Preview
DALLAS-DC-18-18847-CLR-VOL001.pdf:
VOLUME 1 OF 1
Trial Court Cause No. DC-18-18847-K
Appellate Case No. 05-22-00230-CV
In the 192ND District Court of Dallas County, Texas
Honorable KRISTINA WILLIAMS, Judge Presiding
________________________________________________________________________
EDUARDO DEL BOSQUE, Appellant(s)
Vs.
JUAN BARBOSA, Appellee(s)
Appealed To The
Court Of Appeals For The 5TH District Of
Texas, At Dallas, Texas
Attorney for Appellant(s): Lynn Pinker Hurst Schwegmann, LLP
NAME: Gregory A. Brassfield
ADDRESS: 2100 Ross Ave., Suite 2700
Dallas, Texas 75201
TELEPHONE NO.: (214) 981-3800
FAX NO.: N/A
E-MAIL ADDRESS: gbrassfield@lynnllp.com
SBOT NO.: 24079900
ATTORNEY FOR: Plaintiff – EDUARDO DEL BOSQUE
Delivered To The Court Of Appeals
For The 5TH District Of Texas,
At Dallas, Texas
On the 12TH day of APRIL, 2022
FELICIA PITRE
DISTRICT CLERK
DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS
By Angela C. Conejo, Deputy District Clerk
1
DC-18-18847
§ IN THE DISTRICT COURT
§
EDUARDO DEL BOSQUE
g OF
VS.
§
JUAN BARBOSA
§
§
§ DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS
INDEX
Document File Date Page
1. Cover 03/22/2022 1 - 1
2. Index 03/22/2022 2 - 3
3. Caption 03/22/2022 4-4
4. Docket Sheet 03/22/2022 5 - 11
5. Plaintiffs Original Petition, December 18, 2018 12/18/2018 12 - 16
6. Defendant Juan Barbosa's Original Answer 02/22/2019 17 - 20
And General Denial, February 22, 2019
7. Defendant's Motion For Judgment 01/24/2022 21 - 27
Notwithstanding The Verdict, January 24, 2022
8.Plaintiffs Response To Motion For Judgment 02/ 14/2022 28 - 53
Notwithstanding The Verdict, February 14, 2022
9. Defendant's Brief, February 18, 2022 02/18/2022 54 - 123
10. Plaintiffs Brief, February 21, 2022 02/21/2022 124 - 127
11. Order On Judgment Notwithstanding The 03/02/2022 128 - 128
Verdict, March 2, 2022
12. Plaintiff Eduardo Del Bosque's Notice Of 03/18/2022 129 - 131
2
Appeal, March 18, 2022
13. Request For Reporter's Record, March 22, 03/22/2022 132 - 132
2022
14. Request For Clerk's Record, March 22, 2022 03/22/2022 133 - 135
15. Cost Bill 03/22/2022 136 - 136
16. Clerk's Certificate 03/22/2022 137 - 137
3
THE STATE OF TEXAS
COUNTY OF DALLAS
In the 192”” District Court of Dallas County, Texas, the Honorable KRISTINA
WILLIAMS, Judge Presiding, the following proceedings were held and the following
instruments and other papers were filed in this cause, to wit:
Trial Court Cause No.: DC-18-18847 - K
IN THE 192ND DISTRICT COURT
EDUARDO DEL BOSQUE
Vs. OF
JUAN BARBOSA
DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS
4
FELICIA PITRE, DISTRICT CLERK
DOCKET SHEET
CASE N0. DC-18-18847
EDUARDO DEL BOSQUE § Location: 192nd District Court
vs. § Judicial Officer: WILLIAMS, KRISTINA M
JUAN BARBOSA § Filed on: 12/18/2018
§
CASE INFORMATION
Statistical Closures Case Type: OTHER (CIVIL)
03/02/2022 JUDGMENT JURY TRIAL
08/04/2021 DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION
PARTY INFORMATION
Lead Attorneys
PLAINTIFF DEL BOSQUE, EDUARDO BRASSFIELD, GREGORY A
Retained
214-981-3827(W)
DEFENDANT BARBOSA, JUAN O'DENS, DAVID M
Retained
214-520-3300(W)
DATE EVENTS & ORDERS OF THE COURT INDEX
12/18/2018 NEW CASE FILED (OCA) - CIVIL
12/18/2018 Q ORIGINAL PETITION
12/18/2018 E JURY DEMAND
Party: PLAINTIFF DEL BOSQUE, EDUARDO
12/18/2018 E ISSUE CITATION
12/ 19/2018 CITATION
E BARBOSA, JUAN
Served: 01/31/2019
ESER VE J W
02/22/2019 g ORIGINAL ANSWER GENERAL DENIAL
—
Party: DEFENDANT BARBOSA, JUAN
03/01/2019 E RETURN OF SERVICE
2019-01-31 Texas Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 119 - Acceptance of Service - JUAN
BARBOSA
03/18/2019 Q CANCELED DISMISSAL FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION (9:00 AM) (Judicial
Officer: SMITH, CRAIG)
BY COURT ADMINISTRATOR
SRVC (CASE FILED 12/18/18)
04/01/2019 QINTERVENTION
J&B RENTAL INC NAD DESOTO REGIO PETITIONININTER VENTION, 3RD PTYPET
AGAINST BEATRIS DEL BOSQUE , AND M/APPTM 0F RECEIVER TO WIND UP
COMPANY.
04/02/2019 ORDER - PRETRIAL
JURY
PAGE 1 OF 7 Printed on 03/22/2022 at 3:53 PM
5
FELICIA PITRE, DISTRICT CLERK
DOCKET SHEET
CASE N0. DC-18-18847
06/26/2019 VACATION LETTER
Party: ATTORNEY SONG, TAILIM
07/17/2019 fl MOTION -
MISCELLANOUS
PLAINTIFF DEL BOSQUE, EDUARDO
Party;
SWORN MOTION T0 3H0 W A UTHORITY
07/22/2019 VACATION LETTER
Party: ATTORNEY BRASSFIELD, GREGORY A
09/20/2019 fl MOTION - ABATEMENT
JOINT
09/20/2019 E NON-SIGNED PROPOSED ORDER/JUDGMENT
AGREED ORDER T0
ABATE
09/24/2019 E ORDER —
ABATE
AGREED
09/25/2019 INACTIVATE CASE (OCA)
09/25/2019 VACATION LETTER
DEFENDANT BARBOSA, JUAN
Party:
11/14/2019 ERULE 11
01/21/2020 fl CANCELED Jury Trial - Civil (9:00 AM) (Judicial Officer: SMITH, CRAIG)
CASE CLOSED
04/06/2020 fl NOTICE OF APPEARANCE
Party: DEFENDANT BARBOSA, JUAN; INTERVENOR J&B RENTAL
INC; INTERVENOR DESOTO REGIO LLC
ENTRY 0F
04/06/2020 E MOTION - WITHDRAW ATTORNEY
Party: DEFENDANT BARBOSA, JUAN; INTERVENOR J&B RENTAL
INC; INTERVENOR DESOTO REGIO LLC
AND SUBSTITUTION OF COUNSEL
04/06/2020 fl NON-SIGNED PROPOSED ORDER/JUDGMENT
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR WITHDRA WAL AND SUBSTITUTION OF COUNSEL
04/06/2020 7“ NOTICE OF APPEARANCE
Party: DEFENDANT BARBOSA, JUAN; INTERVENOR J&B RENTAL
INC; INTERVENOR DESOTO REGIO LLC
04/06/2020 E MOTION WITHDRAW ATTORNEY
-
DEFENDANT
Party: BARBOSA, JUAN; INTERVENOR J&B RENTAL
INC; INTERVENOR DESOTO REGIO LLC
& SUBSTITUTION OF COUNSEL
04/06/2020 E NON-SIGNED PROPOSED ORDER/JUDGMENT
PAGE 2 OF 7 Printed on 03/22/2022 at 3:53 PM
6
FELICIA PITRE, DISTRICT CLERK
DOCKET SHEET
CASE N0. DC-18-18847
GRANTING WITHDRA WAL & SUBSTITUTION OF COUNSEL
04/09/2020 NOTE - ADMINISTRATOR
ORDER SIGNED APRIL 9, 2020
04/09/2020 E ORDER - WITHDRAW ATTORNEY
Vol/Book 0,
Page 0, 2 pages
Party: DEFENDANT BARBOSA, JUAN
04/27/2020 VACATION LETTER
Party:ATTORNEY O'DENS, DAVID M
10/21/2020 E NON-SIGNED PROPOSED ORDER/JUDGMENT
PROPOSED SCHEDULING ORDER
1 0/ 26/ 2020 REACTIVATE CASE (OCA)
10/26/2020 fl SCHEDULING ORDER Vol/Book 0,
Page 0, 3 pages
LEVEL 3
11/23/2020 VACATION LETTER
ATTORNEY BRASSFIELD, GREGORY A
Party:
GREGORY -BRASSFIELD
06/07/2021 VACATION LETTER
Party;ATTORNEY BRASSFIELD, GREGORY A
07/22/2021 fl RULE 1 1
AGREEMENT
08/02/2021 a CANCELED Jury Trial - Civil (9:00 AIM) (Judicial Officer: WILLIAMS, KRISTINA
M ;Location: 192ND DISTRICT COURT)
REQUESTED BYATTORNEY/PRO SE
Emailed
08/04/2021
fl DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION (Judicial Officer: WILLIAMS,
KRISTINA M)
Vol/Book 0 ,
Page 0, I pages
Total Judgment of $.00
Awarded To: JUAN BARBOSA
Awarded against: EDUARDO DEL BOSQUE
08/04/2021 Q NOTICE OF DISMISSAL FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION
MAILED TO PARTIES
08/10/2021 fl RETURN OF SERVICE
EXECUTED ATTORNEY ISSUED SUBPOENA:C.0.R FANNIN COUNTY DETENTION
CENTER
08/ 19/2021 fl MOTION REINSTATE
-
PLAINTIFF DEL BOSQUEEDUARDO; DEFENDANT BARBOSA, JUAN
Party;
J01NTM0T10N
08/31/2021 fl NON-SIGNED PROPOSED ORDER/JUDGMENT
PAGE 3 OF 7 Printed on 03/22/2022 at 3:53 PM
7
FELICIA PITRE, DISTRICT CLERK
DOCKET SHEET
CASE N0. DC-18-18847
- GRANTING JOINT REINSTA TEMENT
08/31/2021 E ORDER - REINSTATE (OCA and REOPEN CASE)
Vol/Book 0,
Page 0, 2 pages
09/09/2021 E NON-SIGNED PROPOSED ORDER/JUDGMENT
AGREED SCHEDULING ORDER
09/ 1 3/ 2021 a SCHEDULING ORDER Vol/Book 0,
Page 0, 4 pages
- A GREED
11/17/2021 E MOTION - MISCELLANOUS
Pany; ATTORNEY BRASSFIELD, GREGORY A
REQ UEST/MEDIA TION ORDER-PLAINTIFF “Hearing needed**
11/17/2021 a NON—SIGNED PROPOSED ORDER/JUDGMENT
PROPOSED ORDER REQUEST MEDIATION ORDER
11/29/2021 a MOTION - CONTINUANCE
Party: PLAINTIFF DEL BOSQUE, EDUARDO
- AGREED
11/29/2021 a NON-SIGNED PROPOSED ORDER/JUDGMENT
- AGREED CONTINUANCE
11/30/2021 a ORDER - GRANTING CONTINUANCE
Vol/Book 0,
Page 0, 2 pages
- AGREED
12/14/2021 E MOTION - IN LIMINE
Party: DEFENDANT BARBOSA, JUAN; INTERVENOR J&B RENTAL
INC; INTERVENOR DESOTO REGIO LLC
12/14/2021 Q PROPOSED JURY CHARGE
12/14/2021 E MISCELLANOUS EVENT
PRE TRIAL MATERIALS
PRE-TRIAL HEARING (1:00 PM) (Judicial Officer: WILLIAMS, KRISTINA
12/16/2021
M ;Location: 192ND DISTRICT COURT)
12/30/2021 E NON-SIGNED PROPOSED ORDER/JUDGMENT
- 1N LIMINE
01/03/2022 fl ORDER - LIMINE Vol/Book 0,
Page 0, 5 pages
01/04/2022 fl Jury Trial - Civil (9:00 AM) (Judicial Officer: WILLIAMS, KRISTINA
M ;Location: 192ND DISTRICT COURT)
01/05/2022 E RULE 1 1
—
REGARDING A TTORNEY FEES
01/05/2022 E PROPOSED JURY CHARGE
PAGE 4 OF 7 Printed on 03/22/2022 at 3:53 PM
8
FELICIA PITRE, DISTRICT CLERK
DOCKET SHEET
CASE N0. DC-18-18847
DF/I REVISED
0 1/ 06/ 2022 a CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSITION
JESUS EDUARDO DEL BOSQUE
01/07/2022 VOIR DIRE
01/07/2022 JURY SWORN PANEL (OCA)
01/07/2022 MISCELLANOUS EVENT
- R/R VERDICT
01/07/2022 Q STRIKE SHEET
- DEFENDANT
01/07/2022 E STRIKE SHEET
—
PLAINTIFF
01/07/2022 INACTIVATE CASE (OCA)
01/10/2022 E CHARGE OF COURT
01/10/2022 E CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSITION
JUAN BARBOSA
01/24/2022 fl MOTION -
JUDGMENT
DEFENDANT BARBOSA, JUAN
Party;
NOTWITHSTANDING THE VERDICT
0 1/ 26/ 2022 a MOTION - JUDGMENT
Party: PLAINTIFF DEL BOSQUE, EDUARDO
0 1/ 26/ 2022 E NON-SIGNED PROPOSED ORDER/JUDGMENT
- FINAL JUDGMENT
01/27/2022 fl NOTICE OF HEARING / FIAT
MOTION FOR JUDGMENT NOTWITHSTANDING
01/28/2022 VACATION LETTER
Party: ATTORNEY BRASSFIELD, GREGORY A
02/02/2022 E MOTION RETAIN
-
02/02/2022 E NON-SIGNED PROPOSED ORDER/JUDGIWENT
PROPOSED RETENTION
02/09/2022 a MOTION ATTORNEY FEES
-
PLAINTIFF DEL
Party: BOSQUE, EDUARDO
02/09/2022 E NON—SIGNED PROPOSED ORDER/JUDGMENT
—
GRANTING A TTORNE YS' FEES
02/09/2022
PAGE 5 OF 7 Printed on 03/22/2022 at 3:53 PM
9
FELICIA PITRE, DISTRICT CLERK
DOCKET SHEET
CASE N0. DC-18-18847
E NON-SIGNED PROPOSED ORDER/JUDGMENT
PROPOSED JUDGMENT NOTWITHSTANDING VERDICT/FINAL JUD GMENT-
DEFENDANT
02/ 10/2022 E CERTIFICATE 0FA CONFERENCE
0N MOTION FOR TTORNEYS FEES
02/ 14/2022 Q CANCELED DISMISSAL FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION (9:00 AM)
REQUESTED BYATTORNE Y/PRO SE
02/ 14/2022 NON—SIGNED PROPOSED ORDER/JUDGMENT
—
CORRECTED /JUDGMENT NOTW1THSTANDING THE VERDICT & FINAL JUDGMENT
02/14/2022 E PLAINTIFF
RESPONSE
- ’S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT 'S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT
NOTWITHSTANDING THE VERDICT
02/15/2022 Z RESPONSE
1N OPPOSITION/PLAINTIFF ATTORNEYS FEES-DEFENDANT
02/ 15/2022 E NOTICE OF HEARING / FIAT
ATTORNEY FEES-PLAINTIFF
02/16/2022 fl Motion - Judgment (1030 AM) (Judicial Officer: WILLIAMS, KRISTINA
M ;Location: 192ND DISTRICT COURT)
Events: 01/24/2022 MOTION - JUDGMENT
01/27/2022 NOTICE OF HEARING / FIAT
02/09/2022 NON-SIGNED PROPOSED ORDER/JUDGMENT
02/ 14/2022 NON-SIGNED PROPOSED ORDER/JUDGMENT
02/14/2022 RESPONSE
30 MINS - D/M/JUDGMENT NOT WITHSTANDING THE VERDICT FILED 01/24/22 - (IN
PERSON) - SETBYDEBRA CAMACHO - 214-520-3300
02/16/2022 E NOTICE OF HEARING / FIAT
AMENDED RE: PLAINTIFF MTN ENTRYJUDGMENT & MTNA TTORNEY FEES
02/18/2022 E BRIEF FILED
Party: DEFENDANT BARBOSA, JUAN; INTERVENOR J&B RENTAL
INC; INTERVENOR DESOTO REGIO LLC
02/21/2022 BRIEF FILED
JUDGE WILLIAMS
CANCELED MOTION HEARING (2:00 PM) (Judicial Officer: WILLIAMS, KRISTINA
02/24/2022
M ;Location: 192ND DISTRICT COURT)
HEARING RESCHEDULED
30 MINS - P/M/A TTY'S FEES FILED 02/09/22 - (IN PERSON) - SET BYAPRIL - 214-981-
3806
02/28/2022 E CANCELED BYJUD
DISMISSAL FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION
GE
(9:00 AM)
REQUESTED
03/02/2022 fl CANCELED Motion - Judgment (10:45 AM) (Judicial Officer: WILLIAMS, KRISTINA
M ;Location: 192ND DISTRICT COURT)
REQUESTED BYATTORNEY/PRO SE
PAGE 6 OF 7 Printed on 03/22/2022 at 3:53 PM
10
FELICIA PITRE, DISTRICT CLERK
DOCKET SHEET
CASE N0. DC-18-18847
45 IWNS - P/M/JUDGMENT FILED 01/26/22...& ATTYFEES FILED 02/09/22 - (IN
PERSON) - SETBYAPRIL - 214-981-3806
03/02/2022 REACTIVATE CASE (OCA)
03/02/2022
E JUDGMENT JURY TRIAL (Judicial Officer: WILLIAMS, KRISTINA M)
VOL/Book 0 ,
Page 0, 3 pages
Total Judgment of $.00
Awarded To: JUAN BARBOSA
Awarded against: EDUARDO DEL BOSQUE
03/04/2022 fl NOTICE 0F JUDGMENT MAILED
(2) - ALL PARTIES
03/14/2022 fl CANCELED DISMISSAL FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION (9:00 AM)
CASE CLOSED
03/ 1 8/2022 fl NOTICE OF APPEAL - CT. OF APPEALS
Party: PLAINTIFF DEL BOSQUE, EDUARDO
03/21/2022 E COA - CORRESPONDENCE LETTER
05-22-0023 0—C V
03/22/2022 E REQUEST CLERK PREPARE RECORD
PLAINTIFF DEL EDUARDO
Party: BOSQUE,
03/22/2022 NOTE - CLERKS
COA CASE N0 05-22-00230—CV, PREPARING REQUESTED CLERK ’S RECORD
DATE FINANCIAL INFORMATION
DEFENDANT BARBOSA, JUAN
Total Charges 80.00
Total Payments and Credits 80.00
Balance Due as of 03/22/2022 0.00
04/02/2019 Charge DEFENDANT BARBOSA, JUAN 80.00
04/02/2019 CREDIT CARD - Receipt # 21913-2019-DCLK DEFENDANT BARBOSA, JUAN (80.00)
TEXFILE (DC)
PLAINTIFF DEL BOSQUE, EDUARDO
Total Charges 355.00
Total Payments and Credits 355.00
Balance Due as of 03/22/2022 0.00
12/19/2018 Charge PLAINTIFF DEL BOSQUE, 340.00
EDUARDO
12/ 19/2018 CREDIT CARD - Receipt # 82548-2018-DCLK PLAINTIFF DEL BOSQUE, (340.00)
TEXFILE (DC) EDUARDO
08/20/2021 Charge PLAINTIFF DEL BOSQUE, 15.00
EDUARDO
08/20/2021 CREDIT CARD - Receipt # 54491-2021-DCLK PLAINTIFF DEL BOSQUE, (15.00)
TEXFILE (DC) EDUARDO
PAGE 7 OF 7 Printed on 03/22/2022 at 3:53 PM
11
FILED
1 CIT/ ESERVE 13?E/EA0?8°§%NPTJ
FELICIA PITRE
DISTRICT CLERK
Nikiya Harris
CAUSE NO. DC-18—18847
EDUARDO DEL BOSQUE § IN THE DISTRICT COURT
§
§
Plaintiff, §
§
v. § K-1 JUDICIAL DISTRICT
§
§
JUAN BARBOSA §
§
§
Defendant. § DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS
PLAIN TIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION
Plaintiff Eduardo DelBosque files this Original Petition against Defendant Juan Barbosa
as follows:
DISCOVERY CONTROL PLAN
l. Plaintiff intends to conduct discovery under Level 3 of Texas Rule of Civil
Procedure 190.3 and affirmatively pleads that this suit is not governed by the expedited actions
process in Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 169 because Plaintiff seeks monetary relief over
$100,000.
CLAIM FOR RELIEF
2. Plaintiff seeks monetary relief over $1,000,000.
PARTIES
3. Plaintiff Eduardo DelBosque is an individual residing in Ellis County, Texas.
4. Defendant Juan Barbosa is a Texas citizen and can be served through counsel,
Jordan Whiddon of the Talim Song Law Firm, 8111 LBJ Freeway, Suite 480 Dallas, Texas
75251.
PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION PAGE 1
12
FACTS
5. This case involves two disputes involving two separate properties. The first
dispute is about the terms of a partnership, the purpose of which is to own and operate an El
Pollo Regio restaurant located at 517 N. Hampton Rd., DeSoto, Texas (“EPR DeSoto”). The
second dispute is about the ownership of a property in Waxahachie, Texas.
6. The first dispute is simple. Barbosa invited DelBosque to enter into a partnership
to own and operate the EPR DeSoto. DelBosque, a contractor by trade, paid over $400,000 for
materials and supervised the construction of EPR DeSoto. Barbosa acquired paid the down
payment for the site and acquired the franchise license. DelBosque and Barbosa share the
operation costs of EPR DeSoto.
7. DelBosque understood that the partnership would reimburse him for the
construction investment first, and that the partnership would split all profits 50-50 after that.
Barbosa, however, asserts that DelBosque’s $400,000 investment bought him nothing more than
50% of the partnership.
8. The second dispute is similarly simple. Barbosa invited DelBosque to enter into a
second partnership to own and operate another E1 P0110 Regio restaurant in Waxahachie, Texas.
At Barbosa’s request, DelBosque gave Barbosa $50,000 for a franchise license and other
operation expenses. Soon thereafter, however, Barbosa was incarcerated on serious criminal
offenses. DelBosque continued to pay the mortgage on the Waxahachie property after Barbosa’s
incarceration.
9. When Barbosa took DelBosque’s $50,000, he represented that he would add
DelBosque to the property documents to reflect DelBosque’s ownership — just like had been
done in the EPR DeSoto location. But Barbosa not only did not add DelBosque to the property,
but also he absconded with the $50,000.
PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION PAGE 2
13
CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
A. Count 1 — Breach of the EPR DeSoto Contract.
10. Plaintiff incorporates the allegations in the foregoing paragraphs.
11. A valid contract exists between DelBosque and Barbosa whereby Barbosa
promised to repay DelBosque’s construction investment back first, and thereafter share profits of
the EPR DeSoto 50-50.
12. Barbosa now asserts that he does not intend to honor that agreement. That
assertion constitutes a breach of the contract and a repudiation of his contractual obligations.
13. As a result, DelBosque has and will continue to suffer damages in the amount of
his construction investment.
14. DelBosque seeks his actual damages, costs, and reasonable and necessary
attorneys’ fees pursuant to Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code § 38.001.
B. Count 2 — Breach of the Waxahachie Contract.
15. Plaintiff incorporates the allegations in the foregoing paragraphs.
16. A valid contract exists between DelBosque and Barbosa whereby Barbosa
promised to add DelBosque to the title to the Waxahachie property.
17. Barbosa’s refusal to add DelBosque to the Waxachie property’s title constitutes a
breach of that contract.
18. As a result, DelBosque not only has been damages in the amount of his
investment, but also has been deprived of the increase in value in real estate for the Waxahachie
property.
19. DelBosque seeks his actual damages, costs, and reasonable and necessary
attorneys’ fees pursuant to Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code § 38.001.
C. Count 3 — Fraud and Fraudulent Inducement.
PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION PAGE 3
14
20. Plaintiff incorporates the allegations in the foregoing paragraphs.
21. Barbosa induced DelBosque to invest $50,000 in the Waxahachie property,
promising to add him to the title of the property. Barbosa, however, has never done so. Indeed,
Barbosa now claims that he never intended to add DelBosque to the title of the property.
22. DelBosque relied on Barbosa’s representations to make his $50,000 investment,
without which, he never would have done so.
23. Because of Barbosa’s misrepresentations on which DelBosque relied, DelBosque
has lost his $50,000 investment.
24. DelBosque seeks his actual and consequential damages, costs, exemplary
damages.
D. Count 4 — Quantum Meruit
25. Plaintiff incorporates the allegations in the foregoing paragraphs.
26. In the event that the Court or a jury determines as a matter of law or fact that no
contract exists for the EPR DeSoto partnership or the Waxahachie partnership, or both,
DelBosque seeks compensation from Barbosa for the benefits Barbosa received by DelBosque’s
various investments.
CONDITIONS PRECEDENT
27. All conditions precedent to DelBosque’s claims for relief have been performed or
have occurred.
REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURE
28. DelBosque requests that Defendant disclose, within 50 days of the service of this
request, the information or material described in Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 194.2.
29. DelBosque demands a jury trial and tenders the appropriate fee with this petition.
PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION PAGE 4
15
PRAYER
30. For the foregoing reasons, DelBosque asks that the Court issue citation for
Barbosa to appear and answer, and that DelBosque be awarded judgment against Barbosa for
actual damages, prejudgment and post-judgment interest, court costs, attorneys’ fees, and all
other relief to which Plaintiff is entitled.
DATED: December l8, 2018 Respectfiilly submitted,
/s/ Gregory A. Brassfield
Gregory A. Brassfield
Texas Bar No. 24079900
gbrassfield@lmnlln.com
Lynn Pinker Cox & Hurst, LLP
2100 Ross Avenue, Suite 2700
Dallas, Texas 75201
Telephone: (214) 98 1 -3 800
Facsimile: (214) 981-3839
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION PAGE 5
16
FILED
DALLAS COUNTY
2/22/2019 2:18 PM
FELICIA PITRE
DISTRICT CLERK
Cassandra Walker
Cause No. DC-18-18847
EDUARDO, DEL BOSQUE, § IN THE DISTRICT COURT
Plaintifif §
55
V. § 192ND JUDICIAL DISTRICT
§
JUAN BARBOSA, §
Defendant. § DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS
DEFENDANT JUAN BARBOSA’S ORIGINAL ALSWEL AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES,
AND SWORN DENIAL
TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:
COMES NOW Juan Barbosa, Defendant in the above-entitled and numbered cause
(hereinafter “Defendant”), and files this, his Original Answer, Affirmative Defenses, and Sworn
Denial, and in support thereof would show the Court as follows:
I.
GENERAL DENIAL
1. Defendant generally denies each and every allegation contained in Plaintiff's
Original Petition pursuant to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 92 and demands strict
proof thereof by apreponderance of the evidence.
II.
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
2. By way of afiirmative defense, Defendant asserts that some or all of Plaintifi’s
claims have been barred by accord and satisfaction.
3. By way of affirmative defense, Defendant asserts that some or all of Plaintifl’s
claims have been barred .by prior material breach. -
4. By way of affirmative defense, Defendant asserts that some or all of Plaintiffs
claims have been barred by laches.
Defendant Juan Balbosa’s Original Answer Page i of 3
17
5. By way of affirmative defense, Defendant asserts that some or all of Plaintiff’s
claims have been barred by release.
6. By way of affirmative defense, Defendant asserts that some or all of Plaintiff’s
claims have been barred by payment.
7. By way of affirmative defense, Defendant asserts that some or all of Plaintiff’s
claims have been barred by fraud.
III.
SWORN DENIAL
8. By way of Sworn Denial, Defendant asserts that as to the contract claims (Counts l
and 2 of Plaintiffs Petition) he is not liable in the capacity in which he has been
sued. A true and correct copy of the verification of Juan Barbosa is attached hereto
as Exhibit “A.”
WHERBFORE, premises considered, Defendant Juan Barbosa prays that Plaintiff take
nothing by its suit, and that Defendant Juan Barbosa recover all reasonable and necessary
attorneys’ fees and costs incurred together with such other and further relief to which Defendant
may be justly entitled.
Respectfully submitted,
TAILIM SONG LAW FIRM
ls/ Tailim Sang
TAILIM SONG
State Bar No.: 00792845
tsong@tailimsong.com
JORDAN WHIDDON
State Bar.: 24093350
iwhiddon<fi>tailimsongcom
Defendant Juan Barbosa’s Original Answer Page 2 of 3
18
8111 LBJ FWY, Ste 480
Dallas, Texas 75251
(214) 528-8400 Telephone
(214) 528-8402 Facsimile
ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was forwarded to
Plaintiff’s counsel of record on this @‘day of February 2019..
/s/ Tailim Song
Tailim Song
Defendant Jmn Barbosa‘s Original Answer Page 3 of 3
19
STATE OF TEXAS
mace
COUNTY OF DALLAS §
BEFORE ME, the undersigned Notary Public, 011 this day personally appeared Juan
Barbosa, who, being by me duly sworn, on their oath deposed and said that he has read the
foregoing Defendant’s Original Answer, Affinnative Defenses, and Sworn Denial and that he is
in agreement with the Sworn Denial and every statement contain therein is within his persOnal
knowledge and is true and correct.
{57;
I
/{”/
Juan Barbosa
SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me, by Juan Barbosa, this 31):“ _day of
2019.
1 .
K\\ N
NOTARY. PUBLIC \
My Commission Expires:
DONNA JONES
a“‘«I"";w,,l
lg i-\0l”a()3q R0:«El-5’0 '9 NOIOW Public. State 01 Texas
«6;:
.5 Comm. Expires 10—19-2019
3'52. - . -
a 1 ‘s
”°*“§~‘
l
”'lunl“ Notary ID mm ”1.5
EXHIBIT A
20
FILED
1/24/2022 12:19 PM
FELICIA PITRE
DISTRICT CLERK
DALLAS CO., TEXAS
Margaret Thomas DEPUTY
CAUSE NO. DC-18-18847
EDUARDO DEL BOSQUE, § IN THE DISTRICT COURT
Plaintiff, g
vs. g 192ND JUDICIAL DISTRICT
JUAN BARBOSA, g
Defendant. g DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS
DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT
NOTWITHSTDANDING THE VERDICT
Defendant, Juan Barbosa (“Barbosa” or “Defendant”), pursuant to Rule 301 of the
Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, hereby moves the Court to enter judgment
notwithstanding the verdict in the above-entitled and numbered action.
Introduction
1. Plaintiff, Eduardo del Bosque, sued Defendant for breach of an oral
contractl Plaintzfi’s Original Petition (“Petition”) at pg. 1—3, 1H] 1-14; pg. 4, 1H] 26—26 (Dec.
18, 2018).
2. After a trial on the merits, the Court submitted this case to the jury. The
jury returned a verdict adverse to Defendant. Charge of the Court (Jan. 10, 2022).
Specifically, the jury found that the parties had entered into an oral contract (Question
No. 1); that Defendant breached that contract (Question No. 2); that Defendant’s
performance under the contract was not excused (Question No. 3); and Plaintiff incurred
damages in the amount of $117,182.97 (Question No. 4).
1
Plaintiff brought additional causes of action and a third-party complaint was also filed. However,
all issues with the exception of Plaintiff’s breach of oral contract and quantum meruit claim were resolved
by the parties prior to trial and, therefore, not submitted to the jury. Petition at pg. 3-4, 1111 15-24; see
generally J&B Rental, Inc. and DeSoto Regio, LLC’s Petition in Intervention, Third Party Petition Against
Beatris del Basque, and Motion forAppointment of Receiver to Wind Up Company (Apr. 1, 2019).
DEFENDANT ’S MOTION FOR J UDMENT NOTWITHSTAN DING THE VERDICT PAGE 1 OF 6
21
3. Defendant asks the Court to disregard the jury’s answer to Question No. 4
and enter a judgment notwithstanding the verdict that Plaintiff take nothing in this
action.
Argument & Authorities
4. A trial court may disregard all the jury findings and grant a motion for
judgment notwithstanding the verdict if an instructed verdict would have been proper.
TEX. R. CIV. P. 301; see, e.g., Fort Bend County Drainage District v. Sbrusch, 818 S.W.2d
392, 394 (Tex. 1991). In addition, a trial court may disregard the jury’s answer to a
question if there is no evidence to support it. TEX. R. CIV. P. 301; see, e.g., Tiller v. McLure,
121 S.W.3d 709, 713 (Tex. 2003); Wal—Mart Stores, Inc. v, Miller, 102 S.W.3d 706, 709
(Tex. 2003).
5. “The elements of a breach of contract claim are (i) the existence of a valid
contract between the plaintiff and defendant; (ii) the plaintiff performed; (iii) the
defendant breached the contract; and (iv) the plaintiff was damaged as a result of the
breach.” Barnett v. Coppell North Texas Court, Ltd., 123 S.W.3d 804, 815 (Tex. App. —
Dallas 2004, pet. denied) (citing Williams v. First Tenn. Nat’l Corp., 97 S.W.3d 798, 802
(Tex. App. — Dallas 2003, no pet.)).
6. Defendant’s motion is directed at the fourth element of Plaintiff’ s breach of
oral contact claim and the damages incurred by Plaintiff; in particular, the jury’s answer
to Question No. 4. The jury was instructed that the only damages it could consider were
“the reasonable and necessary expenses” for construction of the DeSoto restaurant:
QUESTION N0. 4
What sum of money, if any, if paid now in cash, would fairly and
reasonably compensate Plaintiff for his damages, if any, that resulted from
such failure to comply?
DEFENDANT ’S MOTION FOR J UDMENT NOTWITHSTAN DING THE VERDICT PAGE 2 OF 6
22
Consider the following elements of damages, if any, and none other:
the reasonable and necessary expenses incurred by Plaintifi to construct
the restaurant in DeSoto, Texas.
Answer in dollars and cents, if any.
Answer: $ 112,182.92
Charge of the Court at pg. 7 (bold in original; emphasis added).
7. Having charged the jury on “reasonable and necessary,” Plaintiff is bound
by the charge and must adduce sufficient proof in order to sustain the jury’s verdict. See,
e.g., Insurance Alliance v. Lake Texoma Highport, LLC, 452 S.W.3d 57, 65-66 (TeX. App.
— Dallas 2014, pet denied) (“We measure the evidence of damages by the charge given to
the jury.”); Insurance Alliance, 452 S.W.3d at 70 (“We are required to measure the
sufficiency of the evidence using the charge given....”);2 Silver Star Title, L.L.C. v.
Marquis Westlake Development, Inc., No. 05—19—00562—CV, 2020 WL 4783081, *4 (Tex.
App. — Dallas Aug. 18, 2020, pet. filed) (mem. op.) (“We measure the sufficiency of the
evidence against the court’s jury charge if the challenging party didn’t object to the charge.
[citation omitted] ”); Dallas Central Appraisal District v. Friends ofMilitary, 304 S.W.3d
556, 562 (Tex. App. — Dallas 2010, pet. denied) (“we judge the sufficiency of the evidence
in light of the charge that was given. [citations omitted]”).
8. In this case Plaintiff did not present any evidence
Preview
DALLAS-DC-18-18847-CLR-VOL001.pdf: VOLUME 1 OF 1 Trial Court Cause No. DC-18-18847-K Appellate Case No. 05-22-00230-CV In the 192ND District Court of Dallas County, Texas Honorable KRISTINA WILLIAMS, Judge Presiding ________________________________________________________________________ EDUARDO DEL BOSQUE, Appellant(s) Vs. JUAN BARBOSA, Appellee(s) Appealed To The Court Of Appeals For The 5TH District Of Texas, At Dallas, Texas Attorney for Appellant(s): Lynn Pinker Hurst Schwegmann, LLP NAME: Gregory A. Brassfield ADDRESS: 2100 Ross Ave., Suite 2700 Dallas, Texas 75201 TELEPHONE NO.: (214) 981-3800 FAX NO.: N/A E-MAIL ADDRESS: gbrassfield@lynnllp.com SBOT NO.: 24079900 ATTORNEY FOR: Plaintiff – EDUARDO DEL BOSQUE Delivered To The Court Of Appeals For The 5TH District Of Texas, At Dallas, Texas On the 12TH day of APRIL, 2022 FELICIA PITRE DISTRICT CLERK DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS By Angela C. Conejo, Deputy District Clerk 1 DC-18-18847 § IN THE DISTRICT COURT § EDUARDO DEL BOSQUE g OF VS. § JUAN BARBOSA § § § DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS INDEX Document File Date Page 1. Cover 03/22/2022 1 - 1 2. Index 03/22/2022 2 - 3 3. Caption 03/22/2022 4-4 4. Docket Sheet 03/22/2022 5 - 11 5. Plaintiffs Original Petition, December 18, 2018 12/18/2018 12 - 16 6. Defendant Juan Barbosa's Original Answer 02/22/2019 17 - 20 And General Denial, February 22, 2019 7. Defendant's Motion For Judgment 01/24/2022 21 - 27 Notwithstanding The Verdict, January 24, 2022 8.Plaintiffs Response To Motion For Judgment 02/ 14/2022 28 - 53 Notwithstanding The Verdict, February 14, 2022 9. Defendant's Brief, February 18, 2022 02/18/2022 54 - 123 10. Plaintiffs Brief, February 21, 2022 02/21/2022 124 - 127 11. Order On Judgment Notwithstanding The 03/02/2022 128 - 128 Verdict, March 2, 2022 12. Plaintiff Eduardo Del Bosque's Notice Of 03/18/2022 129 - 131 2 Appeal, March 18, 2022 13. Request For Reporter's Record, March 22, 03/22/2022 132 - 132 2022 14. Request For Clerk's Record, March 22, 2022 03/22/2022 133 - 135 15. Cost Bill 03/22/2022 136 - 136 16. Clerk's Certificate 03/22/2022 137 - 137 3 THE STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF DALLAS In the 192”” District Court of Dallas County, Texas, the Honorable KRISTINA WILLIAMS, Judge Presiding, the following proceedings were held and the following instruments and other papers were filed in this cause, to wit: Trial Court Cause No.: DC-18-18847 - K IN THE 192ND DISTRICT COURT EDUARDO DEL BOSQUE Vs. OF JUAN BARBOSA DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS 4 FELICIA PITRE, DISTRICT CLERK DOCKET SHEET CASE N0. DC-18-18847 EDUARDO DEL BOSQUE § Location: 192nd District Court vs. § Judicial Officer: WILLIAMS, KRISTINA M JUAN BARBOSA § Filed on: 12/18/2018 § CASE INFORMATION Statistical Closures Case Type: OTHER (CIVIL) 03/02/2022 JUDGMENT JURY TRIAL 08/04/2021 DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION PARTY INFORMATION Lead Attorneys PLAINTIFF DEL BOSQUE, EDUARDO BRASSFIELD, GREGORY A Retained 214-981-3827(W) DEFENDANT BARBOSA, JUAN O'DENS, DAVID M Retained 214-520-3300(W) DATE EVENTS & ORDERS OF THE COURT INDEX 12/18/2018 NEW CASE FILED (OCA) - CIVIL 12/18/2018 Q ORIGINAL PETITION 12/18/2018 E JURY DEMAND Party: PLAINTIFF DEL BOSQUE, EDUARDO 12/18/2018 E ISSUE CITATION 12/ 19/2018 CITATION E BARBOSA, JUAN Served: 01/31/2019 ESER VE J W 02/22/2019 g ORIGINAL ANSWER GENERAL DENIAL — Party: DEFENDANT BARBOSA, JUAN 03/01/2019 E RETURN OF SERVICE 2019-01-31 Texas Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 119 - Acceptance of Service - JUAN BARBOSA 03/18/2019 Q CANCELED DISMISSAL FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION (9:00 AM) (Judicial Officer: SMITH, CRAIG) BY COURT ADMINISTRATOR SRVC (CASE FILED 12/18/18) 04/01/2019 QINTERVENTION J&B RENTAL INC NAD DESOTO REGIO PETITIONININTER VENTION, 3RD PTYPET AGAINST BEATRIS DEL BOSQUE , AND M/APPTM 0F RECEIVER TO WIND UP COMPANY. 04/02/2019 ORDER - PRETRIAL JURY PAGE 1 OF 7 Printed on 03/22/2022 at 3:53 PM 5 FELICIA PITRE, DISTRICT CLERK DOCKET SHEET CASE N0. DC-18-18847 06/26/2019 VACATION LETTER Party: ATTORNEY SONG, TAILIM 07/17/2019 fl MOTION - MISCELLANOUS PLAINTIFF DEL BOSQUE, EDUARDO Party; SWORN MOTION T0 3H0 W A UTHORITY 07/22/2019 VACATION LETTER Party: ATTORNEY BRASSFIELD, GREGORY A 09/20/2019 fl MOTION - ABATEMENT JOINT 09/20/2019 E NON-SIGNED PROPOSED ORDER/JUDGMENT AGREED ORDER T0 ABATE 09/24/2019 E ORDER — ABATE AGREED 09/25/2019 INACTIVATE CASE (OCA) 09/25/2019 VACATION LETTER DEFENDANT BARBOSA, JUAN Party: 11/14/2019 ERULE 11 01/21/2020 fl CANCELED Jury Trial - Civil (9:00 AM) (Judicial Officer: SMITH, CRAIG) CASE CLOSED 04/06/2020 fl NOTICE OF APPEARANCE Party: DEFENDANT BARBOSA, JUAN; INTERVENOR J&B RENTAL INC; INTERVENOR DESOTO REGIO LLC ENTRY 0F 04/06/2020 E MOTION - WITHDRAW ATTORNEY Party: DEFENDANT BARBOSA, JUAN; INTERVENOR J&B RENTAL INC; INTERVENOR DESOTO REGIO LLC AND SUBSTITUTION OF COUNSEL 04/06/2020 fl NON-SIGNED PROPOSED ORDER/JUDGMENT ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR WITHDRA WAL AND SUBSTITUTION OF COUNSEL 04/06/2020 7“ NOTICE OF APPEARANCE Party: DEFENDANT BARBOSA, JUAN; INTERVENOR J&B RENTAL INC; INTERVENOR DESOTO REGIO LLC 04/06/2020 E MOTION WITHDRAW ATTORNEY - DEFENDANT Party: BARBOSA, JUAN; INTERVENOR J&B RENTAL INC; INTERVENOR DESOTO REGIO LLC & SUBSTITUTION OF COUNSEL 04/06/2020 E NON-SIGNED PROPOSED ORDER/JUDGMENT PAGE 2 OF 7 Printed on 03/22/2022 at 3:53 PM 6 FELICIA PITRE, DISTRICT CLERK DOCKET SHEET CASE N0. DC-18-18847 GRANTING WITHDRA WAL & SUBSTITUTION OF COUNSEL 04/09/2020 NOTE - ADMINISTRATOR ORDER SIGNED APRIL 9, 2020 04/09/2020 E ORDER - WITHDRAW ATTORNEY Vol/Book 0, Page 0, 2 pages Party: DEFENDANT BARBOSA, JUAN 04/27/2020 VACATION LETTER Party:ATTORNEY O'DENS, DAVID M 10/21/2020 E NON-SIGNED PROPOSED ORDER/JUDGMENT PROPOSED SCHEDULING ORDER 1 0/ 26/ 2020 REACTIVATE CASE (OCA) 10/26/2020 fl SCHEDULING ORDER Vol/Book 0, Page 0, 3 pages LEVEL 3 11/23/2020 VACATION LETTER ATTORNEY BRASSFIELD, GREGORY A Party: GREGORY -BRASSFIELD 06/07/2021 VACATION LETTER Party;ATTORNEY BRASSFIELD, GREGORY A 07/22/2021 fl RULE 1 1 AGREEMENT 08/02/2021 a CANCELED Jury Trial - Civil (9:00 AIM) (Judicial Officer: WILLIAMS, KRISTINA M ;Location: 192ND DISTRICT COURT) REQUESTED BYATTORNEY/PRO SE Emailed 08/04/2021 fl DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION (Judicial Officer: WILLIAMS, KRISTINA M) Vol/Book 0 , Page 0, I pages Total Judgment of $.00 Awarded To: JUAN BARBOSA Awarded against: EDUARDO DEL BOSQUE 08/04/2021 Q NOTICE OF DISMISSAL FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION MAILED TO PARTIES 08/10/2021 fl RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED ATTORNEY ISSUED SUBPOENA:C.0.R FANNIN COUNTY DETENTION CENTER 08/ 19/2021 fl MOTION REINSTATE - PLAINTIFF DEL BOSQUEEDUARDO; DEFENDANT BARBOSA, JUAN Party; J01NTM0T10N 08/31/2021 fl NON-SIGNED PROPOSED ORDER/JUDGMENT PAGE 3 OF 7 Printed on 03/22/2022 at 3:53 PM 7 FELICIA PITRE, DISTRICT CLERK DOCKET SHEET CASE N0. DC-18-18847 - GRANTING JOINT REINSTA TEMENT 08/31/2021 E ORDER - REINSTATE (OCA and REOPEN CASE) Vol/Book 0, Page 0, 2 pages 09/09/2021 E NON-SIGNED PROPOSED ORDER/JUDGMENT AGREED SCHEDULING ORDER 09/ 1 3/ 2021 a SCHEDULING ORDER Vol/Book 0, Page 0, 4 pages - A GREED 11/17/2021 E MOTION - MISCELLANOUS Pany; ATTORNEY BRASSFIELD, GREGORY A REQ UEST/MEDIA TION ORDER-PLAINTIFF “Hearing needed** 11/17/2021 a NON—SIGNED PROPOSED ORDER/JUDGMENT PROPOSED ORDER REQUEST MEDIATION ORDER 11/29/2021 a MOTION - CONTINUANCE Party: PLAINTIFF DEL BOSQUE, EDUARDO - AGREED 11/29/2021 a NON-SIGNED PROPOSED ORDER/JUDGMENT - AGREED CONTINUANCE 11/30/2021 a ORDER - GRANTING CONTINUANCE Vol/Book 0, Page 0, 2 pages - AGREED 12/14/2021 E MOTION - IN LIMINE Party: DEFENDANT BARBOSA, JUAN; INTERVENOR J&B RENTAL INC; INTERVENOR DESOTO REGIO LLC 12/14/2021 Q PROPOSED JURY CHARGE 12/14/2021 E MISCELLANOUS EVENT PRE TRIAL MATERIALS PRE-TRIAL HEARING (1:00 PM) (Judicial Officer: WILLIAMS, KRISTINA 12/16/2021 M ;Location: 192ND DISTRICT COURT) 12/30/2021 E NON-SIGNED PROPOSED ORDER/JUDGMENT - 1N LIMINE 01/03/2022 fl ORDER - LIMINE Vol/Book 0, Page 0, 5 pages 01/04/2022 fl Jury Trial - Civil (9:00 AM) (Judicial Officer: WILLIAMS, KRISTINA M ;Location: 192ND DISTRICT COURT) 01/05/2022 E RULE 1 1 — REGARDING A TTORNEY FEES 01/05/2022 E PROPOSED JURY CHARGE PAGE 4 OF 7 Printed on 03/22/2022 at 3:53 PM 8 FELICIA PITRE, DISTRICT CLERK DOCKET SHEET CASE N0. DC-18-18847 DF/I REVISED 0 1/ 06/ 2022 a CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSITION JESUS EDUARDO DEL BOSQUE 01/07/2022 VOIR DIRE 01/07/2022 JURY SWORN PANEL (OCA) 01/07/2022 MISCELLANOUS EVENT - R/R VERDICT 01/07/2022 Q STRIKE SHEET - DEFENDANT 01/07/2022 E STRIKE SHEET — PLAINTIFF 01/07/2022 INACTIVATE CASE (OCA) 01/10/2022 E CHARGE OF COURT 01/10/2022 E CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSITION JUAN BARBOSA 01/24/2022 fl MOTION - JUDGMENT DEFENDANT BARBOSA, JUAN Party; NOTWITHSTANDING THE VERDICT 0 1/ 26/ 2022 a MOTION - JUDGMENT Party: PLAINTIFF DEL BOSQUE, EDUARDO 0 1/ 26/ 2022 E NON-SIGNED PROPOSED ORDER/JUDGMENT - FINAL JUDGMENT 01/27/2022 fl NOTICE OF HEARING / FIAT MOTION FOR JUDGMENT NOTWITHSTANDING 01/28/2022 VACATION LETTER Party: ATTORNEY BRASSFIELD, GREGORY A 02/02/2022 E MOTION RETAIN - 02/02/2022 E NON-SIGNED PROPOSED ORDER/JUDGIWENT PROPOSED RETENTION 02/09/2022 a MOTION ATTORNEY FEES - PLAINTIFF DEL Party: BOSQUE, EDUARDO 02/09/2022 E NON—SIGNED PROPOSED ORDER/JUDGMENT — GRANTING A TTORNE YS' FEES 02/09/2022 PAGE 5 OF 7 Printed on 03/22/2022 at 3:53 PM 9 FELICIA PITRE, DISTRICT CLERK DOCKET SHEET CASE N0. DC-18-18847 E NON-SIGNED PROPOSED ORDER/JUDGMENT PROPOSED JUDGMENT NOTWITHSTANDING VERDICT/FINAL JUD GMENT- DEFENDANT 02/ 10/2022 E CERTIFICATE 0FA CONFERENCE 0N MOTION FOR TTORNEYS FEES 02/ 14/2022 Q CANCELED DISMISSAL FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION (9:00 AM) REQUESTED BYATTORNE Y/PRO SE 02/ 14/2022 NON—SIGNED PROPOSED ORDER/JUDGMENT — CORRECTED /JUDGMENT NOTW1THSTANDING THE VERDICT & FINAL JUDGMENT 02/14/2022 E PLAINTIFF RESPONSE - ’S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT 'S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT NOTWITHSTANDING THE VERDICT 02/15/2022 Z RESPONSE 1N OPPOSITION/PLAINTIFF ATTORNEYS FEES-DEFENDANT 02/ 15/2022 E NOTICE OF HEARING / FIAT ATTORNEY FEES-PLAINTIFF 02/16/2022 fl Motion - Judgment (1030 AM) (Judicial Officer: WILLIAMS, KRISTINA M ;Location: 192ND DISTRICT COURT) Events: 01/24/2022 MOTION - JUDGMENT 01/27/2022 NOTICE OF HEARING / FIAT 02/09/2022 NON-SIGNED PROPOSED ORDER/JUDGMENT 02/ 14/2022 NON-SIGNED PROPOSED ORDER/JUDGMENT 02/14/2022 RESPONSE 30 MINS - D/M/JUDGMENT NOT WITHSTANDING THE VERDICT FILED 01/24/22 - (IN PERSON) - SETBYDEBRA CAMACHO - 214-520-3300 02/16/2022 E NOTICE OF HEARING / FIAT AMENDED RE: PLAINTIFF MTN ENTRYJUDGMENT & MTNA TTORNEY FEES 02/18/2022 E BRIEF FILED Party: DEFENDANT BARBOSA, JUAN; INTERVENOR J&B RENTAL INC; INTERVENOR DESOTO REGIO LLC 02/21/2022 BRIEF FILED JUDGE WILLIAMS CANCELED MOTION HEARING (2:00 PM) (Judicial Officer: WILLIAMS, KRISTINA 02/24/2022 M ;Location: 192ND DISTRICT COURT) HEARING RESCHEDULED 30 MINS - P/M/A TTY'S FEES FILED 02/09/22 - (IN PERSON) - SET BYAPRIL - 214-981- 3806 02/28/2022 E CANCELED BYJUD DISMISSAL FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION GE (9:00 AM) REQUESTED 03/02/2022 fl CANCELED Motion - Judgment (10:45 AM) (Judicial Officer: WILLIAMS, KRISTINA M ;Location: 192ND DISTRICT COURT) REQUESTED BYATTORNEY/PRO SE PAGE 6 OF 7 Printed on 03/22/2022 at 3:53 PM 10 FELICIA PITRE, DISTRICT CLERK DOCKET SHEET CASE N0. DC-18-18847 45 IWNS - P/M/JUDGMENT FILED 01/26/22...& ATTYFEES FILED 02/09/22 - (IN PERSON) - SETBYAPRIL - 214-981-3806 03/02/2022 REACTIVATE CASE (OCA) 03/02/2022 E JUDGMENT JURY TRIAL (Judicial Officer: WILLIAMS, KRISTINA M) VOL/Book 0 , Page 0, 3 pages Total Judgment of $.00 Awarded To: JUAN BARBOSA Awarded against: EDUARDO DEL BOSQUE 03/04/2022 fl NOTICE 0F JUDGMENT MAILED (2) - ALL PARTIES 03/14/2022 fl CANCELED DISMISSAL FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION (9:00 AM) CASE CLOSED 03/ 1 8/2022 fl NOTICE OF APPEAL - CT. OF APPEALS Party: PLAINTIFF DEL BOSQUE, EDUARDO 03/21/2022 E COA - CORRESPONDENCE LETTER 05-22-0023 0—C V 03/22/2022 E REQUEST CLERK PREPARE RECORD PLAINTIFF DEL EDUARDO Party: BOSQUE, 03/22/2022 NOTE - CLERKS COA CASE N0 05-22-00230—CV, PREPARING REQUESTED CLERK ’S RECORD DATE FINANCIAL INFORMATION DEFENDANT BARBOSA, JUAN Total Charges 80.00 Total Payments and Credits 80.00 Balance Due as of 03/22/2022 0.00 04/02/2019 Charge DEFENDANT BARBOSA, JUAN 80.00 04/02/2019 CREDIT CARD - Receipt # 21913-2019-DCLK DEFENDANT BARBOSA, JUAN (80.00) TEXFILE (DC) PLAINTIFF DEL BOSQUE, EDUARDO Total Charges 355.00 Total Payments and Credits 355.00 Balance Due as of 03/22/2022 0.00 12/19/2018 Charge PLAINTIFF DEL BOSQUE, 340.00 EDUARDO 12/ 19/2018 CREDIT CARD - Receipt # 82548-2018-DCLK PLAINTIFF DEL BOSQUE, (340.00) TEXFILE (DC) EDUARDO 08/20/2021 Charge PLAINTIFF DEL BOSQUE, 15.00 EDUARDO 08/20/2021 CREDIT CARD - Receipt # 54491-2021-DCLK PLAINTIFF DEL BOSQUE, (15.00) TEXFILE (DC) EDUARDO PAGE 7 OF 7 Printed on 03/22/2022 at 3:53 PM 11 FILED 1 CIT/ ESERVE 13?E/EA0?8°§%NPTJ FELICIA PITRE DISTRICT CLERK Nikiya Harris CAUSE NO. DC-18—18847 EDUARDO DEL BOSQUE § IN THE DISTRICT COURT § § Plaintiff, § § v. § K-1 JUDICIAL DISTRICT § § JUAN BARBOSA § § § Defendant. § DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS PLAIN TIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION Plaintiff Eduardo DelBosque files this Original Petition against Defendant Juan Barbosa as follows: DISCOVERY CONTROL PLAN l. Plaintiff intends to conduct discovery under Level 3 of Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 190.3 and affirmatively pleads that this suit is not governed by the expedited actions process in Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 169 because Plaintiff seeks monetary relief over $100,000. CLAIM FOR RELIEF 2. Plaintiff seeks monetary relief over $1,000,000. PARTIES 3. Plaintiff Eduardo DelBosque is an individual residing in Ellis County, Texas. 4. Defendant Juan Barbosa is a Texas citizen and can be served through counsel, Jordan Whiddon of the Talim Song Law Firm, 8111 LBJ Freeway, Suite 480 Dallas, Texas 75251. PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION PAGE 1 12 FACTS 5. This case involves two disputes involving two separate properties. The first dispute is about the terms of a partnership, the purpose of which is to own and operate an El Pollo Regio restaurant located at 517 N. Hampton Rd., DeSoto, Texas (“EPR DeSoto”). The second dispute is about the ownership of a property in Waxahachie, Texas. 6. The first dispute is simple. Barbosa invited DelBosque to enter into a partnership to own and operate the EPR DeSoto. DelBosque, a contractor by trade, paid over $400,000 for materials and supervised the construction of EPR DeSoto. Barbosa acquired paid the down payment for the site and acquired the franchise license. DelBosque and Barbosa share the operation costs of EPR DeSoto. 7. DelBosque understood that the partnership would reimburse him for the construction investment first, and that the partnership would split all profits 50-50 after that. Barbosa, however, asserts that DelBosque’s $400,000 investment bought him nothing more than 50% of the partnership. 8. The second dispute is similarly simple. Barbosa invited DelBosque to enter into a second partnership to own and operate another E1 P0110 Regio restaurant in Waxahachie, Texas. At Barbosa’s request, DelBosque gave Barbosa $50,000 for a franchise license and other operation expenses. Soon thereafter, however, Barbosa was incarcerated on serious criminal offenses. DelBosque continued to pay the mortgage on the Waxahachie property after Barbosa’s incarceration. 9. When Barbosa took DelBosque’s $50,000, he represented that he would add DelBosque to the property documents to reflect DelBosque’s ownership — just like had been done in the EPR DeSoto location. But Barbosa not only did not add DelBosque to the property, but also he absconded with the $50,000. PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION PAGE 2 13 CLAIMS FOR RELIEF A. Count 1 — Breach of the EPR DeSoto Contract. 10. Plaintiff incorporates the allegations in the foregoing paragraphs. 11. A valid contract exists between DelBosque and Barbosa whereby Barbosa promised to repay DelBosque’s construction investment back first, and thereafter share profits of the EPR DeSoto 50-50. 12. Barbosa now asserts that he does not intend to honor that agreement. That assertion constitutes a breach of the contract and a repudiation of his contractual obligations. 13. As a result, DelBosque has and will continue to suffer damages in the amount of his construction investment. 14. DelBosque seeks his actual damages, costs, and reasonable and necessary attorneys’ fees pursuant to Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code § 38.001. B. Count 2 — Breach of the Waxahachie Contract. 15. Plaintiff incorporates the allegations in the foregoing paragraphs. 16. A valid contract exists between DelBosque and Barbosa whereby Barbosa promised to add DelBosque to the title to the Waxahachie property. 17. Barbosa’s refusal to add DelBosque to the Waxachie property’s title constitutes a breach of that contract. 18. As a result, DelBosque not only has been damages in the amount of his investment, but also has been deprived of the increase in value in real estate for the Waxahachie property. 19. DelBosque seeks his actual damages, costs, and reasonable and necessary attorneys’ fees pursuant to Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code § 38.001. C. Count 3 — Fraud and Fraudulent Inducement. PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION PAGE 3 14 20. Plaintiff incorporates the allegations in the foregoing paragraphs. 21. Barbosa induced DelBosque to invest $50,000 in the Waxahachie property, promising to add him to the title of the property. Barbosa, however, has never done so. Indeed, Barbosa now claims that he never intended to add DelBosque to the title of the property. 22. DelBosque relied on Barbosa’s representations to make his $50,000 investment, without which, he never would have done so. 23. Because of Barbosa’s misrepresentations on which DelBosque relied, DelBosque has lost his $50,000 investment. 24. DelBosque seeks his actual and consequential damages, costs, exemplary damages. D. Count 4 — Quantum Meruit 25. Plaintiff incorporates the allegations in the foregoing paragraphs. 26. In the event that the Court or a jury determines as a matter of law or fact that no contract exists for the EPR DeSoto partnership or the Waxahachie partnership, or both, DelBosque seeks compensation from Barbosa for the benefits Barbosa received by DelBosque’s various investments. CONDITIONS PRECEDENT 27. All conditions precedent to DelBosque’s claims for relief have been performed or have occurred. REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURE 28. DelBosque requests that Defendant disclose, within 50 days of the service of this request, the information or material described in Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 194.2. 29. DelBosque demands a jury trial and tenders the appropriate fee with this petition. PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION PAGE 4 15 PRAYER 30. For the foregoing reasons, DelBosque asks that the Court issue citation for Barbosa to appear and answer, and that DelBosque be awarded judgment against Barbosa for actual damages, prejudgment and post-judgment interest, court costs, attorneys’ fees, and all other relief to which Plaintiff is entitled. DATED: December l8, 2018 Respectfiilly submitted, /s/ Gregory A. Brassfield Gregory A. Brassfield Texas Bar No. 24079900 gbrassfield@lmnlln.com Lynn Pinker Cox & Hurst, LLP 2100 Ross Avenue, Suite 2700 Dallas, Texas 75201 Telephone: (214) 98 1 -3 800 Facsimile: (214) 981-3839 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION PAGE 5 16 FILED DALLAS COUNTY 2/22/2019 2:18 PM FELICIA PITRE DISTRICT CLERK Cassandra Walker Cause No. DC-18-18847 EDUARDO, DEL BOSQUE, § IN THE DISTRICT COURT Plaintifif § 55 V. § 192ND JUDICIAL DISTRICT § JUAN BARBOSA, § Defendant. § DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS DEFENDANT JUAN BARBOSA’S ORIGINAL ALSWEL AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, AND SWORN DENIAL TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT: COMES NOW Juan Barbosa, Defendant in the above-entitled and numbered cause (hereinafter “Defendant”), and files this, his Original Answer, Affirmative Defenses, and Sworn Denial, and in support thereof would show the Court as follows: I. GENERAL DENIAL 1. Defendant generally denies each and every allegation contained in Plaintiff's Original Petition pursuant to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 92 and demands strict proof thereof by apreponderance of the evidence. II. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 2. By way of afiirmative defense, Defendant asserts that some or all of Plaintifi’s claims have been barred by accord and satisfaction. 3. By way of affirmative defense, Defendant asserts that some or all of Plaintifl’s claims have been barred .by prior material breach. - 4. By way of affirmative defense, Defendant asserts that some or all of Plaintiffs claims have been barred by laches. Defendant Juan Balbosa’s Original Answer Page i of 3 17 5. By way of affirmative defense, Defendant asserts that some or all of Plaintiff’s claims have been barred by release. 6. By way of affirmative defense, Defendant asserts that some or all of Plaintiff’s claims have been barred by payment. 7. By way of affirmative defense, Defendant asserts that some or all of Plaintiff’s claims have been barred by fraud. III. SWORN DENIAL 8. By way of Sworn Denial, Defendant asserts that as to the contract claims (Counts l and 2 of Plaintiffs Petition) he is not liable in the capacity in which he has been sued. A true and correct copy of the verification of Juan Barbosa is attached hereto as Exhibit “A.” WHERBFORE, premises considered, Defendant Juan Barbosa prays that Plaintiff take nothing by its suit, and that Defendant Juan Barbosa recover all reasonable and necessary attorneys’ fees and costs incurred together with such other and further relief to which Defendant may be justly entitled. Respectfully submitted, TAILIM SONG LAW FIRM ls/ Tailim Sang TAILIM SONG State Bar No.: 00792845 tsong@tailimsong.com JORDAN WHIDDON State Bar.: 24093350 iwhiddon<fi>tailimsongcom Defendant Juan Barbosa’s Original Answer Page 2 of 3 18 8111 LBJ FWY, Ste 480 Dallas, Texas 75251 (214) 528-8400 Telephone (214) 528-8402 Facsimile ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was forwarded to Plaintiff’s counsel of record on this @‘day of February 2019.. /s/ Tailim Song Tailim Song Defendant Jmn Barbosa‘s Original Answer Page 3 of 3 19 STATE OF TEXAS mace COUNTY OF DALLAS § BEFORE ME, the undersigned Notary Public, 011 this day personally appeared Juan Barbosa, who, being by me duly sworn, on their oath deposed and said that he has read the foregoing Defendant’s Original Answer, Affinnative Defenses, and Sworn Denial and that he is in agreement with the Sworn Denial and every statement contain therein is within his persOnal knowledge and is true and correct. {57; I /{”/ Juan Barbosa SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me, by Juan Barbosa, this 31):“ _day of 2019. 1 . K\\ N NOTARY. PUBLIC \ My Commission Expires: DONNA JONES a“‘«I"";w,,l lg i-\0l”a()3q R0:«El-5’0 '9 NOIOW Public. State 01 Texas «6;: .5 Comm. Expires 10—19-2019 3'52. - . - a 1 ‘s ”°*“§~‘ l ”'lunl“ Notary ID mm ”1.5 EXHIBIT A 20 FILED 1/24/2022 12:19 PM FELICIA PITRE DISTRICT CLERK DALLAS CO., TEXAS Margaret Thomas DEPUTY CAUSE NO. DC-18-18847 EDUARDO DEL BOSQUE, § IN THE DISTRICT COURT Plaintiff, g vs. g 192ND JUDICIAL DISTRICT JUAN BARBOSA, g Defendant. g DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT NOTWITHSTDANDING THE VERDICT Defendant, Juan Barbosa (“Barbosa” or “Defendant”), pursuant to Rule 301 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, hereby moves the Court to enter judgment notwithstanding the verdict in the above-entitled and numbered action. Introduction 1. Plaintiff, Eduardo del Bosque, sued Defendant for breach of an oral contractl Plaintzfi’s Original Petition (“Petition”) at pg. 1—3, 1H] 1-14; pg. 4, 1H] 26—26 (Dec. 18, 2018). 2. After a trial on the merits, the Court submitted this case to the jury. The jury returned a verdict adverse to Defendant. Charge of the Court (Jan. 10, 2022). Specifically, the jury found that the parties had entered into an oral contract (Question No. 1); that Defendant breached that contract (Question No. 2); that Defendant’s performance under the contract was not excused (Question No. 3); and Plaintiff incurred damages in the amount of $117,182.97 (Question No. 4). 1 Plaintiff brought additional causes of action and a third-party complaint was also filed. However, all issues with the exception of Plaintiff’s breach of oral contract and quantum meruit claim were resolved by the parties prior to trial and, therefore, not submitted to the jury. Petition at pg. 3-4, 1111 15-24; see generally J&B Rental, Inc. and DeSoto Regio, LLC’s Petition in Intervention, Third Party Petition Against Beatris del Basque, and Motion forAppointment of Receiver to Wind Up Company (Apr. 1, 2019). DEFENDANT ’S MOTION FOR J UDMENT NOTWITHSTAN DING THE VERDICT PAGE 1 OF 6 21 3. Defendant asks the Court to disregard the jury’s answer to Question No. 4 and enter a judgment notwithstanding the verdict that Plaintiff take nothing in this action. Argument & Authorities 4. A trial court may disregard all the jury findings and grant a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict if an instructed verdict would have been proper. TEX. R. CIV. P. 301; see, e.g., Fort Bend County Drainage District v. Sbrusch, 818 S.W.2d 392, 394 (Tex. 1991). In addition, a trial court may disregard the jury’s answer to a question if there is no evidence to support it. TEX. R. CIV. P. 301; see, e.g., Tiller v. McLure, 121 S.W.3d 709, 713 (Tex. 2003); Wal—Mart Stores, Inc. v, Miller, 102 S.W.3d 706, 709 (Tex. 2003). 5. “The elements of a breach of contract claim are (i) the existence of a valid contract between the plaintiff and defendant; (ii) the plaintiff performed; (iii) the defendant breached the contract; and (iv) the plaintiff was damaged as a result of the breach.” Barnett v. Coppell North Texas Court, Ltd., 123 S.W.3d 804, 815 (Tex. App. — Dallas 2004, pet. denied) (citing Williams v. First Tenn. Nat’l Corp., 97 S.W.3d 798, 802 (Tex. App. — Dallas 2003, no pet.)). 6. Defendant’s motion is directed at the fourth element of Plaintiff’ s breach of oral contact claim and the damages incurred by Plaintiff; in particular, the jury’s answer to Question No. 4. The jury was instructed that the only damages it could consider were “the reasonable and necessary expenses” for construction of the DeSoto restaurant: QUESTION N0. 4 What sum of money, if any, if paid now in cash, would fairly and reasonably compensate Plaintiff for his damages, if any, that resulted from such failure to comply? DEFENDANT ’S MOTION FOR J UDMENT NOTWITHSTAN DING THE VERDICT PAGE 2 OF 6 22 Consider the following elements of damages, if any, and none other: the reasonable and necessary expenses incurred by Plaintifi to construct the restaurant in DeSoto, Texas. Answer in dollars and cents, if any. Answer: $ 112,182.92 Charge of the Court at pg. 7 (bold in original; emphasis added). 7. Having charged the jury on “reasonable and necessary,” Plaintiff is bound by the charge and must adduce sufficient proof in order to sustain the jury’s verdict. See, e.g., Insurance Alliance v. Lake Texoma Highport, LLC, 452 S.W.3d 57, 65-66 (TeX. App. — Dallas 2014, pet denied) (“We measure the evidence of damages by the charge given to the jury.”); Insurance Alliance, 452 S.W.3d at 70 (“We are required to measure the sufficiency of the evidence using the charge given....”);2 Silver Star Title, L.L.C. v. Marquis Westlake Development, Inc., No. 05—19—00562—CV, 2020 WL 4783081, *4 (Tex. App. — Dallas Aug. 18, 2020, pet. filed) (mem. op.) (“We measure the sufficiency of the evidence against the court’s jury charge if the challenging party didn’t object to the charge. [citation omitted] ”); Dallas Central Appraisal District v. Friends ofMilitary, 304 S.W.3d 556, 562 (Tex. App. — Dallas 2010, pet. denied) (“we judge the sufficiency of the evidence in light of the charge that was given. [citations omitted]”). 8. In this case Plaintiff did not present any evidence