Document for EDD RD RV Park LLC vs. CITY OF WILMER, TEXAS, et al

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

						
                                
Preview
                                NO. DC-22-13732

EDD RD RV PARK LLC,                                  §         IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF
                                                     §
        Plaintiff,                                   §
                                                     §
v.                                                   §
                                                     §         DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS
CITY OF WILMER, TEXAS; and                           §
MAYOR SHEILA PETTA, in her                           §
official capacity,                                   §
                                                     §
        Defendants.                                  §         192ND JUDICIAL DISTRICT


                   ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ NO EVIDENCE
               AND TRADITIONAL MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

        On this day the Court considered Defendants’1 No Evidence and Traditional Motion for

Summary Judgment (the “Motion”). Upon reviewing the Motion, Plaintiff’s response, the

summary judgment evidence, and the objections asserted against Defendants’ summary

judgment evidence, the Court is of the opinion that the Motion should be DENIED.

        IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendants’ No Evidence and Traditional Motion

for Summary Judgment is denied in its entirety.

        Further, the Court enters the following rulings on Plaintiff’s objections to Defendants’

Summary Judgment Evidence:

        The Court makes the following ruling on Plaintiff’s objections to Defendants’ Exhibit B

attached to Defendants’ Motion:

         _____________ sustained or ______________ denied.




1
  The Motion mistakenly lists the following councilmembers who have not been named as parties in this lawsuit:
Jeff Steele, Candy Madrigal, Laura Jacobs, and Pamela Walsh. The Defendants in this case are City of Wilmer,
Texas and Mayor Sheila Petta, in her official capacity.
       The Court makes the following ruling on Plaintiff’s objections to Defendants’ Exhibit C

attached to Defendants’ Motion:

       _____________ sustained or ______________ denied.

       The Court makes the following ruling on Plaintiff’s objections to Defendants’ Exhibits D

and F attached to Defendants’ Motion:

       _____________ sustained or ______________ denied.



       SIGNED this _____ day of _____________, 202_.




                                           JUDGE PRESIDING
                         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.

Nina Nelson on behalf of Art Anderson
Bar No. 1165957
nnelson@winstead.com
Envelope ID: 82395052
Filing Code Description: Non-Signed Proposed Order/Judgment
Filing Description: PROPOSED ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS NO
EVIDENCE AND TRADITIONA SJ
Status as of 12/11/2023 7:33 AM CST

Associated Case Party: EDD RD RV Park LLC

Name                BarNumber   Email                     TimestampSubmitted Status

Arthur J.Anderson               aanderson@winstead.com    12/8/2023 2:05:50 PM     SENT

Matt LJoeckel                   mjoeckel@winstead.com     12/8/2023 2:05:50 PM     SENT

Michelle Thornton               mthornton@winstead.com    12/8/2023 2:05:50 PM     SENT



Associated Case Party: CITY OF WILMER, TEXAS

Name              BarNumber Email                        TimestampSubmitted      Status

Michael B.Halla             Mhalla@HallaLawfirm.com 12/8/2023 2:05:50 PM         SENT