Preview
FILED
12/6/202111:09 AM
FELICIA PITRE
1 ClT/ESERVE DISTRICT CLERK
DALLAS CO., TEXAS
Alicia Mata DEPUTY
DC-21-17449
CAUSE N0.
REYES GRoup, LTD., § IN THE DISTRICT COURT
§
plaintiff, §
§
V- § 101st
JUDICIAL DISTRICT
g
ELK ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, §
INC. §
§
defendant. DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS
g
PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION
Reyes Group, Ltd. (“Reyes” or “Plaintiff”) files this Original Petition against ELK
Engineering Associates, InC. (“Defendant”) and respectfully shows the Court as follows:
DISCOVERY CONTROL PLAN
1. Reyes intends discovery be conducted under Level 2 pursuant to Rule 190.3 of
the TEXAS RULES 0F CIVIL PROCEDURE.
AMOUNT IN CONTROVERSY
2. Reyes seeks only monetary relief of less than $250,000, including damages of any
kind, penalties, costs, expenses, pre-judgment interest, and attorneys’ fees.
PARTIES
3. Reyes, Plaintiff,is an Illinoiscompany registered to do business in the State of
Texas.
4. ELK Engineering Associates, InC., Defendant, is a Texas corporation that may be
served by and through service on itsregistered agent CT Corporation System, at its registered
office at 1999 Bryan Street, suite 900, Dallas, Texas 75201, or wherever else they may be found.
VENUE AND JURISDICTION
5. Venue is proper in Dallas County, Texas under Section 15.002(a)(1) of the TEXAS
CIVIL PRACTICE & REMEDIES CODE because all or a substantial part of the events giving rise to the
PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION page 1 of 4
claim occurred in Dallas County, Texas.
6. Jurisdiction is proper in this Court as the damages Plaintiff seeks are within the
jurisdictional limits of the Court.
BACKGROUND FACTS
7. Reyes entered into a subcontract agreement with Defendant whereby Defendant
was to, among other things, supply anodes to Reyes for the Lewisville Dam project (the “Project”).
The US Army Corps of Engineers specified Standard Potential Magnesium Anodes. However,
Defendant supplied High Potential Magnesium Anodes to Reyes that were then installed at the
Project. Itwas later discovered that Defendant had supplied the wrong anodes to the Project.
Defendant acknowledged its mistake and advised Reyes that the proper anodes should be installed
in accordance with the original Project design specifications.
8. As a result, Reyes ordered the correct anodes and had them installed. Reyes kept
track of the labor, equipment, material, and subcontractor costs incurred in replacing the anodes and
invoiced Defendant for these damages. However, despite acknowledging its responsibility for the
error, and despite multiple demands for payment, Defendant has failed and refused to pay for the
damages incurred by Reyes in replacing the anodes in the amount of $54,192.03.
9. Despite Reyes’s numerous demands for Defendant to remedy its breach of contract,
Defendant has refused to rectify its breach.
10. As such, Reyes hereby sues for this amount, along with all interest, attorneys’ fees,
costs, and other amounts allowed by law.
BREACH OF CONTRACT
11. To the extent consistent, all facts in this Petition are incorporated by reference in
support of this claim. Reyes entered into a contract with Defendant. Under the contract, Defendant
was to provide and install the specified anodes. In return, Reyes agreed to pay Reyes for the services
and products provided. Despite Reyes’s full performance of its obligations under the contract,
Defendant has breached the contract by providing the incorrect anodes and has refused to rectify
PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION page 2 of 4
the situation. This failure by Defendant is a material breach of the contract.
12. The principal sum of Reyes’s damages caused by this breach is less than
$250,000.00. Reyes would further show it is entitled to recover its reasonable and necessary
attorneys’ fees, interest, and costs as set forth below.
RULE 193.7 NOTICE
21. Pursuant to Rule 193.7 of the TEXAS RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, Reyes hereby
notifies all parties that any and alldocuments produced during discovery may be used at any
pretrial proceeding and/or trial without the necessity of authenticating the documents.
CONDITIONS PRECEDENT
22. All conditions precedent for Reyes to filethese claims against Defendant have
been performed, have occurred, or have been waived or excused.
AGENCY
23. Reyes would further show that at all times and for all events discussed in this
pleading, each party referenced acted by and through its agents, servants, and representatives, each
acting within the course and scope of his or her employment and within the apparent scope of their
authority.
ATTORNEYS’ FEES
26. Reyes hired the law firm of Nixon Jach Hubbard, PLLC to assist itin collecting this
debt, and has agreed to pay a reasonable fee for such services. Under Chapter 38 of the TEXAS
CIVIL PRACTICE & REMEDIES CODE, THE PROPERTY CODE, and the common law, Reyes is entitled
to recover its costs and reasonable and necessary attorneys’ fees.
INTEREST
27. Reyes would show that if it is allowed torecover under any theory inthis cause, itis
entitled to prejudgment interest and post-judgment interest on such amount at the highest rates
allowed by law.
PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION page 3 of 4
PRAYER
Reyes prays Defendant be cited to appear and answer and that Reyes be granted judgment
against Defendant for each of the following:
a. upon any of the theories, actions, or causes of action or accounts pled above
for an amount within the jurisdictional limits of the court and for judgment
against Defendant for all relief enumerated (whether generally or specifically)
in this Petition and Prayer;
b.C.d.e.f.
Plaintiff‘s reasonable attorneys’ fees;
prejudgment interest at the highest rate allowed by law;
post-judgment interest at the highest rate allowed by law;
all court costs;
such orders and judgments affecting the obligations of Defendant and the
rights of Plaintiff as this Honorable Court may find appropriate under the
circumstances; and
such other relief, both general and special, at law or in equity, to which Plaintiff
may show itselfjustly entitled.
Respectfully submitted,
NIXON JACH HUBBARD, PLLC
by:/s/ Curtis Hubbard
Curtis Hubbard
State Bar No. 24029621
chubbard@njh-Iaw.com
JP Morgan International Plaza |||
14241 Dallas Parkway, suite 575
Dallas, Texas 75245
telephone: (972) 503-7000
facsimile: (972)503-7001
www.njh-|aw.com
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION page 4 of 4
Automated Certificate of eService
This automated certificate of service was created by the efiling system.
The filer served this document via email generated by the efiling system
on the date and to the persons listed below. The rules governing
certificates of service have not changed. Filers must still provide a
certificate of service that complies with all applicable rules.
Laura Deen on behalf of Curtis Hubbard
Bar No. 24029621
ldeen@njh-law.com
Envelope ID: 59732871
Status as of 12/9/2021 10:35 AM CST
Case Contacts
Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status
Laura Deen ldeen@njh-law.com 12/6/2021 11:09:54 AM SENT
Curtis Hubbard chubbard@njh-law.com 12/6/2021 11:09:54 AM SENT
Preview
FILED 12/6/202111:09 AM FELICIA PITRE 1 ClT/ESERVE DISTRICT CLERK DALLAS CO., TEXAS Alicia Mata DEPUTY DC-21-17449 CAUSE N0. REYES GRoup, LTD., § IN THE DISTRICT COURT § plaintiff, § § V- § 101st JUDICIAL DISTRICT g ELK ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, § INC. § § defendant. DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS g PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION Reyes Group, Ltd. (“Reyes” or “Plaintiff”) files this Original Petition against ELK Engineering Associates, InC. (“Defendant”) and respectfully shows the Court as follows: DISCOVERY CONTROL PLAN 1. Reyes intends discovery be conducted under Level 2 pursuant to Rule 190.3 of the TEXAS RULES 0F CIVIL PROCEDURE. AMOUNT IN CONTROVERSY 2. Reyes seeks only monetary relief of less than $250,000, including damages of any kind, penalties, costs, expenses, pre-judgment interest, and attorneys’ fees. PARTIES 3. Reyes, Plaintiff,is an Illinoiscompany registered to do business in the State of Texas. 4. ELK Engineering Associates, InC., Defendant, is a Texas corporation that may be served by and through service on itsregistered agent CT Corporation System, at its registered office at 1999 Bryan Street, suite 900, Dallas, Texas 75201, or wherever else they may be found. VENUE AND JURISDICTION 5. Venue is proper in Dallas County, Texas under Section 15.002(a)(1) of the TEXAS CIVIL PRACTICE & REMEDIES CODE because all or a substantial part of the events giving rise to the PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION page 1 of 4 claim occurred in Dallas County, Texas. 6. Jurisdiction is proper in this Court as the damages Plaintiff seeks are within the jurisdictional limits of the Court. BACKGROUND FACTS 7. Reyes entered into a subcontract agreement with Defendant whereby Defendant was to, among other things, supply anodes to Reyes for the Lewisville Dam project (the “Project”). The US Army Corps of Engineers specified Standard Potential Magnesium Anodes. However, Defendant supplied High Potential Magnesium Anodes to Reyes that were then installed at the Project. Itwas later discovered that Defendant had supplied the wrong anodes to the Project. Defendant acknowledged its mistake and advised Reyes that the proper anodes should be installed in accordance with the original Project design specifications. 8. As a result, Reyes ordered the correct anodes and had them installed. Reyes kept track of the labor, equipment, material, and subcontractor costs incurred in replacing the anodes and invoiced Defendant for these damages. However, despite acknowledging its responsibility for the error, and despite multiple demands for payment, Defendant has failed and refused to pay for the damages incurred by Reyes in replacing the anodes in the amount of $54,192.03. 9. Despite Reyes’s numerous demands for Defendant to remedy its breach of contract, Defendant has refused to rectify its breach. 10. As such, Reyes hereby sues for this amount, along with all interest, attorneys’ fees, costs, and other amounts allowed by law. BREACH OF CONTRACT 11. To the extent consistent, all facts in this Petition are incorporated by reference in support of this claim. Reyes entered into a contract with Defendant. Under the contract, Defendant was to provide and install the specified anodes. In return, Reyes agreed to pay Reyes for the services and products provided. Despite Reyes’s full performance of its obligations under the contract, Defendant has breached the contract by providing the incorrect anodes and has refused to rectify PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION page 2 of 4 the situation. This failure by Defendant is a material breach of the contract. 12. The principal sum of Reyes’s damages caused by this breach is less than $250,000.00. Reyes would further show it is entitled to recover its reasonable and necessary attorneys’ fees, interest, and costs as set forth below. RULE 193.7 NOTICE 21. Pursuant to Rule 193.7 of the TEXAS RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, Reyes hereby notifies all parties that any and alldocuments produced during discovery may be used at any pretrial proceeding and/or trial without the necessity of authenticating the documents. CONDITIONS PRECEDENT 22. All conditions precedent for Reyes to filethese claims against Defendant have been performed, have occurred, or have been waived or excused. AGENCY 23. Reyes would further show that at all times and for all events discussed in this pleading, each party referenced acted by and through its agents, servants, and representatives, each acting within the course and scope of his or her employment and within the apparent scope of their authority. ATTORNEYS’ FEES 26. Reyes hired the law firm of Nixon Jach Hubbard, PLLC to assist itin collecting this debt, and has agreed to pay a reasonable fee for such services. Under Chapter 38 of the TEXAS CIVIL PRACTICE & REMEDIES CODE, THE PROPERTY CODE, and the common law, Reyes is entitled to recover its costs and reasonable and necessary attorneys’ fees. INTEREST 27. Reyes would show that if it is allowed torecover under any theory inthis cause, itis entitled to prejudgment interest and post-judgment interest on such amount at the highest rates allowed by law. PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION page 3 of 4 PRAYER Reyes prays Defendant be cited to appear and answer and that Reyes be granted judgment against Defendant for each of the following: a. upon any of the theories, actions, or causes of action or accounts pled above for an amount within the jurisdictional limits of the court and for judgment against Defendant for all relief enumerated (whether generally or specifically) in this Petition and Prayer; b.C.d.e.f. Plaintiff‘s reasonable attorneys’ fees; prejudgment interest at the highest rate allowed by law; post-judgment interest at the highest rate allowed by law; all court costs; such orders and judgments affecting the obligations of Defendant and the rights of Plaintiff as this Honorable Court may find appropriate under the circumstances; and such other relief, both general and special, at law or in equity, to which Plaintiff may show itselfjustly entitled. Respectfully submitted, NIXON JACH HUBBARD, PLLC by:/s/ Curtis Hubbard Curtis Hubbard State Bar No. 24029621 chubbard@njh-Iaw.com JP Morgan International Plaza ||| 14241 Dallas Parkway, suite 575 Dallas, Texas 75245 telephone: (972) 503-7000 facsimile: (972)503-7001 www.njh-|aw.com ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION page 4 of 4 Automated Certificate of eService This automated certificate of service was created by the efiling system. The filer served this document via email generated by the efiling system on the date and to the persons listed below. The rules governing certificates of service have not changed. Filers must still provide a certificate of service that complies with all applicable rules. Laura Deen on behalf of Curtis Hubbard Bar No. 24029621 ldeen@njh-law.com Envelope ID: 59732871 Status as of 12/9/2021 10:35 AM CST Case Contacts Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status Laura Deen ldeen@njh-law.com 12/6/2021 11:09:54 AM SENT Curtis Hubbard chubbard@njh-law.com 12/6/2021 11:09:54 AM SENT