Preview
BRENT GAMBLE
JUDGE, 270™ JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT
CIVIL Cl RTS BUILDING
HOUSYTO! EXAS 77002
713/368-6400
10/11/2011
TO ALL COUNSEL/ PRO SE OF RECORD
Enclosed is a copy of the Order signed by the Judge and or Docket Sheet
entry.
BRENT GAMBLE
Judge, 270TH DISTRICT COURT
CASE - 200977474 FILED - 20091204 COURT - 270th
TYPE - BREACH OF CONTRACT
PREXUS HEALTH CONSUL VS UNIVERSITY GENERAL H
JONATHAN RYAN CHILDERS
1445 ROSS AVE #2500 24050411
DALLAS, TX 75202
BRENT GAMBLE
JUDGE, 270 JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT
CIVIL COURTS BUILDING
IOUSTON, TEXAS 77002
713/368-6400
10/11/2011
TO ALL COUNSEL/ PRO SE OF RECORD
Enclosed is a copy of the Order signed by the Judge and or Docket Sheet
entry.
BRENT GAMBLE
Judge, 270TH DISTRICT COURT
CASE - 200977474 FILED - 20091204 COURT - 270th
TYPE - BREACH OF CONTRACT
PREXUS HEALTH CONSUL VS UNIVERSITY GENERAL H
MICHAEL K. HURST
1445 ROSS AVE 48 FL 10316310
DALLAS, TX 752020000
BRENT GAMBLE
JUDGE, 270" JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT
CIVIL COURTS BUILDING
HOUSTON, TEXAS 77002
713/368-6400
10/11/2011
TO ALL COUNSEL/ PRO SE OF RECORD
Enclosed is a copy of the Order signed by the Judge and or Docket Sheet
entry.
BRENT GAMBLE
Judge, 270TH DISTRICT COURT
CASE - 200977474 FILED - 20091204 COURT - 270th
TYPE - BREACH OF CONTRACT
PREXUS HEALTH CONSUL VS UNIVERSITY GENERAL H
JOHN HATCHETT MCFARLAND
712 MAIN STREET SUITE 1500 794270
HOUSTON, TX 77002
BRENT GAMBLE
JUDGE, 270" JUDICIAL DISTRI COURT
cr OURTS BUILDING
HOU |, TEXAS 77002
713/368-6400
10/11/2011
TO ALL COUNSEL/ PRO SE OF RECORD
Enclosed is a copy of the Order signed by the Judge and or Docket Sheet
entry.
BRENT GAMBLE
Judge, 270TH DISTRICT COURT
CASE - 200977984 FILED - 20091208 COURT - 270th
TYPE - DECLARATORY JUDGMENT
GRAFF, CORY VS C A T SCAN CENTRE IN
GREGG M. ROSENBERG
3555 TIMMONS 17268750
HOUSTON, TX 77027
BRENT GAMBLE
JUDGE, 270" JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT
CIVIL COURTS BUILDING
HOUSTON, XAS 77002
713/368-6400
10/11/2011
TO ALL COUNSEL/ PRO SE OF RECORD
Enclosed is a copy of the Order signed by the Judge and or Docket Sheet
entry.
BRENT GAMBLE
Judge, 270TH DISTRICT COURT
CASE - 200977984 FILED - 20091208 COURT - 270th
TYPE - DECLARATORY JUDGMENT
GRAFF, CORY VS C AT SCAN CENTRE IN
MARK DOUGLAS GORANSON
550 WESTCOTT #415 8192950
HOUSTON, TX 770070000
eS Filed 11 September 12 A10:30
Chris Daniel - District Clerk
Harris Coun’
ED101J016490651
By: Sandra Talbert
PREXUS HEALTH CONSULTANTS,
CAUSE NO. 2009-77474
§ INTHE DISTRICT COURT
P5
LLC and PREXUS HEALTH, LLC, §
§
Plaintiffs, §
v. § 270th SUDICIAL DISTRICT
UNIVERSITY GENERAL HOSPITAL §
SYSTEMS, LLP f/k/a UNIVERSITY
GENERAL HOSPITAL, LP,
ASCENSION PHYSICIAN SOLUTIONS,
LLC, DEVYN WOLENS,
INDIVIDUALLY, LUXXUS HEALTH
SYSTEMS, LLC, HASSAN CHADADEB,
INDIVIDUALLY, AND MIKE GRIFFIN,
INDIVIDUALLY,
Defendants. § HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS
JUDGMENT
At the conclusion of evidence, on April 25, 2011, the Court submitted the
questions of fact in the case to the jury. The Charge of the Court reflecting the verdict of
the jury, file-stamped April 26, 2011, is incorporated herein for all purposes by reference.
Before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Motion for Judgment on the Verdict (the “Motion”),
Defendants’ Motion to Disregard Certain Jury Findings and for Judgment
Notwithstanding the Verdict, and all responses and replies thereto. On June 30, 2011,
Plaintiffs Prexus Health Consultants, LLC and Prexus Health, LLC (collectively,
“Plaintiffs”) appeared through their attomeys; and Defendants University General
Hospital, L.P, (“UGH”), Ascension Physician Solutions, LLC (“Ascension”), Luxxus
Health Systems, LLC (“Luxxus”), Hassan Chahadeh (“Chahadeh”), and Mike Griffin
(“Griffin”) (collectively, “Defendants”) appeared through their attorneys. Upon
examination of the pleadings, the record, and upon hearing the argument of counsel, on
JUDGMENT (election of breach of contract, no tortious interference of employment contracts) Page 1
68941_1.DOC
Nata!8"
July 15, 2011 through docket entry, the Court granted in part and denied in part
Defendants’ Motion to Disregard by disregarding the jury’s answers of damages awarded
against Luxxus for tortious interference with employment contracts. The Court hereby
GRANTS Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment on the Verdict.
‘The Court finds that, on good and sufficient evidence presented during the jury
trlal of this matter, Plaintiffs are entitled to have and recover a judgment from and against
the Defendants as follows:
A. Against UGH
Judgment against UGH and in favor of Plaintiffs for breach of contract,
Professional Services Agreement;
$146,000.00 in monies owed for the work performed;
$900,000.00, constituting the amount University General agreed to pay Prexus for
the Professional Services Agreement less the expenses Prexus saved by not
completing the Professional Services Agreement;
Take-nothing judgment against UGH and in favor of Plaintiffs for UGH’s
counterclaims in this lawsuit, including on its counterclaims for breach of
contract, Professional Services Agreement; fraud; and recovery of attorncys’ fees;
and
Pre-judgment interest on the breach of the Professional Services Agreement in the
amount of $146,000.00 at the rate of 12% calculated from January 1, 2011 to
Septemtber 2, 2011 is $11,712.00.
B. Against Ascension and UGH, jointly and severally
Judgment against Ascension aid UGH, jointly and severally, and in favor of
Plaintiffs, for breach of contract, Consulting Services Agreement;
$608,005.00 in monies owed for the work performed;
$1,200,000.00, constituting the amount Ascension agreed to pay Prexus for the
Consulting Services Agrcement less the expenses Prexus saved by not completing
the Consulting Services Agreement;
JUDGMENT (election of breach of contract, no tortious interference of employment contracts) Page 2
68941_1.DOC
d, Take-nothing judgment in favor of Plaintiffs for Ascension’s counterclaims in this
lawsuit, including on its counterclaims for breach of contract, Professional
Services Agreement; fraud; and recovery of attorneys’ fees; and
Pre-judgment interest on the breach of the Consulting Services Agreement in the
amount of $608,005.00 at the rate of 12% calculated from January 1, 2011 to
September 2, 2011 is $48,773.66.
Cc. Against Laxxus
Take-nothing judgment in. favor of Luxxus for Plaintiffs claims of tortious
interference with the employment relationships between Plaintiffs and i) Mike
Griffin, ii) Rusty Shelton, iii) Devyn Wolens, and iv) Robyn Finnegan.
The Court further finds that, on good and sufficient evidence presented during the
jury trial of this matter, througli the Motion, as well as in the completed Charge of the
Court file-stamped April 26, 2011, Plaintiffs are entitled to recover from and against
Defendants UGH arid Ascension, jointly and severally, reasonable and necessary
attomeys’ fees in the amount of $107,000.00, Plaintiffs are likewise entitled to costs of
Court; pre-judgment interest at the rate of 12% on $146,000.00 against UGH and
$608,005.00 against Ascension and UGH, jointly and severally, pursuant to Texas
Finance Code § 304.002; and post-judgment interest at the rate of 12% for breach of
contract pursuant to Texas Finance Code § 304.002 and at the rate of 5% for the
rémainder-of the Judgment accrues from the date of Judgment until UGH and Ascension
satisfy the Judgment.
IT IS THEREFORE, ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that a judgment
is entered against Defendants University General Hospital, L.P. and Ascension Physician
Solutions, LLC as follows:
a. Judgment against UGH and in favor of Plaintiffs for $1,046,000.00 plus
$11,712.00 for pre-judgment interest through September 2, 2011 equals a total of
$1,057,712.00;
JUDGMENT (election of breach of contract,no tortious interference of employment contracts) Page 3
68941_1.DOC
Post-judgment interest in the amount of 12% on $1,057,712.00 against UGH,
which constitutes $347.74 per day until the judgment is satisfied;
Judgment against Ascension and UGH, jointly and severally, and in favor of
Plaintiffs, for $1,808,005.00 plus $48,773.66 pre-judgment interest through
September 2, 2011 equals a total of $1,856,778.66;
Post-judgment interest in the amount of 12% on $1,856,778.66 against Ascension
and UGH, which constitutes $610.45 per day until the judgment is satisfied;
Plaintiffs are additionally entitled to recover from and against Defendants UGH
and Ascension, jointly and severally, reasonable and necessary attorneys’ fees in
the amount of $107,000.00 with post-judgment interest in the amount of 5%,
which constitutes $14.66 per day until the judgment is satisfied;
All costs of Court are taxed against Defendants UGH and Ascension.
UGH take nothing by way of its counterclaims in this lawsuit, including on its
counterclaims for breach of contract, Professional Services Agreement; fraud; and
recovery of attorneys’ fees;
Ascension take nothing by way of its counterclaims in this lawsuit, including on
its counterclaims for breach of contract, Professional Services Agrcement; fraud;
and recovery of attorneys’ fees;
Plaintiffs’ claims for tortious interference by UGH with the relationships between
Plaintiffs and their former employees, and also for tortious interference by UGH,
Luxxus, Hassan Chahadeh, and Mike Griffin with respect to the agreements
between Plaintiffs and Humble Surgical Hospital, LLC, are hereby Dismissed
with Prejudice to the refiling of same.
Plaintifis shall take nothing from their claims for tortious interference by Luxxus
with the rclationships between Plaintiffs and their former employees.
Plaintiffs are allowed such writs and processes as may be necessary in the
enforcement and collection of this Judgment.
All relief requested in this case and not expressly granted is denied. This
Judgment disposes of all parties and all claims in the above-captioned cause,
Therefore, this Judgment is a final judgment.
JUDGMENT (election of breach of contract, no tortious interference of employment contracts) Page 4.
68941_1.DOC
Judge|Presiding
JUDGMENT (election of breach of contract, no tortious interference of employment contracts) Page 5
68941_1 DOC
Preview
BRENT GAMBLE JUDGE, 270™ JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT CIVIL Cl RTS BUILDING HOUSYTO! EXAS 77002 713/368-6400 10/11/2011 TO ALL COUNSEL/ PRO SE OF RECORD Enclosed is a copy of the Order signed by the Judge and or Docket Sheet entry. BRENT GAMBLE Judge, 270TH DISTRICT COURT CASE - 200977474 FILED - 20091204 COURT - 270th TYPE - BREACH OF CONTRACT PREXUS HEALTH CONSUL VS UNIVERSITY GENERAL H JONATHAN RYAN CHILDERS 1445 ROSS AVE #2500 24050411 DALLAS, TX 75202 BRENT GAMBLE JUDGE, 270 JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT CIVIL COURTS BUILDING IOUSTON, TEXAS 77002 713/368-6400 10/11/2011 TO ALL COUNSEL/ PRO SE OF RECORD Enclosed is a copy of the Order signed by the Judge and or Docket Sheet entry. BRENT GAMBLE Judge, 270TH DISTRICT COURT CASE - 200977474 FILED - 20091204 COURT - 270th TYPE - BREACH OF CONTRACT PREXUS HEALTH CONSUL VS UNIVERSITY GENERAL H MICHAEL K. HURST 1445 ROSS AVE 48 FL 10316310 DALLAS, TX 752020000 BRENT GAMBLE JUDGE, 270" JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT CIVIL COURTS BUILDING HOUSTON, TEXAS 77002 713/368-6400 10/11/2011 TO ALL COUNSEL/ PRO SE OF RECORD Enclosed is a copy of the Order signed by the Judge and or Docket Sheet entry. BRENT GAMBLE Judge, 270TH DISTRICT COURT CASE - 200977474 FILED - 20091204 COURT - 270th TYPE - BREACH OF CONTRACT PREXUS HEALTH CONSUL VS UNIVERSITY GENERAL H JOHN HATCHETT MCFARLAND 712 MAIN STREET SUITE 1500 794270 HOUSTON, TX 77002 BRENT GAMBLE JUDGE, 270" JUDICIAL DISTRI COURT cr OURTS BUILDING HOU |, TEXAS 77002 713/368-6400 10/11/2011 TO ALL COUNSEL/ PRO SE OF RECORD Enclosed is a copy of the Order signed by the Judge and or Docket Sheet entry. BRENT GAMBLE Judge, 270TH DISTRICT COURT CASE - 200977984 FILED - 20091208 COURT - 270th TYPE - DECLARATORY JUDGMENT GRAFF, CORY VS C A T SCAN CENTRE IN GREGG M. ROSENBERG 3555 TIMMONS 17268750 HOUSTON, TX 77027 BRENT GAMBLE JUDGE, 270" JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT CIVIL COURTS BUILDING HOUSTON, XAS 77002 713/368-6400 10/11/2011 TO ALL COUNSEL/ PRO SE OF RECORD Enclosed is a copy of the Order signed by the Judge and or Docket Sheet entry. BRENT GAMBLE Judge, 270TH DISTRICT COURT CASE - 200977984 FILED - 20091208 COURT - 270th TYPE - DECLARATORY JUDGMENT GRAFF, CORY VS C AT SCAN CENTRE IN MARK DOUGLAS GORANSON 550 WESTCOTT #415 8192950 HOUSTON, TX 770070000 eS Filed 11 September 12 A10:30 Chris Daniel - District Clerk Harris Coun’ ED101J016490651 By: Sandra Talbert PREXUS HEALTH CONSULTANTS, CAUSE NO. 2009-77474 § INTHE DISTRICT COURT P5 LLC and PREXUS HEALTH, LLC, § § Plaintiffs, § v. § 270th SUDICIAL DISTRICT UNIVERSITY GENERAL HOSPITAL § SYSTEMS, LLP f/k/a UNIVERSITY GENERAL HOSPITAL, LP, ASCENSION PHYSICIAN SOLUTIONS, LLC, DEVYN WOLENS, INDIVIDUALLY, LUXXUS HEALTH SYSTEMS, LLC, HASSAN CHADADEB, INDIVIDUALLY, AND MIKE GRIFFIN, INDIVIDUALLY, Defendants. § HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS JUDGMENT At the conclusion of evidence, on April 25, 2011, the Court submitted the questions of fact in the case to the jury. The Charge of the Court reflecting the verdict of the jury, file-stamped April 26, 2011, is incorporated herein for all purposes by reference. Before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Motion for Judgment on the Verdict (the “Motion”), Defendants’ Motion to Disregard Certain Jury Findings and for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict, and all responses and replies thereto. On June 30, 2011, Plaintiffs Prexus Health Consultants, LLC and Prexus Health, LLC (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) appeared through their attomeys; and Defendants University General Hospital, L.P, (“UGH”), Ascension Physician Solutions, LLC (“Ascension”), Luxxus Health Systems, LLC (“Luxxus”), Hassan Chahadeh (“Chahadeh”), and Mike Griffin (“Griffin”) (collectively, “Defendants”) appeared through their attorneys. Upon examination of the pleadings, the record, and upon hearing the argument of counsel, on JUDGMENT (election of breach of contract, no tortious interference of employment contracts) Page 1 68941_1.DOC Nata!8" July 15, 2011 through docket entry, the Court granted in part and denied in part Defendants’ Motion to Disregard by disregarding the jury’s answers of damages awarded against Luxxus for tortious interference with employment contracts. The Court hereby GRANTS Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment on the Verdict. ‘The Court finds that, on good and sufficient evidence presented during the jury trlal of this matter, Plaintiffs are entitled to have and recover a judgment from and against the Defendants as follows: A. Against UGH Judgment against UGH and in favor of Plaintiffs for breach of contract, Professional Services Agreement; $146,000.00 in monies owed for the work performed; $900,000.00, constituting the amount University General agreed to pay Prexus for the Professional Services Agreement less the expenses Prexus saved by not completing the Professional Services Agreement; Take-nothing judgment against UGH and in favor of Plaintiffs for UGH’s counterclaims in this lawsuit, including on its counterclaims for breach of contract, Professional Services Agreement; fraud; and recovery of attorncys’ fees; and Pre-judgment interest on the breach of the Professional Services Agreement in the amount of $146,000.00 at the rate of 12% calculated from January 1, 2011 to Septemtber 2, 2011 is $11,712.00. B. Against Ascension and UGH, jointly and severally Judgment against Ascension aid UGH, jointly and severally, and in favor of Plaintiffs, for breach of contract, Consulting Services Agreement; $608,005.00 in monies owed for the work performed; $1,200,000.00, constituting the amount Ascension agreed to pay Prexus for the Consulting Services Agrcement less the expenses Prexus saved by not completing the Consulting Services Agreement; JUDGMENT (election of breach of contract, no tortious interference of employment contracts) Page 2 68941_1.DOC d, Take-nothing judgment in favor of Plaintiffs for Ascension’s counterclaims in this lawsuit, including on its counterclaims for breach of contract, Professional Services Agreement; fraud; and recovery of attorneys’ fees; and Pre-judgment interest on the breach of the Consulting Services Agreement in the amount of $608,005.00 at the rate of 12% calculated from January 1, 2011 to September 2, 2011 is $48,773.66. Cc. Against Laxxus Take-nothing judgment in. favor of Luxxus for Plaintiffs claims of tortious interference with the employment relationships between Plaintiffs and i) Mike Griffin, ii) Rusty Shelton, iii) Devyn Wolens, and iv) Robyn Finnegan. The Court further finds that, on good and sufficient evidence presented during the jury trial of this matter, througli the Motion, as well as in the completed Charge of the Court file-stamped April 26, 2011, Plaintiffs are entitled to recover from and against Defendants UGH arid Ascension, jointly and severally, reasonable and necessary attomeys’ fees in the amount of $107,000.00, Plaintiffs are likewise entitled to costs of Court; pre-judgment interest at the rate of 12% on $146,000.00 against UGH and $608,005.00 against Ascension and UGH, jointly and severally, pursuant to Texas Finance Code § 304.002; and post-judgment interest at the rate of 12% for breach of contract pursuant to Texas Finance Code § 304.002 and at the rate of 5% for the rémainder-of the Judgment accrues from the date of Judgment until UGH and Ascension satisfy the Judgment. IT IS THEREFORE, ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that a judgment is entered against Defendants University General Hospital, L.P. and Ascension Physician Solutions, LLC as follows: a. Judgment against UGH and in favor of Plaintiffs for $1,046,000.00 plus $11,712.00 for pre-judgment interest through September 2, 2011 equals a total of $1,057,712.00; JUDGMENT (election of breach of contract,no tortious interference of employment contracts) Page 3 68941_1.DOC Post-judgment interest in the amount of 12% on $1,057,712.00 against UGH, which constitutes $347.74 per day until the judgment is satisfied; Judgment against Ascension and UGH, jointly and severally, and in favor of Plaintiffs, for $1,808,005.00 plus $48,773.66 pre-judgment interest through September 2, 2011 equals a total of $1,856,778.66; Post-judgment interest in the amount of 12% on $1,856,778.66 against Ascension and UGH, which constitutes $610.45 per day until the judgment is satisfied; Plaintiffs are additionally entitled to recover from and against Defendants UGH and Ascension, jointly and severally, reasonable and necessary attorneys’ fees in the amount of $107,000.00 with post-judgment interest in the amount of 5%, which constitutes $14.66 per day until the judgment is satisfied; All costs of Court are taxed against Defendants UGH and Ascension. UGH take nothing by way of its counterclaims in this lawsuit, including on its counterclaims for breach of contract, Professional Services Agreement; fraud; and recovery of attorneys’ fees; Ascension take nothing by way of its counterclaims in this lawsuit, including on its counterclaims for breach of contract, Professional Services Agrcement; fraud; and recovery of attorneys’ fees; Plaintiffs’ claims for tortious interference by UGH with the relationships between Plaintiffs and their former employees, and also for tortious interference by UGH, Luxxus, Hassan Chahadeh, and Mike Griffin with respect to the agreements between Plaintiffs and Humble Surgical Hospital, LLC, are hereby Dismissed with Prejudice to the refiling of same. Plaintifis shall take nothing from their claims for tortious interference by Luxxus with the rclationships between Plaintiffs and their former employees. Plaintiffs are allowed such writs and processes as may be necessary in the enforcement and collection of this Judgment. All relief requested in this case and not expressly granted is denied. This Judgment disposes of all parties and all claims in the above-captioned cause, Therefore, this Judgment is a final judgment. JUDGMENT (election of breach of contract, no tortious interference of employment contracts) Page 4. 68941_1.DOC Judge|Presiding JUDGMENT (election of breach of contract, no tortious interference of employment contracts) Page 5 68941_1 DOC