Fairport Asset Management II REO, LLC v. Gonzalez
(5:22-cv-00054)
District Court, S.D. Texas, Judge Marina Marmolejo
JUN 13, 2022 | REPUBLISHED BY LIT: JUN 14, 2022
Time-barred, unsecured debt by unbonded debt collecting law firm lawsuit is dismissed WITHOUT PREJUDICE by Judge Marmolejo.
It should have been dismissed WITH PREJUDICE, but this is Texas, folks..
Return of Service Executed (Jun 20)
PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT
Plaintiff Fairport Asset Management II REO, LLC (the “Plaintiff”) files this Original Complaint complaining of Rosa Maria Gonzalez a/k/a Rosemary Gonzalez (“Defendant”) as follows:
I. PARTIES
1. Plaintiff is a Missouri limited liability company with an address in Rochester, New York.
The sole member of Plaintiff is FAM II REO, Inc., a Missouri corporation with a Missouri principal place of business.
Accordingly, Plaintiff is a citizen of the state of Missouri for diversity purposes.
2. Defendant is a resident of Texas. She may be served at her home address of 1512 Bull Elk, Laredo, Texas 78045, or wherever else she may be located.
II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE
3. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction in this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332 as the amount in controversy exceeds Seventy-Five Thousand Dollars ($75,000.00), exclusive of interest and costs, and this matter is between citizens of different states (Missouri and Texas).
4. Venue is proper in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 1391(a).
IV.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
5. On or about January 9, 2001, Defendant executed a Real Estate Lien Note (as amended, restated, or modified from time to time, the “Note”)
payable to South Texas National Bank [This bank is inactive as of November 30, 2005] , as lender,
evidencing a loan in the original principal amount of $149,200.00.
A true and correct copy of the Note is attached hereto as “Exhibit A.” [That’s your ‘Evidence’, seriously?].
6. Plaintiff is now the owner and holder of the Note via assignment. [UNTRUTHFUL; the bank went bust, the debt is UNSECURED].
7. The Note has matured but Defendant has failed to pay the balance due of more than $250,000.00.
8. Plaintiff’s predecessor sent formal written demand for payment on October 8, 2021, but Defendant has failed and refused to pay. [STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS applies, the unsecured debt is no longer subject to collection].
9. Plaintiff seeks recovery of the full balance due and owing under the Note, including accrued interest and all reasonable and necessary legal fees. In the event Plaintiff forecloses on the property pledged as security for the Note and the proceeds are not sufficient to pay all amounts owed to Plaintiff, then Plaintiff seeks recovery of any remaining deficiency balance.
We’re still correct judge, y’all cannot claim this civil action as a foreclosure. As proof, it’s not categorized as a foreclosure by y’all when this rogue debt collector filed suit.
V.
COUNT ONE: BREACH OF NOTE
10. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference the allegations set out in the foregoing paragraphs as though fully set forth herein.
11. As described above, Defendant was and is obligated to pay certain amounts to Plaintiff under the terms of the Note.
Plaintiff is the successor in interest to the original lender, which loaned money to Defendant pursuant to the terms of the Note.
Defendant has breached the Note by failing to pay the amounts due thereunder. Accordingly, Plaintiff is entitled to recover all damages caused by Defendant’s breach.
COUNT TWO: ATTORNEYS’ FEES
12. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference the allegations set out in the foregoing paragraphs as though fully set forth herein.
13. Plaintiff has retained the firm of Kane Russell Coleman Logan PC to represent it in this action and has agreed to pay the firm reasonable and necessary attorneys’ fees. Plaintiff is entitled to recover its reasonable and necessary attorneys’ fees under Civil Practice and Remedies Code § 38.001 and the terms of the Note and multiple written forbearance agreements with Defendant.
CONDITIONS PRECEDENT
14. Plaintiff has satisfied all conditions precedent for bringing this action.
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiff respectfully prays that Defendant be cited to appear and answer herein, and that upon final trial or hearing hereof, the Court grant Plaintiff judgment against Defendant for:
1. Actual damages in an amount to be proven at trial;
2. Costs of court;
3. Pre-judgment and post-judgment interest as permitted by law;
4. Reasonable and necessary attorneys’ fees incurred by Plaintiff through the trial and all appeals of this cause; and
5. Such other and further relief to which Plaintiff may show itself justly entitled.
Respectfully submitted,
KANE RUSSELL COLEMAN LOGAN PC
By: /s/ Brian W. Clark
Brian W. Clark
State Bar No. 24032075
bclark@krcl.com
901 Main Street
Suite 5200
Dallas, TX 75202
Telephone: (214) 777-4200
Facsimile: (214) 777-4299
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
John Himmelberg Jr.,
Associate General Counsel
John is the Associate General Counsel and a shareholder of Midwest. John graduated from the from Washington University School of Law (St. Louis, MO) in 1994 after attending the College of the Holy Cross where he earned a Bachelor’s Degree in Philosophy.
John worked both as an attorney for the State of Missouri and in private practice as a commercial litigator prior to joining Midwest in 1998.
John, who is licenses to practice in both New York and Missouri, supervises Midwest’s in house legal department, working primarily in transactional, real estate and corporate areas.
John is actively involved local civic and community service activities, serving as Chair of the Fairport Village Zoning Board of Appeals while and several committees within his own faith community.
Sourcing
Midwest has earned a reputation as one of the leading asset management and loan servicing companies in the country. For that reason, they are typically exposed to prospective opportunities in one of three ways:
Loan Sales Advisors
Midwest has developed excellent relationships with loan sales advisors – counsel hired by financial institutions to seek out asset management and service companies that fit the institution’s criteria.
Loan Sales Brokers
Midwest also supports brokers representing financial institutions that sell loans outside the typical loan sale advisor process.
Direct Institution Relationships
Midwest enjoys relationships with the nation’s leading financial institutions.
Many of whom they have supported in previous strategic transactions –earning a high level of credibility for their management and service expertise.
When a potential opportunity is presented to Midwest, it is evaluated against specific investor criteria to determine if the deal is appropriate for our investors’ portfolio.
If there is a potential fit, offering materials are forwarded to the investor for discussion and a decision to pursue.
With approval to proceed, there may be a formal indicative bid process to provides initial pricing feedback and determine competitive interest.
In the absence of an indicative bid, the process typically proceeds toward informal pricing discussions.
In either case, and at this stage, a spreadsheet-level analysis and sampling of collateral is completed in order to determine a preliminary pricing range.
This initial analysis is intended to help Midwest gain a better understand the economics of the prospective deal and is critical to evaluating the reasonable probability of successfully acquiring the assets before investing a moving toward final bid.
Midwest Financial Group Underwriting (Fairfield is the Shell for Midwest, in LIT's Audit Assessment)
Underwriting
Midwest Financial Group prides itself on an expert underwriting process honed over the course of several years and hundreds of transactions.
Midwest’s underwriting strategies can vary depending on the nature of the assets, the size of the portfolio, the information provided by the seller, and other variables.
Most underwriting projects occur on an accelerated timeline. In fact, it’s rare to have more than 30 days from the date a decision is made to pursue a project until the date that the final bid is due.
Once a decision is made to move forward, Midwest follows a diligent, determined, expedient approach to underwriting that helps to ensure that all parties involved realize their specific goals for the transaction.
Due Diligence Database
Midwest utilizes a proprietary Due Diligence Database (DDD) as the framework of each project.
The DDD is populated initially with datatape information provided by the seller (names, balances, due dates, collateral addresses, payment history, seller valuations, etc.).
The DDD then becomes the repository for additional information gathered and developed during the underwriting process.
Underwriting Budget
An underwriting budget is established for each project and submitted to the investor for approval.
The budget incorporates the anticipated costs of broker price opinions, title work, site inspections and other out of pocket expenses.
Typically, the budget will target a certain level of coverage based on investor preferences.
Underwriting Assignments
Each loan relationship is assigned to an underwriter, who has primary responsibility for reviewing the file, aggregating and summarizing the available information and developing proposed exit strategies and projections for each asset.
File Review
The underwriter reviews the due diligence file provided by Seller. Key facts and documents (loan documents, title work, appraisals, litigation documents, financial statements) are summarized in the DDD.
Collateral Review
The underwriter analyzes each item of collateral and develops an estimate of value based on a critical review of the available datapoints.
Sources reviewed include seller appraisals, broker price opinions, rent rolls and operating statements, underwriter developed pro-formas, comparables obtained from online data sources, and conversations with brokers and appraisers.
This analysis is summarized in the DDD.
Financial Review
The underwriter reviews available financial statements, tax returns, rent rolls and other financial information on each property and obligor.
Financials are spread as appropriate and key information regarding financial performance, trends, liquidity and debt service ability are summarized in the DDD.
Searches and Third-Party Work
In addition to reviewing the seller provided files, information is concurrently gathered from other sources and captured in the DDD.
These additional sources include, without limitation: Broker Price Opinions – Broker price opinions (BPO) are typically obtained on all key collateral items.
These are obtained from national BPO services and direct relationships with brokers and appraisers in selected markets.
Title Searches – Confirmatory title work is obtained on all key collateral items to verify lien priority.
This title work supplements seller provided title policies/searches and noted issues are reflected in final pricing.
UCC Searches – UCC searches are completed on a case by case basis as appropriate for loans having significant non-real estate collateral.
Tax Research – Property tax research is completed on all collateral and information regarding delinquent and future property taxes is incorporated into pricing.
Bankruptcy and Litigation Searches – Bankruptcy searches are completed on all obligors. Litigation searches are completed on a case by case basis.
Case status for any hits is summarized in the DDD.
Asset Searches – Asset searches on obligors are completed on a case by case basis as appropriate.
Environmental Screens – Environmental screens are completed on a case by case basis depending on property type/history and other available information.
Dun & Bradstreet Reports – Dun & Bradstreet reports on operating companies are completed on a case by case basis.
Site Inspections – Site inspections of collateral and operating companies are completed on a case by case basis.
These inspections may be completed by Midwest personnel or outsourced to third party providers.
Online Valuations Resources – Underwriters consult online valuation resources (such as Loopnet and Zillow) to independently research competing sales, sale listings and lease listings.
Industry specific websites are also consulted in connection with valuation of significant items of equipment.
Internet Searches – Internet searches are completed on properties and obligors.
Summaries, Strategies and Projections
As the information is assembled into the DDD, the underwriter prepares the following for each loan relationship.
1. Summary of the asset, including an overview of the borrower, collateral, financial performance and other significant facts. This incorporates the highlights of the information gathered on each asset and sets forth how the underwriter valued the collateral.
2. Proposed exit strategy setting forth the underwriter’s view of how the asset will be resolved (restructure, refinance, liquidation, sale of collateral, etc.) and the likely timing.
3. Projections showing the estimated cash flow for each asset,including the anticipated timing and amount of all collections and expenses.
Review and Roll Up
The underwriter discusses the asset and the proposed model with Midwest management. Feedback is provided and changes are made as appropriate. Upon completion of internal review, a report summarizing each asset is sent to the investor for review, along with a bid model containing projections and other valuation metrics. A roll up call is then scheduled with the investor to review assets and answer investor questions. Pricing discussions are ongoing until the date of the bid as additional information is received and incorporated into the model.
Asset Sale Agreement
A proposed asset sale agreement is generally provided by the seller for review prior to the bid date.
This proposed agreement is reviewed to confirm that key items are adequately addressed (e.g., seller representations and warranties, remedies in event of seller breach, economics of purchase price adjustments, closing mechanics, etc.).
In most cases, sellers have flexibility on contract terms and will ultimately agree to a contract that contains industry standard term and conditions.
U.S. District Court
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS (Laredo)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 5:22-cv-00054
Create an Alert for This Case on RECAP
| Fairport Asset Management II REO, LLC v. Gonzalez Assigned to: Judge Marina Garcia Marmolejo Referred to: Magistrate Judge John A Kazen Demand: $250,000,000 Cause: 28:1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract |
Date Filed: 06/13/2022 Jury Demand: None Nature of Suit: 190 Contract: Other Jurisdiction: Diversity |
| Plaintiff | ||
| Fairport Asset Management II REO, LLC | represented by | Brian Wade Clark Kane Russell Coleman Logan PC 901 Main Street Suite 5200 Dallas, TX 75201 214-777-4200 Fax: 214-777-4299 Email: bclark@krcl.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED |
| V. | ||
| Defendant | ||
| Rosa Maria Gonzalez also known as Rosemary Gonzalez |
||
| Date Filed | # | Docket Text |
|---|---|---|
| 06/13/2022 | 1 | COMPLAINT against Rosa Maria Gonzalez (Filing fee $ 402 receipt number ATXSDC-28310074) filed by Fairport Asset Management II REO, LLC. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Civil Cover Sheet)(Clark, Brian) (Entered: 06/13/2022) |
| 06/13/2022 | 2 | Request for Issuance of Summons as to Rosa Maria Gonzalez, filed.(Clark, Brian) (Entered: 06/13/2022) |
| 06/14/2022 | 3 | Summons Issued as to Rosa Maria Gonzalez. Issued summons delivered to plaintiff by NEF, filed.(MargaretPeregoy, 5) (Entered: 06/14/2022) |
| PACER Service Center | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Transaction Receipt | |||
| 06/15/2022 01:19:21 |
U.S. District Court
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS (Laredo)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 5:21-cv-00125
| Ruiz-Ramirez v. El Chalala, Inc. et al Assigned to: Judge Marina Garcia Marmolejo Referred to: Magistrate Judge John A Kazen Cause: 28:1332 Diversity-Injunctive & Declaratory Relief |
Date Filed: 10/01/2021 Jury Demand: Plaintiff Nature of Suit: 190 Contract: Other Jurisdiction: Federal Question |
| Plaintiff | ||
| Irma Ruiz-Ramirez | represented by | Irma Ruiz-Ramirez 3407 N Buena Vista Ave Laredo, TX 78043 PRO SE |
| V. | ||
| Defendant | ||
| El Chalala, Inc. | ||
| Defendant | ||
| Rosemary Gonzalez | represented by | Rosemary Gonzalez 1507 Bull Elk Ln Laredo, TX 78045 PRO SE |
| Defendant | ||
| Mark Anthony Gonzalez | represented by | Mark Anthony Gonzalez 1507Bull Elk Ln Laredo, TX 78045 PRO SE |
| Date Filed | # | Docket Text |
|---|---|---|
| 10/01/2021 | 1 | COMPLAINT against El Chalala, Inc., Mark Anthony Gonzalez, Rosemary Gonzalez filed by Irma Ruiz-Ramirez. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E)(RaulGamas, 5) (Entered: 10/01/2021) |
| 10/01/2021 | 2 | NOTICE to Pro Se Litigant of Case Opening. Party notified, filed. (RaulGamas, 5) (Entered: 10/01/2021) |
| 11/19/2021 | 4 | RETURN of Service of SUMMONS Executed as to El Chalala, Inc. served on 11/10/2021, answer due 12/1/2021, filed.(RaulGamas, 5) (Entered: 11/19/2021) |
| 11/19/2021 | 5 | RETURN of Service of SUMMONS Executed as to Rosemary Gonzalez served on 11/10/2021, answer due 12/1/2021, filed.(RaulGamas, 5) (Entered: 11/19/2021) |
| 11/19/2021 | 6 | RETURN of Service of SUMMONS Executed as to Mark Anthony Gonzalez served on 11/10/2021, answer due 12/1/2021, filed.(RaulGamas, 5) (Entered: 11/19/2021) |
| 11/19/2021 | 7 | AFFIDAVIT of Marco Valentin Munoz, filed.(RaulGamas, 5) (Additional attachment(s) added on 11/19/2021: # 1 Texas DL) (RaulGamas, 5). (Entered: 11/19/2021) |
| 12/10/2021 | 8 | DECLARATION of Irma Ruiz Ramirez, filed.(RaulGamas, 5) (Entered: 12/10/2021) |
| 12/10/2021 | 9 | MOTION for Default Judgment against El Chalala, Inc., Mark Anthony Gonzalez, Rosemary Gonzalez Motions referred to John A Kazen. by Irma Ruiz-Ramirez, filed. Motion Docket Date 1/3/2022. (RaulGamas, 5) (Entered: 12/10/2021) |
| 12/20/2021 | 10 | ANSWER to 1 Complaint by Mark Anthony Gonzalez, Rosemary Gonzalez, filed.(RaulGamas, 5) (Entered: 12/20/2021) |
| 12/28/2021 | 11 | MOTION to Obtain Docket SheetMotions referred to John A Kazen. by Irma Ruiz-Ramirez, filed. Motion Docket Date 1/18/2022. (Attachments: # 1 Envelope)(vcantu, 5) (Entered: 12/28/2021) |
| 01/12/2022 | 12 | OBJECTIONS to 10 Answer to Complaint, filed by Irma Ruiz-Ramirez. (RaulGamas, 5) (Entered: 01/12/2022) |
| 04/12/2022 | 14 | ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. (Signed by Magistrate Judge John A Kazen) Parties notified. (JessicaGRodriguez, 5) (Entered: 04/12/2022) |
| 04/18/2022 | 17 | ORDER Denying without Prejudice 9 MOTION for Default Judgment against El Chalala, Inc., Mark Anthony Gonzalez, Rosemary Gonzalez (Signed by Judge Marina Garcia Marmolejo) Parties notified.(RaulGamas, 5) (Entered: 04/18/2022) |
| 05/13/2022 | 20 | First AMENDED COMPLAINT against El Chalala, Inc., Mark Anthony Gonzalez, Rosemary Gonzalez filed by Irma Ruiz-Ramirez. Related document: 1 Complaint filed by Irma Ruiz-Ramirez. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D)(RaulGamas, 5) (Entered: 05/13/2022) |
| 05/13/2022 | 21 | DECLARATION of Rodrigo Gutierrez, filed.(RaulGamas, 5) (Entered: 05/13/2022) |
| 05/13/2022 | 22 | Mail Returned Undeliverable as to Mark Anthony Gonzalez, Rosemary Gonzalez re: 18 Document(s) Sent, filed. (RaulGamas, 5) (Entered: 05/13/2022) |
| 05/16/2022 | 23 | DECLARATION of Maribel Garcia, filed.(RaulGamas, 5) (Entered: 05/16/2022) |
| 05/17/2022 | 24 | ORDER. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED TO SEAL Exhibit C, (Dkt. No. 20-3), and Exhibit D, (Dkt. No. 20-4), to Plaintiff’s First Amended 20 Complaint & Response to Show Cause Order. (Signed by Magistrate Judge John A Kazen) Parties notified. (JessicaGRodriguez, 5) (Entered: 05/17/2022) |
| 06/13/2022 | 25 | SECOND MOTION for Default Judgment against El Chalala, Inc., Mark Anthony Gonzalez, Rosemary Gonzalez Motions referred to John A Kazen. by Irma Ruiz-Ramirez, filed. Motion Docket Date 7/5/2022. (RaulGamas, 5) Modified on 6/13/2022 (RaulGamas, 5). (Entered: 06/13/2022) |
Ruiz-Ramirez v. El Chalala, Inc.
(5:21-cv-00125)
District Court, S.D. Texas, Judge Marina Garcia Marmolejo
OCT 1, 2021 | REPUBLISHED BY LIT: JUN 14, 2022
El Chalala, Inc - A Mexican Restaurant in Laredo
This is a complaint re the restaurant El Chalala and alleged assault and slander, from what we’ve deduced so far.
The main case by Fairport has been randomly assigned to the same federal judge.
U.S. District Court
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS (Laredo)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 5:21-cv-00125
| Ruiz-Ramirez v. El Chalala, Inc. et al Assigned to: Judge Marina Garcia Marmolejo Referred to: Magistrate Judge John A Kazen Cause: 28:1332 Diversity-Injunctive & Declaratory Relief |
Date Filed: 10/01/2021 Jury Demand: Plaintiff Nature of Suit: 190 Contract: Other Jurisdiction: Federal Question |
| Plaintiff | ||
| Irma Ruiz-Ramirez | represented by | Irma Ruiz-Ramirez 3407 N Buena Vista Ave Laredo, TX 78043 PRO SE |
| V. | ||
| Defendant | ||
| El Chalala, Inc. | ||
| Defendant | ||
| Rosemary Gonzalez | represented by | Rosemary Gonzalez 1507 Bull Elk Ln Laredo, TX 78045 PRO SE |
| Defendant | ||
| Mark Anthony Gonzalez | represented by | Mark Anthony Gonzalez 1507Bull Elk Ln Laredo, TX 78045 PRO SE |
| Date Filed | # | Docket Text |
|---|---|---|
| 10/01/2021 | 1 | COMPLAINT against El Chalala, Inc., Mark Anthony Gonzalez, Rosemary Gonzalez filed by Irma Ruiz-Ramirez. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E)(RaulGamas, 5) (Entered: 10/01/2021) |
| 10/01/2021 | 2 | NOTICE to Pro Se Litigant of Case Opening. Party notified, filed. (RaulGamas, 5) (Entered: 10/01/2021) |
| 11/19/2021 | 4 | RETURN of Service of SUMMONS Executed as to El Chalala, Inc. served on 11/10/2021, answer due 12/1/2021, filed.(RaulGamas, 5) (Entered: 11/19/2021) |
| 11/19/2021 | 5 | RETURN of Service of SUMMONS Executed as to Rosemary Gonzalez served on 11/10/2021, answer due 12/1/2021, filed.(RaulGamas, 5) (Entered: 11/19/2021) |
| 11/19/2021 | 6 | RETURN of Service of SUMMONS Executed as to Mark Anthony Gonzalez served on 11/10/2021, answer due 12/1/2021, filed.(RaulGamas, 5) (Entered: 11/19/2021) |
| 11/19/2021 | 7 | AFFIDAVIT of Marco Valentin Munoz, filed.(RaulGamas, 5) (Additional attachment(s) added on 11/19/2021: # 1 Texas DL) (RaulGamas, 5). (Entered: 11/19/2021) |
| 12/10/2021 | 8 | DECLARATION of Irma Ruiz Ramirez, filed.(RaulGamas, 5) (Entered: 12/10/2021) |
| 12/10/2021 | 9 | MOTION for Default Judgment against El Chalala, Inc., Mark Anthony Gonzalez, Rosemary Gonzalez Motions referred to John A Kazen. by Irma Ruiz-Ramirez, filed. Motion Docket Date 1/3/2022. (RaulGamas, 5) (Entered: 12/10/2021) |
| 12/20/2021 | 10 | ANSWER to 1 Complaint by Mark Anthony Gonzalez, Rosemary Gonzalez, filed.(RaulGamas, 5) (Entered: 12/20/2021) |
| 12/28/2021 | 11 | MOTION to Obtain Docket SheetMotions referred to John A Kazen. by Irma Ruiz-Ramirez, filed. Motion Docket Date 1/18/2022. (Attachments: # 1 Envelope)(vcantu, 5) (Entered: 12/28/2021) |
| 01/12/2022 | 12 | OBJECTIONS to 10 Answer to Complaint, filed by Irma Ruiz-Ramirez. (RaulGamas, 5) (Entered: 01/12/2022) |
| 04/12/2022 | 14 | ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. (Signed by Magistrate Judge John A Kazen) Parties notified. (JessicaGRodriguez, 5) (Entered: 04/12/2022) |
| 04/18/2022 | 17 | ORDER Denying without Prejudice 9 MOTION for Default Judgment against El Chalala, Inc., Mark Anthony Gonzalez, Rosemary Gonzalez (Signed by Judge Marina Garcia Marmolejo) Parties notified.(RaulGamas, 5) (Entered: 04/18/2022) |
| 05/13/2022 | 20 | First AMENDED COMPLAINT against El Chalala, Inc., Mark Anthony Gonzalez, Rosemary Gonzalez filed by Irma Ruiz-Ramirez. Related document: 1 Complaint filed by Irma Ruiz-Ramirez. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D)(RaulGamas, 5) (Entered: 05/13/2022) |
| 05/13/2022 | 21 | DECLARATION of Rodrigo Gutierrez, filed.(RaulGamas, 5) (Entered: 05/13/2022) |
| 05/13/2022 | 22 | Mail Returned Undeliverable as to Mark Anthony Gonzalez, Rosemary Gonzalez re: 18 Document(s) Sent, filed. (RaulGamas, 5) (Entered: 05/13/2022) |
| 05/16/2022 | 23 | DECLARATION of Maribel Garcia, filed.(RaulGamas, 5) (Entered: 05/16/2022) |
| 05/17/2022 | 24 | ORDER. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED TO SEAL Exhibit C, (Dkt. No. 20-3), and Exhibit D, (Dkt. No. 20-4), to Plaintiff’s First Amended 20 Complaint & Response to Show Cause Order. (Signed by Magistrate Judge John A Kazen) Parties notified. (JessicaGRodriguez, 5) (Entered: 05/17/2022) |
| 06/13/2022 | 25 | SECOND MOTION for Default Judgment against El Chalala, Inc., Mark Anthony Gonzalez, Rosemary Gonzalez Motions referred to John A Kazen. by Irma Ruiz-Ramirez, filed. Motion Docket Date 7/5/2022. (RaulGamas, 5) Modified on 6/13/2022 (RaulGamas, 5). (Entered: 06/13/2022) |
1507 Bull Elk Ln, Laredo Listed as Residence for Rosemary Gonzales in related Lawsuit before same Federal Judge
OCC Real Estate Investments LLC Sued PT-Patriot Title For Breach of Lease then Changed its Mind
OCC’s lawsuit was filed by debt collector Bob Kruckemeyer of 244 Malone St, and OCC returns results that he is a member of OCC.
A Legal Cowboy and the Stallones in Harris County District Court Complainin’ About a Chain Saw Operator
Debt Collectin’ lawyer Robert Kruckemeyer files suit on behalf of Jeff and Pam Stallones complaining about the felling of pine and oak trees.
The Stallones and Greystone Custom Builders Cross-Sue Each Other in Travis County
US Gov. Wingman and Cowboy Robert Kruckemeyer is counsel in both cases for the Stallones and Stallones Holdings Inc.
