Preview
ECEIy;
acepr ECOR; FILED
lock.
43-GHov0n SEP 14 ayy,
are
ACTION NO. 23-05-6617
By, Clerk
as
Deputy
HIGH MEADOW RANCH COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION,
IN THE 457TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
Vv
COURT OF MONTGOMERY
COUNTY TEXAS
SCOTT BIONDO AND SONJA DEROSA-
GRUND,
SCOTT BIONDO’S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT
Defendant Scott Biondo denies any allegations and claims in Defendant’s Original
Complaint. Defendant claims that in bringing this complaint that Plaintiff itself did not properly
follow its own procedures as proscribed by and memorialized in the procedures and rules of the
High Meadow Ranch Community Association. Plaintiff can and will show that based on the
foregoing, Plaintiff are both premature in bringing this claim and are estopped by their own rules
and procedures from doing so at this time.
Additionally, I did send a timely response motion to their Original Complaint to the
Court Clerk (which they apparently never received) contrary to Plaintiffs contention that I as a
pro se litigant never responded.
Also, Defendant would ask the Court to not hold the hearing scheduled for this Friday,
October 15, 2021 as Defendant was not at any time provided notice of same. Just yesterday I was
apprised that this hearing was scheduled by Mrs. DeRosa-Grund as she got notice, while I did
not. Not only did I not receive notice of same, but Plaintiffs’ counsel also knowingly sent said
notice to the wrong address for me.
Plaintiffs’ counsel knows my current address is not 923 High Meadow Ranch Dr.,
Magnolia, Texas 77355. Counsel is fully aware that is only the address for Defendant Sonja
DeRosa-Grund. They are fully aware that my address is Scott Biondo, 1619 Eberhart Star Ct
Katy, TX 77494-0000.
Plaintiffs and their counsel knowingly and willfully are not sending notices to the proper
address for me, not following the rules as codified in the High Meadow Ranch Community
Association Deed Restriction, engaging in selective enforcement of the deed restrictions and
enforcing same against homeowners while the HOA themselves continuously violate same. This
is just a small sampling of how Plaintiff, and their counsel, “game” the system and this Court.
At no time during the pendency of this matter have Plaintiffs or their attorney provided
me the following docket items:
A 08/30/2023 Notice of Nonsuit
B 08/30/2023 Partial Nonsuit
08/31/2023 Injunction or Show Cause (OCA)
09/01/2023 E-Notice Envelope Number:
09/01/2023 E-Notice Envelope Number:
F 09/11/2023 Motion for Default Judgment
G 09/11/2023 Proposed Order
The only reason I am aware of aware of anything now is that Mrs. DeRosa-Grund got a copy of
the “Partial Nonsuit” and told me about it.
It is worth noting that neither Plaintiffs, nor their attorney, noticed me of their Motion for
Default Judgement. A reasonable person would conclude that this was a willful act on their part.
The timing their Default Judgement is also suspect in that their filing it a mere four days before
the hearing this Friday is purposeful on their part as it does not afford me any time to respond in
a meaningful manner before this Fridays hearing — a hearing that I was never noticed by them on,
and one that I cannot attend. Again, all examples of gamesmanship of the part of the Plaintiffs
and their counsel. I believer this pattern of gamesmanship on part of opposing counsel at
minimum strains the ethical covenants that govern lawyers in Texas, at worst violates it and they
should be sanctioned for this by the Court.
One only has to look as far as the prior litigation between the parties Montgomery
County to evidence this.
In that matter, Plaintiffs and their counsel, also litigated against Defendants for various
claimed deed restriction violations.
In that matter, they settled same rather than take to trial as they had no sustainable
position. In that action they sued both Defendants Scott Biondo and Sonja DeRosa-Grund. What
is incredulous is that in that matter, they did not nonsuit against her, despite the fact that
Plaintiffs and their counsel had the same exact information then, as they do now, as to the title
holder/deed holder. (Case No. 15-05-05524, HIGH MEADOW RANCH COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION, INC. VS. SCOTT BIONDO, SONJA DEROSA-GRUND).
The fact that they only nonsuited against Defendant Sonja DeRosa-Grund, despite
knowing who that I am the title holder since the 2015 prior litigation, evidences that in the
instant matter the artifice contrived by Plaintiffs’ of nonsuiting Defendant DeRosa-Grund is
only so they can attempt to avoid a trial in the instant matter. This serves as further evidence that
Plaintiffs and their counsel play “fast and loose” with the rules and facts in these matters.
Defendant Biondo asks this court to:
Dismiss this matter with prejudice in his favor for the foregoing reasons;
or,
Suspend the hearing scheduled for this Friday as he was never noticed of
same; and,
Provide him with the statutory period to respond to Plaintiffs’ Motion for
Default Judgement as he both did send his response motion to their
Original Complaint to the Court Clerk (which they apparently never
received), and that Plaintiffs never noticed him at any time of their Motion
for Default Judgement.
If this Court does not grant my request to dismiss now with prejudice in
my favor, I ask that this matter be heard at a jury trial as there are real
issues which the parties take a diametrically opposite view of which
should be adjudicated at trial if not dismissed in my favor.
Additionally, Defendant, if this goes to trial will be able to demonstrate that the Plaintiff
comes to this matter with “unclean hands” and has historically exhibited a patten of selected
enforcement, and not following their own published governing rules. For this reason Plaintiffs
should also not be entitled to any fees.
Since the fact set for me, is the same as that for Defendant Sonja DeRosa-Grund, this
matter should be nonsuited for me as it was for her.
Respectfully submitted,
Scott Biondo, Pro Se
/Scott Biondo _/
Scott Biondo (Pro Se)
1619 Eberhart Star Ct
Katy, TX 77494-0000.
CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE
I, Scott Biondo, have provided a copy of this my response to plaintiff's Original Complaint to
them by USPS mail on October 13. 2023 at the following address:
HOLTTOLLETT, P.C.
Attorney, J.C. Jamison
9821 Katy Freeway, Suite 350
Houston, Texas 77024
Scott Biondo, Pro Se
/Scott Biondo _/
Scott Biondo (Pro Se)
1619 Eberhart Star Ct
Katy, TX 77494-0000.
nisin, guppnres 138 29ser29
By Bio
Sey; ERrontera, (261) 681-4808 9 Bgat i9s/Ssr0244)
18 NERO RANCH OR
BILL CREDIT CARD
Untied 8Siares
, TA 27355
Us
Yo ATTN: COURT CLERK
MONTGOMERY COUNTY DISTRICT CLERK
301 N MAIN ST, SUITE 103
CONROE 1™ 77301
(po se
nt tte tt an UN
FedEx ‘a8
x
t \
ne
Hf "
tit
\f Ht
14 SEP 10:30A
TRKE PRIORITY OVERNIGHT
jez01 7837 1489 4485
43 CXOA mx-us
77301
AH
5,tas
MOM
ees
aw
ORIGIN,
S6na 10:40vR, (Za) 681-4909
Enos meboh Dare: 1aser29
ScuTT
S23 NIGHBt HERDOM RANCH OR Pad" ba1 5i88/SEro2001
neo. ta. x 72388 BILL CREDIT CARO
— —
wR URT CLERK
Ph 69, MONTGOMERY COUNTY DISTRICT CLERK
Sepp 301 N MAIN ST, SUITE 103
v 20
aaa CONROE 1X 77301
ele. —=
[eee
10 i
FedEx
ee
THU - 14 SEP 10:30A
TAKE
(ozo!) 7837 1489 4485 PRIORITY OVERNIGHT
43 CXOA mx-us_
77301
IAH
HM
Preview
ECEIy; acepr ECOR; FILED lock. 43-GHov0n SEP 14 ayy, are ACTION NO. 23-05-6617 By, Clerk as Deputy HIGH MEADOW RANCH COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, IN THE 457TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT Vv COURT OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY TEXAS SCOTT BIONDO AND SONJA DEROSA- GRUND, SCOTT BIONDO’S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT Defendant Scott Biondo denies any allegations and claims in Defendant’s Original Complaint. Defendant claims that in bringing this complaint that Plaintiff itself did not properly follow its own procedures as proscribed by and memorialized in the procedures and rules of the High Meadow Ranch Community Association. Plaintiff can and will show that based on the foregoing, Plaintiff are both premature in bringing this claim and are estopped by their own rules and procedures from doing so at this time. Additionally, I did send a timely response motion to their Original Complaint to the Court Clerk (which they apparently never received) contrary to Plaintiffs contention that I as a pro se litigant never responded. Also, Defendant would ask the Court to not hold the hearing scheduled for this Friday, October 15, 2021 as Defendant was not at any time provided notice of same. Just yesterday I was apprised that this hearing was scheduled by Mrs. DeRosa-Grund as she got notice, while I did not. Not only did I not receive notice of same, but Plaintiffs’ counsel also knowingly sent said notice to the wrong address for me. Plaintiffs’ counsel knows my current address is not 923 High Meadow Ranch Dr., Magnolia, Texas 77355. Counsel is fully aware that is only the address for Defendant Sonja DeRosa-Grund. They are fully aware that my address is Scott Biondo, 1619 Eberhart Star Ct Katy, TX 77494-0000. Plaintiffs and their counsel knowingly and willfully are not sending notices to the proper address for me, not following the rules as codified in the High Meadow Ranch Community Association Deed Restriction, engaging in selective enforcement of the deed restrictions and enforcing same against homeowners while the HOA themselves continuously violate same. This is just a small sampling of how Plaintiff, and their counsel, “game” the system and this Court. At no time during the pendency of this matter have Plaintiffs or their attorney provided me the following docket items: A 08/30/2023 Notice of Nonsuit B 08/30/2023 Partial Nonsuit 08/31/2023 Injunction or Show Cause (OCA) 09/01/2023 E-Notice Envelope Number: 09/01/2023 E-Notice Envelope Number: F 09/11/2023 Motion for Default Judgment G 09/11/2023 Proposed Order The only reason I am aware of aware of anything now is that Mrs. DeRosa-Grund got a copy of the “Partial Nonsuit” and told me about it. It is worth noting that neither Plaintiffs, nor their attorney, noticed me of their Motion for Default Judgement. A reasonable person would conclude that this was a willful act on their part. The timing their Default Judgement is also suspect in that their filing it a mere four days before the hearing this Friday is purposeful on their part as it does not afford me any time to respond in a meaningful manner before this Fridays hearing — a hearing that I was never noticed by them on, and one that I cannot attend. Again, all examples of gamesmanship of the part of the Plaintiffs and their counsel. I believer this pattern of gamesmanship on part of opposing counsel at minimum strains the ethical covenants that govern lawyers in Texas, at worst violates it and they should be sanctioned for this by the Court. One only has to look as far as the prior litigation between the parties Montgomery County to evidence this. In that matter, Plaintiffs and their counsel, also litigated against Defendants for various claimed deed restriction violations. In that matter, they settled same rather than take to trial as they had no sustainable position. In that action they sued both Defendants Scott Biondo and Sonja DeRosa-Grund. What is incredulous is that in that matter, they did not nonsuit against her, despite the fact that Plaintiffs and their counsel had the same exact information then, as they do now, as to the title holder/deed holder. (Case No. 15-05-05524, HIGH MEADOW RANCH COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, INC. VS. SCOTT BIONDO, SONJA DEROSA-GRUND). The fact that they only nonsuited against Defendant Sonja DeRosa-Grund, despite knowing who that I am the title holder since the 2015 prior litigation, evidences that in the instant matter the artifice contrived by Plaintiffs’ of nonsuiting Defendant DeRosa-Grund is only so they can attempt to avoid a trial in the instant matter. This serves as further evidence that Plaintiffs and their counsel play “fast and loose” with the rules and facts in these matters. Defendant Biondo asks this court to: Dismiss this matter with prejudice in his favor for the foregoing reasons; or, Suspend the hearing scheduled for this Friday as he was never noticed of same; and, Provide him with the statutory period to respond to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Default Judgement as he both did send his response motion to their Original Complaint to the Court Clerk (which they apparently never received), and that Plaintiffs never noticed him at any time of their Motion for Default Judgement. If this Court does not grant my request to dismiss now with prejudice in my favor, I ask that this matter be heard at a jury trial as there are real issues which the parties take a diametrically opposite view of which should be adjudicated at trial if not dismissed in my favor. Additionally, Defendant, if this goes to trial will be able to demonstrate that the Plaintiff comes to this matter with “unclean hands” and has historically exhibited a patten of selected enforcement, and not following their own published governing rules. For this reason Plaintiffs should also not be entitled to any fees. Since the fact set for me, is the same as that for Defendant Sonja DeRosa-Grund, this matter should be nonsuited for me as it was for her. Respectfully submitted, Scott Biondo, Pro Se /Scott Biondo _/ Scott Biondo (Pro Se) 1619 Eberhart Star Ct Katy, TX 77494-0000. CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE I, Scott Biondo, have provided a copy of this my response to plaintiff's Original Complaint to them by USPS mail on October 13. 2023 at the following address: HOLTTOLLETT, P.C. Attorney, J.C. Jamison 9821 Katy Freeway, Suite 350 Houston, Texas 77024 Scott Biondo, Pro Se /Scott Biondo _/ Scott Biondo (Pro Se) 1619 Eberhart Star Ct Katy, TX 77494-0000. nisin, guppnres 138 29ser29 By Bio Sey; ERrontera, (261) 681-4808 9 Bgat i9s/Ssr0244) 18 NERO RANCH OR BILL CREDIT CARD Untied 8Siares , TA 27355 Us Yo ATTN: COURT CLERK MONTGOMERY COUNTY DISTRICT CLERK 301 N MAIN ST, SUITE 103 CONROE 1™ 77301 (po se nt tte tt an UN FedEx ‘a8 x t \ ne Hf " tit \f Ht 14 SEP 10:30A TRKE PRIORITY OVERNIGHT jez01 7837 1489 4485 43 CXOA mx-us 77301 AH 5,tas MOM ees aw ORIGIN, S6na 10:40vR, (Za) 681-4909 Enos meboh Dare: 1aser29 ScuTT S23 NIGHBt HERDOM RANCH OR Pad" ba1 5i88/SEro2001 neo. ta. x 72388 BILL CREDIT CARO — — wR URT CLERK Ph 69, MONTGOMERY COUNTY DISTRICT CLERK Sepp 301 N MAIN ST, SUITE 103 v 20 aaa CONROE 1X 77301 ele. —= [eee 10 i FedEx ee THU - 14 SEP 10:30A TAKE (ozo!) 7837 1489 4485 PRIORITY OVERNIGHT 43 CXOA mx-us_ 77301 IAH HM