        The Molinas have failed to present any evidence of change circumstances.        In fact they

expressly admit that they are attempting to relitigate the same circumstances as were pending at the

time of the Temporary Injunction (hereinafter “IT”) evidentiary hearing. In the Motion, the Molinas

state that “Almost immediately [after the Temporary Injunction], the full scope of the problems
Defendant complained of began to become clear.” Motion at p. 1. Consistent with this effort to

relitigate the basis of the injunction, the Molinas’ Motion is based upon two points that directly

relate to the evidence introduced during the evidentiary hearing.       The first point is a Letter of

Warning that relates to events that predated the entry of the Temporary Injunction. This point was

addressed during the TI evidentiary hearing. See, Plaintiff's Exhibit L from TI evidentiary hearing.

The second point is asserted fines due to the alleged failure to keep the property clean. Again, this

point was addressed during the TI evidentiary hearing and at this stage no fine has actually been

assessed and present to Plaintiffs by the Molinas.

            These two points are part of the same complaints that the Molinas’ raised and that were

addressed during the TI evidentiary hearing.         As addressed and documented during the TI

evidentiary hearing, the express terms of the 60 Month Contract, Plaintiff's Exhibit A, control.

There is no change in circumstances. The Molinas are simply attempting to relitigate the injunction

based upon the same circumstances.

        The Molinas assert that they have lost their Grant. Motion at p. 2. There is no evidence of

such. The State has not advised Plaintiffs of such. The State inspector is onsite as always. Plaintiffs

continue to operate the slaughterhouse. More importantly, as the Molinas are aware, on December

15, 2020 the Plaintiffs obtained their own Grant from the State.       Such was done to address the

Molinas’ concerns and to prevent the Molinas from surrendering or losing the Grant without

Plaintiffs having any control or involvement.

        WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiffs ALI AL RIKABI and MUSTAFA

AL RIKABI pray that the Motion to Dissolve Temporary Injunction be denied, and that Plaintiffs

have such other and further relief at law or in equity, to which they may show themselves be justly

entitled.
Respectfully submitted,

                                                   KOCHMAN & CHARBONNET, LLP

                                                   By:
                                                         A501 IHN «Da
                                                                   D,        EOE, JR.
                                                          TBA
                                                   12012 Wickchester, Suite 150
                                                   Houston, Texas   77079
                                                   713-871-2490 — phone
                                                   713-871-2495 — fax
                                                   jdcharbonnet@kdclaw.com - email

                                                   ATTORNEY FOR PLAINITFFS
                                                   ALI AL RIKABI and
                                                   MUSTAFA AL RIKABI

                                CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

       I do hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing Response in
Opposition to Motion to Dissolve has been forwarded to via Efiling to all parties on January7,
2021:


                                                          JOHN D. CHARBONNET, JR.