On July 09, 2019 a
Motion-Secondary
was filed
involving a dispute between
American Bankers Insurance Company Of Florida,
Avila, Dr. Nathaniel,
Bruning, Trey,
Central Mutual Insurance A S O Amanda Thier,
Crawford, Maxine,
Dallas Tattoo Llc,
Daniels, Brenesha,
Dyer, Spencer,
Fahmy, Dylan,
Fahmy, Kahlil,
Finch, Jeremy,
Flores, Mason,
Garrison Insurance Company,
Gomez, Joshua,
Goulbourne, Devaughn,
Griffin, Antonio,
Hall, Stephanie,
Hamamci, Edis,
Hurst, Joseph,
James, Chelsey,
Janes, Chesea,
Kearney, Shawn,
Kerlee, Kacie,
Kirkland, Patrick,
Kirkland, Teresa,
Lee, Tyra,
Le, Vykim,
Marshall, Tonian,
Martinelli, Elena,
Miller, Laura,
Muirhead, Clay,
Page, Brijanae,
Peacock, Cody,
Pittman, Justin,
Ranchers And Farmers Mutual Insurance Company,
Rattler, Tierney,
Roberts, Abbey,
Sawatski, Rebecca,
Smith, Mikos,
Stoll, Amanda,
United Services Automobile Association,
Usaa General Indemnity Company,
Washington, Ebony,
Watson, Trevor,
Williams, Michele,
Wint, Oraine,
and
Bigge Crane And Rigging, Co.,
Crocker Crane Rentals, L.P,,
Elan Dallas City Lights Gp, Llc,
Elan Dallas City Lights Owner, Lp,
Gabriella Nationwide Llc,
Gabriella Tower Contractor Series,
Gabriella Tower, Llc,
Greystar Development And Construction, Lp,
Greystar Development & Construction, Lp,
Greystar Development & Construction, L.P. - Gabriella Tower Contractor Series,
Gru Comedil, S.R.L.,
Gru Comedil, S.R.L,
Hilty, Casey "Robert",
Housley Communications, Inc. D B A The Housley Group,
Meeks+Partners, Co.,
Meeks + Partners, Co.,
Rcd Equipment, L.L.C. D B A Crocker Crane,
Rcd Equipment, Llc D B A Crocker Crane,
Terex Corporation,
Terex Usa, Llc,
Ultimate Crane Services, Llc,
for DAMAGES (NON COLLISION)
in the District Court of Dallas County.
Preview
FILED
7/6/2023 9:22 AM
JOHN F. WARREN
COUNTY CLERK
DALLAS COUNTY
CAUSE NO. CC-19-04006-B
Mason Flores, Antonio Griffin, Tyra Lee, COUNTY COURT AT LAW
Tonian Marshall, and Tierney Rattler,
Individually, And As Next Friend of yy
Rattler,
Plaintiffs,
David Rufila
Intervenor,
NO. 2
Bigge Crane and Rigging, Greystar
Development & Construction, LP,
Gabriella Tower, LLC, Gabriella Nationwide,
LLC, and Meeks + Partners, Co.,
Defendants. § DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS
Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Supplemental Brief in Support of Motion to
Strike Jonathan H. Cox, Troy J. Pradia, and The Cox Pradia Law
Firm, PLLC’s Petition in Intervention
I
Summary of Argument
There are three supplemental reasons why Plaintiffs’ Motion to Strike Intervenors’
Petition in Intervention should be granted.
First, Intervenors filed Jonathan Cox’s affidavit, which discloses confidential and
privileged information, without client consent and to the disadvantage of their former
client, Michele Williams. This violates Rule 1.05(b)(3) of the Texas Disciplinary Rules of
Professional Conduct, and their continuing fiduciary duty to safeguard client confidences.
Second, despite the fact that the attorney-client file belongs exclusively to the client,
and despite multiple requests for that production, Intervenors have not produced Michele
Williams’ attorney-client file. This is yet another ethical violation.
Finally, contrary to Rule 1.04(f)(2)(i)-(ii) of the Texas Disciplinary Rules of
Professional Conduct, Intervenors, in 2019, apparently referred Michele Williams’ case to
a different law firm without the client consenting to a joint fee-sharing agreement with this
new firm. Where, as here, the contingency contract does not disclose the identity of the
firm accepting the referral and the division of fees and labor amongst both firms—and
when the client fails to consent in writing thereto- the contingency contract is void and
unenforceable. See Cokinos, Bosien & Young v. Moore, 2020 WL 549066, at *3-6 (Tex.
App.—Dallas Feb. 4, 2020, no pet.); see also Garcia-Vela, P.C. v. Jolly, 2023 WL
2995973, at *4-6 (Tex. App.—San Antonio, April 19, 2023, no pet.).
Because there have already been three serious and unexcused ethical violations, the
equities are in favor of their former client, Michele Williams, and against Intervenors. The
fact that Intervenors are wrongfully harming their former client in the very dispute that
created the prior representation—while this dispute is still unresolved and remains
pending—underscores the point that this is the inappropriate forum. This Court should
grant Plaintiffs’ Motion to Strike the Intervention.
I.
Argument & Authoritie:
As a supplement to Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Motion to Strike Jonathan H. Cox, Troy
J. Pradia, and The Cox Pradia Law Firm’s (collectively “Intervenors”) Plea in Intervention,
there are three additional reasons why Plaintiffs’ Motion should be granted.
A.
Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Supplemental Briefin Support of Motion to Strike Intervention - Page 2
Intervenors Filed Confidential and Privileged
Information without Client Consent
First, under Rule 1.05(b)(3) of the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional
Conduct, a lawyer cannot “[u]se confidential information of a former client to the
disadvantage of the former client after the representation is concluded unless the former
client consents after consultation...” TEX. Disc. R. PROF. CONDUCT 1.05(b)(3). Indeed,
lawyers have a continuing fiduciary duty—that survives the termination of the attorney-
client representation—to protect confidential information and to prevent its disclosure.
See, e.g., Pfeiffer v. Ajamie PLLC, 469 F.Supp.3d 752, 762 (S.D. Tex. 2019) (“The duty of
loyalty to the client, with which the duty of confidentiality is inherently intertwined, is one
of the basic tenets of the legal profession. These duties survive termination of the attorney-
client relationship.”) [citations and internal quotations omitted]; see also In re Liebbe, 2019
WL 1416637, at *4 (Tex. App.—Tyler Mar. 29, 2019, orig. proceeding) (“an attorney
generally owes a former client a continuing duty to not reveal to third parties confidential
client information without the client’s express or implicit permission.”) [quotations
omitted].
Texas courts have stated that, “virtually any information relating to a case should
be considered confidential [under Rule 1.05].” See Phoenix Founders, Inc. v. Marshall,
887 S.W.2d 831, 834 (Tex. 1994); Pollard v. Merkel, 114 S.W.3d 695, 700 (Tex. App
Dallas 2003, pet. denied) (“Moreover, virtually any information relating to a case should
be considered confidential: [Texas Rule 1.05] define[s] ‘confidential information’ to
encompass even unprivileged client information.”); accord Honorable James E. Kinkeade,
The Top Ten Reasons Clients File Grievances Against their Lawyers, 5 TEX. WESLEYAN
Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Supplemental Briefin Support of Motion to Strike Intervention - Page 3
L. REV. 35, 52 (1998) (“The term ‘confidential information’ as used by [Texas Rule 1.05]
includes all information gained during, prior to, or after the course of representation.”)
[citations omitted].
In fact, in In re Liebbe supra, the Tyler court of appeals held in the appeal of a
guardianship proceeding that, even though the former client had testified that he was
married, and despite the fact that his marital status was publicly available, his former
lawyer’s disclosure that his former client was married was “confidential” information that
was improperly disclosed, warranting disqualification. See In re Liebbe, 2019 WL
1416637, at *4-5.
In the case at bar, Jonathan Cox, who is Michele Williams’ former attorney,
executed an affidavit that was filed in support of Intervenors’ Application for a Writ of
Garnishment in this case. Ex. “A.” Contrary to Rule 1.05(b)(3), in that wrongfully filed
affidavit, Intervenors disclose Michele Williams’ confidential and privileged information
without client consent. Furthermore, Intervenors did so in a way specifically designed to
disadvantage their former client in the very case that forms the subject matter of that prior
representation. The improperly filed affidavit states in pertinent part as follows:
Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Supplemental Briefin Support of Motion to Strike Intervention - Page 4
On June 9, 2019, I was contacted by Michele Williams whom I had
known for approximately 5 years. Ms. Williams described the crane
collapse accident that had caused the death of her daughter and
seriously injured several other people. She asked me for legal advice
and asked if I would represent her and her daughter’s estate. After
meeting with Ms. Williams and after explaining the terms, conditions,
and obligations of my representation, she signed my firm’s contract of
employment. The contract that Ms. Williams signed is attached to and
incorporated in this affidavit as Exhibit “A-1.”
After concluding my preliminary investigation of the facts, I began
drafting the lawsuit to be filed. Several weeks after I had been retained,
I learned that Ms. Williams had signed a contract of employment with
the firm, Arnold & Itkin. Ms. Williams sent me a letter stating that she
had received information suggesting that I did not have the experience
necessary to provide competent representation. The only specific
reason provided by Ms. Williams for terminating my representation was
that I or my staff had misspelled her first name on one occasion, and it
seemed to be taking too long to file suit.
See Ex. “A” (J 1, 3) (pp. 10-11).
Needless to say, the facts set forth in this affidavit contain confidential and
privileged communications. including conversations between lawyer and client for the
Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Supplemental Briefin Support of Motion to Strike Intervention - Page 5
purpose of providing legal advice—without the former client’s consent.
Notably, Michele Williams has not sued Intervenors; and, consequently, there has
been neither an express nor an implicit waiver of either her privilege with her former
lawyers or her right to maintain confidentiality.
Intervenors wrongful use of confidential and privileged information against their
former client underscores the point that this forum is being used in an unlawful and
improper way. This alone should warrant striking Intervenors’ Petition in Intervention.
B
Intervenors have Not Produced the Attorney-Client
File Despite Repeated Requests
Second, the attorney-client file is “property” that belongs exclusively to the client.
See Resolution Trust Corp. v. H---, 28 F.R.D. 647, 649 (N.D. Tex. 1989); see also In re
Grand Jury Proceedings, 727 F.2d 941, 944-45 (10th Cir. 1984). Furthermore, the “entire
contents” of the attorney-client file belong to the client. See Resolution Trust Corp., 28
F.R.D. at 649. The attorney-client file must be transferred to the client upon request. See
Professional Ethics Committee Opinion No. 627 (April 2013); see also Professional Ethics
Committee Opinion No. 657 (May 2016). In Opinion No. 657, the Professional Ethics
Committee stated:
[D]ocuments, papers, and other information received from a client or
received or generated in the course of representing the client, including
work product and notes, are the property of the client. When a lawyer
receives a request for those materials from a former client, the lawyer
must make those materials available for delivery to the former client...
See Professional Ethics Committee Opinion No. 657 (May 2016) (emphasis added).
In the case at bar, Michele Williams has made no less than three written requests
Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Supplemental Briefin Support of Motion to Strike Intervention - Page 6
for her attorney-client file from Intervenors. One such request was made as long ago as
2019. To date, no attorney-client file has been produced.
On the one hand, Intervenors are wrongfully disclosing privileged and confidential
information about their former client; yet, on the other hand, Intervenors have, so far,
refused to produce the attorney-client file to their former client, which would contain this
very confidential and sensitive information.
Because Intervenors have breached their ethical obligation to produce the attorney-
client file, which, if it had been produced, would undoubtedly undermine any interest
Intervenors claim they have in this proceeding, Plaintiffs’ Motion to Strike the Intervention
should be granted.
Cc.
Intervenors Apparently Gave Williams’ Attorney-Client
File to a Firm that Williams Never Retained
Finally, under Rule 1.04(f)(2)(i)-(ii) of the Texas Disciplinary Rules of
Professional Conduct, a joint fee-sharing agreement that is not signed by the client which
fully discloses each firm and how they will be compensated—is void and unenforceable.
See Cokinos, Bosien & Young v. Moore, 2020 WL 549066, at *3-6 (Tex. App.—Dallas
Feb. 4, 2020, no pet.); see also Garcia-Vela, P.C. v. Jolly, 2023 WL 2995973, at *4-6 (Tex.
App.—San Antonio, April 19, 2023, no pet.).
Here, through outside counsel, Intervenors have told Williams that they gave her
attorney-client file, back in 2019, to a different personal injury law firm and it was this
referral that continues to delay the production of the attorney-client file. The client—
Michele Williams—never consented to the retention of this other firm (Abraham Watkins).
Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Supplemental Briefin Support of Motion to Strike Intervention - Page 7
In fact, the very contingency contract that Intervenors sue upon does not disclose any of
the lawyers at this other law firm nor does it disclose how any fee would be divided, in the
event of a recovery.
Because Michele Williams did not sign a fee-sharing agreement that identifies and
discloses the law firm who Intervenors referred her case to, the contingency contract that
is the basis of the intervention is void and unenforceable. Plaintiffs’ Motion to Strike the
Intervention should be granted.
Ti.
Conclusion
In conclusion, this Court should strike Jonathan H. Cox, Troy J. Pradia, and the
Cox Pradia Law Firm, PLLC’s Petition in Intervention.
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiffs respectfully pray that
this Court strike the Original Petition in Intervention filed by Jonathan H. Cox, Troy J.
Pradia, and the Cox Pradia Law Firm, PLLC; or, in the alternative, sever the Plea in
Intervention and Consolidate it with Cause Number CC-23-03025-B; and Plaintiffs further
request all such other relief whether in law or in equity upon which they may show
themselves justly entitled.
Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Supplemental Briefin Support of Motion to Strike Intervention - Page 8
Respectfully submitted,
Lyons & Simmons, LLP
Weibull? poe
Michael P. Lyons
State Bar No. 24013074
mlyons@lyons-simmons.com
Christopher J. Simmons
State Bar No. 24058796
csimmons@lyons-simmons.com
2101 Cedar Springs Rd, Suite 1900
Dallas, Texas 75201
(214) 665-6900 (t)
(214) 665-6950 (f)
-and-
ARNOLD & ITKIN, LLP
/s/ Jason A. Itkin
Jason A. Itkin
Texas State Bar No. 24032461
Cory D. Itkin
Texas State Bar No. 24050808
Alexandra F. Poulson
Texas State Bar No. 24130390
6009 Memorial Drive
Houston, Texas 77007
Telephone: (713) 222-3800
Facsimile: (713) 222-3850
e-service@arnolditkin.com
jitkin@arnolditkin.com
citkin@arnolditkin.com
apoulson@arnolditkin.com
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS
Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Supplemental Briefin Support of Motion to Strike Intervention - Page 9
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned hereby certifies that a true and correct copy of the foregoing
instrument was served on all counsel of record pursuant to the Texas Rules of Civil
Procedure on July 6, 2023.
/s/ Jason A. Itkin
Jason A, Itkin
Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Supplemental Briefin Support of Motion to Strike Intervention - Page 10
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.
Leticia Saavedra on behalf of Jason Itkin
Bar No. 24032461
Isaavedra@arnolditkin.com
Envelope ID: 77237389
Filing Code Description: Ody - Brief Filed
Filing Description: PLAINTIFFS CONSOLIDATED SUPPLEMENTAL
BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE JONATHAN H COX
TROY J PRADIA AND THE COX PRADIA LAW FIRM PLLC PETITION IN
INTERVENTION
Status as of 7/6/2023 1:38 PM CST
Associated Case Party: BIGGE CRANE AND RIGGING, CO.
Name BarNumber | Email TimestampSubmitted Status
Darrell L.Barger dbarger@hartlinebarger.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Brian Rawson brawson@hartlinebarger.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Clayton J.Callen clayton.callen@bowmanandbrooke.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Judy Vice jvice@hartlinebarger.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Courtney M.Kenisky courtney.kenisky@bowmanandbrooke.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Jessica Z.Barger barger@wrightclosebarger.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
R. Russell Hollenbeck hollenbeck@wrightclosebarger.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Michael Adams-Hurta hurta@wrightclosebarger.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Case Contacts
Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status
Matt Last mlast@cobbmartinez.com 7/16/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Jeff Nicodemus jnicodemus@cobbmartinez.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Justin Roy jroy@cobbmartinez.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
John HolmanBarr jbarr@bbarr.com 7/16/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Nina Cortell nina.cortell@haynesboone.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Ben Mesches ben.mesches@haynesboone.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Christopher J.Simmons csimmons@lyons-simmons.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Clifford Harrison charrison@munsch.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Justin KRatley jratley@munsch.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
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.
Leticia Saavedra on behalf of Jason Itkin
Bar No. 24032461
lsaavedra@arnolditkin.com
Envelope ID: 77237389
Filing Code Description: Ody - Brief Filed
Filing Description: PLAINTIFFS CONSOLIDATED SUPPLEMENTAL
BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE JONATHAN H COX
TROY J PRADIA AND THE COX PRADIA LAW FIRM PLLC PETITION IN
INTERVENTION
Status as of 7/6/2023 1:38 PM CST
Case Contacts
Nathan Vrazel nvrazel@munsch.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
L. DarleneMitchell dmitchell@bbarr.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Katherine Compton 4652100 katherine.compton@steptoe-johnson.com 7/16/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Sarnie ARandle Jr SAR@RandleLaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Fernando P.Arias fred.arias@fletcherfarley.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Jeffrey MTillotson jtillotson@tillotsonilaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Jonathan RPatton jpatton@tillotsonlaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Joseph Alrrobali airrobali@tillotsonlaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Mark D.Hardy, Jr. dj.hardy@fletcherfarley.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Lisa Dykes lisa@montgomeryfirm.com 7/16/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Jason A. Itkin jaiteam@arnolditkin.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
JASON A.ITKIN e-service@arnolditkin.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
JASON A.ITKIN jitkin@arnolditkin.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Deborah Stick deborah.stick@fletcherfarley.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Abby Golman abby.golman@fletcherfarley.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Hardin Ramey hramey@rameylawfirm.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Michael P.Lyons mlyons@lyons-simmons.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Oscar Addis OAddis@fulcolaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Brian PLauten blauten@brianlauten.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Courtney GBowline cbowline@brianlauten.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Michelle Logan mlogan@brianlauten.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
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.
Leticia Saavedra on behalf of Jason Itkin
Bar No. 24032461
lsaavedra@arnolditkin.com
Envelope ID: 77237389
Filing Code Description: Ody - Brief Filed
Filing Description: PLAINTIFFS CONSOLIDATED SUPPLEMENTAL
BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE JONATHAN H COX
TROY J PRADIA AND THE COX PRADIA LAW FIRM PLLC PETITION IN
INTERVENTION
Status as of 7/6/2023 1:38 PM CST
Case Contacts
Zach Mayer zmayer@mayerllp.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Edward Johnson ejohnson@mayerllp.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Kira Lytle klytle@tillotsonlaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Irma Prado Irma.P@glasheenlaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
JASON A.ITKIN jitkin@arnolditkin.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
JOHNATHAN CCLARK efile jon.clark@gvilaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
MUHAMMAD S.AZIZ maziz@awtxlaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
PATTI KILGORE pkilgore@foley.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Mary ChristianBarr mebarr@bbarr.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
JASON A.ITKIN jaiteam@arnolditkin.com 7/16/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Jonathan H.Cox jhc@coxpradialaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Troy J.Pradia tjp@coxpradialaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Jeffrey Fultz jfultz@taylorbook.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Sean Juarez sjuarez@taylorbook.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Jeremy Mckey eservicejmckeylawfirm@gmail.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Craig Thomas Craig@mckeylawfirm.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Aaron Morin Aaron@mckeylawfirm.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Winston B.Line winston@linelawfirm.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Wesley Nute wesley@nutelaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Hardin R.Ramey hramey@rameylawfirm.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
RYAN MPARKS rparks@lafitteparks.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
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.
Leticia Saavedra on behalf of Jason Itkin
Bar No. 24032461
lsaavedra@arnolditkin.com
Envelope ID: 77237389
Filing Code Description: Ody - Brief Filed
Filing Description: PLAINTIFFS CONSOLIDATED SUPPLEMENTAL
BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE JONATHAN H COX
TROY J PRADIA AND THE COX PRADIA LAW FIRM PLLC PETITION IN
INTERVENTION
Status as of 7/6/2023 1:38 PM CST
Case Contacts
Teresa Valcoviak Teresa.Valcoviak@fletcherfarley.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
CHARLES WATERBURY charles@waterburylawpc.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Yajaira Ramirez yramirez@bbarr.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Jeanne Thompson jeanne@atwoodmccall.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Michael Lilley michael.lilley@lewisbrisbois.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM ERROR
Sean Juarez SJuarez@fulcolaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM ERROR
Ryan S.MacLeod tmacleod@arnolditkin.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM ERROR
Jeffrey P.Fultz JFultz@FulCoLaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM ERROR
Doug Heuvel dheuvel@cstriallaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Cory I.Itkin jaiteam@arnolditkin.com 7/16/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Marie Cheung-Truslow marie@cheungtruslowlaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Clint McCord clint@cheungtruslowlaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
John Vanover john.vanover@lewisbrisbois.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Enrique Ramirez eramirez@tillotsonlaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Benjamin LNabors bnabors@tillotsonlaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Christopher C.White chris.white@lewisbrisbois.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM ERROR
Jeanette Adams jeanette.adams@lewisbrisbois.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM ERROR
Yolanda White yolanda.white@lewisbrisbois.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
wendy swartzell wendy.swartzell@fletcherfarley.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Seth MAnderson seth@anderson-cummings.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Carolyn SBurton carolyn@anderson-cummings.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
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.
Leticia Saavedra on behalf of Jason Itkin
Bar No. 24032461
lsaavedra@arnolditkin.com
Envelope ID: 77237389
Filing Code Description: Ody - Brief Filed
Filing Description: PLAINTIFFS CONSOLIDATED SUPPLEMENTAL
BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE JONATHAN H COX
TROY J PRADIA AND THE COX PRADIA LAW FIRM PLLC PETITION IN
INTERVENTION
Status as of 7/6/2023 1:38 PM CST
Case Contacts
Lorie Taylor Itaylor@mayerllp.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Suzanne Le Blanc sleblanc@lyons-simmons.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Samantha Demuren sdemuren@arnolditkin.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Anita Malone records@lexitaslegal.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Andrew R.Gould agould@arnolditkin.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Anita Malone records@lexitaslegal.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Anita Malone records@lexitaslegal.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Lauren Lopez llopez@tillotsonlaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Mollie Mallory mmallory@tillotsonlaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Shameya McGill smcgill@bbarr.com 7/16/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Alecia Tipton alecia.tipton@haynesboone.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Nathaniel Buchheit nbuchheit@tillotsonilaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Mark Pickering mpickering@donatobrown.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Aaron M.Pool apool@donatobrown.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Anne Johnson ajohnson@tillotsonlaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Kelli Bills kbills@tillotsonlaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
LBBS Eservice Dal.E-Storage@lewisbrisbois.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Katherine Compton katherine.compton@steptoe-johnson.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Christopher White chris.white@steptoe-johnson.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Yolanda White yolanda.white@steptoe-johnson.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Terre Meza terre.meza@steptoe-johnson.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
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.
Leticia Saavedra on behalf of Jason Itkin
Bar No. 24032461
lsaavedra@arnolditkin.com
Envelope ID: 77237389
Filing Code Description: Ody - Brief Filed
Filing Description: PLAINTIFFS CONSOLIDATED SUPPLEMENTAL
BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE JONATHAN H COX
TROY J PRADIA AND THE COX PRADIA LAW FIRM PLLC PETITION IN
INTERVENTION
Status as of 7/6/2023 1:38 PM CST
Case Contacts
Jeanette Adams jeanette.adams@steptoe-johnson.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Michael Lilley michael.lilley@steptoe-johnson.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT
Preview
FILED 7/6/2023 9:22 AM JOHN F. WARREN COUNTY CLERK DALLAS COUNTY CAUSE NO. CC-19-04006-B Mason Flores, Antonio Griffin, Tyra Lee, COUNTY COURT AT LAW Tonian Marshall, and Tierney Rattler, Individually, And As Next Friend of yy Rattler, Plaintiffs, David Rufila Intervenor, NO. 2 Bigge Crane and Rigging, Greystar Development & Construction, LP, Gabriella Tower, LLC, Gabriella Nationwide, LLC, and Meeks + Partners, Co., Defendants. § DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Supplemental Brief in Support of Motion to Strike Jonathan H. Cox, Troy J. Pradia, and The Cox Pradia Law Firm, PLLC’s Petition in Intervention I Summary of Argument There are three supplemental reasons why Plaintiffs’ Motion to Strike Intervenors’ Petition in Intervention should be granted. First, Intervenors filed Jonathan Cox’s affidavit, which discloses confidential and privileged information, without client consent and to the disadvantage of their former client, Michele Williams. This violates Rule 1.05(b)(3) of the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct, and their continuing fiduciary duty to safeguard client confidences. Second, despite the fact that the attorney-client file belongs exclusively to the client, and despite multiple requests for that production, Intervenors have not produced Michele Williams’ attorney-client file. This is yet another ethical violation. Finally, contrary to Rule 1.04(f)(2)(i)-(ii) of the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct, Intervenors, in 2019, apparently referred Michele Williams’ case to a different law firm without the client consenting to a joint fee-sharing agreement with this new firm. Where, as here, the contingency contract does not disclose the identity of the firm accepting the referral and the division of fees and labor amongst both firms—and when the client fails to consent in writing thereto- the contingency contract is void and unenforceable. See Cokinos, Bosien & Young v. Moore, 2020 WL 549066, at *3-6 (Tex. App.—Dallas Feb. 4, 2020, no pet.); see also Garcia-Vela, P.C. v. Jolly, 2023 WL 2995973, at *4-6 (Tex. App.—San Antonio, April 19, 2023, no pet.). Because there have already been three serious and unexcused ethical violations, the equities are in favor of their former client, Michele Williams, and against Intervenors. The fact that Intervenors are wrongfully harming their former client in the very dispute that created the prior representation—while this dispute is still unresolved and remains pending—underscores the point that this is the inappropriate forum. This Court should grant Plaintiffs’ Motion to Strike the Intervention. I. Argument & Authoritie: As a supplement to Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Motion to Strike Jonathan H. Cox, Troy J. Pradia, and The Cox Pradia Law Firm’s (collectively “Intervenors”) Plea in Intervention, there are three additional reasons why Plaintiffs’ Motion should be granted. A. Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Supplemental Briefin Support of Motion to Strike Intervention - Page 2 Intervenors Filed Confidential and Privileged Information without Client Consent First, under Rule 1.05(b)(3) of the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct, a lawyer cannot “[u]se confidential information of a former client to the disadvantage of the former client after the representation is concluded unless the former client consents after consultation...” TEX. Disc. R. PROF. CONDUCT 1.05(b)(3). Indeed, lawyers have a continuing fiduciary duty—that survives the termination of the attorney- client representation—to protect confidential information and to prevent its disclosure. See, e.g., Pfeiffer v. Ajamie PLLC, 469 F.Supp.3d 752, 762 (S.D. Tex. 2019) (“The duty of loyalty to the client, with which the duty of confidentiality is inherently intertwined, is one of the basic tenets of the legal profession. These duties survive termination of the attorney- client relationship.”) [citations and internal quotations omitted]; see also In re Liebbe, 2019 WL 1416637, at *4 (Tex. App.—Tyler Mar. 29, 2019, orig. proceeding) (“an attorney generally owes a former client a continuing duty to not reveal to third parties confidential client information without the client’s express or implicit permission.”) [quotations omitted]. Texas courts have stated that, “virtually any information relating to a case should be considered confidential [under Rule 1.05].” See Phoenix Founders, Inc. v. Marshall, 887 S.W.2d 831, 834 (Tex. 1994); Pollard v. Merkel, 114 S.W.3d 695, 700 (Tex. App Dallas 2003, pet. denied) (“Moreover, virtually any information relating to a case should be considered confidential: [Texas Rule 1.05] define[s] ‘confidential information’ to encompass even unprivileged client information.”); accord Honorable James E. Kinkeade, The Top Ten Reasons Clients File Grievances Against their Lawyers, 5 TEX. WESLEYAN Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Supplemental Briefin Support of Motion to Strike Intervention - Page 3 L. REV. 35, 52 (1998) (“The term ‘confidential information’ as used by [Texas Rule 1.05] includes all information gained during, prior to, or after the course of representation.”) [citations omitted]. In fact, in In re Liebbe supra, the Tyler court of appeals held in the appeal of a guardianship proceeding that, even though the former client had testified that he was married, and despite the fact that his marital status was publicly available, his former lawyer’s disclosure that his former client was married was “confidential” information that was improperly disclosed, warranting disqualification. See In re Liebbe, 2019 WL 1416637, at *4-5. In the case at bar, Jonathan Cox, who is Michele Williams’ former attorney, executed an affidavit that was filed in support of Intervenors’ Application for a Writ of Garnishment in this case. Ex. “A.” Contrary to Rule 1.05(b)(3), in that wrongfully filed affidavit, Intervenors disclose Michele Williams’ confidential and privileged information without client consent. Furthermore, Intervenors did so in a way specifically designed to disadvantage their former client in the very case that forms the subject matter of that prior representation. The improperly filed affidavit states in pertinent part as follows: Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Supplemental Briefin Support of Motion to Strike Intervention - Page 4 On June 9, 2019, I was contacted by Michele Williams whom I had known for approximately 5 years. Ms. Williams described the crane collapse accident that had caused the death of her daughter and seriously injured several other people. She asked me for legal advice and asked if I would represent her and her daughter’s estate. After meeting with Ms. Williams and after explaining the terms, conditions, and obligations of my representation, she signed my firm’s contract of employment. The contract that Ms. Williams signed is attached to and incorporated in this affidavit as Exhibit “A-1.” After concluding my preliminary investigation of the facts, I began drafting the lawsuit to be filed. Several weeks after I had been retained, I learned that Ms. Williams had signed a contract of employment with the firm, Arnold & Itkin. Ms. Williams sent me a letter stating that she had received information suggesting that I did not have the experience necessary to provide competent representation. The only specific reason provided by Ms. Williams for terminating my representation was that I or my staff had misspelled her first name on one occasion, and it seemed to be taking too long to file suit. See Ex. “A” (J 1, 3) (pp. 10-11). Needless to say, the facts set forth in this affidavit contain confidential and privileged communications. including conversations between lawyer and client for the Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Supplemental Briefin Support of Motion to Strike Intervention - Page 5 purpose of providing legal advice—without the former client’s consent. Notably, Michele Williams has not sued Intervenors; and, consequently, there has been neither an express nor an implicit waiver of either her privilege with her former lawyers or her right to maintain confidentiality. Intervenors wrongful use of confidential and privileged information against their former client underscores the point that this forum is being used in an unlawful and improper way. This alone should warrant striking Intervenors’ Petition in Intervention. B Intervenors have Not Produced the Attorney-Client File Despite Repeated Requests Second, the attorney-client file is “property” that belongs exclusively to the client. See Resolution Trust Corp. v. H---, 28 F.R.D. 647, 649 (N.D. Tex. 1989); see also In re Grand Jury Proceedings, 727 F.2d 941, 944-45 (10th Cir. 1984). Furthermore, the “entire contents” of the attorney-client file belong to the client. See Resolution Trust Corp., 28 F.R.D. at 649. The attorney-client file must be transferred to the client upon request. See Professional Ethics Committee Opinion No. 627 (April 2013); see also Professional Ethics Committee Opinion No. 657 (May 2016). In Opinion No. 657, the Professional Ethics Committee stated: [D]ocuments, papers, and other information received from a client or received or generated in the course of representing the client, including work product and notes, are the property of the client. When a lawyer receives a request for those materials from a former client, the lawyer must make those materials available for delivery to the former client... See Professional Ethics Committee Opinion No. 657 (May 2016) (emphasis added). In the case at bar, Michele Williams has made no less than three written requests Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Supplemental Briefin Support of Motion to Strike Intervention - Page 6 for her attorney-client file from Intervenors. One such request was made as long ago as 2019. To date, no attorney-client file has been produced. On the one hand, Intervenors are wrongfully disclosing privileged and confidential information about their former client; yet, on the other hand, Intervenors have, so far, refused to produce the attorney-client file to their former client, which would contain this very confidential and sensitive information. Because Intervenors have breached their ethical obligation to produce the attorney- client file, which, if it had been produced, would undoubtedly undermine any interest Intervenors claim they have in this proceeding, Plaintiffs’ Motion to Strike the Intervention should be granted. Cc. Intervenors Apparently Gave Williams’ Attorney-Client File to a Firm that Williams Never Retained Finally, under Rule 1.04(f)(2)(i)-(ii) of the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct, a joint fee-sharing agreement that is not signed by the client which fully discloses each firm and how they will be compensated—is void and unenforceable. See Cokinos, Bosien & Young v. Moore, 2020 WL 549066, at *3-6 (Tex. App.—Dallas Feb. 4, 2020, no pet.); see also Garcia-Vela, P.C. v. Jolly, 2023 WL 2995973, at *4-6 (Tex. App.—San Antonio, April 19, 2023, no pet.). Here, through outside counsel, Intervenors have told Williams that they gave her attorney-client file, back in 2019, to a different personal injury law firm and it was this referral that continues to delay the production of the attorney-client file. The client— Michele Williams—never consented to the retention of this other firm (Abraham Watkins). Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Supplemental Briefin Support of Motion to Strike Intervention - Page 7 In fact, the very contingency contract that Intervenors sue upon does not disclose any of the lawyers at this other law firm nor does it disclose how any fee would be divided, in the event of a recovery. Because Michele Williams did not sign a fee-sharing agreement that identifies and discloses the law firm who Intervenors referred her case to, the contingency contract that is the basis of the intervention is void and unenforceable. Plaintiffs’ Motion to Strike the Intervention should be granted. Ti. Conclusion In conclusion, this Court should strike Jonathan H. Cox, Troy J. Pradia, and the Cox Pradia Law Firm, PLLC’s Petition in Intervention. WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiffs respectfully pray that this Court strike the Original Petition in Intervention filed by Jonathan H. Cox, Troy J. Pradia, and the Cox Pradia Law Firm, PLLC; or, in the alternative, sever the Plea in Intervention and Consolidate it with Cause Number CC-23-03025-B; and Plaintiffs further request all such other relief whether in law or in equity upon which they may show themselves justly entitled. Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Supplemental Briefin Support of Motion to Strike Intervention - Page 8 Respectfully submitted, Lyons & Simmons, LLP Weibull? poe Michael P. Lyons State Bar No. 24013074 mlyons@lyons-simmons.com Christopher J. Simmons State Bar No. 24058796 csimmons@lyons-simmons.com 2101 Cedar Springs Rd, Suite 1900 Dallas, Texas 75201 (214) 665-6900 (t) (214) 665-6950 (f) -and- ARNOLD & ITKIN, LLP /s/ Jason A. Itkin Jason A. Itkin Texas State Bar No. 24032461 Cory D. Itkin Texas State Bar No. 24050808 Alexandra F. Poulson Texas State Bar No. 24130390 6009 Memorial Drive Houston, Texas 77007 Telephone: (713) 222-3800 Facsimile: (713) 222-3850 e-service@arnolditkin.com jitkin@arnolditkin.com citkin@arnolditkin.com apoulson@arnolditkin.com ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Supplemental Briefin Support of Motion to Strike Intervention - Page 9 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned hereby certifies that a true and correct copy of the foregoing instrument was served on all counsel of record pursuant to the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure on July 6, 2023. /s/ Jason A. Itkin Jason A, Itkin Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Supplemental Briefin Support of Motion to Strike Intervention - Page 10 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. Leticia Saavedra on behalf of Jason Itkin Bar No. 24032461 Isaavedra@arnolditkin.com Envelope ID: 77237389 Filing Code Description: Ody - Brief Filed Filing Description: PLAINTIFFS CONSOLIDATED SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE JONATHAN H COX TROY J PRADIA AND THE COX PRADIA LAW FIRM PLLC PETITION IN INTERVENTION Status as of 7/6/2023 1:38 PM CST Associated Case Party: BIGGE CRANE AND RIGGING, CO. Name BarNumber | Email TimestampSubmitted Status Darrell L.Barger dbarger@hartlinebarger.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Brian Rawson brawson@hartlinebarger.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Clayton J.Callen clayton.callen@bowmanandbrooke.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Judy Vice jvice@hartlinebarger.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Courtney M.Kenisky courtney.kenisky@bowmanandbrooke.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Jessica Z.Barger barger@wrightclosebarger.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT R. Russell Hollenbeck hollenbeck@wrightclosebarger.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Michael Adams-Hurta hurta@wrightclosebarger.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Case Contacts Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status Matt Last mlast@cobbmartinez.com 7/16/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Jeff Nicodemus jnicodemus@cobbmartinez.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Justin Roy jroy@cobbmartinez.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT John HolmanBarr jbarr@bbarr.com 7/16/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Nina Cortell nina.cortell@haynesboone.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Ben Mesches ben.mesches@haynesboone.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Christopher J.Simmons csimmons@lyons-simmons.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Clifford Harrison charrison@munsch.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Justin KRatley jratley@munsch.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT 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. Leticia Saavedra on behalf of Jason Itkin Bar No. 24032461 lsaavedra@arnolditkin.com Envelope ID: 77237389 Filing Code Description: Ody - Brief Filed Filing Description: PLAINTIFFS CONSOLIDATED SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE JONATHAN H COX TROY J PRADIA AND THE COX PRADIA LAW FIRM PLLC PETITION IN INTERVENTION Status as of 7/6/2023 1:38 PM CST Case Contacts Nathan Vrazel nvrazel@munsch.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT L. DarleneMitchell dmitchell@bbarr.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Katherine Compton 4652100 katherine.compton@steptoe-johnson.com 7/16/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Sarnie ARandle Jr SAR@RandleLaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Fernando P.Arias fred.arias@fletcherfarley.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Jeffrey MTillotson jtillotson@tillotsonilaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Jonathan RPatton jpatton@tillotsonlaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Joseph Alrrobali airrobali@tillotsonlaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Mark D.Hardy, Jr. dj.hardy@fletcherfarley.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Lisa Dykes lisa@montgomeryfirm.com 7/16/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Jason A. Itkin jaiteam@arnolditkin.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT JASON A.ITKIN e-service@arnolditkin.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT JASON A.ITKIN jitkin@arnolditkin.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Deborah Stick deborah.stick@fletcherfarley.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Abby Golman abby.golman@fletcherfarley.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Hardin Ramey hramey@rameylawfirm.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Michael P.Lyons mlyons@lyons-simmons.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Oscar Addis OAddis@fulcolaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Brian PLauten blauten@brianlauten.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Courtney GBowline cbowline@brianlauten.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Michelle Logan mlogan@brianlauten.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT 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. Leticia Saavedra on behalf of Jason Itkin Bar No. 24032461 lsaavedra@arnolditkin.com Envelope ID: 77237389 Filing Code Description: Ody - Brief Filed Filing Description: PLAINTIFFS CONSOLIDATED SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE JONATHAN H COX TROY J PRADIA AND THE COX PRADIA LAW FIRM PLLC PETITION IN INTERVENTION Status as of 7/6/2023 1:38 PM CST Case Contacts Zach Mayer zmayer@mayerllp.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Edward Johnson ejohnson@mayerllp.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Kira Lytle klytle@tillotsonlaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Irma Prado Irma.P@glasheenlaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT JASON A.ITKIN jitkin@arnolditkin.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT JOHNATHAN CCLARK efile jon.clark@gvilaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT MUHAMMAD S.AZIZ maziz@awtxlaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT PATTI KILGORE pkilgore@foley.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Mary ChristianBarr mebarr@bbarr.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT JASON A.ITKIN jaiteam@arnolditkin.com 7/16/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Jonathan H.Cox jhc@coxpradialaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Troy J.Pradia tjp@coxpradialaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Jeffrey Fultz jfultz@taylorbook.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Sean Juarez sjuarez@taylorbook.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Jeremy Mckey eservicejmckeylawfirm@gmail.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Craig Thomas Craig@mckeylawfirm.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Aaron Morin Aaron@mckeylawfirm.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Winston B.Line winston@linelawfirm.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Wesley Nute wesley@nutelaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Hardin R.Ramey hramey@rameylawfirm.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT RYAN MPARKS rparks@lafitteparks.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT 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. Leticia Saavedra on behalf of Jason Itkin Bar No. 24032461 lsaavedra@arnolditkin.com Envelope ID: 77237389 Filing Code Description: Ody - Brief Filed Filing Description: PLAINTIFFS CONSOLIDATED SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE JONATHAN H COX TROY J PRADIA AND THE COX PRADIA LAW FIRM PLLC PETITION IN INTERVENTION Status as of 7/6/2023 1:38 PM CST Case Contacts Teresa Valcoviak Teresa.Valcoviak@fletcherfarley.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT CHARLES WATERBURY charles@waterburylawpc.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Yajaira Ramirez yramirez@bbarr.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Jeanne Thompson jeanne@atwoodmccall.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Michael Lilley michael.lilley@lewisbrisbois.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM ERROR Sean Juarez SJuarez@fulcolaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM ERROR Ryan S.MacLeod tmacleod@arnolditkin.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM ERROR Jeffrey P.Fultz JFultz@FulCoLaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM ERROR Doug Heuvel dheuvel@cstriallaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Cory I.Itkin jaiteam@arnolditkin.com 7/16/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Marie Cheung-Truslow marie@cheungtruslowlaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Clint McCord clint@cheungtruslowlaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT John Vanover john.vanover@lewisbrisbois.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Enrique Ramirez eramirez@tillotsonlaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Benjamin LNabors bnabors@tillotsonlaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Christopher C.White chris.white@lewisbrisbois.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM ERROR Jeanette Adams jeanette.adams@lewisbrisbois.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM ERROR Yolanda White yolanda.white@lewisbrisbois.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT wendy swartzell wendy.swartzell@fletcherfarley.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Seth MAnderson seth@anderson-cummings.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Carolyn SBurton carolyn@anderson-cummings.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT 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. Leticia Saavedra on behalf of Jason Itkin Bar No. 24032461 lsaavedra@arnolditkin.com Envelope ID: 77237389 Filing Code Description: Ody - Brief Filed Filing Description: PLAINTIFFS CONSOLIDATED SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE JONATHAN H COX TROY J PRADIA AND THE COX PRADIA LAW FIRM PLLC PETITION IN INTERVENTION Status as of 7/6/2023 1:38 PM CST Case Contacts Lorie Taylor Itaylor@mayerllp.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Suzanne Le Blanc sleblanc@lyons-simmons.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Samantha Demuren sdemuren@arnolditkin.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Anita Malone records@lexitaslegal.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Andrew R.Gould agould@arnolditkin.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Anita Malone records@lexitaslegal.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Anita Malone records@lexitaslegal.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Lauren Lopez llopez@tillotsonlaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Mollie Mallory mmallory@tillotsonlaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Shameya McGill smcgill@bbarr.com 7/16/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Alecia Tipton alecia.tipton@haynesboone.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Nathaniel Buchheit nbuchheit@tillotsonilaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Mark Pickering mpickering@donatobrown.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Aaron M.Pool apool@donatobrown.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Anne Johnson ajohnson@tillotsonlaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Kelli Bills kbills@tillotsonlaw.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT LBBS Eservice Dal.E-Storage@lewisbrisbois.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Katherine Compton katherine.compton@steptoe-johnson.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Christopher White chris.white@steptoe-johnson.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Yolanda White yolanda.white@steptoe-johnson.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Terre Meza terre.meza@steptoe-johnson.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT 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. Leticia Saavedra on behalf of Jason Itkin Bar No. 24032461 lsaavedra@arnolditkin.com Envelope ID: 77237389 Filing Code Description: Ody - Brief Filed Filing Description: PLAINTIFFS CONSOLIDATED SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE JONATHAN H COX TROY J PRADIA AND THE COX PRADIA LAW FIRM PLLC PETITION IN INTERVENTION Status as of 7/6/2023 1:38 PM CST Case Contacts Jeanette Adams jeanette.adams@steptoe-johnson.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT Michael Lilley michael.lilley@steptoe-johnson.com 7/6/2023 9:22:08 AM SENT