Preview
FILED
8/27/2020 2:31PM
FELICIA PITRE
DISTRICT CLERK
DALLAS CO.,TEXAS
Debra ClarkDEPUTY
CAUSE NO. DC-20-09420
ROZ C. LYLES, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS IN THE DISTRICT COURT
REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF
WILLIAM LYLES, DECEASED
VS.
ssc MCKINNEY OPERATING
COMPANY, LLC d/b/a NORTH PARK mmmmmmmmmmmmmm
44TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
HEALTH AND REHABILITATION
CENTER; MPD OPERATORS
MCKINNEY, LLC d/b/a BELTERRA
HEALTH & REHAB; ZAHID N. ZAFAR,
M.D.; MOBILE MD PA; MOSES J. KENG,
JR, M.D. and ALLEN J. FRAIZER, R.N. DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS
PLAINTIFF’S VERIFIED MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE ON DEFENDANTS’
MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE AND RESPONSE TO
DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE
TO THE HONORABLE COURT:
COMES NOW, ROZ C. LYLES, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVE
F0 THE STATE OF WILLIAM LYLES (“Plaintiff”), and files this Verified Motion for
Continuance 0n Defendants’ Motion t0 Transfer Venue and Response t0 Defendants’ Motion t0
Transfer Venue, and in support thereof, would show the following:
I
PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
This is a case involving allegations of medical negligence.
Plaintiff filed her Original Petition in Dallas County, Texas District Court on July 10,
2020 and her First Amended Petition on July 31, 2020 asserting the following venue
allegations:
Venue is proper in Dallas County, Texas pursuant to TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM.
CODE §15.002(a)(2) as at the time 0f the incident at issue, Defendant Fraizer
resided in Dallas County. Further, Defendant Keng maintained a principal place of
business in Dallas County.
PLAINTIFF’S VERIFIED MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE AND RESPONSE
TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE Page 1
3. Specifically, Plaintiff has plead that Dallas County is an appropriate county of venue
pursuant to Tex. CiV. Prac. & Rem. Code 15.002(3) as Defendant MOSES J. KENG, JR,
M.D. is a medical doctor licensed t0 practice in the State 0f Texas whose principal office
is 1350 East Lookout Drive, Richardson, Dallas County, Texas 75082.
4. Specifically, Plaintiff has plead that Dallas County is an appropriate county of venue
pursuant to TeX. CiV. Prac. & Rem. Code 15.002(3) as Defendant ALLEN J. FRAIZER,
R.N. is a registered nurse licensed t0 practice in the State 0f Texas and resided at 5165
Verde Valley Ln, Apt. 2410, Dallas, Dallas County, Texas 75254 at the time this cause 0f
action accrued.
5. A11 Defendants have brought Motions to Transfer Venue.
6. The publicly available records through the Texas Secretary 0f State are attached to this
Motion to Continue the hearing on Defendants' Motion to Transfer Venue and Response
t0 Defendants’ Motion t0 Transfer Venue. However, Plaintiff has not had sufficient time
to conduct venue discovery t0 Defendants because this case was filed and served a little
over four weeks ago.
7. Should the Court believe that the publicly available records through the Texas Secretary 0f
State that are attached t0 this Motion and Response are insufficient to establish that these
Defendants maintained a principal office in Dallas County Texas and a residence in Dallas
County, Texas, then Plaintiff requests the Court continue this hearing until such a time as
Plaintiff has sufficient opportunity to conduct discovery on the venue issue.
II.
EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF VENUE ALLEGATIONS
Exhibit “A” The TSBME profile for Dr. Moses J. Keng, Jr.reporting his principal place
0f business as 1350 East Lookout Drive, Richardson, Texas 75082.
Exhibit “B” Lexis Nexis Public Records Report of Allen Justin Fraizer
Exhibit “C” Venue Discovery served 0n Defendants Keng and Fraizer 0n August 25,
2020
PLAINTIFF’S VERIFIED MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE AND RESPONSE
TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE Page 2
III.
AUTHORITIES AND APPLICABLE LAW
The specific provisions from the TEXAS CIVIL PRACTICES AND REMEDIES CODE that apply
to venue are outlined below:
Sec. 15.002. VENUE: GENERAL RULE.
(a) Except as otherwise provided by this subchapter 0r Subchapter B 0r C, all
lawsuits shall be brought. ...
(2) in the county of defendant's residence at the time the cause 0f
action accrued if defendant is a natural person;
(3) in the county 0f the defendant’s principal office in this state, if
the defendant is not a natural person.
(b) For the convenience 0f the parties and witnesses and in the interest ofjustice,
a court may transfer an action from a county 0f proper venue under this subchapter
0r Subchapter C to any other county of proper venue on motion 0f a defendant filed
and served concurrently With or before the filing of the answer, Where the court
finds:
(1) maintenance of the action in the county of suit would work an injustice
t0 the movant considering the movant's economic and personal hardship;
(2) the balance of interests of all the parties predominates in favor of the
action being brought in the other county and
(3) the transfer 0f the action would not work an injustice t0 any other
party. ..
(c) A court's ruling or decision to grant 0r deny a transfer under Subsection (b) is
not grounds for appeal or mandamus and is not reversible error.
Sec. 15.005. MULTIPLE DEFENDANTS.
In a suit in which the plaintiff has established proper venue against a defendant, the
court also has venue of all the defendants in allclaims 0r actions arising out of the
same transaction, occurrence, 0r series of transactions 0r occurrences.
Sec. 15.006. VENUE DETERMINED BY FACTS EXISTING AT THE
TIME OF ACCRUAL.
A court shall determine the venue 0f a suit based 0n the facts existing at the time
the cause 0f action that is the basis of the suit accrued.
PLAINTIFF’S VERIFIED MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE AND RESPONSE
TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE Page 3
Furthermore, TEXAS CIVIL PRACTICE AND REMEDIES CODE 87(2)(b) states:
CAUSE OF ACTION. It shall not be necessary for a claimant to prove the merits
of a cause of action, but the existence 0f a cause 0f action, when pleaded properly,
shall be taken as established as alleged by the pleadings. When the defendant
specifically denies the venue allegations, the claimant is required, by prima facie
proof as provided in paragraph 3 0fthis rule, t0 support such pleading that the cause
0f action taken as established by the pleadings, or a part of such cause 0f action,
accrued in the county of suit. If a defendant seeks transfer t0 a county Where the
cause 0f action 0r a part thereof accrued, it shall be sufficient for the defendant t0
plead that if a cause of action exists, then the cause 0f action or part thereof accrued
in the specific county to Which transfer is sought, and such allegation shall not
constitute an admission that a cause 0f action in fact exists. But the defendant shall
be required t0 support his pleading by prima facie proof as provided in paragraph
3 of this rule, that, if a cause of action exists, itor a part thereof accrued in the
county t0 Which transfer is sought.
The definition 0f prima facie proof can be found in TEXAS CIVIL PRACTICE AND
REMEDIES CODE 87(3)(c) which states:
PRIMA FACIE PROOF. If a claimant has adequately pleaded and made prima
facie proof that venue is proper in the county of suit as provided in subdivision (a)
of paragraph 3, then the cause shall not be transferred but shall be retained in the
county 0f suit, unless the motion t0 transfer is based 0n the grounds that an impartial
trial cannot be had in the county where the action is pending as provided in Rules
257-259 0r 0n an established ground of mandatory venue. A ground of mandatory
venue is established When the party relying upon a mandatory exception t0 the
general rule makes prima facie proof as provided in subdivision (a) of paragraph 3
of this rule.
It iswell established that, “[t]he Plaintiffhas the first choice t0 fix venue in a proper county;
this the Plaintiff does by filing the suit in the county 0f his choice.” In re Masonite Corp, 997
S.W.2d 194, 197 (Tex. 1999). If there is more than one county 0f appropriate venue, the plaintiff” s
choice controls. See M0vef01free.com, Inc. v. David Hetrik, Ina, 288 S.W.3d 539,542 (TeX.
App.—Houston [14th Dist] 2009, no pet); Velasco v. Texas Kenworth C0,, 144 S.W.3d 632, 635
(TeX. App.—Dallas 2004, pet. denied). “[I]f the plaintiff chooses a county 0f proper venue, and
[the venue] is supported by proof as required by Rule 87, no other county can be a proper venue
in that case. This rule gives effect t0 the plaintiff‘s right to select a proper venue.” Wilson v. Texas
PLAINTIFF’S VERIFIED MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE AND RESPONSE
TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE Page 4
Parks & Wildlife Dep't, 886 S.W.2d 259, 261 (Tex. 1994), citing Maranatha Temple, Inc. v.
Enterprise Prod. Ca, 833 S.W.2d 736, 741, (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist] 1992, writ denied).
“Venue may be proper in more than one county under the venue rules. In general, Plaintiffs
are allowed t0 choose venue first and the plaintiff’s choice 0f venue cannot be disturbed as long
as the suit is initially filed in a county of proper venue. A trial court must consider all venue facts
pled by the plaintiff as true, unless they are specifically denied by an adverse party. ..On appeal,
the trialcourt’s determination that venue is proper in a particular county will be upheld if there is
any probative evidence supporting venue in the county of suit, even if the evidence preponderates
t0 the contrary.” In re Henry, 274. S.W.3d 185, 190 (Tex. App.—Houston [1“ Dist], 2008, orig.
proceeding); Shell Oil C0. v. Baran, 258 S.W.3d 719, 722 (Tex. App.—Beaum0nt 2008, pet.
dism’d).
In a suit with multiple defendants, if the plaintiff establishes proper venue against one
defendant, then venue is proper for all defendants as long as the claims arise from the same
transaction, occurrence, 0r series of transactions 0r occurrences. TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE
15.005; American Home Prods. v. Clark, 38 S.W.3d 92, 94 (Tex. 2000).
IV.
APPLICATION OF THE LAW TO THE VENUE FACTS OF THE CASE
A) Defendant Moses J. Keng, M.D.’s Principal Place 0f Business was in Dallas County,
Texas at the time 0f this Cause 0f Action Accrued
It isundisputed the incident at issue in this case occurred in 2019. At that time, Defendant
Moses J. Keng, Jr., M.D. maintained and continues t0 maintain a principal office at 1350 East
Lookout Drive, Richardson, Dallas County, Texas 75082, which is located in Dallas County,
Texas. See Defendant Moses J. Keng, MD. ’s
Motion t0 Transfer Venue, and Subject Thereto,
PLAINTIFF’S VERIFIED MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE AND RESPONSE
TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE Page 5
Original Answer and Special Exceptions t0 Plaintifi’iv First Amended Original Petition; see also
Exhibit “B”.
Plaintiffs First Amended Petition and the evidence attached t0 this motion are sufficient
t0 satisfy TeX. CiV. Prac. & Rem. Code §15.002 and Texas Rule 0f Civil Procedure 87. Plaintiff
requests the Court take judicial notice of the venue allegations made in her First Amended Petition
and 0f the fact that Defendant Moses J. Keng, Jr.,M.D., maintained and continues t0 maintain a
principal office at 1350 East Lookout Drive, Richardson, Dallas County, Texas 75082, Which is
located in Dallas County, Texas.
B) Defendant Allen J. Fraizer, R.N. resided in Dallas County, Texas at the time
THIS CAUSE 0F ACTION ACCRUED.
It isundisputed the incident at issue in this case occurred in 2019. At that time, Defendant
Allen J.Fraizer, R.N., resided at 5 165 Verde Valley Ln, Apt. 2410, Dallas, Dallas County, Texas
75254. See Exhibit “B”.
Plaintiff” s First Amended Petition and the evidence attached t0 this motion are sufficient
t0 satisfy Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §15.002 and Texas Rule 0f Civil Procedure 87. Plaintiff
requests the Court take judicial notice of the venue allegations made in her First Amended Petition
and 0f the fact that Defendant Allen J. Fraizer, R.N. resided at 5165 Verde Valley Ln, Apt. 2410,
Dallas, Dallas County, Texas 75254, at the time this incident occurred. See Exhibit “B”.
C) Defendants have Failed t0 Support their Motions to Transfer Venue with Prima Facie
Proof that an Inconvenience exists t0 Trigger Transfer 0f this Case
Despite Defendants’ arguments regarding convenience, there is n0 evidence that there
actually exists an inconvenience that would trigger the transfer options under TEX. CIV. PRAC. &
REM. CODE §15.002(b), given the geographic proximity 0f Collin County and Dallas County. The
Texas inconvenience rule is conceptually similar t0 the Federalforum non-conveniens venue rule,
PLAINTIFF’S VERIFIED MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE AND RESPONSE
TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE Page 6
Which allows for transfers of venue in situations Where alternate venues may be thousands of miles
apart and create obvious impediments. Such “hardship” simply does not exist here. Collin and
Dallas Counties are not counties of great divide and travel ofresidents commonly happens between
both areas. The counties share a common border and are linked With a several ground roads and a
highway. No true inconvenience is present sufficient to warrant setting aside the prerogative of
Plaintiff in choosing a demonstrably proper county 0f venue. Nor have Defendants provided any
evidence of inconvenience as required by TeX.R.CiV.Proc. 87(3)(c).
As Plaintiff has established proper venue against one or more Defendants, the court also
has venue over the other Defendants in this matter as the claims against all Defendants arise out
0f the same “transaction, occurrence, 0r series 0f transactions 0r occurrences.” See Tex. CiV. Prac.
& Rem. Code §15.005.
As such, there is no need to transfer this matter and Plaintiff requests the Court deny
Defendants’ motions t0 transfer venue.
V.
IN THE ALTERNATIVE, PLAINTIFF REQUESTS THAT THE HEARING ON
DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS BE CONTINUED UNTIL SUCH TIME THAT VENUE
DISCOVERY MAY BE CONDUCTED
Plaintiff filed her Original Petition in Dallas County, Texas District Court on July 10, 2020
and her First Amended Petition 0n July 31, 2020. On August 25, 2020, Plaintiff served venue
discovery 0n all Defendants. Should Defendants fail t0respond t0 Plaintiff” s discovery in advance
of this hearing, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this honorable Court continue the hearing on
Defendants’ Motions t0 Transfer Venue until such time that meaningful discovery responses are
served.
PLAINTIFF’S VERIFIED MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE AND RESPONSE
TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE Page 7
VI.
CONCLUSION
Plaintiff has filed this suit in the proper venue as is evidenced from the attached exhibits
hereto. Defendant Moses Keng’s principal place 0f business was in Dallas County at the time 0f
the incident. Additionally, Defendant Allen Fraizer resided in Dallas County at the time 0f the
incident.
N0 Defendant has provided evidence 0r proof that the maintenance of a suit in Dallas
County creates an injustice. N0 Defendant has shown that Dallas County is not a permissible
County 0f venue 0r that there is a mandatory provision requiring transfer 0f venue pursuant t0 any
statute.
As there is n0 dispute that venue is proper, then venue is proper in Dallas County.
Therefore, the Motions to Transfer Venue brought by these Defendants should be denied and this
matter should remain in Dallas County.
VII.
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, PREMISE CONSIDERED, Plaintiff prays that this Court deny the
Motion t0 Transfer Venue brought by Defendants and for such other and further relief, both at law
and in equity, to Which Plaintiffs may be entitled. In the alternative, Plaintiff respectfully requests
that this Court continue the hearing on the Defendants' Motions to Transfer Venue until such time
that meaningful discovery responses 0n the venue issue are timely served. This Motion for
Continuance 0f the hearing is not brought for purposes 0f delay, but rather t0 allow the parties the
time needed to conduct adequate and necessary discovery 0n the venue issue and ensure that justice
may be served. Plaintiff further prays for such other and further relief to Which she may show
herself entitled.
PLAINTIFF’S VERIFIED MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE AND RESPONSE
TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE Page 8
Respectfully submitted,
WORMINGTON & BOLLINGER
By:
Maria Wormington, RN JD
State Bar No. 24013783
maria@w0rmingtonlegal.com
Amy Bryant Lauten, JD
State Bar No. 2401 1 148
amv@wormingtonlegal.com
212 East Virginia Street
McKinney, Texas 75069
(972) 569-3930
(972) 547-6440 Facsimile
COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF
PLAINTIFF’S VERIFIED MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE AND RESPONSE
TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE Page 9
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
This Will certify 0n this 27th day 0f August, 2020, a true and correct copy 0f the foregoing
was forwarded t0 opposing counsel as follows:
Via E-Service
Heather A. Kanny/Ashley E. Miller
MAYER LLP
750 N. Saint Paul Street, Suite 900
Dallas, Texas 75201
Counselfor Defendants Dr. Zafar and Mobil MD PA
Via E-Service
Susan C. Cooley/Casey C. Campbell /Kristin G. Mijares
SCHELL COOLEY RYAN CAMPBELL LLP
5057 Keller Springs Road, Suite 425
Addison, Texas 75001
Counsel for Defendants MPD Operators McKinney d/b/a Belterra Health & Rehab and Allen
Fraizer, RN.
Via E-Service
Kimberly L. Cormier/Courtney Boes Huber
Beard Kultgen Brophy Bostwick & Dickson, PLLC
15 1 50 Preston Rd., Ste. 230
Dallas, Texas 75248
Counselfor Defendant Moses J. Keng, MD.
jaw
Maria Wormington
PLAINTIFF’S VERIFIED MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE AND RESPONSE
TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE Page 10
CAUSE NO. DC-20-09420
ROZ C. LYLES, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS IN THE DISTRICT COURT
REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF
WILLIAM LYLES, DECEASED
VS.
SSC MCKINNEY OPERATING
COMPANY, LLC d/b/a NORTH PARK mmwfimwmmmmwwwmw
44T" JUDICIAL DISTRICT
HEALTH AND REHABILITATION
CENTER; MPD OPERATORS
MCKINNEY, LLC d/b/a BELTERRA
HEALTH & REHAB; ZAHID N. ZAFAR,
M.D.; MOBILE MD PA; MOSES J. KENG,
JR, M.D. and ALLEN J. FRAZIER, R.N. DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS
PLAINTIFF’S COUNSEL VERIFICATION
STATE OF TEXAS §
COUNTY OF COLLIN g
The undersigned affirms that the contents of this motion are based upon her personal
knowledge and that the contents and statements are true and accurate. She is of majority age and
is competent to make this verification. The undersigned is aware of the penalties of perjury. She
has never been arrested for perjury or conduct involving moral turpitude. This motion isnot filed
for the purposes 0f harassment 0r undue delay.
Verified this 27‘“ day of August. 2020.
\_/f /.
m
Maria ‘Yormington, RN, JD
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO on this 27‘“ day of August, 2020, by Pearl Weatherford
to certify which witness my hand and seal of office.
Q!)
Staté‘é? Texas Notaly Public
fl
PERLA WEATHERFORD
{I g/
. . .
Notarylomeams My commissnon Expires
My CommissionExpires
May 8. 2022
7/1/2020 Welcome TMB Website
to the
EXH'B'T
PUBLIC VERIFICATION I PHYSICIAN PROFILE
PHYSICIAN
NAME: MOSES JOSHUA KENG JR MD DATE: 07/01/2020
THE INFORMATION IN THIS BOX HAS BEEN VERIFIED
BY THE TEXAS MEDICAL BOARD
Date of Birth: 1970
License Number: M1181 Full Medical License
Issuance Date: 06/03/2005
Expiration Date of Physician’s Registration Permit: 05/31/2021
Registration Status: ACTIVE Registration Date: 06/23/2005
Disciplinary Status: NONE Disciplinary Date: NONE
Licensure Status: NONE Licensure Date: NONE
Medical School of Graduation:
At the time of licensure, TMB verified the physician’s graduation from medical school as follows:
ROSALIND FRANKLIN UNIVERSITY OF MEDICINE AND SCIENCE, CHICAGO MEDICAL
SCHOOL, CHICAGO
Medical School Graduation Year: 2001
TMB Filings, Actions and License Restrictions
The Texas Medical Board has the following board actions against this physician. (This may include
any formal complaints filed by TMB, as well as petitions and/or responses related to licensure
contested matters, at the State Office of Administrative Hearings.)
NONE
Investigations by TMB of Medical Malpractice
Section 164.201 of the Act requires that: the board review information relating to a physician against
whom three or more malpractice claims have been reported within a five year period. Based on
these reviews, the following investigations were conducted with the listed resolutions.
NONE
reg.tmb.state.tx.us/OnLineVerif/Phys_ReportVerif_new.asp 1/6
7/1/2020 Welcome TMB Website
to the
Status History
Status history contains entries for any updates to the individual's registration, licensure or
disciplinary status types (beginning with 1/1/78, when the board’s records were first automated).
Entries are in reverse chronological order; new entries of each type supersede the previous entry of
that same type. These records do not display status type. Should you have any questions, please
contact our Customer Information Center at 512-305-7030 or verifcic@tmb.state.tx.us
Status Code: AC Effective Date: 06/23/2005
Description: ACTIVE
Status Code: L| Effective Date: 06/03/2005
Description: LICENSE ISSUED
THE INFORMATION IN THIS BOX WAS REPORTED BY THE LICENSEE AND
HAS NOT BEEN VERIFIED BY THE TEXAS MEDICAL BOARD
Gender: MALE
*Ethnicity: ASIAN OR PACIFIC ISLANDER
Race: ASIAN
*
We are inthe process of transitioning from the current ethnic origin values to federal
standards for race and Hispanic origin. The transition period will allow time for
individuals to submit updated race and Hispanic origin data to the TMB.
Place of Birth: PHILIPPINES
Current Primary Practice Address:
1350 EAST LOOKOUT DRIVE
RICHARDSON ,
TX 75082
Years of Active Practice in the U.S. or Canada:
The physician reports that he/she has actively practiced medicine in
the United States or Canada for 14 year(s).
Years of Active Practice in Texas:
The physician reports that, of the above years he/she has actively practiced in
the State of Texas for 14 year(s).
Specialty Board Certification
The physician reports that he/she holds the following specialty certifications issued by a
board that is a member of the American Board of Medical Specialties or the Bureau of
Osteopathic Specialists:
Specialty Certification: AMERICAN BOARD OF PHYSICAL MEDICINE &
REHABILITATION
Date: 2009
reg .tmb.state.tx.us/OnLi neVerif/Phys_Re portVerif_new.asp 2/6
7/1/2020 Welcome TMB Website
to the
Primary Specialty
The physician reports his/her primary practice is in the area of PHYSICAL MED. &
REHABILITATION.
Secondary Specialty
The physician did not report a secondary practice area.
Name, Location and Graduation Date of All Medical Schools Attended
Name: CHICAGO MEDICAL SCHOOL
Location: NORTH CHICAGO,|L
Graduation Date: 06/2001
Graduate Medical Education In The United States 0r Canada
Program Name: EVANSTON NORTHWESTERN HEALTHCARE HOSP.
Location: EVANSTON IL Begin Date: 06/2001
Type: INTERNSHIP End Date: 06/2002
Specialty: INTERNAL MEDICINE
Program Name: BAYLOR COLLEGE
Location: HOUSTON TX Begin Date: 06/2002
Type: RESIDENCY End Date: 06/2005
Specialty: PHYSICAL MEDICINE AND REHABILITATION
Hospital Privileges
The physician reports that he/she has hospital privileges in the following in the State of
Texas:
Hospital: DALLAS MEDICAL CENTER
Location: DALLAS
Utilization Review
The physician did not report whether he/she provides utilization review.
NONE REPORTED
Patient Services
Accessibility: The physician reports that the patient service area is accessible to
persons with disabilities as defined by federal law.
Language Translation Services: The physician did not report whether he/she provided
any language translation services for patients.
reg .tmb.state.tx.us/OnLi neVerif/Phys_Re portVerif_new.asp 3/6
7/1/2020 Welcome TMB Website
to the
Medicaid Participant: The physician reports that he/she does participate in the
Medicaid program.
Awards, Honors, Publications and Academic Appointments
Optional Information
The physician may optionally report descriptions of up to five such honors and has
reported the following:
Description: PUBLICATION - SLEEP. 2000 FEB 1;23 (1):87-95
Description: PUBLICATION - BRAIN BEHAV EVOL 1997
Description: ABSTRACT - SLEEP RESEARCH ABSTRACT, 1996:# 259:132
Description: ABSTRACT - AAP ANNUAL ASSEMBLY 2005
Malpractice Information
Section 154.006(b)(16) of the Act requires that: a physician profile display a description
of any medical malpractice claim against the physician, not including a description of any
offers by the physician to settle the claim, for which the physician was found liable, a jury
awarded monetary damages to the claimant, and the award has been determined to be
final and not subject to further appeal. The physician has the following reportable claims.
Description: NONE
Criminal History
Self-Reported Criminal Offenses:The physician is required to report a description of
(1) "any conviction for an offense constituting a felony, a Class A or Class B
misdemeanor, or a Class C misdemeanor involving moral turpitude" and (2) "any
charges reported to the board to which the physician has pleaded no contest, for which
the physician is the subject of deferred adjudication or pretrial diversion, or in which
sufficient facts of guilt were found and the matter was continued by a court of competent
jurisdiction."
The physician has reported the following:
Description: NONE
Criminal history information is also obtained by TMB from the Texas Department
of Public Safety. Resulting action, if any, will be reported under the TMB Action
and Non-Disciplinary Restrictions section above.
Disciplinary Actions By Other State Medical Boards
reg .tmb.state.tx.us/OnLi neVerif/Phys_Re portVerif_new.asp 4/6
7/1/2020 Welcome TMB Website
to the
The physician has reported the following:
Description: NONE
To obtain
primary
Physician Assistant Supervision source
verifications,
clickname
Description: NONE
To obtain
primary
Advanced Practice Nurse Delegation source
verifications,
clickname
APN Name: HENDAWI, TARIQ APN
APN License Number: AP139932
Delegation Location Type: Long-Term Facility
Approve Date: 7/1/2019
Hours Supervised: 8
Dangerous Drugs: YES
Controlled Substances: YES
APN Name: HENDAWI, TARIQ APN
APN License Number: AP139932
Delegation Location Type: Practice Site
Approve Date: 7/1/2019
Hours Supervised: 12
Dangerous Drugs: YES
Controlled Substances: YES
Summary of all LicenseIPermit Types
Issue Date: Type:
07/01/2002 PHYSICIAN IN TRAINING PERMIT
09/01/2003 PHYSICIAN IN TRAINING PERMIT
03/01/2005 PHYSICIAN IN TRAINING PERMIT
06/03/2005 LICENSED PHYSICIAN
05/03/2005 PHYSICIAN TEMPORARY LICENSE
reg .tmb.state.tx.us/OnLi neVerif/Phys_Re portVerif_new.asp 5/6
7/1/2020 Welcome TMB Website
to the
07/01/2002
Contact Us |
Privacy Policy|
Compact
Accessibility Policy
|
withTexans |
Website Linking Policy
Please contact Pre-Licensure, Registration and Consumer Services at (512) 305-7030
for assistance.
reg.tmb.state.tx.us/OnLineVerif/Phys_ReportVerif_new.asp 6/6
@' LexisNexis‘
1 OF1 RECORD(S)
FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY
Copyright 2020 LexisNexis
a division of Reed Elsevier Rights Reserved.
Inc. A||
Date:7/1/2020
Report processed by:
Wormington Law Group PLLC
Full Name Address County Phone
FRAIZER, ALLEN JUSTIN 5165 VERDE VALLEY LN APT 2410 DALLAS None Listed
DALLAS, TX 75254-1 633
DALLAS COUNTY
ADDITIONAL PERSONAL INFORMATION
SSN DOB Gender LexlD(sm) Email
51 2—70-XXXX 11/1 958 000846934869 AFRAIZER@SBCGLOBAL.NET
(
Preview
FILED 8/27/2020 2:31PM FELICIA PITRE DISTRICT CLERK DALLAS CO.,TEXAS Debra ClarkDEPUTY CAUSE NO. DC-20-09420 ROZ C. LYLES, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS IN THE DISTRICT COURT REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF WILLIAM LYLES, DECEASED VS. ssc MCKINNEY OPERATING COMPANY, LLC d/b/a NORTH PARK mmmmmmmmmmmmmm 44TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT HEALTH AND REHABILITATION CENTER; MPD OPERATORS MCKINNEY, LLC d/b/a BELTERRA HEALTH & REHAB; ZAHID N. ZAFAR, M.D.; MOBILE MD PA; MOSES J. KENG, JR, M.D. and ALLEN J. FRAIZER, R.N. DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS PLAINTIFF’S VERIFIED MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE AND RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE TO THE HONORABLE COURT: COMES NOW, ROZ C. LYLES, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVE F0 THE STATE OF WILLIAM LYLES (“Plaintiff”), and files this Verified Motion for Continuance 0n Defendants’ Motion t0 Transfer Venue and Response t0 Defendants’ Motion t0 Transfer Venue, and in support thereof, would show the following: I PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND This is a case involving allegations of medical negligence. Plaintiff filed her Original Petition in Dallas County, Texas District Court on July 10, 2020 and her First Amended Petition on July 31, 2020 asserting the following venue allegations: Venue is proper in Dallas County, Texas pursuant to TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE §15.002(a)(2) as at the time 0f the incident at issue, Defendant Fraizer resided in Dallas County. Further, Defendant Keng maintained a principal place of business in Dallas County. PLAINTIFF’S VERIFIED MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE AND RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE Page 1 3. Specifically, Plaintiff has plead that Dallas County is an appropriate county of venue pursuant to Tex. CiV. Prac. & Rem. Code 15.002(3) as Defendant MOSES J. KENG, JR, M.D. is a medical doctor licensed t0 practice in the State 0f Texas whose principal office is 1350 East Lookout Drive, Richardson, Dallas County, Texas 75082. 4. Specifically, Plaintiff has plead that Dallas County is an appropriate county of venue pursuant to TeX. CiV. Prac. & Rem. Code 15.002(3) as Defendant ALLEN J. FRAIZER, R.N. is a registered nurse licensed t0 practice in the State 0f Texas and resided at 5165 Verde Valley Ln, Apt. 2410, Dallas, Dallas County, Texas 75254 at the time this cause 0f action accrued. 5. A11 Defendants have brought Motions to Transfer Venue. 6. The publicly available records through the Texas Secretary 0f State are attached to this Motion to Continue the hearing on Defendants' Motion to Transfer Venue and Response t0 Defendants’ Motion t0 Transfer Venue. However, Plaintiff has not had sufficient time to conduct venue discovery t0 Defendants because this case was filed and served a little over four weeks ago. 7. Should the Court believe that the publicly available records through the Texas Secretary 0f State that are attached t0 this Motion and Response are insufficient to establish that these Defendants maintained a principal office in Dallas County Texas and a residence in Dallas County, Texas, then Plaintiff requests the Court continue this hearing until such a time as Plaintiff has sufficient opportunity to conduct discovery on the venue issue. II. EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF VENUE ALLEGATIONS Exhibit “A” The TSBME profile for Dr. Moses J. Keng, Jr.reporting his principal place 0f business as 1350 East Lookout Drive, Richardson, Texas 75082. Exhibit “B” Lexis Nexis Public Records Report of Allen Justin Fraizer Exhibit “C” Venue Discovery served 0n Defendants Keng and Fraizer 0n August 25, 2020 PLAINTIFF’S VERIFIED MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE AND RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE Page 2 III. AUTHORITIES AND APPLICABLE LAW The specific provisions from the TEXAS CIVIL PRACTICES AND REMEDIES CODE that apply to venue are outlined below: Sec. 15.002. VENUE: GENERAL RULE. (a) Except as otherwise provided by this subchapter 0r Subchapter B 0r C, all lawsuits shall be brought. ... (2) in the county of defendant's residence at the time the cause 0f action accrued if defendant is a natural person; (3) in the county 0f the defendant’s principal office in this state, if the defendant is not a natural person. (b) For the convenience 0f the parties and witnesses and in the interest ofjustice, a court may transfer an action from a county 0f proper venue under this subchapter 0r Subchapter C to any other county of proper venue on motion 0f a defendant filed and served concurrently With or before the filing of the answer, Where the court finds: (1) maintenance of the action in the county of suit would work an injustice t0 the movant considering the movant's economic and personal hardship; (2) the balance of interests of all the parties predominates in favor of the action being brought in the other county and (3) the transfer 0f the action would not work an injustice t0 any other party. .. (c) A court's ruling or decision to grant 0r deny a transfer under Subsection (b) is not grounds for appeal or mandamus and is not reversible error. Sec. 15.005. MULTIPLE DEFENDANTS. In a suit in which the plaintiff has established proper venue against a defendant, the court also has venue of all the defendants in allclaims 0r actions arising out of the same transaction, occurrence, 0r series of transactions 0r occurrences. Sec. 15.006. VENUE DETERMINED BY FACTS EXISTING AT THE TIME OF ACCRUAL. A court shall determine the venue 0f a suit based 0n the facts existing at the time the cause 0f action that is the basis of the suit accrued. PLAINTIFF’S VERIFIED MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE AND RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE Page 3 Furthermore, TEXAS CIVIL PRACTICE AND REMEDIES CODE 87(2)(b) states: CAUSE OF ACTION. It shall not be necessary for a claimant to prove the merits of a cause of action, but the existence 0f a cause 0f action, when pleaded properly, shall be taken as established as alleged by the pleadings. When the defendant specifically denies the venue allegations, the claimant is required, by prima facie proof as provided in paragraph 3 0fthis rule, t0 support such pleading that the cause 0f action taken as established by the pleadings, or a part of such cause 0f action, accrued in the county of suit. If a defendant seeks transfer t0 a county Where the cause 0f action 0r a part thereof accrued, it shall be sufficient for the defendant t0 plead that if a cause of action exists, then the cause 0f action or part thereof accrued in the specific county to Which transfer is sought, and such allegation shall not constitute an admission that a cause 0f action in fact exists. But the defendant shall be required t0 support his pleading by prima facie proof as provided in paragraph 3 of this rule, that, if a cause of action exists, itor a part thereof accrued in the county t0 Which transfer is sought. The definition 0f prima facie proof can be found in TEXAS CIVIL PRACTICE AND REMEDIES CODE 87(3)(c) which states: PRIMA FACIE PROOF. If a claimant has adequately pleaded and made prima facie proof that venue is proper in the county of suit as provided in subdivision (a) of paragraph 3, then the cause shall not be transferred but shall be retained in the county 0f suit, unless the motion t0 transfer is based 0n the grounds that an impartial trial cannot be had in the county where the action is pending as provided in Rules 257-259 0r 0n an established ground of mandatory venue. A ground of mandatory venue is established When the party relying upon a mandatory exception t0 the general rule makes prima facie proof as provided in subdivision (a) of paragraph 3 of this rule. It iswell established that, “[t]he Plaintiffhas the first choice t0 fix venue in a proper county; this the Plaintiff does by filing the suit in the county 0f his choice.” In re Masonite Corp, 997 S.W.2d 194, 197 (Tex. 1999). If there is more than one county 0f appropriate venue, the plaintiff” s choice controls. See M0vef01free.com, Inc. v. David Hetrik, Ina, 288 S.W.3d 539,542 (TeX. App.—Houston [14th Dist] 2009, no pet); Velasco v. Texas Kenworth C0,, 144 S.W.3d 632, 635 (TeX. App.—Dallas 2004, pet. denied). “[I]f the plaintiff chooses a county 0f proper venue, and [the venue] is supported by proof as required by Rule 87, no other county can be a proper venue in that case. This rule gives effect t0 the plaintiff‘s right to select a proper venue.” Wilson v. Texas PLAINTIFF’S VERIFIED MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE AND RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE Page 4 Parks & Wildlife Dep't, 886 S.W.2d 259, 261 (Tex. 1994), citing Maranatha Temple, Inc. v. Enterprise Prod. Ca, 833 S.W.2d 736, 741, (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist] 1992, writ denied). “Venue may be proper in more than one county under the venue rules. In general, Plaintiffs are allowed t0 choose venue first and the plaintiff’s choice 0f venue cannot be disturbed as long as the suit is initially filed in a county of proper venue. A trial court must consider all venue facts pled by the plaintiff as true, unless they are specifically denied by an adverse party. ..On appeal, the trialcourt’s determination that venue is proper in a particular county will be upheld if there is any probative evidence supporting venue in the county of suit, even if the evidence preponderates t0 the contrary.” In re Henry, 274. S.W.3d 185, 190 (Tex. App.—Houston [1“ Dist], 2008, orig. proceeding); Shell Oil C0. v. Baran, 258 S.W.3d 719, 722 (Tex. App.—Beaum0nt 2008, pet. dism’d). In a suit with multiple defendants, if the plaintiff establishes proper venue against one defendant, then venue is proper for all defendants as long as the claims arise from the same transaction, occurrence, 0r series of transactions 0r occurrences. TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE 15.005; American Home Prods. v. Clark, 38 S.W.3d 92, 94 (Tex. 2000). IV. APPLICATION OF THE LAW TO THE VENUE FACTS OF THE CASE A) Defendant Moses J. Keng, M.D.’s Principal Place 0f Business was in Dallas County, Texas at the time 0f this Cause 0f Action Accrued It isundisputed the incident at issue in this case occurred in 2019. At that time, Defendant Moses J. Keng, Jr., M.D. maintained and continues t0 maintain a principal office at 1350 East Lookout Drive, Richardson, Dallas County, Texas 75082, which is located in Dallas County, Texas. See Defendant Moses J. Keng, MD. ’s Motion t0 Transfer Venue, and Subject Thereto, PLAINTIFF’S VERIFIED MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE AND RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE Page 5 Original Answer and Special Exceptions t0 Plaintifi’iv First Amended Original Petition; see also Exhibit “B”. Plaintiffs First Amended Petition and the evidence attached t0 this motion are sufficient t0 satisfy TeX. CiV. Prac. & Rem. Code §15.002 and Texas Rule 0f Civil Procedure 87. Plaintiff requests the Court take judicial notice of the venue allegations made in her First Amended Petition and 0f the fact that Defendant Moses J. Keng, Jr.,M.D., maintained and continues t0 maintain a principal office at 1350 East Lookout Drive, Richardson, Dallas County, Texas 75082, Which is located in Dallas County, Texas. B) Defendant Allen J. Fraizer, R.N. resided in Dallas County, Texas at the time THIS CAUSE 0F ACTION ACCRUED. It isundisputed the incident at issue in this case occurred in 2019. At that time, Defendant Allen J.Fraizer, R.N., resided at 5 165 Verde Valley Ln, Apt. 2410, Dallas, Dallas County, Texas 75254. See Exhibit “B”. Plaintiff” s First Amended Petition and the evidence attached t0 this motion are sufficient t0 satisfy Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §15.002 and Texas Rule 0f Civil Procedure 87. Plaintiff requests the Court take judicial notice of the venue allegations made in her First Amended Petition and 0f the fact that Defendant Allen J. Fraizer, R.N. resided at 5165 Verde Valley Ln, Apt. 2410, Dallas, Dallas County, Texas 75254, at the time this incident occurred. See Exhibit “B”. C) Defendants have Failed t0 Support their Motions to Transfer Venue with Prima Facie Proof that an Inconvenience exists t0 Trigger Transfer 0f this Case Despite Defendants’ arguments regarding convenience, there is n0 evidence that there actually exists an inconvenience that would trigger the transfer options under TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE §15.002(b), given the geographic proximity 0f Collin County and Dallas County. The Texas inconvenience rule is conceptually similar t0 the Federalforum non-conveniens venue rule, PLAINTIFF’S VERIFIED MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE AND RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE Page 6 Which allows for transfers of venue in situations Where alternate venues may be thousands of miles apart and create obvious impediments. Such “hardship” simply does not exist here. Collin and Dallas Counties are not counties of great divide and travel ofresidents commonly happens between both areas. The counties share a common border and are linked With a several ground roads and a highway. No true inconvenience is present sufficient to warrant setting aside the prerogative of Plaintiff in choosing a demonstrably proper county 0f venue. Nor have Defendants provided any evidence of inconvenience as required by TeX.R.CiV.Proc. 87(3)(c). As Plaintiff has established proper venue against one or more Defendants, the court also has venue over the other Defendants in this matter as the claims against all Defendants arise out 0f the same “transaction, occurrence, 0r series 0f transactions 0r occurrences.” See Tex. CiV. Prac. & Rem. Code §15.005. As such, there is no need to transfer this matter and Plaintiff requests the Court deny Defendants’ motions t0 transfer venue. V. IN THE ALTERNATIVE, PLAINTIFF REQUESTS THAT THE HEARING ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS BE CONTINUED UNTIL SUCH TIME THAT VENUE DISCOVERY MAY BE CONDUCTED Plaintiff filed her Original Petition in Dallas County, Texas District Court on July 10, 2020 and her First Amended Petition 0n July 31, 2020. On August 25, 2020, Plaintiff served venue discovery 0n all Defendants. Should Defendants fail t0respond t0 Plaintiff” s discovery in advance of this hearing, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this honorable Court continue the hearing on Defendants’ Motions t0 Transfer Venue until such time that meaningful discovery responses are served. PLAINTIFF’S VERIFIED MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE AND RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE Page 7 VI. CONCLUSION Plaintiff has filed this suit in the proper venue as is evidenced from the attached exhibits hereto. Defendant Moses Keng’s principal place 0f business was in Dallas County at the time 0f the incident. Additionally, Defendant Allen Fraizer resided in Dallas County at the time 0f the incident. N0 Defendant has provided evidence 0r proof that the maintenance of a suit in Dallas County creates an injustice. N0 Defendant has shown that Dallas County is not a permissible County 0f venue 0r that there is a mandatory provision requiring transfer 0f venue pursuant t0 any statute. As there is n0 dispute that venue is proper, then venue is proper in Dallas County. Therefore, the Motions to Transfer Venue brought by these Defendants should be denied and this matter should remain in Dallas County. VII. PRAYER WHEREFORE, PREMISE CONSIDERED, Plaintiff prays that this Court deny the Motion t0 Transfer Venue brought by Defendants and for such other and further relief, both at law and in equity, to Which Plaintiffs may be entitled. In the alternative, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court continue the hearing on the Defendants' Motions to Transfer Venue until such time that meaningful discovery responses 0n the venue issue are timely served. This Motion for Continuance 0f the hearing is not brought for purposes 0f delay, but rather t0 allow the parties the time needed to conduct adequate and necessary discovery 0n the venue issue and ensure that justice may be served. Plaintiff further prays for such other and further relief to Which she may show herself entitled. PLAINTIFF’S VERIFIED MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE AND RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE Page 8 Respectfully submitted, WORMINGTON & BOLLINGER By: Maria Wormington, RN JD State Bar No. 24013783 maria@w0rmingtonlegal.com Amy Bryant Lauten, JD State Bar No. 2401 1 148 amv@wormingtonlegal.com 212 East Virginia Street McKinney, Texas 75069 (972) 569-3930 (972) 547-6440 Facsimile COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF PLAINTIFF’S VERIFIED MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE AND RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE Page 9 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This Will certify 0n this 27th day 0f August, 2020, a true and correct copy 0f the foregoing was forwarded t0 opposing counsel as follows: Via E-Service Heather A. Kanny/Ashley E. Miller MAYER LLP 750 N. Saint Paul Street, Suite 900 Dallas, Texas 75201 Counselfor Defendants Dr. Zafar and Mobil MD PA Via E-Service Susan C. Cooley/Casey C. Campbell /Kristin G. Mijares SCHELL COOLEY RYAN CAMPBELL LLP 5057 Keller Springs Road, Suite 425 Addison, Texas 75001 Counsel for Defendants MPD Operators McKinney d/b/a Belterra Health & Rehab and Allen Fraizer, RN. Via E-Service Kimberly L. Cormier/Courtney Boes Huber Beard Kultgen Brophy Bostwick & Dickson, PLLC 15 1 50 Preston Rd., Ste. 230 Dallas, Texas 75248 Counselfor Defendant Moses J. Keng, MD. jaw Maria Wormington PLAINTIFF’S VERIFIED MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE AND RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE Page 10 CAUSE NO. DC-20-09420 ROZ C. LYLES, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS IN THE DISTRICT COURT REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF WILLIAM LYLES, DECEASED VS. SSC MCKINNEY OPERATING COMPANY, LLC d/b/a NORTH PARK mmwfimwmmmmwwwmw 44T" JUDICIAL DISTRICT HEALTH AND REHABILITATION CENTER; MPD OPERATORS MCKINNEY, LLC d/b/a BELTERRA HEALTH & REHAB; ZAHID N. ZAFAR, M.D.; MOBILE MD PA; MOSES J. KENG, JR, M.D. and ALLEN J. FRAZIER, R.N. DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS PLAINTIFF’S COUNSEL VERIFICATION STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTY OF COLLIN g The undersigned affirms that the contents of this motion are based upon her personal knowledge and that the contents and statements are true and accurate. She is of majority age and is competent to make this verification. The undersigned is aware of the penalties of perjury. She has never been arrested for perjury or conduct involving moral turpitude. This motion isnot filed for the purposes 0f harassment 0r undue delay. Verified this 27‘“ day of August. 2020. \_/f /. m Maria ‘Yormington, RN, JD SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO on this 27‘“ day of August, 2020, by Pearl Weatherford to certify which witness my hand and seal of office. Q!) Staté‘é? Texas Notaly Public fl PERLA WEATHERFORD {I g/ . . . Notarylomeams My commissnon Expires My CommissionExpires May 8. 2022 7/1/2020 Welcome TMB Website to the EXH'B'T PUBLIC VERIFICATION I PHYSICIAN PROFILE PHYSICIAN NAME: MOSES JOSHUA KENG JR MD DATE: 07/01/2020 THE INFORMATION IN THIS BOX HAS BEEN VERIFIED BY THE TEXAS MEDICAL BOARD Date of Birth: 1970 License Number: M1181 Full Medical License Issuance Date: 06/03/2005 Expiration Date of Physician’s Registration Permit: 05/31/2021 Registration Status: ACTIVE Registration Date: 06/23/2005 Disciplinary Status: NONE Disciplinary Date: NONE Licensure Status: NONE Licensure Date: NONE Medical School of Graduation: At the time of licensure, TMB verified the physician’s graduation from medical school as follows: ROSALIND FRANKLIN UNIVERSITY OF MEDICINE AND SCIENCE, CHICAGO MEDICAL SCHOOL, CHICAGO Medical School Graduation Year: 2001 TMB Filings, Actions and License Restrictions The Texas Medical Board has the following board actions against this physician. (This may include any formal complaints filed by TMB, as well as petitions and/or responses related to licensure contested matters, at the State Office of Administrative Hearings.) NONE Investigations by TMB of Medical Malpractice Section 164.201 of the Act requires that: the board review information relating to a physician against whom three or more malpractice claims have been reported within a five year period. Based on these reviews, the following investigations were conducted with the listed resolutions. NONE reg.tmb.state.tx.us/OnLineVerif/Phys_ReportVerif_new.asp 1/6 7/1/2020 Welcome TMB Website to the Status History Status history contains entries for any updates to the individual's registration, licensure or disciplinary status types (beginning with 1/1/78, when the board’s records were first automated). Entries are in reverse chronological order; new entries of each type supersede the previous entry of that same type. These records do not display status type. Should you have any questions, please contact our Customer Information Center at 512-305-7030 or verifcic@tmb.state.tx.us Status Code: AC Effective Date: 06/23/2005 Description: ACTIVE Status Code: L| Effective Date: 06/03/2005 Description: LICENSE ISSUED THE INFORMATION IN THIS BOX WAS REPORTED BY THE LICENSEE AND HAS NOT BEEN VERIFIED BY THE TEXAS MEDICAL BOARD Gender: MALE *Ethnicity: ASIAN OR PACIFIC ISLANDER Race: ASIAN * We are inthe process of transitioning from the current ethnic origin values to federal standards for race and Hispanic origin. The transition period will allow time for individuals to submit updated race and Hispanic origin data to the TMB. Place of Birth: PHILIPPINES Current Primary Practice Address: 1350 EAST LOOKOUT DRIVE RICHARDSON , TX 75082 Years of Active Practice in the U.S. or Canada: The physician reports that he/she has actively practiced medicine in the United States or Canada for 14 year(s). Years of Active Practice in Texas: The physician reports that, of the above years he/she has actively practiced in the State of Texas for 14 year(s). Specialty Board Certification The physician reports that he/she holds the following specialty certifications issued by a board that is a member of the American Board of Medical Specialties or the Bureau of Osteopathic Specialists: Specialty Certification: AMERICAN BOARD OF PHYSICAL MEDICINE & REHABILITATION Date: 2009 reg .tmb.state.tx.us/OnLi neVerif/Phys_Re portVerif_new.asp 2/6 7/1/2020 Welcome TMB Website to the Primary Specialty The physician reports his/her primary practice is in the area of PHYSICAL MED. & REHABILITATION. Secondary Specialty The physician did not report a secondary practice area. Name, Location and Graduation Date of All Medical Schools Attended Name: CHICAGO MEDICAL SCHOOL Location: NORTH CHICAGO,|L Graduation Date: 06/2001 Graduate Medical Education In The United States 0r Canada Program Name: EVANSTON NORTHWESTERN HEALTHCARE HOSP. Location: EVANSTON IL Begin Date: 06/2001 Type: INTERNSHIP End Date: 06/2002 Specialty: INTERNAL MEDICINE Program Name: BAYLOR COLLEGE Location: HOUSTON TX Begin Date: 06/2002 Type: RESIDENCY End Date: 06/2005 Specialty: PHYSICAL MEDICINE AND REHABILITATION Hospital Privileges The physician reports that he/she has hospital privileges in the following in the State of Texas: Hospital: DALLAS MEDICAL CENTER Location: DALLAS Utilization Review The physician did not report whether he/she provides utilization review. NONE REPORTED Patient Services Accessibility: The physician reports that the patient service area is accessible to persons with disabilities as defined by federal law. Language Translation Services: The physician did not report whether he/she provided any language translation services for patients. reg .tmb.state.tx.us/OnLi neVerif/Phys_Re portVerif_new.asp 3/6 7/1/2020 Welcome TMB Website to the Medicaid Participant: The physician reports that he/she does participate in the Medicaid program. Awards, Honors, Publications and Academic Appointments Optional Information The physician may optionally report descriptions of up to five such honors and has reported the following: Description: PUBLICATION - SLEEP. 2000 FEB 1;23 (1):87-95 Description: PUBLICATION - BRAIN BEHAV EVOL 1997 Description: ABSTRACT - SLEEP RESEARCH ABSTRACT, 1996:# 259:132 Description: ABSTRACT - AAP ANNUAL ASSEMBLY 2005 Malpractice Information Section 154.006(b)(16) of the Act requires that: a physician profile display a description of any medical malpractice claim against the physician, not including a description of any offers by the physician to settle the claim, for which the physician was found liable, a jury awarded monetary damages to the claimant, and the award has been determined to be final and not subject to further appeal. The physician has the following reportable claims. Description: NONE Criminal History Self-Reported Criminal Offenses:The physician is required to report a description of (1) "any conviction for an offense constituting a felony, a Class A or Class B misdemeanor, or a Class C misdemeanor involving moral turpitude" and (2) "any charges reported to the board to which the physician has pleaded no contest, for which the physician is the subject of deferred adjudication or pretrial diversion, or in which sufficient facts of guilt were found and the matter was continued by a court of competent jurisdiction." The physician has reported the following: Description: NONE Criminal history information is also obtained by TMB from the Texas Department of Public Safety. Resulting action, if any, will be reported under the TMB Action and Non-Disciplinary Restrictions section above. Disciplinary Actions By Other State Medical Boards reg .tmb.state.tx.us/OnLi neVerif/Phys_Re portVerif_new.asp 4/6 7/1/2020 Welcome TMB Website to the The physician has reported the following: Description: NONE To obtain primary Physician Assistant Supervision source verifications, clickname Description: NONE To obtain primary Advanced Practice Nurse Delegation source verifications, clickname APN Name: HENDAWI, TARIQ APN APN License Number: AP139932 Delegation Location Type: Long-Term Facility Approve Date: 7/1/2019 Hours Supervised: 8 Dangerous Drugs: YES Controlled Substances: YES APN Name: HENDAWI, TARIQ APN APN License Number: AP139932 Delegation Location Type: Practice Site Approve Date: 7/1/2019 Hours Supervised: 12 Dangerous Drugs: YES Controlled Substances: YES Summary of all LicenseIPermit Types Issue Date: Type: 07/01/2002 PHYSICIAN IN TRAINING PERMIT 09/01/2003 PHYSICIAN IN TRAINING PERMIT 03/01/2005 PHYSICIAN IN TRAINING PERMIT 06/03/2005 LICENSED PHYSICIAN 05/03/2005 PHYSICIAN TEMPORARY LICENSE reg .tmb.state.tx.us/OnLi neVerif/Phys_Re portVerif_new.asp 5/6 7/1/2020 Welcome TMB Website to the 07/01/2002 Contact Us | Privacy Policy| Compact Accessibility Policy | withTexans | Website Linking Policy Please contact Pre-Licensure, Registration and Consumer Services at (512) 305-7030 for assistance. reg.tmb.state.tx.us/OnLineVerif/Phys_ReportVerif_new.asp 6/6 @' LexisNexis‘ 1 OF1 RECORD(S) FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY Copyright 2020 LexisNexis a division of Reed Elsevier Rights Reserved. Inc. A|| Date:7/1/2020 Report processed by: Wormington Law Group PLLC Full Name Address County Phone FRAIZER, ALLEN JUSTIN 5165 VERDE VALLEY LN APT 2410 DALLAS None Listed DALLAS, TX 75254-1 633 DALLAS COUNTY ADDITIONAL PERSONAL INFORMATION SSN DOB Gender LexlD(sm) Email 51 2—70-XXXX 11/1 958 000846934869 AFRAIZER@SBCGLOBAL.NET (