Preview
CAUSE NO.
Karen E. Oluma IN THE District Court
APPLICANT
PRECINCT ONE, PLACE TWO
FORT BEND COUNTY, TEXAS
EMERGENCY APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF RESTORATION
The undersigned Applicant makes this Application for Writ of Restoration of utilities at a residence
at the following location, which Applicant is authorized to occupy (“Residence”):
LOCATION OF RESIDENCE: [nn
The person who has unlawfully disconnected the utilities at the Residence is
Maite L. Oluma-Cervantes, who may be given notice of this application at the following address:
Attorney Mary Beth Cameron,
700 Westgreen Blvd., Katy, TX 77450-2799 Phone: 713-929-6218 State Bar No. 24069458
The following is a statement of facts showing that the utilities have been illegally
disconnected at the Residence:
Ms. Oluma/Cervantes received a default judgment for home ownership in a divorce decree
signed February 14, 2024, and for which judgment was filed by the Clerk of Court on February 15,
2024. She has asserted property ownership using the decree as muniment of title and the rights
of ownership declared in the decree. Her attorney has assisted her in these actions.
Section 92.008 of the Texas Property Code: “A landlord or a landlord’s agent may not
interrupt or cause the interruption of utility service paid for directly to the utility company
by a tenant unless the interruption results from bona fide repairs, construction, or an
emergency.” Copy attached
Ms. Karen Oluma, homestead owner, filed a motion for a new trial and that motion was
granted by the Hon. Janet B. Heppard in the 387* District Court, Fort Bend County, Texas. The
hearing date is set for April3, 2024. See attached Motion and Court Coordinator’s confirmation of
hearing date.
Texas Family Code 9.007 (c) reads:
“The trial court may not render an order to assist in the implementation of or to clarify
the property division made or approved in the decree before the 30th day after the date
the final judgment is signed. Ifa timely motion for new trial or to vacate, modify, correct,
or reform the decree is filed, the trial court may not render an order to assist in the
implementation of or to clarify the property division made or approved in the decree
before the 30th day after the date the order overruling the motion is signed or the motion
is overruled by operation of law.”
By Texas law Ms. Olu yi ervantes, whose primary residence is in Utah, made herself an
absentee owner upon the judgment of the divorce decree. She has not declared her intention to
move into the home to claim it as a homestead. Therefore she is operating as landlord for the
current occupant of the home.
While the judgment granted Ms. Oluma/Cervantes the right to eviction, she has not initiated
Ea, process. Instead she chose to have th ice to the home disconnected
leaving me without water and related municipal services. | have a current and up-to-date contract
with the City of Fulshear Utilities department. The City of Fulshear Utilities Department legal
representatives Josh Green and Byron Brown refused to have my services reconnected despite my
notice to them that I am still occupying the residence and that no eviction has been started. My
water utilities bill is paid. City of Fulshear Utilities Documents Attached.
I request that the Court issue a Writ for immediate restoration of water to the residence
and further enjoin Ms. Oluma/Cervantes from disconnecting any utilities at 3914 Morning Creek
Ct, Fulshear, TX 77441, until the 30 days following the hearing of the Motion for a New Trial as
stipulated in Tex Fam Code 9.007 and enjoin Ms. Oluma/Cervantes from any self-help eviction
actions or legal eviction actions throughout that period prescribed by law during which no
enforcement action can be ordered in the division of property in divorce.
I was contacted last night at about 7:00 PM by Adult Protective Services Shelby
Thundercloud who told me a report had been made to their office that I am an elder whose water
had been cut off. A Fort Bend County DFPS investigator was assigned to the case this morning:
Jessica Sides: 832-449-0450 APS case #: 49997738. I have late sate three chronic kidney disease
and cardiomyopathy.
Applicant’s Information: My current legal name is: Karen Esther Oluma.
My date of birth is: July 14, 1946. My phone number is: 612-402-7848.
My address is: 3914 Morning Creek Ct, Fulshear, TX 77441 USA.
My email address is: Mokula4@gmail.com.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed in FORT BEND County, State of TEXAS, on the 21ST day of FEBRUARY, 2024.
Karen
6 Obunae
Applicant's (Declarant’s) Signature
a
2/21/24, 8:51 AM Accounts - Account detail - Utility Billing - City of Fulshear - Municipal Online Services
City of Fulshear Utility Billing 0
7 KO
7
€
Home
Account
m Manage <
detail
Account ¢
Account summary
Transacti
a
Consump Account 02-010245-02
Owner QP ren £ Oluma
Service re
Service address 3914 Morning Creek Ct
Contact p
Balance
Prior account balance $156.24
Current bill Due 2/29/2024 $141.97
Transactions since current bill ($140.00)
Account balance $158.21
Recent bills
a 2/7/2024 View bill
https://www.municipalonlinepayments.com/fulsheartx/utilities/accounts/detail/02-010245-02 1/2
(EE
CITY OF FULSHEAR
6611 W Cross Creek Bend Ln
Po Box 1134 Account Number AMOUNT DUE
FULSHEAR Fulshear, TX 77441
(281) 346-8830 02-010245-02 $298.21
wy municipalonlinepayments.com/fulsheartx
Pay By Phone: (866) 271-0823
Due Date
2/29/2024
After Due Date Pay
$312.41
NTA A Mm | i
illing Date Penalty Date
2/7/2024 3/1/2024
Service From Service To
12/25/2023 1/25/2024
Service Address
3914 Morning Creek Ct
Karen E Oluma PREVIOUS BALANCE $142.05
3914 Morning Creek Ct PAYMENTS, $0.00
Fulshear, TX 77441 PENALTIES $14.19
ADJUSTMENTS $0.00
PAST DUE AMOUNT $156.24
CURRENT PREVIOUS
Usage READING READING USAGE
60000 1,163 1,152 11,000 WATER 31.06
SEWER 42.75
50000 SOLID WASTE 11.44
RECYCLING 5.29
40000 NFBWA USAGE FEE 50.05
Tax $1.38
30000
CURRENT BILL —$1aTo7
20000 AMOUNT DUE $298.21
1
10000 4 AMOUNT DUE AFTER 02/29/2024 $312.41
aml & &
The Water My Yard program is a tool to assist you in determining an adequate amount of water needed to maintain a healthy lawn. To sign up go to
watermyyard.org.
If you have a previous balance due, a late notice will be mailed out on the 10th of the month with a $10.00 fee and if not paid by the 20th of the month
service will be disconnected and a fee of $154.00 will be assessed.
CUSTOMER ACCOUNT INFORMATION - RETAIN FOR YOUR RECORDS
There will be a charge on all returned checks.
CITY OF FULSHEAR Please return this portion with your payment.
(EES.
Failure to receive bill or notice will not waive charges.
611 W Cross Creek Bend Ln hy
a
Po Box 1134 ie
Account Number AMOUNT DUE
FULSHEAR Fulshear, TX 77441
(281) 346-8830
wT
02-010245-02 $298.21
municipalonlinepayments.com/fulsheartx nt Due Date After Due Date Pay
Pay By Phone: (866) 271-0823 ht
2/29/2024 $312.41
NO 0 UMA
Account Name
Karen E Oluma
Service Address
3914 Morning Creek Ct
Amount Enclosed
CITY OF FULSHEAR
6611 W Cross Creek Bend Ln
Po Box 1134
Fulshear, TX 77441
1: 387th Court Coordinator
t: RE: 22-DCV-293652 Request for Hearing Date on Motion for New Trial
L Feb 16, 2024 at 11:12:29
AM
Jeremy Oluma 1
Good Morning,
The court confirms M/for New Trial Wednesday April 3rd, at 9:00am
In Person.
Thank you,
Janie Gaeta
Zoom Meeting link, ID and Passcode are listed below. Please include this in
your notice.
JANIE GAETA
CERTIFIED COURT MANAGER
COURT COORDINATOR-387TH DISTRICT COURT
The Honorable Janet B. Heppard & Assoc. Judge Richard Bell
1422 Eugen See
Richmond, TX 77469
281-238-3377
Janie.gaeta@fortbendcountytx.gov
AE LAW TOTLDENGCOUNLYLX. GOV
FOR COURT HEARINGS USE:
387TH COURT COORDINATOR@fortbendcountytx.gov
DISTRICT CLERKS FILINGS:
E-File: http://www.efiletexas.gov/
Fax: (281) 341-4519
Please email Exhibits to:
387Exhibits@fortbendcountytx.gov
ZOOM INFORMATION: https://zoom.us/
Meeting ID: 99500629176 Passcode: 638339
District Clerk's office:
Distclerk@fortbendcountytx.gov
Self-Represented Litigants (ProSe) Instructions and checklist as well as the
387th District Court Rules of Practice can be found on our website,
https://www.fortbendcountytx.gov/government/departments/district-courts/
JME PATE s/OIstict=COUrtsi.
387th-district-court
DEAD WEEK FOR 2024:
JUNE 3rd THRU 07TH
DECEMBER 18th THRU JAN 1ST
----- Original Message -----
From: Jeremy Oluma
Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2024 10:38 AM
To: 387th Court Coordinator <387thCourtCoordinator@fortbendcountytx.gov>
Subject: 22-DCV-293652 Request for Hearing Date on Motion for New Trial
Janie,
| need a hearing date for the above requested Motion at the earliest possible
date onthe court's calendar.
An estimated four hours are needed.
Jeremy Oluma
ae
Texas State Law Library
Landlord/Tenant Law
This legal research guide provides information about landlord and tenant law that is helpful to
both the practitioner and the public looking for legal information.
B General
Information
¥ Utility Shutoffs
i Leases
f) Rent
SS Repairs
S Moving
Out
!
e Common
Problems
3& Mold
and Pests
%a Utility
Shutoffs
A
Landlord
Retaliation
4) Noise
a
Lockouts
» Can a Landlord Shut Off the
Evictions Utilities?
@
We often receive questions about whether or not a landlord
Subsidized
can shut off or cut off access to utilities such as electricity,
Housing
water, gas, and wastewater. Section 92.008 of the Texas
a Property Code
states:
Forms
@ More
A landlord or a landlord's agent
Landlord/Tenant
may not interrupt or cause the
Books
interruption of utility service paid
@% Practice
for directly to the utility company
by a tenant unless the
Aids interruption results from bona
fide repairs, construction, or an
Q Find
emergency.
More
Information
If a tenant pays directly to a utility company, the landlord
cannot interrupt service due to nonpayment of rent or other
charges. The landlord may only interrupt service to make
repairs, during construction, or due to an emergency.
Texas Laws
¢ Texas Property Code, Chapter 92, Subchapter G
This section of the Texas Property Code discusses utility
cutoffs due to the landlord's nonpayment of the utility bill.
Section 92.008 of the Texas Property Code
This section of the Texas Property Code discusses
interruption of utilities.
Section 92.0091 of the Texas Property Code
This section of the Texas Property Code details a
residential tenant's right of restoration after unlawful
utility disconnection.
Disclaimer:
The State Law
Understanding the Law
Library cannot
¢ Tenant Remedies: When Your Landlord Has Locked
tell you what a
You Out or Cut Off Your Utilities
law means for
This Self-Help Information Packet from the Texas Justice
your
Courts Training Center answers many frequently asked
situation. Please cx
questions about a tenant's rights when their landlord has
an attorney for
shut off their utilities.
help determining
what the law Utilities (Texas Tenant Advisor)
means for you. If This article from Texas Tenant Advisor explains the
you have tenant's rights when it comes to utility shutoffs.
questions or Landlords and Tenants Guide
need help finding This guide provides information about a variety of issues
resources, affecting landlords and tenants, including utility cutoffs
please ask a and restoration.
librarian.
Forms
¢ Utilities and Landlord/Tenant Issues
This page from TexasLawHelp.org includes an article on
a tenant's right to utilities and two forms that can be filed
in court: Writ of Restoration Application (to ask the court
to order the landlord to restore your utilities) and Writ of
Restoration (for the court to sign, ordering the landlord to
restore utilities).
Utility Interruption — Demand Letter
Demand service restoration to your rental unit after an
illegal utility interruption.
Tenant Remedies: When Your Landlord Has Locked
You Out or Cut Off Your Utilities
In addition to their Self-Help Information Packet, the
Texas Justice Courts Training Center provides this page
with many forms a tenant will need to restore their
utilities or access to their rental.
<< Previous: 3€ Mold and Pests
Next: A Landlord Retaliation >>
Last Updated: Feb 13, 2024 3:24 PM URL: https://guides.sll.texas.gov/landlord-tenant-law
Subjects: Consumer Information, Housing & Real Property Tags: eviction, landlord, landlord/tenant,
lease, rent, rental, tenant, tenant's right
Filed
2/14/2024 8:22 PM
Beverley McGrew Walker
District Clerk
NOTICE: THIS DOCUMENT Fort Bend County, Texas
A’Leah Hudson
CONTAINS SENSITIVE DATA
NO. 22:DCV-293652
IN THE MATTER OF IN THE DISTRICT COURT
THE MARRIAGE OF
JEREMY DAVID OLUMA
AND
MAITE L. OLUMA 387™ JUDICIAL DISTRICT
AND IN THE INTEREST OF
T.0.0., §
A CHILD § FORT BEND COUNTY, TEXAS
MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL
Movants Jeremy David Oluma, and Karen Oluma bring the Trial Court their
Motion for New Trial in the above captioned divorce case and shows in support as
follows:
Movants are filing this motion immediately after receiving their first notice of the
signed default judgment in Final Divorce Decree noticed by Attorney Mary Beth Cameron
at 3:05 p.m. February 14, 2024, via eFile.
Tex. R. C. P 321
“Each point relied upon in a motion for new trial or in arrest of judgment shall
briefly refer to that part of the ruling of the court, charge given to the jury, or charge
refused, admission or rejection of evidence, or other proceedings which are
designated to be complained of, in such a way that the objection can be clearly
identified and understood by the court.”
Attorney Illegally Demands Immediate Enforcement of Final Divorce Decree
Attorney Cameron sent with the initial notification of Final Decree, which was
taken by default in Trial on February 13, 2024, a threatening demand for the immediate
enforcement of separation of property and the return of the minor child.
1|Page
Improper Notice of Hearing
This order was rendered at a bench Trial appearance for which notice was issued
after a Status Hearing on January 26, 2024, that was held during the restriction on judicial
actions by this trial court in the second pending recusal Motion filed for Judge Janet B.
Heppard.
The second recusal Motion for Judge Janet B. Heppard had not yet been completed
as of February 12, 2024, because a Motion for Recusal of Presiding Regional Judge Susan
Brown had not yet been completed as ordered by the Hon. Chief Justice Nathan L. Hecht
on February 8, 2024.
There was no notice to Movants of the final denial in that hearing until February 12,
2024, at 9:09 a.m. when it was filed into the Research Texas Record, date and time
stamped by the District Clerk of Court.
No Intentional or Conscious Indifference by Petitioner
Petitioner did not receive proper notice of hearing because the Status Hearing for
the Bench Trial was held on January 26, 2024, during a period that Trial Court Judge was
restricted from taking further action on this matter, the notice provided for the Trial Date is
NULL and VOID.
Opposing Counsel issued multiple notices for February 13, 2024, all for the same
time: (1) Amended Notice of Trial Setting on 1/26/24 at 12:51 PM; (2) Notice of Pretrial
Conference Hearing 1/26/24; (3) Notice of Hearing (Respondent’s Motion to Deposit
Funds into Court Registry) 1/26/24 at 4:46 p.m. AND (4) Second Amended Notice of Trial
Setting 1/29/24 at 9:51 p.m. without an attendant order.
2|Page
a
Movants have every intention to defend their case before the Trial Court if and
when served with proper notice while Judge Janet B. Heppard has unrestricted authority to
proceed with hearings.
Outstanding Issues Before the Court
Petitioner’s Emergency Motion for Judicial Notice of constitutional issues and
Request for Injunctive relief were not heard or rescheduled for hearing during the
pendency of the case, after the January 23, 2024, hearing was not held during a restriction
on judicial actions in the case.
Judge Janet B. Heppard scheduled that hearing after stating in the January 5, 2024,
Status Hearing that she needed time to review the motion.
The Court has not yet ruled on that motion although it was resubmitted by
Petitioner for judicial notice and ruling by Petitioner on January 23, 2024.
Petitioner’s motions for Proposed Order of Compliance for Emergency Notice of
Failure to Comply with Cessation of Orders and other Court actions while Recusal is
Pending was filed on January 30, 2024, but never heard.
Impermissible and Illegal Award of Co-Respondent’s Real Estate to Respondent
Judge Janet B. Heppard, relying solely on Respondent’s testimony, deemed Co-
respondent’s homestead property as 100% marital property in a glaring abuse of discretion
and fundamental error of law.
Then the real estate purchase by movant Karen Oluma was impermissibly voided
by Judge Janet B. Heppard as a result of her illegal designation of 3914 Morning Creek
3|Page
Court as 100% marital property.
Respondent misrepresented the purchase of the real estate by Co-respondent as a
transfer of property between Petitioner and Co-respondent, in absolute contradiction to
Texas Business and case law.
The property at the above address was the property of Mountain High Local
Services, LLC when it was purchased by Co-Respondent from that LLC. Texas Property
and case law hold that:
“A limited-liability company is a separate legal entity, and property owned by such
a company is neither the community property nor the separate property of its
members,” see:
Tex. Bus. Org. Code Ann. § 101.106(a)-(a-1); Mandell v. Mandell, 310 S.W.3d 531
539 (Tex. App.-Fort Worth 2010, pet. denied); cf. McKnight v. McKnight, 543
S.W.2d 863, 867 (Tex. 1976) (holding same for specific assets owned by
partnership)
Tex. Bus. Org. Code Ann. § 101.106(b); “A member of a limited liability company
or an assignee ofa membership interest in a limited liability company does not have
an interest in any specific property of the company.”
The real estate property awarded to the Respondent was never held in the name of
the Petitioner or in the name of the Respondent and because it was the property of the LLC
as demonstrated in the Respondent’s own evidence, it was not a homestead property.
The Respondent’s claims of the property being her homestead are wholly false and
without merit and were presented as such to the Court.
The Court had insufficient evidence to rule the property as marital property at all and
therefore the award to the Respondent was a fundamental error in law and an abuse of
judicial discretion.
4|Page
Impermissible, Illegal and Erroneous Award of Petitioner’s Separate Property to
Respondent
The only vehicle in Petitioner’s possession was awarded to Respondent by the
Judge who operated without sufficient evidence in making that award. None of the other
vehicles listed under possession of Petitioner are titled in his name.
None of the other automobiles, motorcycles, trailers or RV’s listed under the
Petitioner’s assets are titled to the Petitioner.
The only vehicle in Petitioner’s control is titled with the finance company.
The note on the vehicle is held by both Petitioner and Co-respondent who co-
financed the vehicle: 2022 BMS 530i motor vehicle} A53BHO3NCH63875.
Therefore the vehicle is separate property, not community property and this was
another illegal award of property by Judge Janet B. Heppard to Respondent.
Orders are Unconstitutional and Unsupported
The Court infringed on Petitioner’s constitutional rights and the minor child’s
concomitant fundamental rights by the restriction of possession of and access to the minor
child.
Petitioner is a fit parent as defined by the Supreme Court and by the State of Texas
and, absent a separate state fitness hearing that found him unfit, the restrictions and
conditions imposed by the Court in this Final Divorce Decree are unconstitutional and
unsupported.
Order for drug test is unconstitutional invasion of privacy and unsupported by
factual evidence.
5|Page
The order for drug test is not specific as to how the drug test would be passed.
Restrictions related to travel to Ethiopia are without basis in fact or merit.
Supervised visitation is absent a state finding that Petitioner is an unfit parent.
All orders related to the supervised visitation are unsupported in the evidence.
Order authorizing entry to any location where the minor child can be found for all
state and local law enforcement agencies as well as private agencies employed by Maite
Oluma is unconstitutional and unenforceable.
Finding that Petitioner’s monthly earnings are currently $12,000 per month is
unsupported by fact.
Finding that Petitioner is intentionally underemployed is factually incorrect and
Petitioner has a chronic disability that limits his endurance and ability to have gainful
employment as determined by the Social Security Department.
Finding that Petitioner has a criminal history and violating court orders is factually
incorrect.
Finding that Petitioner has a history of domestic violence is factually incorrect and.
unsupported.
Allegation/finding that Petitioner has previously threatened to take child away from
Maite L. Oluma is NOT accurate or factually supported
Extended orders for child support beyond the child’s age of eighteen is
unsupported.
Orders for reimbursement of attorney’s fees and for exemplary damages are not
supported.
Orders for bond and for purchase of life insurance is unsupported
6|Page
Orders for the child support orders to continue for Petitioner’s estate after his death
and to include all pensions, 401K’s etc. are unsupported
Withhold of child support is unsupported in all its specifications.
Appointment of Maite L. Oluma as sole managing conservator with child living
outside Texas without geographic restrictions is contrary to Texas public policy.
Appointment of Petitioner as possessory conservator is unconstitutional.
A New Trial in this Case is Necessary
A new trial is necessary in this case to prevent a manifest miscarriage of justice in
the terms of parental custody awarded by this Court absent a finding of a state fitness
hearing that found the Petitioner an unfit parent.
The restrictive custody terms thrust upon Petitioner’s absent due process are
punitive and this Court has engaged in quasi-criminal behavior in those rulings.
The terms of Petitioner’s parental custody are unconstitutional.
Infringement on and deprivation of constitutional rights causes irreparable injury to
the individual and is a crime under the color of law: U.S.C. Title 18, Section 242.
Movants Have Credible and Meritorious Defenses to the Division of Property and
Custody Decisions Taken in the Default Divorce Decree
Movants individually have evidence-based defenses to the orders rendered in this
case.
Movants requested a copy of the trial proceedings from the court reporter on or
about 4:45 p.m. on February 13, 2024, without response to their request at the time of this
7|Page
filing.
Movants file this motion under extreme duress from Attorney Mary Beth Cameron
who is threatening, and unlawfully harassing Movants immediately and illegally enforce
orders in contravention of Texas Family Code.
Movants are filing this motion under the threat of home invasion by the Respondent
who has attempted to weaponize the local Fulshear Police Department to gain entry into
the home without following the due process required by the courts and Texas Law.
Movants reserve the right to amend this motion as necessary due to the extreme
duress and timeline under which it is being filed.
Movants reserve the right to pursue such relief in appeals or any other avenue that
is afforded to them in law.
Movants reserve the right to amend this motion and to correct any errors or
omissions made under extreme duress.
Prayer
Movants pray the court grant a new trial in this case as is just and right by law.
8|Page
Respectfully Submitted,
BY: Davik Obama
Jere DavidOluma
3914 Morning Creek Court Fulshear, TX 77441
612-412-7090
jeremyoluma@gmail.com
Petitioner Pro Se
a BY: Aas — Obama
Karen Esther Oluma
3914 Morning Creek Court Fulshear, TX 77441
612-402-7848
Certificate of Service
I certify that a true copy of the foregoing was served in accordance with rule 21a of the Texas
Rules of Civil Procedure on the following on: February 14, 2024.
Mary Beth Cameron Attorney of record for Respondent, by electronic filing manager.
David Obuma
Jeremy David Oluma
Petitioner Pro Se
9|Page
NOTICE: THIS DOCUMENT
CONTAINS SENSITIVE DATA
NO. 22-DCV-293652
IN THE MATTER OF IN THE DISTRICT COURT
THE MARRIAGE OF
JEREMY DAVID OLUMA
AND
MAITE L. OLUMA 387™ JUDICIAL DISTRICT
AND IN THE INTEREST OF
T.0.0., §
A CHILD § FORT BEND COUNTY, TEXAS
AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL
AFFIDAVIT
Petitioner, Jeremy David Oluma, writes this affidavit base on personal knowledge
and facts in support of the request for a new trial in the above captioned case, after the
default judgment rendered in Trial on February 13, 2024, by Judge Janet B. Heppard.
lam filing this motion immediately after receiving my first official notice of the
signed default judgment in Final Divorce Decree by Attorney Mary Beth Cameron at 3:05
p.m. February 14, 2024, via eFile.
I have evidence-based defenses to each of the orders rendered in this case but
I did not receive proper notice of hearing and I have requested copy of the trial proceedings
from the court reporter Minne Cadena by email at 4:55 p.m. on February 13, 2024. At the
time of this writing I have received no response to my request.
I did not receive adequate notice of a final trial for divorce, and I had filed multiple
motions to the Court that were never addressed, including one filed initially on January 4,
2024, for an Emergency Hearing for Judicial notice and Injunctive Relief. I have every
intention to defend my case before the Trial Court.
1|Page
That filing was due "aiiialillilliaiiniiasaiatiiiiaiiiia
to abuse at the hands of his
mother while in her care in Utah. He has since divulged even more details of the abuse
including her hitting him, so often he can’t count the times, getting a bloody nose, he has a
scar on his right side where she cut him with a kitchen utensil and her daily threats that he
will never see his dad again. Now he’s reporting she’s been threatening to kill me, my
mother and him if he ever tells her “secrets.
Tam filing this affidavit under extreme duress from Attorney Mary Beth Cameron
who is threatening, and unlawfully harassing me and Co-Respondent, my mother Karen
Oluma. Attorney Cameron sent with her first official notice to me of the Final Divorce
Decree her demand for immediate and illegal compliance of orders for the awards of
property in the Decree and immediate surrender of our minor child in contravention of
Texas Family Code. See Attached Exhibit A Official Legal Notice
The trial court may not render an order to assist in the implementation of or to clarify the property division
made or approved in the decree before the 30th day after the date the final judgment is signed. If a timely
motion for new trial or to vacate, modify, correct, or reform the decree is filed, the trial court may not render
an order to assist in the implementation of or to clarify the property division made or approved in the decree
before the 30th day after the date the order overruling the motion is signed or the motion is overruled by
operation of law.
Muniment of property is unenforceable based on the language of the
Final Divorce Decree and the Decree itself states:
“If any part of this decree violates the law, that portion shall be deemed deleted...” Page
11 of 49, Final Divorce Decree, referenced and hereby incorporated.
Attorney Cameron harassed and threatened movants as follows in her letter that
accompanied the Notice of Findal Divorce Decree:
“Furthermore, the property located at 3914 Morning Creek Court, Fulshear, Texas
was 100% awarded to Maite in the divorce. As a courtesy, we will allow y’all a few days to
remove your belongings to surrender the house. Please communicate with us on what y’all
need to move out so we can graciously offer you that time.”
2|Page
1 am filing this affidavit under the threat of home invasion and fear for my life, our
son’s life and my a s - ™ to threats made by the Respondent, Maite L. Oluma,
who has attempted to weaponize the local Fulshear Police Department to gain entry into the
home without following the due process required by the courts and Texas Law.
This morning Respondent, Maite L. Oluma, came to the residence accompanied by to
at ee 2ccompanied by Fulshear Police units
twice and on the second visit she destroyed property while attempting to gain illegal entry
into the residence.
The Fulshear Police Department did not announce as Police and stood by while
Maite L. Oluma attempted to illegally enter the house and I witnessed these actions by
security camera footage.
Neighbors who witnessed the attempted break-in as well as the destruction of
property notified Petitioner and one neighbor also reported that Respondent knocked on
their door harassing them and accusing them of “helping” Petitioner.
Weaponization of the Police Department for unlawful purposes is illegal and the
crime will be reported to the Fulshear Police Department.
When she attempted to forcibly enter the residence, Co-respondent and homeowner
Karen Oluma, was notified on by security cameras of the activity and called 911 for
assistance to report the attempted illegal entry into the residence.
The only vehicle I own is the 2022 BMW 530i that is separate property.
The residence at 3914 Morning Creek Court is my mother’s home that was
purchased from the LLC that owned the home.
3|Page
"My name is Jeremy David Oluma
(First) (Middle) Last)
My date of birth ; and my address is
ee
(Street) (City) (State) (Zip Code)
and a I declare under penalty of
(Country)
perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed in FORT BEND County, State of TEXAS,
on the 14™ day of,February 2024
(Month) (Year)
David Oluuma
clarant"
4|P agge
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.
Envelope ID: 84528791
Filing Code Desc:
Filing Description
Status
en
as of 2/15/2024 9:46
for New Trial
ew Trial
AM CST
Associated Case Party: JeremyDavidOluma
Name BarNumber | Email TimestampSubmitted | Status
Randi Parrish randi@goodnightlaw.com | 2/14/2024 8:22:20 PM | SENT
Jeremy Oluma jeremyoluma@gmail.com | 2/14/2024 8:22:20 PM | SENT
Associated Case Party: Maite Oluma
Name BarNumber | Email TimestampSubmitted | Status
Mary Cameron | 24069458 admin@goodnightlaw.com | 2/14/2024 8:22:20 PM | SENT
Associated Case Party: Karen Oluma
Name BarNumber | Email TimestampSubmitted | Status
Karen EstherOluma Mokula4@gmail.com | 2/14/2024 8:22:20 PM | SENT
Tex. R. Civ. P. 329b
Rule 329b - Time for Filing Motions
The following rules shall be applicable to motions for new trial and motions to modify,
correct, or reform judgments (other than motions to correct the record under Rule 316) in all
district and county courts:
(a) A motion for new trial, if filed, shall be filed prior to or within thirty days after the
judgment or other order complained of is signed.
(b) One or more amended motions for new trial may be filed without leave of court before
any preceding motion for new trial filed by the movant is overruled and within thirty days
after the judgment or other order complained of is signed.
(c) In the event an original or amended motion for new trial or a motion to modify, correct
or reform a judgment is not determined by written order signed within seventy-five days
after the judgment was signed, it shall be considered overruled by operation of law on
expiration of that period.
(d) The trial court, regardless of whether an appeal has been perfected, has plenary power to
grant a new trial or to vacate, modify, correct, or reform the judgment within thirty days
after the judgment is signed.
(e) Ifa motion for new trial is timely filed by any party, the trial court, regardless of whether
an appeal has been perfected, has plenary power to grant a new trial or to vacate, modify,
correct, or reform the judgment until thirty days after all such timely-filed motions are
overruled, either by a written and signed order or by operation of law, whichever occurs
first.
(f) On expiration of the time within which the trial court has plenary power, a judgment
cannot be set aside by the trial court except by bill of review for sufficient cause, filed
within the time allowed by law; provided that the court may at any time correct a clerical
error in the record of a judgment and render judgment nunc pro tunc under Rule 316, and
may also sign an order declaring a previous judgment or order to be void because signed
after the court's plenary power had expired.
(g) A motion to modify, correct, or reform a judgment (as distinguished from motion to
correct the record ofa judgment under Rule 316), if filed, shall be filed and determined
within the time prescribed by this rule for a motion for new trial and shall extend the trial
court's plenary power and the time for perfecting an appeal in the same manner as a motion
for new trial. Each such motion shall be in writing and signed by the party or his attorney
and shall specify the respects in which the judgment should be modified, corrected, or
reformed. The overruling of such a motion shall not preclude the filing ofa motion for new
trial, nor shall the overruling ofa motion for new trial preclude the filing ofa motion to
modify, correct, or reform.
(h) Ifa judgment is modified, corrected or reformed in any respect, the time for appeal shall
run from the time the modified, corrected, or reformed judgment is signed, but ifa
correction is made pursuant to Rule 316 after expiration of the period of plenary power
casetext
Part of Thomeon Reuters
Rule 329b - Time for Filing Motions Tex. R. Civ. P. 329b
provided by this rule, no complaint shall
Preview
CAUSE NO. Karen E. Oluma IN THE District Court APPLICANT PRECINCT ONE, PLACE TWO FORT BEND COUNTY, TEXAS EMERGENCY APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF RESTORATION The undersigned Applicant makes this Application for Writ of Restoration of utilities at a residence at the following location, which Applicant is authorized to occupy (“Residence”): LOCATION OF RESIDENCE: [nn The person who has unlawfully disconnected the utilities at the Residence is Maite L. Oluma-Cervantes, who may be given notice of this application at the following address: Attorney Mary Beth Cameron, 700 Westgreen Blvd., Katy, TX 77450-2799 Phone: 713-929-6218 State Bar No. 24069458 The following is a statement of facts showing that the utilities have been illegally disconnected at the Residence: Ms. Oluma/Cervantes received a default judgment for home ownership in a divorce decree signed February 14, 2024, and for which judgment was filed by the Clerk of Court on February 15, 2024. She has asserted property ownership using the decree as muniment of title and the rights of ownership declared in the decree. Her attorney has assisted her in these actions. Section 92.008 of the Texas Property Code: “A landlord or a landlord’s agent may not interrupt or cause the interruption of utility service paid for directly to the utility company by a tenant unless the interruption results from bona fide repairs, construction, or an emergency.” Copy attached Ms. Karen Oluma, homestead owner, filed a motion for a new trial and that motion was granted by the Hon. Janet B. Heppard in the 387* District Court, Fort Bend County, Texas. The hearing date is set for April3, 2024. See attached Motion and Court Coordinator’s confirmation of hearing date. Texas Family Code 9.007 (c) reads: “The trial court may not render an order to assist in the implementation of or to clarify the property division made or approved in the decree before the 30th day after the date the final judgment is signed. Ifa timely motion for new trial or to vacate, modify, correct, or reform the decree is filed, the trial court may not render an order to assist in the implementation of or to clarify the property division made or approved in the decree before the 30th day after the date the order overruling the motion is signed or the motion is overruled by operation of law.” By Texas law Ms. Olu yi ervantes, whose primary residence is in Utah, made herself an absentee owner upon the judgment of the divorce decree. She has not declared her intention to move into the home to claim it as a homestead. Therefore she is operating as landlord for the current occupant of the home. While the judgment granted Ms. Oluma/Cervantes the right to eviction, she has not initiated Ea, process. Instead she chose to have th ice to the home disconnected leaving me without water and related municipal services. | have a current and up-to-date contract with the City of Fulshear Utilities department. The City of Fulshear Utilities Department legal representatives Josh Green and Byron Brown refused to have my services reconnected despite my notice to them that I am still occupying the residence and that no eviction has been started. My water utilities bill is paid. City of Fulshear Utilities Documents Attached. I request that the Court issue a Writ for immediate restoration of water to the residence and further enjoin Ms. Oluma/Cervantes from disconnecting any utilities at 3914 Morning Creek Ct, Fulshear, TX 77441, until the 30 days following the hearing of the Motion for a New Trial as stipulated in Tex Fam Code 9.007 and enjoin Ms. Oluma/Cervantes from any self-help eviction actions or legal eviction actions throughout that period prescribed by law during which no enforcement action can be ordered in the division of property in divorce. I was contacted last night at about 7:00 PM by Adult Protective Services Shelby Thundercloud who told me a report had been made to their office that I am an elder whose water had been cut off. A Fort Bend County DFPS investigator was assigned to the case this morning: Jessica Sides: 832-449-0450 APS case #: 49997738. I have late sate three chronic kidney disease and cardiomyopathy. Applicant’s Information: My current legal name is: Karen Esther Oluma. My date of birth is: July 14, 1946. My phone number is: 612-402-7848. My address is: 3914 Morning Creek Ct, Fulshear, TX 77441 USA. My email address is: Mokula4@gmail.com. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in FORT BEND County, State of TEXAS, on the 21ST day of FEBRUARY, 2024. Karen 6 Obunae Applicant's (Declarant’s) Signature a 2/21/24, 8:51 AM Accounts - Account detail - Utility Billing - City of Fulshear - Municipal Online Services City of Fulshear Utility Billing 0 7 KO 7 € Home Account m Manage < detail Account ¢ Account summary Transacti a Consump Account 02-010245-02 Owner QP ren £ Oluma Service re Service address 3914 Morning Creek Ct Contact p Balance Prior account balance $156.24 Current bill Due 2/29/2024 $141.97 Transactions since current bill ($140.00) Account balance $158.21 Recent bills a 2/7/2024 View bill https://www.municipalonlinepayments.com/fulsheartx/utilities/accounts/detail/02-010245-02 1/2 (EE CITY OF FULSHEAR 6611 W Cross Creek Bend Ln Po Box 1134 Account Number AMOUNT DUE FULSHEAR Fulshear, TX 77441 (281) 346-8830 02-010245-02 $298.21 wy municipalonlinepayments.com/fulsheartx Pay By Phone: (866) 271-0823 Due Date 2/29/2024 After Due Date Pay $312.41 NTA A Mm | i illing Date Penalty Date 2/7/2024 3/1/2024 Service From Service To 12/25/2023 1/25/2024 Service Address 3914 Morning Creek Ct Karen E Oluma PREVIOUS BALANCE $142.05 3914 Morning Creek Ct PAYMENTS, $0.00 Fulshear, TX 77441 PENALTIES $14.19 ADJUSTMENTS $0.00 PAST DUE AMOUNT $156.24 CURRENT PREVIOUS Usage READING READING USAGE 60000 1,163 1,152 11,000 WATER 31.06 SEWER 42.75 50000 SOLID WASTE 11.44 RECYCLING 5.29 40000 NFBWA USAGE FEE 50.05 Tax $1.38 30000 CURRENT BILL —$1aTo7 20000 AMOUNT DUE $298.21 1 10000 4 AMOUNT DUE AFTER 02/29/2024 $312.41 aml & & The Water My Yard program is a tool to assist you in determining an adequate amount of water needed to maintain a healthy lawn. To sign up go to watermyyard.org. If you have a previous balance due, a late notice will be mailed out on the 10th of the month with a $10.00 fee and if not paid by the 20th of the month service will be disconnected and a fee of $154.00 will be assessed. CUSTOMER ACCOUNT INFORMATION - RETAIN FOR YOUR RECORDS There will be a charge on all returned checks. CITY OF FULSHEAR Please return this portion with your payment. (EES. Failure to receive bill or notice will not waive charges. 611 W Cross Creek Bend Ln hy a Po Box 1134 ie Account Number AMOUNT DUE FULSHEAR Fulshear, TX 77441 (281) 346-8830 wT 02-010245-02 $298.21 municipalonlinepayments.com/fulsheartx nt Due Date After Due Date Pay Pay By Phone: (866) 271-0823 ht 2/29/2024 $312.41 NO 0 UMA Account Name Karen E Oluma Service Address 3914 Morning Creek Ct Amount Enclosed CITY OF FULSHEAR 6611 W Cross Creek Bend Ln Po Box 1134 Fulshear, TX 77441 1: 387th Court Coordinator t: RE: 22-DCV-293652 Request for Hearing Date on Motion for New Trial L Feb 16, 2024 at 11:12:29 AM Jeremy Oluma 1 Good Morning, The court confirms M/for New Trial Wednesday April 3rd, at 9:00am In Person. Thank you, Janie Gaeta Zoom Meeting link, ID and Passcode are listed below. Please include this in your notice. JANIE GAETA CERTIFIED COURT MANAGER COURT COORDINATOR-387TH DISTRICT COURT The Honorable Janet B. Heppard & Assoc. Judge Richard Bell 1422 Eugen See Richmond, TX 77469 281-238-3377 Janie.gaeta@fortbendcountytx.gov AE LAW TOTLDENGCOUNLYLX. GOV FOR COURT HEARINGS USE: 387TH COURT COORDINATOR@fortbendcountytx.gov DISTRICT CLERKS FILINGS: E-File: http://www.efiletexas.gov/ Fax: (281) 341-4519 Please email Exhibits to: 387Exhibits@fortbendcountytx.gov ZOOM INFORMATION: https://zoom.us/ Meeting ID: 99500629176 Passcode: 638339 District Clerk's office: Distclerk@fortbendcountytx.gov Self-Represented Litigants (ProSe) Instructions and checklist as well as the 387th District Court Rules of Practice can be found on our website, https://www.fortbendcountytx.gov/government/departments/district-courts/ JME PATE s/OIstict=COUrtsi. 387th-district-court DEAD WEEK FOR 2024: JUNE 3rd THRU 07TH DECEMBER 18th THRU JAN 1ST ----- Original Message ----- From: Jeremy Oluma Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2024 10:38 AM To: 387th Court Coordinator <387thCourtCoordinator@fortbendcountytx.gov> Subject: 22-DCV-293652 Request for Hearing Date on Motion for New Trial Janie, | need a hearing date for the above requested Motion at the earliest possible date onthe court's calendar. An estimated four hours are needed. Jeremy Oluma ae Texas State Law Library Landlord/Tenant Law This legal research guide provides information about landlord and tenant law that is helpful to both the practitioner and the public looking for legal information. B General Information ¥ Utility Shutoffs i Leases f) Rent SS Repairs S Moving Out ! e Common Problems 3& Mold and Pests %a Utility Shutoffs A Landlord Retaliation 4) Noise a Lockouts » Can a Landlord Shut Off the Evictions Utilities? @ We often receive questions about whether or not a landlord Subsidized can shut off or cut off access to utilities such as electricity, Housing water, gas, and wastewater. Section 92.008 of the Texas a Property Code states: Forms @ More A landlord or a landlord's agent Landlord/Tenant may not interrupt or cause the Books interruption of utility service paid @% Practice for directly to the utility company by a tenant unless the Aids interruption results from bona fide repairs, construction, or an Q Find emergency. More Information If a tenant pays directly to a utility company, the landlord cannot interrupt service due to nonpayment of rent or other charges. The landlord may only interrupt service to make repairs, during construction, or due to an emergency. Texas Laws ¢ Texas Property Code, Chapter 92, Subchapter G This section of the Texas Property Code discusses utility cutoffs due to the landlord's nonpayment of the utility bill. Section 92.008 of the Texas Property Code This section of the Texas Property Code discusses interruption of utilities. Section 92.0091 of the Texas Property Code This section of the Texas Property Code details a residential tenant's right of restoration after unlawful utility disconnection. Disclaimer: The State Law Understanding the Law Library cannot ¢ Tenant Remedies: When Your Landlord Has Locked tell you what a You Out or Cut Off Your Utilities law means for This Self-Help Information Packet from the Texas Justice your Courts Training Center answers many frequently asked situation. Please cx questions about a tenant's rights when their landlord has an attorney for shut off their utilities. help determining what the law Utilities (Texas Tenant Advisor) means for you. If This article from Texas Tenant Advisor explains the you have tenant's rights when it comes to utility shutoffs. questions or Landlords and Tenants Guide need help finding This guide provides information about a variety of issues resources, affecting landlords and tenants, including utility cutoffs please ask a and restoration. librarian. Forms ¢ Utilities and Landlord/Tenant Issues This page from TexasLawHelp.org includes an article on a tenant's right to utilities and two forms that can be filed in court: Writ of Restoration Application (to ask the court to order the landlord to restore your utilities) and Writ of Restoration (for the court to sign, ordering the landlord to restore utilities). Utility Interruption — Demand Letter Demand service restoration to your rental unit after an illegal utility interruption. Tenant Remedies: When Your Landlord Has Locked You Out or Cut Off Your Utilities In addition to their Self-Help Information Packet, the Texas Justice Courts Training Center provides this page with many forms a tenant will need to restore their utilities or access to their rental. << Previous: 3€ Mold and Pests Next: A Landlord Retaliation >> Last Updated: Feb 13, 2024 3:24 PM URL: https://guides.sll.texas.gov/landlord-tenant-law Subjects: Consumer Information, Housing & Real Property Tags: eviction, landlord, landlord/tenant, lease, rent, rental, tenant, tenant's right Filed 2/14/2024 8:22 PM Beverley McGrew Walker District Clerk NOTICE: THIS DOCUMENT Fort Bend County, Texas A’Leah Hudson CONTAINS SENSITIVE DATA NO. 22:DCV-293652 IN THE MATTER OF IN THE DISTRICT COURT THE MARRIAGE OF JEREMY DAVID OLUMA AND MAITE L. OLUMA 387™ JUDICIAL DISTRICT AND IN THE INTEREST OF T.0.0., § A CHILD § FORT BEND COUNTY, TEXAS MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL Movants Jeremy David Oluma, and Karen Oluma bring the Trial Court their Motion for New Trial in the above captioned divorce case and shows in support as follows: Movants are filing this motion immediately after receiving their first notice of the signed default judgment in Final Divorce Decree noticed by Attorney Mary Beth Cameron at 3:05 p.m. February 14, 2024, via eFile. Tex. R. C. P 321 “Each point relied upon in a motion for new trial or in arrest of judgment shall briefly refer to that part of the ruling of the court, charge given to the jury, or charge refused, admission or rejection of evidence, or other proceedings which are designated to be complained of, in such a way that the objection can be clearly identified and understood by the court.” Attorney Illegally Demands Immediate Enforcement of Final Divorce Decree Attorney Cameron sent with the initial notification of Final Decree, which was taken by default in Trial on February 13, 2024, a threatening demand for the immediate enforcement of separation of property and the return of the minor child. 1|Page Improper Notice of Hearing This order was rendered at a bench Trial appearance for which notice was issued after a Status Hearing on January 26, 2024, that was held during the restriction on judicial actions by this trial court in the second pending recusal Motion filed for Judge Janet B. Heppard. The second recusal Motion for Judge Janet B. Heppard had not yet been completed as of February 12, 2024, because a Motion for Recusal of Presiding Regional Judge Susan Brown had not yet been completed as ordered by the Hon. Chief Justice Nathan L. Hecht on February 8, 2024. There was no notice to Movants of the final denial in that hearing until February 12, 2024, at 9:09 a.m. when it was filed into the Research Texas Record, date and time stamped by the District Clerk of Court. No Intentional or Conscious Indifference by Petitioner Petitioner did not receive proper notice of hearing because the Status Hearing for the Bench Trial was held on January 26, 2024, during a period that Trial Court Judge was restricted from taking further action on this matter, the notice provided for the Trial Date is NULL and VOID. Opposing Counsel issued multiple notices for February 13, 2024, all for the same time: (1) Amended Notice of Trial Setting on 1/26/24 at 12:51 PM; (2) Notice of Pretrial Conference Hearing 1/26/24; (3) Notice of Hearing (Respondent’s Motion to Deposit Funds into Court Registry) 1/26/24 at 4:46 p.m. AND (4) Second Amended Notice of Trial Setting 1/29/24 at 9:51 p.m. without an attendant order. 2|Page a Movants have every intention to defend their case before the Trial Court if and when served with proper notice while Judge Janet B. Heppard has unrestricted authority to proceed with hearings. Outstanding Issues Before the Court Petitioner’s Emergency Motion for Judicial Notice of constitutional issues and Request for Injunctive relief were not heard or rescheduled for hearing during the pendency of the case, after the January 23, 2024, hearing was not held during a restriction on judicial actions in the case. Judge Janet B. Heppard scheduled that hearing after stating in the January 5, 2024, Status Hearing that she needed time to review the motion. The Court has not yet ruled on that motion although it was resubmitted by Petitioner for judicial notice and ruling by Petitioner on January 23, 2024. Petitioner’s motions for Proposed Order of Compliance for Emergency Notice of Failure to Comply with Cessation of Orders and other Court actions while Recusal is Pending was filed on January 30, 2024, but never heard. Impermissible and Illegal Award of Co-Respondent’s Real Estate to Respondent Judge Janet B. Heppard, relying solely on Respondent’s testimony, deemed Co- respondent’s homestead property as 100% marital property in a glaring abuse of discretion and fundamental error of law. Then the real estate purchase by movant Karen Oluma was impermissibly voided by Judge Janet B. Heppard as a result of her illegal designation of 3914 Morning Creek 3|Page Court as 100% marital property. Respondent misrepresented the purchase of the real estate by Co-respondent as a transfer of property between Petitioner and Co-respondent, in absolute contradiction to Texas Business and case law. The property at the above address was the property of Mountain High Local Services, LLC when it was purchased by Co-Respondent from that LLC. Texas Property and case law hold that: “A limited-liability company is a separate legal entity, and property owned by such a company is neither the community property nor the separate property of its members,” see: Tex. Bus. Org. Code Ann. § 101.106(a)-(a-1); Mandell v. Mandell, 310 S.W.3d 531 539 (Tex. App.-Fort Worth 2010, pet. denied); cf. McKnight v. McKnight, 543 S.W.2d 863, 867 (Tex. 1976) (holding same for specific assets owned by partnership) Tex. Bus. Org. Code Ann. § 101.106(b); “A member of a limited liability company or an assignee ofa membership interest in a limited liability company does not have an interest in any specific property of the company.” The real estate property awarded to the Respondent was never held in the name of the Petitioner or in the name of the Respondent and because it was the property of the LLC as demonstrated in the Respondent’s own evidence, it was not a homestead property. The Respondent’s claims of the property being her homestead are wholly false and without merit and were presented as such to the Court. The Court had insufficient evidence to rule the property as marital property at all and therefore the award to the Respondent was a fundamental error in law and an abuse of judicial discretion. 4|Page Impermissible, Illegal and Erroneous Award of Petitioner’s Separate Property to Respondent The only vehicle in Petitioner’s possession was awarded to Respondent by the Judge who operated without sufficient evidence in making that award. None of the other vehicles listed under possession of Petitioner are titled in his name. None of the other automobiles, motorcycles, trailers or RV’s listed under the Petitioner’s assets are titled to the Petitioner. The only vehicle in Petitioner’s control is titled with the finance company. The note on the vehicle is held by both Petitioner and Co-respondent who co- financed the vehicle: 2022 BMS 530i motor vehicle} A53BHO3NCH63875. Therefore the vehicle is separate property, not community property and this was another illegal award of property by Judge Janet B. Heppard to Respondent. Orders are Unconstitutional and Unsupported The Court infringed on Petitioner’s constitutional rights and the minor child’s concomitant fundamental rights by the restriction of possession of and access to the minor child. Petitioner is a fit parent as defined by the Supreme Court and by the State of Texas and, absent a separate state fitness hearing that found him unfit, the restrictions and conditions imposed by the Court in this Final Divorce Decree are unconstitutional and unsupported. Order for drug test is unconstitutional invasion of privacy and unsupported by factual evidence. 5|Page The order for drug test is not specific as to how the drug test would be passed. Restrictions related to travel to Ethiopia are without basis in fact or merit. Supervised visitation is absent a state finding that Petitioner is an unfit parent. All orders related to the supervised visitation are unsupported in the evidence. Order authorizing entry to any location where the minor child can be found for all state and local law enforcement agencies as well as private agencies employed by Maite Oluma is unconstitutional and unenforceable. Finding that Petitioner’s monthly earnings are currently $12,000 per month is unsupported by fact. Finding that Petitioner is intentionally underemployed is factually incorrect and Petitioner has a chronic disability that limits his endurance and ability to have gainful employment as determined by the Social Security Department. Finding that Petitioner has a criminal history and violating court orders is factually incorrect. Finding that Petitioner has a history of domestic violence is factually incorrect and. unsupported. Allegation/finding that Petitioner has previously threatened to take child away from Maite L. Oluma is NOT accurate or factually supported Extended orders for child support beyond the child’s age of eighteen is unsupported. Orders for reimbursement of attorney’s fees and for exemplary damages are not supported. Orders for bond and for purchase of life insurance is unsupported 6|Page Orders for the child support orders to continue for Petitioner’s estate after his death and to include all pensions, 401K’s etc. are unsupported Withhold of child support is unsupported in all its specifications. Appointment of Maite L. Oluma as sole managing conservator with child living outside Texas without geographic restrictions is contrary to Texas public policy. Appointment of Petitioner as possessory conservator is unconstitutional. A New Trial in this Case is Necessary A new trial is necessary in this case to prevent a manifest miscarriage of justice in the terms of parental custody awarded by this Court absent a finding of a state fitness hearing that found the Petitioner an unfit parent. The restrictive custody terms thrust upon Petitioner’s absent due process are punitive and this Court has engaged in quasi-criminal behavior in those rulings. The terms of Petitioner’s parental custody are unconstitutional. Infringement on and deprivation of constitutional rights causes irreparable injury to the individual and is a crime under the color of law: U.S.C. Title 18, Section 242. Movants Have Credible and Meritorious Defenses to the Division of Property and Custody Decisions Taken in the Default Divorce Decree Movants individually have evidence-based defenses to the orders rendered in this case. Movants requested a copy of the trial proceedings from the court reporter on or about 4:45 p.m. on February 13, 2024, without response to their request at the time of this 7|Page filing. Movants file this motion under extreme duress from Attorney Mary Beth Cameron who is threatening, and unlawfully harassing Movants immediately and illegally enforce orders in contravention of Texas Family Code. Movants are filing this motion under the threat of home invasion by the Respondent who has attempted to weaponize the local Fulshear Police Department to gain entry into the home without following the due process required by the courts and Texas Law. Movants reserve the right to amend this motion as necessary due to the extreme duress and timeline under which it is being filed. Movants reserve the right to pursue such relief in appeals or any other avenue that is afforded to them in law. Movants reserve the right to amend this motion and to correct any errors or omissions made under extreme duress. Prayer Movants pray the court grant a new trial in this case as is just and right by law. 8|Page Respectfully Submitted, BY: Davik Obama Jere DavidOluma 3914 Morning Creek Court Fulshear, TX 77441 612-412-7090 jeremyoluma@gmail.com Petitioner Pro Se a BY: Aas — Obama Karen Esther Oluma 3914 Morning Creek Court Fulshear, TX 77441 612-402-7848 Certificate of Service I certify that a true copy of the foregoing was served in accordance with rule 21a of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure on the following on: February 14, 2024. Mary Beth Cameron Attorney of record for Respondent, by electronic filing manager. David Obuma Jeremy David Oluma Petitioner Pro Se 9|Page NOTICE: THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS SENSITIVE DATA NO. 22-DCV-293652 IN THE MATTER OF IN THE DISTRICT COURT THE MARRIAGE OF JEREMY DAVID OLUMA AND MAITE L. OLUMA 387™ JUDICIAL DISTRICT AND IN THE INTEREST OF T.0.0., § A CHILD § FORT BEND COUNTY, TEXAS AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL AFFIDAVIT Petitioner, Jeremy David Oluma, writes this affidavit base on personal knowledge and facts in support of the request for a new trial in the above captioned case, after the default judgment rendered in Trial on February 13, 2024, by Judge Janet B. Heppard. lam filing this motion immediately after receiving my first official notice of the signed default judgment in Final Divorce Decree by Attorney Mary Beth Cameron at 3:05 p.m. February 14, 2024, via eFile. I have evidence-based defenses to each of the orders rendered in this case but I did not receive proper notice of hearing and I have requested copy of the trial proceedings from the court reporter Minne Cadena by email at 4:55 p.m. on February 13, 2024. At the time of this writing I have received no response to my request. I did not receive adequate notice of a final trial for divorce, and I had filed multiple motions to the Court that were never addressed, including one filed initially on January 4, 2024, for an Emergency Hearing for Judicial notice and Injunctive Relief. I have every intention to defend my case before the Trial Court. 1|Page That filing was due "aiiialillilliaiiniiasaiatiiiiaiiiia to abuse at the hands of his mother while in her care in Utah. He has since divulged even more details of the abuse including her hitting him, so often he can’t count the times, getting a bloody nose, he has a scar on his right side where she cut him with a kitchen utensil and her daily threats that he will never see his dad again. Now he’s reporting she’s been threatening to kill me, my mother and him if he ever tells her “secrets. Tam filing this affidavit under extreme duress from Attorney Mary Beth Cameron who is threatening, and unlawfully harassing me and Co-Respondent, my mother Karen Oluma. Attorney Cameron sent with her first official notice to me of the Final Divorce Decree her demand for immediate and illegal compliance of orders for the awards of property in the Decree and immediate surrender of our minor child in contravention of Texas Family Code. See Attached Exhibit A Official Legal Notice The trial court may not render an order to assist in the implementation of or to clarify the property division made or approved in the decree before the 30th day after the date the final judgment is signed. If a timely motion for new trial or to vacate, modify, correct, or reform the decree is filed, the trial court may not render an order to assist in the implementation of or to clarify the property division made or approved in the decree before the 30th day after the date the order overruling the motion is signed or the motion is overruled by operation of law. Muniment of property is unenforceable based on the language of the Final Divorce Decree and the Decree itself states: “If any part of this decree violates the law, that portion shall be deemed deleted...” Page 11 of 49, Final Divorce Decree, referenced and hereby incorporated. Attorney Cameron harassed and threatened movants as follows in her letter that accompanied the Notice of Findal Divorce Decree: “Furthermore, the property located at 3914 Morning Creek Court, Fulshear, Texas was 100% awarded to Maite in the divorce. As a courtesy, we will allow y’all a few days to remove your belongings to surrender the house. Please communicate with us on what y’all need to move out so we can graciously offer you that time.” 2|Page 1 am filing this affidavit under the threat of home invasion and fear for my life, our son’s life and my a s - ™ to threats made by the Respondent, Maite L. Oluma, who has attempted to weaponize the local Fulshear Police Department to gain entry into the home without following the due process required by the courts and Texas Law. This morning Respondent, Maite L. Oluma, came to the residence accompanied by to at ee 2ccompanied by Fulshear Police units twice and on the second visit she destroyed property while attempting to gain illegal entry into the residence. The Fulshear Police Department did not announce as Police and stood by while Maite L. Oluma attempted to illegally enter the house and I witnessed these actions by security camera footage. Neighbors who witnessed the attempted break-in as well as the destruction of property notified Petitioner and one neighbor also reported that Respondent knocked on their door harassing them and accusing them of “helping” Petitioner. Weaponization of the Police Department for unlawful purposes is illegal and the crime will be reported to the Fulshear Police Department. When she attempted to forcibly enter the residence, Co-respondent and homeowner Karen Oluma, was notified on by security cameras of the activity and called 911 for assistance to report the attempted illegal entry into the residence. The only vehicle I own is the 2022 BMW 530i that is separate property. The residence at 3914 Morning Creek Court is my mother’s home that was purchased from the LLC that owned the home. 3|Page "My name is Jeremy David Oluma (First) (Middle) Last) My date of birth ; and my address is ee (Street) (City) (State) (Zip Code) and a I declare under penalty of (Country) perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in FORT BEND County, State of TEXAS, on the 14™ day of,February 2024 (Month) (Year) David Oluuma clarant" 4|P agge 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. Envelope ID: 84528791 Filing Code Desc: Filing Description Status en as of 2/15/2024 9:46 for New Trial ew Trial AM CST Associated Case Party: JeremyDavidOluma Name BarNumber | Email TimestampSubmitted | Status Randi Parrish randi@goodnightlaw.com | 2/14/2024 8:22:20 PM | SENT Jeremy Oluma jeremyoluma@gmail.com | 2/14/2024 8:22:20 PM | SENT Associated Case Party: Maite Oluma Name BarNumber | Email TimestampSubmitted | Status Mary Cameron | 24069458 admin@goodnightlaw.com | 2/14/2024 8:22:20 PM | SENT Associated Case Party: Karen Oluma Name BarNumber | Email TimestampSubmitted | Status Karen EstherOluma Mokula4@gmail.com | 2/14/2024 8:22:20 PM | SENT Tex. R. Civ. P. 329b Rule 329b - Time for Filing Motions The following rules shall be applicable to motions for new trial and motions to modify, correct, or reform judgments (other than motions to correct the record under Rule 316) in all district and county courts: (a) A motion for new trial, if filed, shall be filed prior to or within thirty days after the judgment or other order complained of is signed. (b) One or more amended motions for new trial may be filed without leave of court before any preceding motion for new trial filed by the movant is overruled and within thirty days after the judgment or other order complained of is signed. (c) In the event an original or amended motion for new trial or a motion to modify, correct or reform a judgment is not determined by written order signed within seventy-five days after the judgment was signed, it shall be considered overruled by operation of law on expiration of that period. (d) The trial court, regardless of whether an appeal has been perfected, has plenary power to grant a new trial or to vacate, modify, correct, or reform the judgment within thirty days after the judgment is signed. (e) Ifa motion for new trial is timely filed by any party, the trial court, regardless of whether an appeal has been perfected, has plenary power to grant a new trial or to vacate, modify, correct, or reform the judgment until thirty days after all such timely-filed motions are overruled, either by a written and signed order or by operation of law, whichever occurs first. (f) On expiration of the time within which the trial court has plenary power, a judgment cannot be set aside by the trial court except by bill of review for sufficient cause, filed within the time allowed by law; provided that the court may at any time correct a clerical error in the record of a judgment and render judgment nunc pro tunc under Rule 316, and may also sign an order declaring a previous judgment or order to be void because signed after the court's plenary power had expired. (g) A motion to modify, correct, or reform a judgment (as distinguished from motion to correct the record ofa judgment under Rule 316), if filed, shall be filed and determined within the time prescribed by this rule for a motion for new trial and shall extend the trial court's plenary power and the time for perfecting an appeal in the same manner as a motion for new trial. Each such motion shall be in writing and signed by the party or his attorney and shall specify the respects in which the judgment should be modified, corrected, or reformed. The overruling of such a motion shall not preclude the filing ofa motion for new trial, nor shall the overruling ofa motion for new trial preclude the filing ofa motion to modify, correct, or reform. (h) Ifa judgment is modified, corrected or reformed in any respect, the time for appeal shall run from the time the modified, corrected, or reformed judgment is signed, but ifa correction is made pursuant to Rule 316 after expiration of the period of plenary power casetext Part of Thomeon Reuters Rule 329b - Time for Filing Motions Tex. R. Civ. P. 329b provided by this rule, no complaint shall