Preview
CAUSE NO. 16-09595-393
WILLIAM RICHARD MILLER and IN THE DISTRICT COURT
MELISSIA M. KRISCO
Plaintiffs
393rd JUDICIAL DISTRICT
SEAN MCALLISTER and
ROBERT SWORD
Defendants DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS
PLAINIIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED PETITION AND
APPLICATION FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION
Plaintiffs William Richard Miller and Melissia M. Krisco file this First Amended Petition
and Application for Permanent Injunction, and in support thereof, respectfully show the Court as
follows:
DISCOVERY CONTROL LEVEL
Plaintiffs plead that discovery should be conducted under Rule 190.3 (Level 2) of
the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure.
IL
RULE 47 COMPLIANCE
Plaintiffs seek monetary relief of more than $200,000.00 but less than
$1,000,000.00, and non-monetary relief.
PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED PETITION AND
APPLICATION FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION: Page1
IIL.
PARTIES
3, Defendant Sean McAllister (“McAllister”) is an individual residing who may be
served with process at 1628 County Road, Suite 14, Spring Lake Park, Minnesota 55432, or
wherever
else he may be found.
4. Defendant Robert Sword (“Sword”) is an individual who may be served with
process at 1628 County Road, Suite 14, Spring Lake Park, Minnesota 55432 or wherever else he
may
be found. Sword has been served with process but has not entered an appearance in this
Case.
5, McAllister and Sword are collectively referred to herein as “Defendants.”
6. Plaintiff William Richard Miller (“Miller”) is an individual, who for the purposes
of this lawsuit, has an address of 15954 Jackson Creek Parkway, Suite B534, Monument, CO
80132.
7, Melissia M. Krisco (“Krisco”) is an individual, who for the purposes of this
lawsuit, has an address of 15954 Jackson Creek Parkway, Suite B534, Monument, CO 80132.
8. Miller and Krisco are collectively referred to herein as “Plaintiffs.”
IV.
URISDICTIONAND
J VENUE
9, Jurisdiction is proper in this Court because the amount in controversy, exclusive
of interest and costs, exceeds the minimum jurisdictional limits of this Court.
10. Pursuant to Section 15.002(a)(1) of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code,
venue is proper in this Court because Denton County, Texas, is the county where all or a
substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claims asserted herein occurred.
PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED PETITION AND
APPLICATION FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION: Page2
11. Additional facts supporting venue is that the personal property which is the
subject of Plaintiffs’ application for restraining order is located within Denton County, Texas.
V.
FACTS
A. Facts Regarding Trailer
at Issue
12. Plaintiff Krisco is the owner of a 2015 Keystone “Fifth Wheel” trailer, VIN
4Y DF36125FE760678, License Plate No. 1MB9705 (the “Trailer”).
13. Plaintiff Miller and Defendants previously conducted business together in and
around the Denton County, Texas area as a satellite system contractor under the business name
DigiTek Texas.
14. While Miller, McAllister, and Sword conducted business together in the Denton
County area, Krisco loaned the Trailer to Miller, who in tum, with Krisco’s permission, loaned
the Trailer to Sword.
15. Sword temporarily resided in the Trailer while Miller, McAllister, and Sword
conducted business together.
16. Upon the conclusion of their business, Sword, possibly at McAllister’s direction,
without either Miller or Krisco’s permission, moved the Trailer from the site where it was
located, and have actively prevented Miller or Krisco from accessing the Trailer.
17. Specially, Sword moved
the Trailer to - or caused the Trailer to be moved to -
Legacy Storage Center, LLC, 1201 N. Legacy Drive, Prosper, Denton County, Texas 75078
(“Legacy Storage”). Upon information and belief Sword undertook these actions at McAllister’s
direction.
PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED PETITION AND
APPLICATION FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION: Page3
18. Upon information and belief, at McAllister’s direction, Sword signed a lease or
rental agreement
to store the Trailerat Legacy Storage, without listing either Miller or Krisco as
owners of the Trailer. Further, Sword did not list either Miller or Krisco as having access to the
Trailer on the agreement with Legacy Storage.
19. As such, Sword is preventing Krisco from accessing and using her personal
property, and wrongfully have exercised dominion and control over Krisco’s property;
specifically, the Trailer.
20. Sword has converted Krisco’s Trailer.
B._ Facts Regarding Property Conversion / Loss of Property Caused by Defendant Sword
21. On or about September 23, 2016, DigiTek Texas was invoiced for thirty-two
pieces of equipment that were in the possession, custody or control of Sword - or technicians
working under the control of Sword.
22. Sword was responsible for paying for this equipment, or for ensuring that DigiTek
Texas paid for this equipment (or retumed
if not used). This equipment was not retumed
or paid
for by Sword or DigiTek, Texas before DigiTek ceased operations, and was converted by Sword.
23. As a result, Plaintiff Miller had to personally pay $6,090.00 for this equipment
to
avoid being personally sued by DigiTek LLC. As such, Sword caused Miller to incur $6,090 in
damages, for which Sword is responsible.
C. Facts Regarding Property Damages Caused by Defendants
24. While DigiTek Texas technicians were perfomming installation work for DirecTV
under Swords direction, these technicians caused damage to the property of DirecTV customers
in the amount of $615.00.
PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED PETITION AND
APPLICATION FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION: Page4
25. Sword was responsible for paying for this damage or ensuring DigiTek Texas
paid for this damage before ceasing operations. Sword failed to pay for these damages, and
Miller personally paid for these damages to avoid being personally sued by DirecTV.
26. As such, Sword caused Miller to incur $615.00 in damages, for which Sword is
responsible
VI.
REQUEST FOR PERMANENT. INJUNCTIONS & OWNERSHIP DETERMINATION
A. Plaintiffs’ Obtained Temporary Restraining Order/Injunction
27. The Court previously found that Plaintiffs met the requirements to be entitled to a
temporary restraining order, and subsequently, a temporary injunction.
28. The Court previously ruled and ordered that no one was allowed to move the
Trailer pending the outcome of the trial in this matter. The Court further ruled that neither
Sword nor McAllister could access the trailer, but that Plaintiffs could access the Trailer for
maintenance purposes.
B Plaintiffs’ Entitled to Permanent Injunction
29. Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court to issue a permanent injunction to
permanently prevent Sword from exercising dominion and control over the Trailer in any
fashion.
Cc Plaintiffs’ Request that Court Find Krisoo Trailer Owner
30. Plaintiffs further request that the Court find that Krisco is the true and rightful
owner of the Trailer.
PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED PETITION AND
APPLICATION FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION: Page5S
31. If Sword is prevented from controlling the Trailer, and Krisco is found to be the
true and rightful owner of the Trailer, then Krisco, or Miller at Krisco’s request, should be
allowed and permitted to move the Trailer and exercised control and dominion over the Trailerin
all capacities.
VIL
ADDITIONAL CAUSES OF ACTIONAGAINST SWORD
A. Breach of Contrad-Trailer
32. Plaintiff Miller had a verbal agreement that Sword could use the Trailer while
they conducted business with Miller, and that Sword was to retum the Trailer to Miller upon
completion of their work together.
33. Sword breached his agreement with Miller by failing to retum the Trailer as
promised. Sword’s breach of Agreement with Miller has caused Miller damages for which he
hereby sues.
34. All conditions precedent to Miller's breach of contract claim have been performed.
and have occurred, or have
been waived.
B. Breach of Contrad-Property
Damage
35. Pursuant to Miller's agreement with Sword, Sword was responsible for paying for
the property damage caused to DirecTV or ensuring DigiTek Texas paid for this damage before
ceasing operations. Sword failed to pay for these damages, and Miller personally paid for these
damages to avoid being personally sued by DirecTV. As such, Sword breached his contract with
Miller
PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED PETITION AND
APPLICATION FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION: Page6
36. All conditions precedent to Miller's breach of contract claim have been performed.
and have occurred, or have
been waived.
C. Conversion-Trailer
37. Plaintiff Krisco owned and possessed a specific chattel in the form of the Trailer.
Sword wrongfully exercised dominion and control over the Trailer, and have failed to retum the
Trailer to Krisco as demanded
and as promised.
38. Plaintiffs have been able to confirm the Trailer is being held at Legacy Storage,
and that neither Krisco nor Miller are listed on the agreement with Legacy Storage as having
access
to the Trailer.
39. As a direct and proximate result of the Sword’s conversion, Plaintiff Krisco has
suffered actual damages
which continue to accrue.
40. All conditions precedent to Krisco’s conversion claim have been performed and
have occurred, or have been waived.
D. Conversion-Equipment
41. Defendant Sword wrongfully exercised dominion and control over the lost or
converted equipment, which cased Miller to incur damages for which he hereby
sues.
42. All conditions precedent to Miller’s breach of contract claim have been performed
and have occurred, or have
been waived.
PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED PETITION AND
APPLICATION FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION: Page7
VIII.
ADDITIONAL CAUSE OF ACTIONAGAINST MCALLISTER
A. Conversion
43. | McAllister wrongfully exercised dominion and control over a bank account of
DigiTek Texas and improperly withdrew the amount of $90,000.00.
44. Plaintiff Miller was entitled to his proportionate share of these bank account
funds, but McAllister has refused to provide same.
45. As such, McAllister has converted
these bank account funds, and caused Miller
damages, for which he hereby sues.
46. All conditions precedent to Miller's conversion claim against McAllister have
been performed
and have occurred, or have been waived.
B._ Breach
of Contrac:
47. Pursuant to the agreement between Miller and McAllister, bank account funds
were to be used to pay DigiTek Texas’ s expenses and then distributed to Miller
and McAllister.
48. | McAllister breached this agreement
by taking all funds out of DigiTek Texas’ bak
accounts, and refusing to use the funds to pay expenses or allow Miller to receive his
proportionate share of the funds.
49. As such, McAllister breached his agreement with Miller, which caused Miller
damages for which he hereby sues.
50. All conditions precedent to Miller's breach of contract claim against McAllister
have been performed
and have occurred, or have been waived.
PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED PETITION AND
APPLICATION FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION: Page8
Ix.
ADDITIONAL CAUSE OF ACTIONAGAINST BOTH DEFENDANTS
51. As a result
of Defendants’ failure and refusal to abide by the terms of their
agreement with Plaintiff Miller, Plaintiff Miller has been required to retain the undersigned legal
counsel to institute and prosecute this action. Accordingly, Plaintiffs plead and requests that, as
provided for by TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 38.001, upon the granting of a
favorable judgment in this cause, they be awarded reasonable attomeys’ fees.
52. All conditions precedent to Plaintiffs’ attomeys’ fees claim have been performed.
and have occurred, or have
been waived.
X.
CONCLUSION AND RELIEF REQUESTED
WHEREFORE PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiffs respectfully request the following
relief:
Krisco being held and declared as the true and rightful owner
of the Trailer;
Neither Sword nor McAllister may exercise control or dominion over the Trailer;
Award Plaintiffs damages for their breach of contract claims against Sword;
Award Plaintiffs damages for their conversion claims against Sword;
Award Plaintiffs damages for their breach of contract claims against McAllister;
Award Plaintiffs damages for their conversion claims against McAllister;
Enter judgment for Plaintiffs against Defendants jointly and severally on
Plaintiffs’ attomeys’ fees claims;
Award court costs; and
Grant any other relief it deems appropriate.
PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED PETITION AND
APPLICATION FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION: Page9
Respectfully submitted,
FOX ROTHSCHILD LLP
a5 OO
By:
Michael Rumac
State Bar No. 24041835
mrumac@foxrothschild.com
K. Patrick Babb
State Bar No. 24077060
pbabb@foxrothscild.com
Two Lincoln Centre
5420 LBJ Freeway, Suite 1200
Dallas, Texas 75240
972-991-0889
972-404-0516 — Fax
Rule 21a Certification
Defendant Sword has been served with process in this matter but has not entered an appearance.
Defendant McAllister is actively avoiding service of process. As such, service of this amended
petition is not required at this time.
ao 2. OOS
Michael Rumac
PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED PETITION AND
APPLICATION FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION Page 10
Preview
CAUSE NO. 16-09595-393 WILLIAM RICHARD MILLER and IN THE DISTRICT COURT MELISSIA M. KRISCO Plaintiffs 393rd JUDICIAL DISTRICT SEAN MCALLISTER and ROBERT SWORD Defendants DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS PLAINIIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED PETITION AND APPLICATION FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION Plaintiffs William Richard Miller and Melissia M. Krisco file this First Amended Petition and Application for Permanent Injunction, and in support thereof, respectfully show the Court as follows: DISCOVERY CONTROL LEVEL Plaintiffs plead that discovery should be conducted under Rule 190.3 (Level 2) of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. IL RULE 47 COMPLIANCE Plaintiffs seek monetary relief of more than $200,000.00 but less than $1,000,000.00, and non-monetary relief. PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED PETITION AND APPLICATION FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION: Page1 IIL. PARTIES 3, Defendant Sean McAllister (“McAllister”) is an individual residing who may be served with process at 1628 County Road, Suite 14, Spring Lake Park, Minnesota 55432, or wherever else he may be found. 4. Defendant Robert Sword (“Sword”) is an individual who may be served with process at 1628 County Road, Suite 14, Spring Lake Park, Minnesota 55432 or wherever else he may be found. Sword has been served with process but has not entered an appearance in this Case. 5, McAllister and Sword are collectively referred to herein as “Defendants.” 6. Plaintiff William Richard Miller (“Miller”) is an individual, who for the purposes of this lawsuit, has an address of 15954 Jackson Creek Parkway, Suite B534, Monument, CO 80132. 7, Melissia M. Krisco (“Krisco”) is an individual, who for the purposes of this lawsuit, has an address of 15954 Jackson Creek Parkway, Suite B534, Monument, CO 80132. 8. Miller and Krisco are collectively referred to herein as “Plaintiffs.” IV. URISDICTIONAND J VENUE 9, Jurisdiction is proper in this Court because the amount in controversy, exclusive of interest and costs, exceeds the minimum jurisdictional limits of this Court. 10. Pursuant to Section 15.002(a)(1) of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, venue is proper in this Court because Denton County, Texas, is the county where all or a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claims asserted herein occurred. PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED PETITION AND APPLICATION FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION: Page2 11. Additional facts supporting venue is that the personal property which is the subject of Plaintiffs’ application for restraining order is located within Denton County, Texas. V. FACTS A. Facts Regarding Trailer at Issue 12. Plaintiff Krisco is the owner of a 2015 Keystone “Fifth Wheel” trailer, VIN 4Y DF36125FE760678, License Plate No. 1MB9705 (the “Trailer”). 13. Plaintiff Miller and Defendants previously conducted business together in and around the Denton County, Texas area as a satellite system contractor under the business name DigiTek Texas. 14. While Miller, McAllister, and Sword conducted business together in the Denton County area, Krisco loaned the Trailer to Miller, who in tum, with Krisco’s permission, loaned the Trailer to Sword. 15. Sword temporarily resided in the Trailer while Miller, McAllister, and Sword conducted business together. 16. Upon the conclusion of their business, Sword, possibly at McAllister’s direction, without either Miller or Krisco’s permission, moved the Trailer from the site where it was located, and have actively prevented Miller or Krisco from accessing the Trailer. 17. Specially, Sword moved the Trailer to - or caused the Trailer to be moved to - Legacy Storage Center, LLC, 1201 N. Legacy Drive, Prosper, Denton County, Texas 75078 (“Legacy Storage”). Upon information and belief Sword undertook these actions at McAllister’s direction. PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED PETITION AND APPLICATION FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION: Page3 18. Upon information and belief, at McAllister’s direction, Sword signed a lease or rental agreement to store the Trailerat Legacy Storage, without listing either Miller or Krisco as owners of the Trailer. Further, Sword did not list either Miller or Krisco as having access to the Trailer on the agreement with Legacy Storage. 19. As such, Sword is preventing Krisco from accessing and using her personal property, and wrongfully have exercised dominion and control over Krisco’s property; specifically, the Trailer. 20. Sword has converted Krisco’s Trailer. B._ Facts Regarding Property Conversion / Loss of Property Caused by Defendant Sword 21. On or about September 23, 2016, DigiTek Texas was invoiced for thirty-two pieces of equipment that were in the possession, custody or control of Sword - or technicians working under the control of Sword. 22. Sword was responsible for paying for this equipment, or for ensuring that DigiTek Texas paid for this equipment (or retumed if not used). This equipment was not retumed or paid for by Sword or DigiTek, Texas before DigiTek ceased operations, and was converted by Sword. 23. As a result, Plaintiff Miller had to personally pay $6,090.00 for this equipment to avoid being personally sued by DigiTek LLC. As such, Sword caused Miller to incur $6,090 in damages, for which Sword is responsible. C. Facts Regarding Property Damages Caused by Defendants 24. While DigiTek Texas technicians were perfomming installation work for DirecTV under Swords direction, these technicians caused damage to the property of DirecTV customers in the amount of $615.00. PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED PETITION AND APPLICATION FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION: Page4 25. Sword was responsible for paying for this damage or ensuring DigiTek Texas paid for this damage before ceasing operations. Sword failed to pay for these damages, and Miller personally paid for these damages to avoid being personally sued by DirecTV. 26. As such, Sword caused Miller to incur $615.00 in damages, for which Sword is responsible VI. REQUEST FOR PERMANENT. INJUNCTIONS & OWNERSHIP DETERMINATION A. Plaintiffs’ Obtained Temporary Restraining Order/Injunction 27. The Court previously found that Plaintiffs met the requirements to be entitled to a temporary restraining order, and subsequently, a temporary injunction. 28. The Court previously ruled and ordered that no one was allowed to move the Trailer pending the outcome of the trial in this matter. The Court further ruled that neither Sword nor McAllister could access the trailer, but that Plaintiffs could access the Trailer for maintenance purposes. B Plaintiffs’ Entitled to Permanent Injunction 29. Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court to issue a permanent injunction to permanently prevent Sword from exercising dominion and control over the Trailer in any fashion. Cc Plaintiffs’ Request that Court Find Krisoo Trailer Owner 30. Plaintiffs further request that the Court find that Krisco is the true and rightful owner of the Trailer. PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED PETITION AND APPLICATION FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION: Page5S 31. If Sword is prevented from controlling the Trailer, and Krisco is found to be the true and rightful owner of the Trailer, then Krisco, or Miller at Krisco’s request, should be allowed and permitted to move the Trailer and exercised control and dominion over the Trailerin all capacities. VIL ADDITIONAL CAUSES OF ACTIONAGAINST SWORD A. Breach of Contrad-Trailer 32. Plaintiff Miller had a verbal agreement that Sword could use the Trailer while they conducted business with Miller, and that Sword was to retum the Trailer to Miller upon completion of their work together. 33. Sword breached his agreement with Miller by failing to retum the Trailer as promised. Sword’s breach of Agreement with Miller has caused Miller damages for which he hereby sues. 34. All conditions precedent to Miller's breach of contract claim have been performed. and have occurred, or have been waived. B. Breach of Contrad-Property Damage 35. Pursuant to Miller's agreement with Sword, Sword was responsible for paying for the property damage caused to DirecTV or ensuring DigiTek Texas paid for this damage before ceasing operations. Sword failed to pay for these damages, and Miller personally paid for these damages to avoid being personally sued by DirecTV. As such, Sword breached his contract with Miller PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED PETITION AND APPLICATION FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION: Page6 36. All conditions precedent to Miller's breach of contract claim have been performed. and have occurred, or have been waived. C. Conversion-Trailer 37. Plaintiff Krisco owned and possessed a specific chattel in the form of the Trailer. Sword wrongfully exercised dominion and control over the Trailer, and have failed to retum the Trailer to Krisco as demanded and as promised. 38. Plaintiffs have been able to confirm the Trailer is being held at Legacy Storage, and that neither Krisco nor Miller are listed on the agreement with Legacy Storage as having access to the Trailer. 39. As a direct and proximate result of the Sword’s conversion, Plaintiff Krisco has suffered actual damages which continue to accrue. 40. All conditions precedent to Krisco’s conversion claim have been performed and have occurred, or have been waived. D. Conversion-Equipment 41. Defendant Sword wrongfully exercised dominion and control over the lost or converted equipment, which cased Miller to incur damages for which he hereby sues. 42. All conditions precedent to Miller’s breach of contract claim have been performed and have occurred, or have been waived. PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED PETITION AND APPLICATION FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION: Page7 VIII. ADDITIONAL CAUSE OF ACTIONAGAINST MCALLISTER A. Conversion 43. | McAllister wrongfully exercised dominion and control over a bank account of DigiTek Texas and improperly withdrew the amount of $90,000.00. 44. Plaintiff Miller was entitled to his proportionate share of these bank account funds, but McAllister has refused to provide same. 45. As such, McAllister has converted these bank account funds, and caused Miller damages, for which he hereby sues. 46. All conditions precedent to Miller's conversion claim against McAllister have been performed and have occurred, or have been waived. B._ Breach of Contrac: 47. Pursuant to the agreement between Miller and McAllister, bank account funds were to be used to pay DigiTek Texas’ s expenses and then distributed to Miller and McAllister. 48. | McAllister breached this agreement by taking all funds out of DigiTek Texas’ bak accounts, and refusing to use the funds to pay expenses or allow Miller to receive his proportionate share of the funds. 49. As such, McAllister breached his agreement with Miller, which caused Miller damages for which he hereby sues. 50. All conditions precedent to Miller's breach of contract claim against McAllister have been performed and have occurred, or have been waived. PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED PETITION AND APPLICATION FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION: Page8 Ix. ADDITIONAL CAUSE OF ACTIONAGAINST BOTH DEFENDANTS 51. As a result of Defendants’ failure and refusal to abide by the terms of their agreement with Plaintiff Miller, Plaintiff Miller has been required to retain the undersigned legal counsel to institute and prosecute this action. Accordingly, Plaintiffs plead and requests that, as provided for by TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 38.001, upon the granting of a favorable judgment in this cause, they be awarded reasonable attomeys’ fees. 52. All conditions precedent to Plaintiffs’ attomeys’ fees claim have been performed. and have occurred, or have been waived. X. CONCLUSION AND RELIEF REQUESTED WHEREFORE PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiffs respectfully request the following relief: Krisco being held and declared as the true and rightful owner of the Trailer; Neither Sword nor McAllister may exercise control or dominion over the Trailer; Award Plaintiffs damages for their breach of contract claims against Sword; Award Plaintiffs damages for their conversion claims against Sword; Award Plaintiffs damages for their breach of contract claims against McAllister; Award Plaintiffs damages for their conversion claims against McAllister; Enter judgment for Plaintiffs against Defendants jointly and severally on Plaintiffs’ attomeys’ fees claims; Award court costs; and Grant any other relief it deems appropriate. PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED PETITION AND APPLICATION FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION: Page9 Respectfully submitted, FOX ROTHSCHILD LLP a5 OO By: Michael Rumac State Bar No. 24041835 mrumac@foxrothschild.com K. Patrick Babb State Bar No. 24077060 pbabb@foxrothscild.com Two Lincoln Centre 5420 LBJ Freeway, Suite 1200 Dallas, Texas 75240 972-991-0889 972-404-0516 — Fax Rule 21a Certification Defendant Sword has been served with process in this matter but has not entered an appearance. Defendant McAllister is actively avoiding service of process. As such, service of this amended petition is not required at this time. ao 2. OOS Michael Rumac PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED PETITION AND APPLICATION FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION Page 10