Preview
Filed 11 October 13 P12:44
Chris Daniel - District Clerk
Harris Coun!
ED101) 016: P9339
By: Furshilla McGee
CAUSE NO, 2010-11656
ESTELA ORTEGA, INDIVIDUALLY IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF
AND AS NEXT FRIEND OF BRITNEY
ORTEGA AND JOSE ORTEGA
VS. HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS
WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC., WASTE
MANAGEMENT OF TEXAS, INC. D/B/A
WASTE MANAGEMENT HOUSTON
METRO AND FILIBERTO CARDENAS 80™ JUDICIAL DISTRICT
AGREED MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE
TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:
NOW COME Plaintiffs, Estella Ortega, Individually and as next friend of Britney Ortega and Jose
Ortega, and Defendants Waste Management, Inc., Waste Management of Texas, Inc. D/B/A Waste
Management Houston Metro and Filiberto Cardenas, as Movants herein, and file this Agreed Motion for
Continuance, and in support hereof show the court the following:
I
This is a suit arising out of personal injuries sustained by Plaintiffs on March 7, 2008, when Plaintiff
Jose Ortega was in his1997 Neon Dodge with his wife Estela Ortega and daughter, Britney Ortega, and
stopped at a red light behind a Waste Management trash truck at the 130 block of W. Parker Road in
Houston, Texas. Plaintiffs filed suit on February 22
22, 2010 against Waste Management, Inc., Waste
Management of Texas, Inc. d/b/a Waste Management Houston Metro and Feliberto Cardenas. Defendants
were properly served and have made an appearance in this suit. This case is presently set for trial on October
31, 2011.
IL.
Plaintiffs were being represented by Attorney Anastasios C. Roth a/k/a Tasi C. Roth in connection
with the March 7, 2008 incident, Attorney Anastasios C. Roth a/k/a Tasi C. Roth represented the Plaintiffs
aid negotiated the settlement and release of this matter. On or about March 9 or 10, 2009, Attorney Roth
received Plaintiffs’ settlement checks and deposited them into his firm’s bank account. Plaintiffs never
received their share of the settlement funds.
Plaintiffs would show that Attorney Anastasios C. Roth a/k/a Tasi C. Roth, converted the settlement
funds obtained from Defendant Waste Management of Texas, Inc. for their injuries sustained in the March
7, 2008 incident. These acts were committed without the knowledge of the Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs never agreed
to let Attorney Roth take the settlement monies that were due and owed to them and deposit them into an
account that was operated and controlled by Attorney Roth. Likewise, Plaintiffs never agteed to allow
Attorney Roth to endorse checks which were to be made payable to Plaintiffs, Estela Ortega and Jose Ortega.
The checks were personal property of Plaintiffs, Estela Ortega and Jose Ortega, and Attorney Anastasios
C. Roth a/k/a Tasi C. Roth wrongfully exercised dominion or control over the checks. As a result, Plaintiffs
suffered injuries within the jurisdictional limits of this Court. Plaintiffs seek both actual and exemplary
damages for conversion.
Plaintifiis, Estela Ortega and Jose Ortega, would show that the agreement entered into resulted ina
joint venture between Plaintiffs and Attorney Anastasios C. Roth a/k/a Tasi C. Roth. As such, Attorney
Roth owed Plaintiffs the duties of loyalty, full disclosure, candor and utmost good faith. Attorney Roth
breached each of these fiduciary duties owed to Plaintiffs, Estela Ortega and Jose Ortega, by not disclosing
to Plaintiffs his true intentions, that is, that he did not intend to give them their share of the settlement funds.
Attormey Roth’s breach of fiduciary duties resulted in injury to Plaintiffs, Estela Ortega and Jose Ortega, and
benefits to Defendant.
TL.
The parties have agreed to mediate this case. The mediator will be David E. Brothers with the
law firm of Brothers, Sepulveda & Alvarado, P.C., Two Memorial City Plaza, 820 Gessner, Suite 1075,
Houston, Texas 77024 - Tel: 713-337-0750/Fax: 713-337-0760.
Iv
Plaintiffs and Defendants request the Court grant a continuance of the trial of this matter in order
that Attorney Roth can be added as a defendant in this matter and properly served.
Vv.
Movants ask the Court to continue the present trial setting of October 31, 2011 for at least one
huridred twenty (120) days and request that a new docket control order be issued.
VI
This request for continuance is not for delay, but so that justice may be done.
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Movants request the Court grant this Agreed
Motion for Continuance, and continue the present trial setting of October 31, 2011 for at least one hundred
twenty (120) days and request that a docket control order be issued and for such other arid further relief that
may be awarded at law or in equity.
Respectfully submitted,
VILLALOBOS & VAUGHAN, PLLC
5804 N. 23” Street
McAllen, Texas 78504
(956) 687-4000 Tel.
(956) 687-4001 Fax
4s/ Jeffrey R. Vaughan
Jeffrey R. Vaughan
State Bar No. 24013676
ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFFS
HARRISON, BETTIS, STAFF,
McFARLAND & WEEMS, L.L.P.
1415 Louisiana, 37" Floor
Houston, Texas 77002
(713) 843-7900 Tel.
(713) 843-7901 Fax
4s/ Michael Lon
Michael Long
State Bar No.24065638
ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANTS
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify that on the 13th_ day of October, 2010, a true and correct copy of this Agreed Motion
for Continuance was served on counsel for Defendant as indicated below:
Mr. Michael Long Fax No.: 713-843-7901
HARRISON, BETTIS, STAFF,
McFARLAND & WEEMS, L.L.P,
1415 Louisiana, 37" Floor
Houston, Texas 77002
4s Jeffrey R. Vaughan
Jeffrey R. Vaughan