Levi Morin v. Law Office of Kleinhans Gruber, PLLC

ACCEPTED 03-15-00174-CV 4745489 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 4/2/2015 1:01:03 PM JEFFREY D. KYLE CLERK NO. 03-15-00174-CV LEVI MORIN § FILED IN Appellant, § 3rd COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS v. § 4/2/2015 1:01:03 PM § THIRD COURT OF APPEALS JEFFREY D. KYLE LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS § AUSTIN, TEXAS Clerk GRUBER, PLLC, § Appellee. § RESPONSE TO MORIN'S MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO NOTICE APPEAL AND MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL TO nm HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT: Now comes Appellee, LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC, in the above styled and numbered cause, and moves the Court to deny LEVI MORIN's Motion to Extend Time to Notice Appeal and moves this Court to grant this Motion to Dismiss Appeal. A. Untiled Record and/or Reference Abbreviations "District Court" refers to the case subject to this appeal that is pending before Honorable Judge Stephen Yelenoski in the 201" District Court of Travis County, Texas, Cause No. D-1-GN-14-003874; Law Office ofKleinhans Gruber. PLLC v. Levi Morin. "TCPA" refers to the Texas Participation Act. "Amended Order; 03-05.15" refers to the Amended Order signed by the court on March 26, 2015, arising from the District Court hearing on March 5, 2015, which denied LEVI MORIN's Motion to Dismiss under the Texas Citizens Participation Act on various grounds, which is allachcd hereto and incorporated herein by ___________ reference as Exhibit A. .._____________ LiWI MORIN V. LAW OFFICI' OF KL.EINIIANS GRUBER, PLLC RFSI'ONSF. /\ND MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL. PAGEl OF 12 "Motion to Extend _ _ ; 03~23~15" refers to the page number and paragraph number of the Motion to Extend Time to Notice Appeal filed by LEVI MORIN on March 23, 2015, which is the subject of this Response. "Motion to Strike; __ ; 02~18-15" refers to the page number and paragraph number of LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC's Second Amended Plaintiffs Motion to Strike or Deny Morin's Motion to Dismiss and Motion for nonsuit or In the Alternative motion tor Continuance and Motion to Withdraw Nonsuit and Motion for Sanctions filed with the District Court on February 1R, 2015, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as hxhibit B. "Return Citation; 09~30-14" refers to the citation served on LEVI MORIN with the District Court lawsuit, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit C. "TCPA Pleading; 12-03-14" refers to the Refiled Motion to Dismiss filed by LEVT MORIN on December 3, 2015, which was filed following the December 1, 2014 filing without exhibits or affidavits, as LEVI MORIN admits in his Motion to Extend. R. Factual and Statutory Background 1. On September 30, 2014, Nicole M. Hybner of Austin Process, LLC personally served LEVI MORIN at the front door of his residence located at 190 I Onion Creek Parkway #3107, Austin, Texas 7R748 at 8:06a.m. with the Original Petition and Request for Disclosure that initiated the lawsuit in District Court that is the subject of this appeal. 1 2. On December I, 2014, the Monday following the 60 1h day deadline pursuant 1 Return Citation; 09-30-14. """'""'"·-~~----· ·"-"'-----''-------------~--- LEVI MORIN V. LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBFR. PLLC RESPONSE AND MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL PAGF 2 OF 12  to TCPA~, LEVI MORIN alleges that he liled his TCPA Pleading, as defined above, under the Texas Citizens Participation Act. This filing was made without any exhibits or aflidavits and therefore, lor purposes of meeting the 60-day deadline the District Court considered this to be no tiling at all~. 3. LEVI MORIN Missed 60-day Filing Deadline: December 3, 2014, LEVI MORIN refiled his TCPA Pleading, this time, with exhibits and affidavits, and therefore, this is the date the District Court considered the TCPA Pleading to be untimely filed, and likewise, the District Court found no good cause to extend this deadline beyond 60 days 4 • 4. LEVI MORIN Also Missed 60-day Hearing Deadline: Had LEVT MORIN's TCPA Pleading been timely filed, Jtmuary 30, 2015 would be the second deadline, which is the 60-day hearing deadline on his TCPA Pleading pursuant to TCPA 5 -of which good cause was NOT found to extend the 2 PursuanLL(J Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code§ 27.003(b), "a Motion to Dismiss a legal action under this section must be filed not later than the 60th day aticr the date of service or the legal action." 3 " ..• the Court: I) Finds no good cause to extend the deadline for Morin to tile his motion to dismiss; ... 3) Strikes the exhibits to Morin's motion to dismiss, which were f11ed aller the deadline for Morin to file his motion ... " (Amended Order: 03-05-15). 4 !d. ' Pursuant to Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 27.004(a), "A hearing on a motion under Section 27.003 must be set not later than the 60th day allcr the date of service of this moti(>n ... " LEVI MOll TN V, LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRURER, PLLC Rt'.SI'ONSF. AND MOTION TO DISMISS Al'l'EAL PAGI·:3 01' 12  h<:aring deadline past this January 30, 2015 1h deadlin<: 6 • 5. On Febmary 17, 2015, the District Court heard LAW OFFiCE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC's Motion for Continuance and the parties agreed in open court that LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC's presence was not necessary on Fcbmary 26, 2015 because the case would merely be resent on February 26, 2015 to March 5, 2015. 6. On Febmary 26, 2015, the case was be announced by LEVI MORIN and recessed/reset to March 5, 2015 7• 7. On March 5, 2015, the District Court began and concluded the hearing on LEV! MORIN's TCPA Pleading and LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC's Second Amended Motion to Strike or Deny Morin's Motion to Dismiss and the responses and replies to those motions; the parties objections; the evidence; and counsel's arguments. (Amended Order; 03-05-15). 8. On March 6, 2015, LEVI MORIN filed his Notice of Appeal. 9. On March 23, 2015, LEVI MORIN filed his Motion that is the subject of this Response. " " ... the Court: 2) Finds Morin did not set the hearing on his motion to dismiss within 60 dnys after service of the motion. and did not meet any of the exceptions indicating the h0aring can be set later than the 60'h d:ty ... " (Amended Order; 03-05-15). 7 Motion to Strike; 3-4:15-16 and 5:21 (a); 02-18-15. Li'.Vt Mol\ IN V. LAW 0FFTCE OF KLEINHANS G!!Uill',!(, PLLC RESPONSE AND MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL 10. On March 25, 2015, lht: Di~tricl Court signt:d tht: ordt:rs rt:ndt:rt:d on March 5, 2015. Jd. II. On March 26, 2015, the District Court signed amended orders as rendered on March 5, 2015./d. C. Appellate Deadlines Missed 12. March 6, 2015 l)eadline to File Appellate Motion for Extension has Passed. As LEVI MORIN admits, TCPA deems a motion denied if the deadline passes without a hcaringH. As no good cause extension was granted, it is clear that Jtmmuy 30, 2015 was the deadline for the hearing on LEVI MORIN's TCPA Pleading and it is undisputed that no hearing occurred on the 9 TCPA Pleading on or prior to the January 30, 2015 dcadline (Amended Order; 03-05-15). Likewise, the motion is denied by opt:ration of law 10 and a Notice of Appeal must be filed within 20 days 11 unless a proper Motion to • "The TCPA deems a motion denied if the deadline passes without a hearing." (Motion I :2; 03-23-15): Pursuant to Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code~ 27.008(a), "If a court does not rule on a motion to dismiss under Section 27.003 in the time pn:sctibed by Section 27.005, the motion is considered to have been denied by operation of law and the moving party may appeal. " •· ... the Court: l) Finds no good cause to extend the deadline for Morin to file his motion to dismiss; 2) Finds Morin did not set the hearing on his motion to dismiss within 60 days after service of the motion, and did not meet any of the exceptions indicating the hearing can be set later than the 60 1h day ... " (Amended Order; 03-05-15). 10 Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code~ 27.008(a), "If a court docs not rule on a motion t(l dismiss under Section 27.003 in the time prescribed by Section 27.005, the motion is con~idered to have been denied by operation of law and the moving party may appeal. 11 Tex. R. App. P. 26.l(b), " ... in an accelerated appeal, the notice or appeal must be liled within 20 days after the judgment or order is signed." LEVI MflRIN V. LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUIII':R, PLLC RESPONSE AND MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL I' AGE 5 or 12  Extend time is filed within 15 days after the deadlineD. The 20' 11 day from Januaty 30, 2015 ran on Febmaty 19, 2015, and the additional 15-day deadline to file for an extension ran on Man.;h 6, 2015. Therefore, as LEVI MORlN admits that, "if the written order states that there is no good cause for extension, then Morin's right to appeal is lost retroactively." (Motion to Extend 2:3; 03-23-15). The Order clearly states that there was no good cause for extension and therefore, it is abundantly clear that this Court is without jurisdiction to mlc on LEVI MORIN's Motion because it is outside the time allowed to file a motion for extension to file for an appeal. 13. TCPA Pleading was Heard Outside District Court's Jurisdiction, on Day 97. Although LEVI MORlN provides cites, LEVT MOIUN provides no relevant cited support or case law for his interpretation that the District Coll!t retained discretion until the District Court heard the motion, as long as it was heard before Day 90. (Motion to Extend 3:1; 03-23-15). Furthennorc, it is clear by counting days, that this case wasn't even heard until day 97, which again, LEVI MORIN admits, is outside of the District Court's jurisdiction. I d. As LEVI MOIUN continues to miss deadlines and drag this case on, later requesting forgiveness for all the missed deadlines, LAW OFFICE OF 17 Tex. R. App. P. 26.3, '"The appellate court may extend the time to file the notice of appeal il; within 15 days aller the deadline for filing the notice of appeal, the party ... (b) Iiles in the appellate C(lll!l a m(lti(ln C(lmplying ~J!!:.J~c::u:..::lc-'lc.:O.:..:.S:..o.(""b)'-"------------ LEVI MOl( IN V. LAW OFFICI·: OF KI.EINIIANS GRUBER, PLLC RESPONSE AND MOTION TO DISMISS APPiiAI, PAOE 6 OF 12  KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC continues to be more prejuc.lict: in pursuing their lawsuit as witnesses and evidence become more stale and LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC continues to accrue more damages by the Yelp posting that remains posted to date. Tt is extrt:mdy unlikely that TCPA would support any interpretation to allow a Defendant to miss deadline after dt:adlint: and wntinuc to hold up the lawsuit by filing motions that stay proceedings well after a motion has been denied by law. However, even if this is the proper interpretation, as set out in more detail above, the District Court did not hear this case until Day 97 (had LEVI MORIN's initial TCPA Pleading been timely, which the District Court found they were not) and LEVI MORIN fails to present any argument to support that the District Court could retain discretion or jurisdiction following the 90111 day. Therefore, it is clear that the District Court did not have discretion or jurisdiction to rule as no good cause finding was made for an extension and likewise, it is clear that the TCPA Pleading was ovt:rrulcd by operation of law and likewise;:, LEVI MORIN fai kc.l to timely tile this Motion for Extension by tht: deadline of March 6, 2015. -=--~--~-....,----:· ..,______________ - - - - - LEVI MORIN V. LAW OFFICE 01' KLEINHANS GRUilER, PLLC RESPONSE AND MOTION TO DlSMlSS A WEAl, PAGE 7 OF 12 14. March 6 1h is Only Deadline, There is No Deadline Confusion. There is no deadline confusion because both of LEVI MORIN's arguments because no good cause was found for the extension of either deadlines and therefore, both arguments resull in the same calculation of the deadline to file a motion to extend time to file, because, as set forth herein, there was no finding of good cause for extension of any of the deadlines. D. No Good Cause for Extension of Appellate Deadline 15. Third Good Cause Extension Being Requested By LEVI MORIN. As set forth above, relating to the TCPA Pleading on appeal before this Court, this is the third time that LEVI MORIN is requesting a good cause extension based on the same arguments that were already denied by the District Court 13 , and likewise, these arguments for good cause for a third request for extension should be found to be without merit and should be denied. 16. No Procedural Forfeiture-Deadlines Need to Be Enforced. This is an appeal off of a denial of a Motion to Dismiss. If this appeal is denied, LEVI MORIN still has a right to be heard in a full final jury trial and nothing has been lost. LEVI MORIN attempts to argue that Texas law disfavors procedural forfeiture but relics on the Sutherland v. Spencer case which is about whether a 13 Amended Order: 03-05-15. ---~--·-·······--··-··,.-·········-------------------- LEVI MORIN V. LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRURF.R, PLLC RESPONSE AND MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL PAGE !I OF 12  14 default judgement (that would dispose of an entire casc) • In the Sutherland case, that court found there was no conscious indifference for missing the deadline to answer because Texas prefers adjudication on the merits. !d. This case is still pending in District court to be adjudicated on the merits; therefore there is no procedural forfeiture. Furthermore, it is of greater importance, that deadlines such as these, arc enforced in order for the rule of law to have any meaning/ 5 and therefore, this Court should deny LEVI MORIN's third request for a good cause extension of the time to file an appeal and should dismiss this appeal. 17. District Court Already Denied Good Cause for LEVI MORIN's Claim "Effort to Reach Agreement" J.n District Court, LEVI MORIN attempted to argue for good cause extensions of the other missed deadlines, by asserting the same argument 1"-that he was trying to reach discovery agreements with LAW OFFTCE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC. LAW OFFTCE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC plead, argued and supported by evidence that LEVI MORIN was not making any legitimate attempts and was in fact refusing to respond to LAW OFFICE OF 14 Surlier/and v. Spencer, 376 S. W.3d 752, 756 (Tex. 20 12). 15 "Our legal system is built around deadlines. Deadlines ensure the orderly pmccss of litigation. If that tool is to have any effect, and the ruk ol'law any meaning, it must be enforced. q: Edwards Aquifer Au/h. v. Chem. Lime, Lid., 291 S.W.3d 392, 403 (Tex.2009) ("Filing deadlines ... necessarily operate harshly and arbitrarily with respect to individuals who tall just on the other side of them, but if the concept ora filing deadline is to have any content, the deadline must be enforced. Any less rigid standard would risk encouraging a Ia~ altitude toward filing dates." (quoting United Srates v. Locke, 471 U.S. 84, 101, 105 S.Cl. 1785,85 L.Ed.2d 64 (19S5))). !d. ~" Motion to Strike: 3-4:15-16 and 5:21 (a); 02-1 S-15. LEVI MORIN V. LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC RESPONSE AND MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL PAGE 9 OF 12 KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC's t:mails sent on Janum-y 5, 2015 and January 28, 2015, which were inquiring: i) whether he was going to answer discovery served 45 days ago, if not, a hearing would be necessary; ii) a date on which discovery would bt: providt:d, if not, hearing availability PRIOR to any setting on tht: Motion to Dismiss 17 • It is clear that LEVI MORIN was not in pursuit of an "amicable resolution," as he intentionally nt:vcr responded to either of these emai Is without any explanation as to why he failed to do so, therefore this argument should be disregarded tmd no good cause finding should be made. E. Conclusion and Prayer 18. As LEVT MORIN admits, TCPA deems a motion denied if the deadline passes without a IH:aring and that the deadline to file the notice of appeal was February 19, 2015, making the deadline to tile tllC request for extension, Mm·ch 6, 20 I 5. As the District Court has found that no good cause extension existed for LEVI MORIN's t~tilure to meet the past two TCPA Pleading deadlines relating to this appeal, this Court should also find no good cause exists for extension of the March 6, 2014 deadline to file a Motion for Extension of Time to Notice Appeal, should deny this Motion tor Extension of Time to Notice Appeal and dismiss his Notice of Appeal with costs being allocated to LEVI MORJN. 17 !d. -~-----------· ..- - LEVI MORIN V, LAW OFFICE OF KLEINIIANS GRUBER, PLLC RESPONSE ANn MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL T'AGE100F12  R~sp~ctfully submiLL~d, LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUHER, PLLC By::-:-:--:--~~4.~~----­ Ki mbcrl y &:"'1\,J.IJflli kim@lawoffic~ . g.com State Bar No. 24062755 Keith L. Kleinhans kcith@lawofficcofkg.com State Bar No. 24065565 12600 Hill Country Blvd, Ste. R-275 Austin, Texas 78738 Telephone: 512.961.8512 Facsimile: 512.623.7320 ···-·-··------,------,,--------,,----.....--· LEVI MORIN V. LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBFR, ------------·- PLLC ..·--- RFSPONSF, AND MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL PAGE 11 OF 12  CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE I conferred with LcifO!son and he opposes this pleading. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that a tme copy of this pleading was served on each attorney of record or party in accordance with the Texas Rules o[ Appellate Procedure on April 1, 2015. The Olsen Finn, PLLC LcifOiscn 4830 Wilson Road, Stc. 300 Humble, Texas 77396 Telephone: 281 .849.8382 Facsimile: 281.248.2190 Email: lei[@olsonappcals.com VIA ESERVICE ~----------·-------------------------- LEVI MORIN V. LAW (WFICE OF KLEINIIANS GRUBER, PLLC RESPONSE ANn MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAl. PAGE 12lll'12 MAR-26-2015 16:36 P.002 Exhibit A - Page 001 No. D-1-GN-14-003874 Law Office of Kleinhans Gruber, PLLC 201 st District Court v. Travis County, Texas Levi Morin Amended Order on Motion to Dismiss The Court has considered Morin's motion to dismiss; Kleinhans Gruber's Second Amended Motion to Strike or Deny Morin's Motion to Dismiss; the responses and replies on those motions; the parties' objec- tions; the evidence; and counsel's argument. Based upon that considera- tion, the Court: 1. Finds no good cause to extend the deadline for Morin to file his motion to dismiss; 2. Finds Morin did not set the hearing on his motion to dismiss within 60 days after service of the motion, and did not meet any of the ex- ceptions indicating the hearing can be set later than the 60th day; 3. Strikes the exhibits to Morin's motion to dismiss, which were filed after the deadline for Morin to file his motion; 4. Overrules Morin's objections to the affidavits of Kimberly Klein- hans, Martin Garza, and Michael Siegler; 5. Finds that Kleinhans Gruber established, by clear and specific evi- dence, a prima facie case for defamation and business disparage- ment based upon Morin's statement that Kleinhans Gruber "sen(t] hung over 'associates' to court dates [Michael Seigler];" 6. Finds that Morin did not establish each element of an affirmative defense by a preponderance of the evidence; and 7. Denies Morin's motion to dismiss. Signed on March 261h, 2015, at Austin, Texas. TOTAL P.002  Exhibit B - Page 001 2/18/2015 10:29:29 AM Velva L. Price District Clerk Travis County CAUSE NO. D-1-GN-14-003874 D-1-GN-14-003874 LAW OFFICE OF § IN THE DISTRICT COURT KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC § Plaintiff, § v. § 201" JUDICIAL DISTRICT § LEVI MORIN, § Defendant. § TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS SECOND AMENDED PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO STRIKE OR DENY MORIN'S MOTION TO DISMISS AND MOTION FOR NONSUIT OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE AND MOTION TO WITHDRAW NOTICE OF NONSUIT AND MOTION FOR SANCTIONS Plaintiff, LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC, asks the court to sign an Order Striking the Setting on LEVI MORIN's Motion to Dismiss, sign an Order of Nonsuit without prejudice, and sign and Order for Sanctions. In the alternative, LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC, asks the court to sign an Order of Continuance and Withdraw of Notice of Nonsuit, as well as an Order for Sanctions. A. Introduction I. Plaintiff is LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC; Defendant is LEVI MORIN. 2. LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC sued LEVI MORIN on the following counts: (1) business disparagement, (2) defamation, (3) defamation per se, and for injunctive relief. B. Facts: Both Deadlines Missed for Filing and Hearing Morin's Motion to Dismiss 3. On September 24, 2014, LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC filed Plaintiff's Original Petition, Request for Equitable Relief & Request for Disclosure. LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC V. LEVI MORIN SECOND AMENDED/SUPPLEMENTED MOTION TO STRIKE SETTING, ET. AL PAGEl OF 12  Exhibit B - Page 002 4. On September 24, 2014, citation issued. 5. On September 25, 2014, Austin Process, LLC received a copy of Plaintiffs Original Petition, Request for Equitable Relief & Request for Disclosure and citation for service. 6. On September 30, 2014, Nicole M. Hybner of Austin Process, LLC personally served LEVI MORIN at the front door of his residence located at 1901 Onion Creek Parkway #31 07, Austin, Texas 78748 at 8:06 a.m. with the Original Petition and Request for Disclosure. See Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. 7. On October 28, 2014, LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC served counsel for LEVI MORIN with Requests for Admission, Request for Production and First Set of Interrogatories. See Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. 8. 1st deadline missed by LEVI MORIN: On November 19, 2014, LEVI MORIN's Response to Request for Disclosure was due. LEVI MORIN failed to respond until February 13, 2015, nearly 3 months later. 9. 2nd deadline missed by LEVI MORIN: On November 27, 2014, LEVI MORIN's Response to Request for Admissions, Response to Request for Production and Response to First Set of Interrogatories was due. LEVI MORIN failed to respond until February 13, 2015, nearly 3 months later. 10. 3rd deadline missed by LEVI MORIN: On December I, 2014, the Monday following the 60'h day (November 29, 2014 actually being the 601h day) to file a Motion to Dismiss by LEVI MORIN pursuant to Section 27.003 of the Texas Participation Act (the "Act") ran. In accordance with the Act, LEVI MORIN is limited, "not later than the 60th day after the date ofservice of the legal action" (Date of Service: September 30, 20 14). 11. On December 3, 2014, counsel for LEVI MORIN filed LEVI MORIN's Motion to Dismiss with exhibits. Although a Motion to Dismiss was filed 2 days prior, it failed to include any of the Motion to Dismiss exhibits or evidence. 12. On December 22, 2014, LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC filed a Notice of Nonsuit. 13. On December 30, 2014, LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC filed a Notice of Address Change and Notice of Unavailability and on January 28, 2015, LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC filed an Amended Notice of Unavailability which noticed counsel for LEVI MORIN that LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC would be out of the country and unavailable for a setting on February 18,2015 through February 25,2015. 14. 4th and 5th deadline missed by LEVI MORIN: On January 30, 2015, the 60 111 day ran from the date that LEVI MORIN's Motion to Dismiss would have been timely filed (December l, 2014). In accordance with Section 27.004 of the Act, "A hearing on a LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC V. LEVI MORIN SECOND AMENDEDISUPPLEMENTED MOTION TO STRIKE SETTING. ET. AL. PAGEl OF 12  Exhibit B - Page 003 motion under Section 27.004 must be set not later than the 60th day after the date of service of the motion unless [11 the docket conditions of the court require a later hearing, [21upon a showing ofgood cause, [31 or by agreement of the parties ... but in no event shall the hearing occur more than 90 days after service of the motion under Section 27.003 ... " 15. As required by Section 27.004, to date, there has been [I] no Travis County docket conditions, [2] no timely finding of good cause by the court prior to running of the 60- day deadline (January 30, 2015) and [3] no agreement by the parties to extend the 60-day deadline to a 90-day deadline. The following email correspondence documents the same: a) On January 5, 2015, LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC sent the attached email to counsel for LEVI MORIN requesting the following information, attached hereto an incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit C: i) whether he was going to answer discovery served 45 days prior, if not, a hearing would be necessary; ii) a date on which discovery would be provided, if not, hearing availability PRIOR to any setting on the Motion to Dismiss; and iii) a follow-up request for a copy of the bar complaints that LEVI MORIN filed against Kimberly Kleinhans and Michael Siegler (which were automatically dismissed without further review) that counsel for LEVI MORIN had repeated countless times, he was in agreement to provide. b) On January 28,2015, LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC sent the attached email to counsel for LEVI MORIN requesting the same information as requested in the January 5, 2015 email. Both the January 5, 2015 email and the January 28, 2015 email were ignored by counsel for LEVI MORIN, attached hereto an incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit D. c) On Friday, February 13,2015, at about 9:00p.m., counsel for LEVI MORIN unilaterally sent over a self-serving subset of documents never discussed but solely of his choosing that are only beneficial to his case. Likewise, counsel for LEVI MORIN unilaterally decided that the setting for his Motion to Dismiss would be February 26, 2015, and there would be no time for any of LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC's motions that LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC had clearly noticed counsel for LEVI MORIN would be necessary prior to any setting for a Motion to Dismiss, attached hereto an incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit E. LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC V. LEVI MORIN SECOND AMENDED/SUPPLEMENTED MOTION TO STRIKE SETTING, ET. AL. PAGE3 OF 12  Exhibit B - Page 004 d) On February 14, 2015, upon receipt, LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC noticed counsel for LEVI MORIN of LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC's conflict for February 26, 2015 and counsel for LEVI MORIN refused to reschedule to a time and date which would provide proper notice of setting to LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC, attached hereto an incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit F. 16. On Febmary 17, 2015, this Court found that an announcement for LEVI MORIN's Motion to Dismiss setting would be made on Febmary 26,2015, but that the case shall be recessed to March 5, 2015, at which time this Court shall hear the issues surrounding whether there is good cause to extend the time to allow the Motion to Dismiss past the 60-day deadline, whether there is good cause for discovery, et. al. 17. 6th deadline missed by LEVI MORIN: On February 26, 2015, the 90tl' day ran from the date that LEVI MORIN's Motion to Dismiss would have been timely filed (December I, 2014). 18. On March 5, 2015, it has been noticed that LEVI MORIN's Motion to Dismiss is set for hearing on the 97' 11 day following a timely filing of a Motion to Dismiss. 19. Likewise, LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC seeks this Court's relief to hear this Motion and award the requested relief, primarily that LEVI MORIN's Motion to Dismiss be denied and fees or sanctions be awarded to encourage counsel for LEVI MORIN will comply with rules and deadlines in the future. C. Motion to Strike or Deny Morin's Motion to Dismiss 20. 4 Missed Statutory Deadlines: This Court should strike LEVI MORIN's Motion to Dismiss setting as not being timely as counsel for LEVI MORIN has not missed just one, but four critical deadlines as follows: a. file and serve the Motion to Dismiss in accordance with the Texas Participation Act (the "Act") as the deadline was December I, 2014 and it wasn't filed or served with exhibits on LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC until December 3, 2014. b. set a hearing in accordance with the Act as the 60-day deadline was January 30, 2015. c. request a good cause extension PRIOR to the expiration of the January 30, 2015 60-day dead! in e. d. set a hearing in accordance with the Act, with a timely finding of good cause within the 90-day deadline of February 26, 2015, as the Motion to Dismiss setting is not set until March 5, 2015 (97 days after the filing of the Motion to Dismiss). LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC V. LEVI MORIN SECOND AMENDED/SUPPLEMENTED MOTION TO STRIKE SETTING, ET. AL PAGE40Fl2  Exhibit B - Page 005 21. No Good Cause For Extension of Deadlines: Additionally or in the alternative, LEVI MORIN cannot show good cause for an extension of the January 30, 2015 60-day deadline. In fact, counsel for LEVI MORIN has acted in complete contradiction to the way one should act for good cause finding to be granted for the following reasons: a. Counsel for LEVI MORIN has intentionally held up the litigation process by making oral reassurances that he will provide documents and/or information and/or dates that he has failed to provide as discussed. Please refer to January 5, 2015 and January 28, 2015 emails which followed up phone conversation (referenced in fact section above) which are attached as Exhibit Din which LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC requests time and time again whether LEVI MORIN is going to agree to respond to the discovery and if so, a date in which it will be provided. Counsel for LEVI MORIN refused to respond to these 2 requests until well after the January 30, 2015 60-day deadline, at which time he unilaterally sent over a self-serving subset of documents, never discussed, but solely of his choosing that are only beneficial to his case. Specifically, counsel for LEVI MORIN's Febmary 13, 2015 email with this self-serving discovery, clearly shows his intent was to delay proceedings to prohibit LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC from their right to request this Court to allow discovery, "That [February 26, 2015 setting] will leave you with no time for discovery even if the judge thinks you deserve it." Also attached as Exhibit D. b. Likewise, as counsel for LEVI MORIN has failed to comply with not one, but four strict statutory deadlines set forth in the Act, this Court should not reward LEVI MORIN for bad behavior of carelessly disregarding ALL deadlines by allowing an extension that can only be granted with good cause. c. Disregard of Local Rules: Furthermore, Counsel for LEVI MORIN's disregard of the rule of Jaw isn't limited to disregard of statutory deadlines, he continues to disregard local rules as well. Counsel for LEVI MORIN disregarded local rules requiring counsel for LEVI MORIN to confer about settings and unilaterally initially set this Motion to Dismiss for hearing on February 26, 2015, which required the court to hear an emergency Motion to Strike/Motion for Continuance due to counsel for LEVI MORIN's Jack of due diligence in setting this Motion within the last 4 months, by the deadline, at a time that LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC can have adequate time to hire counsel and/or prepare a defense for a dispositive setting that could potentially dismiss their claims against LEVI MORIN and expose them to attorney fees. d. 2 Missed Discovery Deadlines: Furthermore, Counsel for LEVI MORIN's disregard of the mle of Jaw isn't limited to disregard of statutory deadlines and local mles but to disregard of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure concerning discovery. LEVI MORIN failed to respond by November 19, 2014 to the Request for Disclosure included with the Original Petition. Additionally, LEVI MORIN failed to respond by November 27, 2014 to the Request for Production, Request LAW OFFICE OF KLEINIIA.c'iS GRUBER. PLLC V. LEVI MORIN SECOND AMENDEDiSUPPLEMENTED MOTION TO STRIKE SETTING, ET. AL. PAGE5oFI2  Exhibit B - Page 006 for Admission and First Set of Interrogatories served on October 28, 2014. Counsel for LEVI MORIN improperly argues that his Motion to Dismiss places a hold on discovery, however, this is misplaced as his Motion to Dismiss and exhibits weren't filed until December 3, 2014, days following the discovery deadlines. 22. Pursuant to Texas Participation Act Section 27.003, "in no event shall the hearing occur more than 90 days after sen,ice of the motion under Section 27.003." The hearing on this matter is on the 93'd day, therefore, even with a finding of good cause, this hearing is after the 90' 11 day. which is clearly in violation of statutory law, requiring that the setting be stricken. The "recess" that occurred on February 26, 2015 was merely procedural in an attempt to circumvent the black letter of the law that clearly states a hearing can't be after the 90th day. All case law on the issues only allows a decision to be made within 30 days of a hearing that was at least started within the 90th day. The fact that this hearing wasn't even started on the 90-day deadline of February 26, 2015, distinguishes this case from the case law, again, requiring the court to strike this Motion to Dismiss because a hearing had not began within the 90-day period. 23. For these reasons stated above, this Court should strike LEVI MORIN's Motion to Dismiss setting from the docket. D. Motion tor Nonsuit 24. On December 22, 2014. LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC filed a Notice of Nonsuit that in accordance with Texas Law, should immediately nonsuit this case as there were no prior counterclaims on file as of December 22, 2014, that would otherwise prevent this case from being nonsuited without prejudice. 25. The Texas Participation Act (the "Act") motion to dismiss is predicated on a review of the merits of the lavvsuit. All other claims that are predicated on a review of the merits of the lawsuit. absent a clear counterclaim, can be nonsuited in full by the Plaintiff Therefore, a nonsuit renders the merits of the case moot. UTMB v. Estate of Blackmon. 195 S.W.3d 98, I 01 (Tex. 2006). The nonsuit is effective as soon as the plaintiff files a motion for nonsuit. Epps v. Fowler, 351 S.W.3d 862, 868 (Tex. 20 II). 26. The only relevant case to the contrary was decided following the date that this case was filed and therefore doesn't apply. Rauhauser v. McGibney, No. 02-14-00215-CV, 2014 WL 6996819 (Tex App.-·Fort Worth Dec. 11, 2014, nph) (TCPA rnotion survives nonsuit). This case was tiled on September 24,2014 and the Rauhauser case was decided on December 11, 2/J14. Had LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC known at the time of filing that this case couldn't be nonsuited if their caseload and personal circumstances prevented them from prosecuted this case, LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC would not have filed this case at the time. 27. Likewise, this Court should sign an Order of Nonsuit, finding that the nonsuit date of this case was the date of Notice of Nonsuit of December 22,2104, and strike the February 26, 2015 setting from the docket. 7L-AW--:0:-F-FI_C_E_O_F::K-L-El·N--!!-AN-S-G:::R-C.BER. PLLC V. LEVI MORIN SECOND AMENDED/SUPPLEMENTED MOTION TO STRIKE SETTING. ET. AL. PAGE60F 12  Exhibit B - Page 007 E. In The Alternative to Paragraph D, Motion for Continuance and Motion to Strike Notice of Nonsuit 28. LEVI MORIN's intentional delay has cost him to miss to deadlines imposed by the Act, and likewise, LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC is only requesting a continuance/resetting and discovery and striking of the Notice of Nonsuit in the event that this Court finds that LEVI MORIN's Motion to Dismiss should not be stricken or dismissed based onmis;,ing said deadlines or based on the court's own discretion. 29. This continuance should be granted because LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC is entitled to discovery pursuant to The Texas Participation Act Section 27.006(b), "on a motion hy a party or on the court's own motion and on a showing of good cause, the court may allow specified and limited discovery relevant to the motion." 30. LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC has good cause for discovery prior to the Motion to Dismiss setting so that LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC has evidence that is only in LEVI MORIN's possession to defend the Motion to Dismiss. Such relevant discovery is of any evidence supporting that LEVI MORIN's statements posted on Yelp about LAW OFFTCE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC are false. LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC is entitled to discovery of any evidence supporting that LEVI MORIN knew they were false (for example, LAW OFFTCE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC needs discovery ofthe billing statements in LEVI MORIN's posc;ession thut show ell the work perfom1ed on his case and which document the hourly rate bilku was not S400 an hour as he held it out to be, but rather $350 an hour). 31. October 28, 20 I 4, weli bdorc LEVI lVIORfN filed his Motion to Dismiss, LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC LEVI MORIN has been in possession of discovery for over 4 months. LEVI r.,1()R fN failed to respond by November 19, 20 I 4 to the Request for Disclosure included \\'ith the Orig;nal Petition. Additionally, LEVI MORIN failed to respond by November 27. 2014 to the Req1.1est for Production, Request for Admission and First Set of Interrogatories served on October 28,2014. On February 13,2015, LEVI MORTN provided extremely limited and self-serving responses and production. In fact, for all discovery requested which is "discovery relevant to the motion" (as set forth in the Act as being the type of discovery allowable), is followed by a response from LEVI \10RIN that. "The Act doesn't entitle the finn to this information yet." One such example i·· Reque<•nully np[>earcd Khnbcrly G. Kleinhans, who, after b~ing placed under oath, stated the following: "T have read th<1 above Motion for Continuance and every statement is within my personal knowledge and is true and correct." Kimberly 0R. \~~s-QO"' Not Public LAW OFFICE OF !C. FTNt.r \NS ur.:_·is'~i~, PLLC \/.LEVI MORIN SECOND AMENDal/S:JPPLEMfoYrc D MOTION TO STRIKE SETTING, ET. AL PAGE 11 OF 12  Exhibit B - Page 011 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that a tme copy of the above was served on each attorney of record or party in accordance with the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure on Febmary 18,2015. The Olsen Firm. PLLC LeifOlsen 4830 Wilson Road, Ste. 300 Humble, Texas 77396 Telephone: 281.849.8382 Facsimile: 281.248.2190 Email: leif@olsonappeals.com VIA ESERVICE AND FACSIMILE LAW OFFICE OF KI.ElNIIA~S GRUBER, PLLC V. LEVI MORL'< SECOND AMENDED/SUPPLEMENTED MOTION TO STRIKE SETTING, Er. AL. PAGEI20F12  Exhibit B - Page 012 ,:7;-:p)AVIi ........... OF .....__SERVICE -~-·--- _ 201at Judicial Dlotrlct eoJrt ! Pl~intitf: Law OffiG·;t .~: t :~~,:, ·.!I vu. Dofendar.'· Lflvl Mor••·· For; LawOfftv:. •.• ; ,.·,:. iOO Lavcc.: ~ ;~,. Suite 1qO' Aust!n, ·(;- · ·· ·:' Racaived :·~... •\p·:\i~~: Onlor, c~ .. ,_.;,_ .· /(. ,·:::·.· : _,.·. ·. :. '.''':'''~_:,''~;,,or September, 2014 at4:10 pm to bll served on l.evl Morin, 1901 j <:, .;·)·"' •l~d say that on !he 30th day of Soptembar, 2014 at 8:06am, 1: I I~IOIVIP•.I!' · ·: ,,,., .. :· ,.. ., · . ·/··'"' ::.! ·" -':·· .:.:. I certify tl:;:r I ,.. •··· ··. •· · ·,,,~,.:. · ,•'•. :~:·-::.·I::~! of Septer:: ... . -·.·,:;:. SCH-9631, Exp. 4/30115 known 1-:> r.·": '"-::>2..+.::.. / ,. Auslln Procou LLC 809 Nuoces ~RY·,,;;c Austin, TX 78701 (512) 480-8071 Ou>' Job S~rial Numbe1: MST-2014003433 r;:,,,, ~;G v. Morin -: .._. -;-,'· ,._ .... ,·;  .\ Ill 1111~11" /Ill 1111 7013 2250 0001 3659 4138 . :• ... ··' .. . .·- Exhibit B - Page 013 : .. ., . {~if.Olsen ....... . • ·-."! ::' .• ~ ........ ·-;.- · 4830 Wilso;R.oad, Suite 300 •. · ..... •f:~ :.. • . •""!. . ·. ~--· ... ·Hurn.ble,-rikas 77396 . ,. : ' . ~., ... E';Complete items ·1, 2, and 3. Also complete A. Sign<~tu:c item 4 if Restricted Delivery Is desired. 0 Agent w. Prinryour name and address on the reverse X so that we can return the card to you. B. Received by (Pn'nted Name) rn Attach this card to the bacl< of the mail piece, or on the front if space permits. D. Is delivery adllres5 different from item ! ? Yts 1. Article Addressed to: !t YES, enter deliVel)• address below: 0 No Le; 0 0\.:, ~ill ~ o3 ow: \s."11 fZ.d · sie._). oD ftvlfVI\o\e ,IX. 1--=t?, 1 ~ 0 Priority Mall Express·~ D Retum Receipt for Merchandise 0 Collect 2. Article Numbet~ (Transfer from S 7013 2250 0001 3659 4138  Exhibit B - Page 014 -----~------- -----------~--'----,-------'----- LAw OFFICES OF KLEINHANS GRUBER. PLLC Keith L. Iaeinltnm; Kimberly G. !Oeinhans · k~ith@l:rwofficeofkg.com Jcim@,lawoffi~eofkg.com . ' ' LAW OFFIC."ES OF KQ, PLLC Bc:t: Cavc:'s.AUdn:ss: Mailing Address: 12600 Hill Country _Bh'd_, Suite R-275 ' 700 Lavaca St, Ste. 140'0 Am.1in. Texas 78738 • Au;1in, Tex~ 7870 I -----~Tel: 5!2.961.8512 .- Fnx: ·Si2.623~73:io- - . ' .. ~. ' wWw.laworficeotkg.cam . October 28, 2014 '· .. LeifOlsen · ., . 4830\Viis~n'.!Zoa.d, Suite 300 . Humble, Texas 77396 Telephone Number: 281.849.8382 .... Facsi~ile: No Fax Number E~ists . ,· .. .· . - • ... Email: leif@olsonappeals.com . . :. _.. ~ . . . VIA. CMRRR# 7013 ~250 0001 3659 4138 . ..: : ,ANJ)EMAIL ''f. . .. •. .' . . ' . .... . -~- .... _. RE: .. CAUSE N6. D-1-GN-14-003874; LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC v. LEVI .. .. . ·lvlORJN; IN THii20 1ST J UOICIAL DISTRICT COURT, IRA VIS COUNTY, TExAS' •.· Deaf ML 01seil: : · . ·Enclosed, pleas.e find t11e following d~cuments: •\ : .· : . ·. • .·Law Office ofKiei1Jhm•s Gruber, PLLC's First Requests fo~ Admissien·to Levi Morin;- ; • Law Office oi'Kleinhans Gruber, PLLC's First Set oflntertogatories to Levi Moritl; • . Law Office ofKleinhtms Gruber, ~LLC's F.irst Requests for. Production to Levi Morin~ · Should yini. have any trouble receiving ihe,Se documents, please do nbt hesitate to ~ontact me directly. · · · · ' ., ... .. . ·.~·.·· . ··. . .. 1- . ··. @ J=Vi,; Paral~gal to Kimberly G: Kfeuilians .. . ' .' -~- ., ·' . ·.. ~ ...  Exhibit B - Page 015 CAUSE NO. D-1-GN-14-003874 LAW OFFICE OF § IN THE DISTRICT COURT Iq.EINHANS GRUBER, PLLC, § Plaintiff, § v. § '201" JUDICIAL DISTRICT' § LEVI MORIN, § Defendant. § , TRAVIS COUNTY; TEXAS •' . ' ' FlRST REQUEST FOR ADMISSION TO LEVI MOIDN To: LEVI MORIN;· by and through their attom~y· ofrecord, Leif Olse~, 4830 Wilson Road; Suite 300, HUJnhlc, Texas 77396. -~ .. COMES NOW, LAW OFFICE OF KLErN.HANS GRUBER, PLLC, Plaintiff, and makes the attached 'reques\ tor ~drn•s,ion and serve's th~m .on LEVL MORIN, Defendant, p~tsuant to.· ·. Tex. R: Civ.P.'J98; and respectfully requt;sts that you admit the truth, of each of-the' matters set •·'· forth hereinbelow. Your response to th~se requests must eit~ef. sp~cifically: and s~parately admit ~~ .. ·~ ·.. or deny each ofthe matters set .otit below or explain in detail the.· reasoi)s ~hy you cannot truthfully . . admit or deny sucll m:1tt~r. Each ~(the . . matters· set. forth below . . will. be.admitted by you •' ' ' l.!n.less, within thirty (30) days after service· of this ·~equest, you mak~ and serve on Plaintiff's ' . '·· ; ~ounsel a written re.sponse tc\these matters as required . by Tex. R. Civ. P.·l98, . .·;:. ·. ·:. ... : : -1'. ,.;· : .. !- •.... .· . ·."· . ·.·. '· .·,. .. : '·. ··.:·· ' ,. . " • oli. •• ·.:.' , ... ., '·.·· ..: I; . .·... , :·.. ~- LAW OFFICE OF KLHNHAl';S GRUBER, PLLC V. LEVI !'viORIN ., ;-, .. ·.. . .· FIRST REQUEST FOR ADMISSION TO LEVI MORIN ., . .. ~ '. . .. , . .~". --·~~-.. . .·: . . ·~ .  Exhibit B - Page 016 Respectfully submitted, LAW OFFICE OF KG, PLLC : ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF By: -:::--cP~~~---'-----"-__:_-___:_:_~ Kim Texa kim@lawofficeofkg:com Keith L. Kleinhans Texas Bar No. ;24065565 keith@lawoffic~ofkg.com ;700 Lavaca, Ste. 1400 · Austin, TX 78701 ':. · Telephooe:.5!2.961.8512 . ·r~similei 5!:2'.623.7320 -1· . . ·_": ,. CERTIFICATE Oli' SERVICE I certify that a true copy.ofthe above ,_;.~s' sel'Vedon each atto~ey of rebord or p~rty in accordance >vith the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure on thr 281h day. of October, 20i4. ' ·. ·, .- . .· LeifOisen . -I 4830 Wilson Road, Suite 300 Humble, Texas 77396 Telephone Number: 281.849.8382 '· ', Facsimile: No Fax NumberTxists Email: leif@olsonappeals.corn .·-: VI;\ CMRRH.If 7013 2250.00013659 4138 · AND EMAIL ~: >~-- . < ·• .-... =-~ . ., .•. . LAW OfFICE Of KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC V. LEVI MORIN . ADMISSION FIRST R!:QUEST l'OR - . TO LEVI . MORll\1. . . PAGE20F5 : ·.. · .'  Exhibit B - Page 017 DEFINITIONS As used herein, the following terms are defineil as follows: a. '"Plaintiff' means LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC and all other natural persons or business or legal entities acting or purporting to act for or on her behalf. · ·.b. "Defendant" means LEVI MORIN, and all other natural persons or business or legal entities acting or pcrporting to act for or on behalf of Defendant:. · c. '·Incident" or "Yelp review" as" that word is used.herein refers to the June,24, 2014 posting by LEVI MORIN on an internet website called Yelp. .. . d. "Person" means any natural person, any business, a legal or governmental entity, or~ ~sociation. e. "Occupation" means a full,· accurate and complete description of the nature,· iype, title and employment carried on by the pers.on inquired about; the name and address of their e!llployer; and,· · the date(sJ such occupation began and terminated. · f. '·Document" means anything which rhay be :~onsidered to be a document or tangibl~ thing within the meaning of TEX. R. CIV. P. 193 and· tri.eans the original; or any copy' if the original is not . available, of writings and tangible things of eyery kind .and description, and inCludes, but is not limited to. any drawing; graph, photograph, film, video, phone record, report, minutes, t~anscript, memorandum, notes, jotti'ngs, paper, tetter, correspOridence, .commuriic8tion, invoice,· Contr~Ct, , check, check stub, accowning ledger, chart, map; plat, tape, disk, card, wire and any other electronic_. magnetic or mechanical recording or transcript of anY. other instrument qr deVice which contains any information or from which imy "information can be .derived. or retrieved. The term "document" also includes copies containing any information in addition to. or in any way different .. · from that contained in or on the original, and all attachments, enclosures or documettts affixed or ret(m-ed to in any documents to be described pursuant to these requests. g. ;•Relating"·. means concerning, ref~rring, des~dbing; evidenCing, or constitutine:, direCtly or indircctiy. h. "Statement" means :my written or graphic statements·sigoed or otherwiseadopted;or approved by· the · person making it, . S.·LEV! MORiN posted the Yelp review with intent to cause reputational harm to Lf, W OPI .. ICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC. RESPONSE NO. 8. ,;; ·.··.. ',. ·.·. -:'-=:--::-:::::-:: · - - · :::-c:-:-:-:-::::-::::::=::=-::::-:-:::-:-:-:-:::-'::-:-=::-=----'--,.-~~....::....,_,..,..._ __ LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER; PLLC V. LEVI MORIN FlllST REQI lEST FOR ADMISSION TO LEVI MORIN PAGES OF 5 .. · .. ·:.·. .·;_. . .-:~· . ::: ... : .. ·:}  Exhibit B - Page 020 CAUSE NO. D-1.-GN-14-003874 LAW Ol''F\Cl<: OF § IN THE DISTRICT COURT KLEINHANS GRUBER,'PLLC, § Plaintiff, § v. § 201" JUDICIAL DISTRICT § LEVI MORIN, § Defendant. § TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS ' FIRST ~3ET OF INTERROGATORIES TO LEVI MORIN To~·_. LF.Vl MORIN; by and through their attorney of record, LeifOlsen, 4830 Wilson Road, Suite 300, Humbie, Texas 77396. · COMES NOW, LAW OFFICE. OF KLEINHANS GRUBER; PLLC, Plaintiff, and serves LEVI MORf?-l, Defendant with this First Set of Interrogatories pursuant to TEX. CIV. P. 197 . R~· .· . ' lnterrogalori~s drc to be answered by you separately andfully in writing under. oath. Your answers to the interrogatories are to be preceded by the. particular. Interrogatory· t6 which the answer pertains. '' The interrogatory answers ate to be signed . under·oath :and .. verified by the ' . person making them. You are to serve your answers and objections, if any, ·upon [A W OFFICE OF KLEiNUi\l'\S GRUBER, l'LLC within thirty (30) days after you receive· these discovery . i. requests at the offtcc of LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER; PLLC's counsel, whose address is sel !~orth be-!O\\i. You nre tl(ivised thai it is not a ground.for objettion that an Interrogatory involves an opinion or oontention th"t ·relates to factor application of law.. to· ' ' . fact..·. Tex: R. Civ. P. 197. - Yoti . are (uither adv iscu that an evasive or incomplete answer is to QC. treated as .a failure to answer or I • • t. ' • respond. You are expected to supplement your answers and responses in ·accordanc;e with,TEX: · ' . . . R. CIV. F. bJ. ·~f you fnil w answer these interrogatories as setforth above, and in ai:coroance with TEX. iz. C.W. P. i 97. LAW OFFiCE OF .KLETh!HANS GRUBER; PI;LC. may move for --'---·---··---~---,-'c--,.--,.-.,...,.---~~-----.,...---:----.,.---- LAW OFTTCF OF KLF.!NHANS GRllllER. PLLC V. LEVI MORIN FIRST S.CT ()f. [_-..: L~k~od..:::·,::\U~S In LEV; r.• iORI\1 PAGE I Of 10 . ·.·' . ·,, ··: . '• :- ::.-.·-:-, .·.. ;__ ~_>:._ ...•  Exhibit B - Page 021 sanctions against you pursua!lllo TEX. R. CIV. P. 215. Respectfully submitted, LAW OFFICE OF KG, PLLC A ITORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF By: -:-::--:-i~~~-~---'--- Kimb I G. Kleinhans . Texas r No. 24062755 ' kim@lawoffic.eofkg.com :Keith L. Kleinhans :Texas Bar No. 24065565 keith@lawofficeofkg.com . 700 Lavaca, Ste. 1400 . . Austin, TX 7870 I Telephone: 512.961.8512 Facsimile: 512.623.7320 •. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE l ccni!)· Owt a true copy of the above was served on each attoi:ney of record or party in accordance with the Texas Rules ofCivil Procedure on the 28'h day' of October, 2014. . ;, LeifOlsen . ·-·. 4830 Wilson Road, Suite 300 Humble, Texas.77396 ·.. ~· Telephone Number: 281.849.83~2 Facsimile: No Fax Number Exists Email: le.if@olscn~ppc<.lls.com VIA C!VffiRR# 7013 2250 00013659 4138 . AND EMAIL i ----~--· ·-----~-~~-~~-~--~----~--~--~·~------ LAW 0FFrCE •lF KLf'IW{fiN> GR(lclER, PLLCV.' LEVI!vi.CR!N ·:· FrRST$EToFINTERROGATORJEqo LEVIMORJN · 'PAGE20F 10 ., • .. . ,:'• ·' •'  Exhibit B - Page 022 DEFINITIONS A; used herein, the following.terms are defineil as follows: a. "Plaintiff' means LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC and all other natural persons or business or legal entities acting or purporting to act for or on her behalf.. · b. "Defendant'' means LEVI MORIN, and all other natural persons or business or ·]ega! entities ··'·. acting or purporting to act for or on behalf of Defendant. · c. "Incident" or "Yelp review" as that: word is used herein refers to the June 24, 2014 posting by· LEVI MORIN on an internet website called Yelp. d. "Person'-~ me;J.ns any natural persqn, any business, a legal or governmental entity, or an:. association. e. "Occupation'' means a full, accurate· ~d complete description of th~ nature, type, title arid' c:npLlyment carrie,; on by the person inquired about; the name and address of their employer; and, the dete(s) such occupation began and terminated. f. "Document" means anything which may be considered to be.;;_ document or tangible ·thing within the :o:eaning of TEX. R. C!V. P. ·193 and meims the 'original, or 'any copy if the original is not available, of writings and tangible things of every kind and description,,and includes, but is not limited to~ ~ny d.ra\\iing, graph, :p~~tograph, film, video, phOne r~cord? :r~Port, minutes, transcript, memorandum, n:otes,: jvttings, paper, letter, correspondence, commuriication, invoice,. ·contract, check, ched.;: stub) accounting ledger, chart, map, plat, tape, disk, ·card, wire and·.llily other·· ~teuronic, magnetic or mechanical recording or transcript of any other instrumen~ or device which contains any infomiation or from which any information can be derived or t:"etrieved. · The: term ''ducwneuC ulso includes copies containing any information· in addition to Ot:"· in any way_ different frcm that (:Ontained in or· on the original, and all attachments, enclosures or-documents nfl1;\·~~:l ur rcfcri:ed to i11·any documents to be described pursuant to these_ requests. g. "Rdniing'' means com.:cmilig) referring, describing, evidencing, ~r constituting, direCtly or inc.iircc:tly ... h. "StatcmcnC means P. ;1y 'Nritrcn or graphic statements ·signed or otherwise adopted or approved by the>. person making it,. _and ·any. steriographic, mechanical, ~lectrical or other r~cofding or· tr;:~nsc:i'iption thereof, ,~:hich is a substantially Verbatim recital of·an oral stateinent by the. person rrnkir:g it and contempc•rancously recOrded. ' · · ' i. '·And'' u.nd "or" shC.uld be construed as both ·conjunctive. and·disj~~tive as neces~..;y ;o bring ~;·ithin the scope of the discovery request all response that .Ji'Iight otherwise be: construed to be out;;itic of its ::;cope. -~·' · j. "Y NI,'' "vou:-'' and '·volJrse!P' refers J •• ' • • tO. LEVI.:NI6RIN. · ' !' '-. ·: ' _. ."• 't~' • •.... ·l· I k. "C;:-.r;~tt:,micaticJJ'' n::22ns the transrilissioJ~\9r "exc~ange of :infor~ation between twO or moTe pc:·s'J"''' or<,iiy 0;· \r; r:riting,. l11rough any,fd.ocurrient, as defined abov.e, and includes, without limiiaLioo. ai(Y cunVersatlun or discussions, Whether-face-to:...ra.Ce, via telephone lines· or. data lines .. .' ' ... • - > ' LAWOFFlCT -;;:-j~[;;~7fr~:;;$-(jR-tJB-ER, PLLC v. LfVI MORJN FIRST SeT 0!: J; . ;: . ::R!W:J,\TUlH!::, ru LEV! h1oRrN PAGE30F 10 ... . ',• · •'. . ' . . .. . ::., • ,· .. ·: .·,  Exhibit B - Page 023 I. '·Dl::.:.<.:J ..::./' if!;;tll1!, a d<;tui!t!d statement of all things relating to or affecting the particular subject w > dose: rice<} inducing. but not limited to, times, dates and places and the names and complete rna!lm~ :addrEsses-of any persons involved. ·With reference to do~uments, communications, and agr·.~--~r:l::i-tlS, Lhc.: lcr~n ".J~sGribc" also includes a detailed statement of the substance of the facts e, when ana how it was made, the name(s) and 'address(es) of the pt:r:;en(s) \~.-tw n~_::de it, received i~ and who haS possession m: last kl!oWn_.pos_sesSion-, '""tudy or wnlrcl of.sllch document, provided, hO\yever,:that answers fo interrogatories . rcqucsling identifications_ or desctiptions of certain communications or:_document~ ·may 1:,.:: satisilcd by attaching a true and eorrect coPy of any written documents, as described iH::rei!J. cun!aiHin:~ tile requested informatjorl; an"d. ' . d. · To any other tangible thing means to give a detailed description thereof, inchiding, if . applica~lc, wi1crc, .,vhen and how it was made, the name(s) and .address(es) of the · f'C!.COn(S) •;;he' made it, and identifx WhO presently has :pOSSeSSiOn Or last known pos:::ession, Gllstody and control of such thing.\ · · ... . .. ..... . . .. ~ ';, LAW OFF!CF rJF KLL'TNHAl'S GRT! rhc allcgution; contained in Plaintiff.s Original Petition; Are you, .. any · or . ~gents or IJ;..:i.·snr::.. ~'"'.:i;ng '.>:1 your b~half, aware of any fac.t,!·~bservation, doCument, Or.item of · evidence tha::, cilhe: directly '" ;ndirectly, supports ·your denial or otherw.ise contradicts the allegations of the'Plaintift'! iC your answer is anything other than an unqualified''No,'' then for · each anJ c:\''")' .·cuci: il!ct, ,:.!J.· :::nAion, docu.ment, and item of evidenc~,'please ~et forth the · follOwing inJorrnation ser.'1r.~te!y. specifically, and in detail: .\. i·. ,:u:: i :;;ei '"" :ri;otio:1 or the fact, obsei:vation,. document, ot .itetri. of. evidence, sellir;L'· fcclh n2!Pc:. d:.J.tcs, times, places and any other information that might assist in :h~ i.:i:..';><.ession or first hand knowledge of the subject fact, observation, d.n~ument. or item ol-· evidence~ and that person's relationship to parties he~e'in. th: C. ; k ;;;cthod or manner by which you obtained knowledge of this information, '"'tcing tit''"' .• l!nc'; r: rcpy lo your answers to these interrogatories. INTERRPZ; /.T\2.E.l::1:U.Li For each affirmative defense that you are ~;~sserting, please identify the •kfc>r.r; "nd sptcifically set forth all of the facts and evidence that you intend to use to suppm1 sncl! dc:-cnse; ,;1sc. for ''~ch suclt defense, identify all documents (by title, date,.author, custodi:;,·, !c:d '' '"-'' ,.,.,,,,;zu''-'" oC cnnlents)-that yo;t intend to use to" support the defense, ~nd ·all persons who have knowlcd;.•c ol tac•ts supporting the defense. Those perso.ns should be identified by name, occnpatiun, address, title, relation to the parties herein and a description of the informatio!: that ri:·.::y :111,;: ~o ;.~res~:nt. · INTE!UtUC~.:''l'Ci:£X.Ji_(). -:!,. With respect to allofthe documents that You have in Your possessi<•n or under Yc•ur w,;i;·o! That are relevant to the InCident that forms ..i)te basis"()fthis lawsuit, p[cr:sc idc;o:if:; th•)se.doc•umcnls that ai·e likely to contain the following info.rmaticin:. documcnh i; P:n '"' ·> i, ? ()' ·''" tho: present that contain· infori)laticin that Yo.u allege suppm:t that the stateme;.,t., . Picase indicate the location of the documents and the type of sto.rage tha£'ccnitains •hem '; ·'' I cgrd or Letter Size File Drawers; ·Lateral Drawers, Boxes, etc.}: Also, oic:>s(; llldicate the number of storage units that contain the doc1,1merits. • T , . C. Please identify those p01ti~ns of the requested d~cumen~ that are .computerized, or kv:;:i n• ~,;,y (1\h:;- ,:igiud, upticai or.e1ectr0nic foi·mat and indicate whether the Origin!3.l <:l!~ri~.·:~ ·/.:,:;n: :._;,;;.·.r;p-.::-:1 typl,.;J by hluid) Dr ~ntercd by way ofvoi~~ reco~ition software. .\')_ S::i :,.,.,;-, lik •J;::nc:,, ;;ddresses. and relatio.nships to ·the parties of all persons from wh;_1m ,,,,;!len st:t'•:ments concerning thci, subject incident [or accident] have bee·n · >!'c .. ,tc th>- r.late thnt each stateJrtent was taken and. the person .who. no.w pn.;;S(':"',~-C."- H. -'c--'-'~-· LAW OFFICE ul" c< 1 ·,:i·Vi/<1 ,.: ( ii<;:·,;a:. PLLC V. LEVI MORiN . ..PAGE6GFJO . . ,\_,.,, _.::. i:~ ••• ' .. . 'j.~:·.  '·· Exhibit B - Page 026 .. .\ .,_. INTERR~)_Gci:IQJ:~Y i:ii)_,_?. ln the June 24,2014 statements contained-in your Yelp review of Law U!'flc·c uf i,knwans Gruber, PLLC, you make the following allegations; •. A. \n r<:garlis wtile aiicgation, "You will be doing the majority of the work," state what··. work you allege you performed on the family law case during your representation by Law r>fk." oi f~kintWil' Gruber. PLLC, and the dates you preformed the "work." ., B. !n reg~rds lo the ailegation, "her legal counsel consists of her arguing with you," state the d:;tes enci ii)nnt !email, letter, etc.) and content of the correspondence of any. insrGncc in -.vhieh Ynu ,_,liege LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC was ·· ·.,,· C. In regards In tiL~ :.ilkg;ition, "her legal counsel consist of ... sending hung over r:;; ..• , :~'''''> cuu:~ :be..>•. ,•c <···"·'·····..,..~;hung <..\. ; •..JI'--t:.•Vl >' that LAW OFFICE OF KLEINRANS G~UBER;.'J>l:tc :•/::: . : ."·.i· ,. ', · h:L fa ikJ to, ";;ct. :;,:.;l~i cJso;; up for success later," sfite ~U dates, .. iriforrilaiion ·and facts·_· · -:· · ·.-. lba~ you usc.d lo {(:>i n1 _your allegation. . · . • . _· _.. ... ' . :-.· . LAW OFFiCe or :::_;:··.·:::M:•; C::.c'!kl!, PLLC '1. LEV! lVIORr-l . : : . :· .: f~: ... : ..· ., : .: . .'.•.  Exhibit B - Page 027 INTERH_!_){_;,~,:rQUX_~1\!,_.lo To the extent that you have not alrel!dy done so, state in detail, y,;ur ·,vsion cr.·,d d·,:crii:•tion of the events which are the subject of the Original Petition; include ~it of vom per::oncd ob;:~·rvmions. Please provide all relevant times, dates, names and locations. INTEE:~\)~.-~:.~0~·~:-. l.:<::_l~-~2:.2.:- l_,__ientify all di~coverable, consulting experts, that is;_consulting experts w!u.·:c wur:: :,,l:.: h.;:;;; H>Yiewed by the testifying expert. See Tex. R. Civ. P. 192.3(e). For each expc·:-~ rl_<;_ C\..::.d. pl'(J\-[(;;;; i_iiC ;~Jih::;wing information: . <:L Ti.tc expcr·~'s :uJ_mc, address, and telephone number. ; i;., •.' ;pen's cuncnt resume and bibliography. c. The facts knmvn to the expert that relate to or fonri the basis of:tlte expert's r"' ,ur' i~<)l:ressio:"; ami opinions fonned or made in connection ·with the case,· t L-:5_;(:·~-~l.:::s:_- --)r -},'~~en a11d how the factual.inforffiation was aCquired._ The :·c;c-;,_H ir'prcssion:; or opinions ofthe expert formed or made in connection · with the case cl!ld Gny methods used to derive them.. · ' ''. :;c,- :·.': ,, ·c·,:mcnls nnd tangible things, including reports, models; or data .. :.i: . ··c:·, , .. :!:r '·"''~:·;, iC:d "Yo," please set forjh the following infoimation specifically and in dc:cii: .\ ·;·,,c,c "'''~ncr m which the LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PT r (' f,..,;:,.,--1 ~n :--.;it;,.T~Jt"' +)Jct'r '·-'·-··-.,·_.H._,,";,·.::-·""-"~ damages o · ·." 2 •.;.,, ''"!'• ·:cc' ''"'"i!l•: n~tion that the LAW OFFICE OF KLEiNHANS GRUBER,. iJt.j_.~~ :·~~w;)!.·i tr_.,.,.,, f8.~<<:n tc mitigate or their damages:· - - ........ ,___ .. - ,. .. ,... -----------~-'-'--'-----~---....::.C. LAW OFI-Ilil:. Ol' KU:li· _. ·,:. :.::;(:· . ~~--- LAW Oi·i'i!:'\'. c:;;c K:Yi'iH,\>;:, GRUBER, PLLC v .. LEVJMORIN. FIRST SET C•:- :'", ~~ •_;;r:<;.•:i\:.'RiE~- 1f.1 LEVl MORlN ·' . ..,.  Exhibit B - Page 029 ~-: .. VERIFICATION § § COUNTY OF § - - - - - ' after being duly sworn, states: that she i·; c;hwc tik <:gc ccf J g years and is competent in all respects to make this affidavit; that he has carefully reviewed the attached answers to "FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO LEVl MORJN'. ,;,,; 1v: h:>s pcr: rwd thai all of th6 matters, facts, jnfonnation and answers contained LEVI MORIN SUBSCRIBED AND SWOR1'1 TO BEFORE ME, by LEVI MORIN, on this----.,., . 201 NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Texas ' My Commission expires: .. - .. :.· ; :· - - - - - - - - ---- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ' - - - " : . . _ - ' " - , -_ _~_ ___.:c;_;__--'--- LAW OFF!( F. OF KLUNHANo lJII.UBER, PLLC V. LEVI MORIN FIRST SET ,y: !;-. rr.RROG.-\T()RIES TO LEV: MORIN · PAGE 10 on,o . .: .. \- ..... .  Exhibit B - Page 030 CAVSE NO. D-1-GN-14-003874 LA\V OFF5Ci( OF § IN THE DISTRICT COURT KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC, § Phdntiff. § v. § 201'' JUDICIAL DISTRICT § LEVI rviORli\~ § Deft.. ndaH~. § TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS· ;<'lEST l?EOUEST FOR PRODUCTION TO LEVI MORIN To: i.::•:; \·lORlN, by and through their attorney of record, Leif Olsen, 4830 Wilson Road, Suite 300. Humble, Texas 77396. COTvT:~ "iOW. L/\ \\" OH"JCE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC, Plaintiff, and serves LEVi MO\':L\. L·c,,·.n,hnc ~eid> >his First Rcqaest for Production pursuant to Tex. R. Civ. P. 196. Your re;p;m:;cs to ;his First Request for Production are to be preceded by the particular Request for Production to which the response pertains. You are to serve your responses and objections, if any, upc•:, L. \ \';' Of"f ICE CF K"LElNHANS GRUBER, PLLC w;ithin thirty (30) days ilfter you receive tllc::c· '"·''"·""'"Y :cq;:cst:; {',y(_d ;:,,, Ui(':i(: discovery requests as set forth above and in accordance with Tex. R. c:n. l'. i 96, LAV/ OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC, by and through their attorney ui" lt:e<)rci, mco.y move: i(l!· sanctions against you pursuant to Tex. R. Civ. P. 215. ,. ·.; ...... - . ': '· .· LAW OFfJCE ()F K.LEE,;I·iA(~S CP..UBER, PLLC V. LEVI MORJN ,fiRSTRHY.:!:?.T r;cY, P?r·,uu::·-nnt.; ·10 LEVI 'MORIN PAGi;J OF7 . -·· .-..  Exhibit B - Page 031 Respectfully submitted, Respectfully submitted, LAW OFFICE OF KG, PLLC ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF By: -::-:--:-P.>f::.CC::-':'-:--------- Kimb I . Kleinhans r No. 24062755 kim@lawofficeofkg.com Keith L. Kleinhans Texas Bar No. 24065565 keith@lawofficeofkg.com 700 Lavaca, Ste, 1400 Austin, TX 78701 Telephone: 512.961.8512 Facsimile: 512.623.7320 ' . ... ,. =-~j '· ::~. . ··. ~ .. ·-· · CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE .. l certify t!"'t a true copy of the above was served on each attorney of record or piuty in aceordancc w;t:1 -!HA:NS C:RU!-~ER, PLLCV. LEVI MORJN FIRST REQUEST F•Jt< f)l\OOUCTI0:-1 '!\ 1 LEVi MORIN. PAGE20F7 ·~· ...· · ..-·..  Exhibit B - Page 032 DEFINITIONS t" :.sed heroin, the following terms are defined as follows: a. ··J>!e>inttit' <~'t"J:S L.\ W C>FFlCE Of KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC and all other natural persons or business or legal entities acting or purporting to act for or oh her behalf. b. "Deh,d .;.nyiid;~g •vhich may be considered to be a document or tangible_thing within the mca,,ie<[: of TEX. R. CIV. P. 193 and means the original, or any copy if tlie original is not a\·.:j~.,\ltic or ;r,ce[mnical recording or transcript of any other inst11:1ment or device which conuins any infOrmatiun or H"om which any infonnati6n can· be derived· or retrieyed. ·The tenn · ··dcL~·t<;-;-,l'::i!'' --,1.-:c• ir,--::1\.v::_::; c(nr,. :;upp•.•;·cing da•.•:t, c:dcu!ations, photographs and opinions of each such expert who may tesrii~Y Hr"i cf any cFKLEINHANS · ·. GRU BEF. '' U C lhi1 supp '"" v,,,. responses to Interrogatory No. ?.subparts A through L ..... ·-- -- -~·- ·----~~-::-::-:--:-:::~. ;-::-::--::--~----c--'----'---,-~~--- LAW OFFtC\3.0!' ;,uo:NHJ\NS LiRl!BER,PLLCV.LEVI MORiN :'. 'J \-_! i\JORTN PAGE40F7  Exhibit B - Page 034 REQLY:ccL ·cf.},_iJ. \ •: r'' -: ci·.:Jl :nodels, and alf other exhibits that may be used at trial by any witnes~. ·\ l! cbwments you may use as demonstrative aids at trial. REOUFs·; .V::c_J..IL id thcuments concerning apy alleged criminal violation committed by LEVI iVFlFJ~:. REOlJE{iLi~Q,.lL. 1\ii p•:blished treatises, periodicals or pamphlets on the subject of hiStory, medici"" c>r .:-iher scic:H:.: ,,,. <:n dmt you claim to be areliable authority which may be used at the timL '< :_! •:,: REQl!_EbT_.'i~i. ,'.,.';., An:. end ail Documents which you contend demonstrate that LEVI MORif'. >.v:;~- u_,_, n'::gligcn1. REOU(..0.i..c:•.•z,j)~ ,\c: ad nil documents and things prepared by, shown to, relied upon, referred i ;' i ;:; " ; ·.' i;".VV.i hv nny (act Witness Or testifying expert WitneSS in preparation for Or while S;V;~,-~~1, k.·--t_ir;l._Hty ;L ;_hi;~ CDS:.:.!. RE0l'l<5L!'''-~.L~~ l'ie<>.r;(: orofluce copies of any letter, e-mail, text message or other wdtten or electron·. '·"' ''' :;;;;c::ti·.:<> ,,;· '-'lY type rbat you have received or read from anyone (excepting only y: >:: · .·r: ,.. ·.-:y .;c •:;: ~' •rJ•r:lev' <: s:aff) that describes or mentions 'the Incident. LAW OFciCF '·''' ;:,' .l'lNH.·\?-"i UUHJER, PLLC V. LEVI MORIN FlRST RF)l.._i"-:~T '-<>;{ ?~:()l)lj~_] FjN jfJ LEVJ !V10RIN PAGE50F7 .;',; ··:·.  Exhibit B - Page 035 REOU !':-:·r '!0 b. Pkose produce any invo!ce and/or bill reflecting LEVI MORIN's attorney fees forth\ :;r:i.\\:~;'uii. REOl!lCiU.':i!l.':: i'k•>~L.\\.U.L ;\copy of ;uJy and all documents evidencing, identifying, and((O)r relating to any time spent, w ''"'.!a!! tape recordings 'in possession of LEVI MORIN that pertain to any issu,~:-: '~~ Hti~ ;:_:-~_~:.-_-. REQli\',::i:.\. :~:_Q__In, ,\ny and a!! calendars, diaries or other written logs of LEVI MORIN that. pertain 1.c ,::t-l:·-' i:;sJ;~s ::l Ll:!~; ctse REOlU~.::iJ.. >~O?__ll,_ ;\ny :md all Documents that support the allegation in Your Yelp review that, -~v.~u \.v-i1 ~Y.: ;:;~)in::; :.k" majority of the work." LAW OF; •c;, i. ;.: i~: •:-:! '·'·"' ; •iil.'JliE.R, PLLC V. LEVI MORIN fiRST i :-:~;T (. H: p:;(;!Jd_"f!l :<·:··;.)LEVI MORIN PAGE60F7 . ' Jate: 02/15/2015 Record Report Page: 1 L.D...VV OFFICE OFExhibit B - Page 036GRUBER, KLEINHANS PLLC Field Value Record Type ~~=>~---------------- Date Time I: ti:OO AM Duration 0 00:00 Status u Description Client ID 1 Subject Fwd: Offer declined; potential hearing dates Spoke With N Returned Call ;~ Left Message N Voice Message \j First Date mrn/dd/yyyy Last Date rnm/dd/yyyy First Time '11-.-mm:ss Alvl Last Time !1h:mm:ss AM Duration Research URL Research File E-mail Body ---------- Forwarded message---------- Frorn: Kimberly A. Gruber, Esq. Date: Man, Jan 5, 2015 at 11:26 AM .Subject: Re: Offer declined; potential hearing dates To: Leif Olson ·~eif- ' hope you had a good holiday. N2 a:e still in the process of moving offices and in addition I am '"igt1ific:;;ntly decreasing my hours in the offices to care for our daughter and our son on the way (one of the primary reasons amoungst other personal reasons that we need to nonsuit this case). However, if you are ·;oing to push forward and make us present these facts to a judge, despite ·::lur :'lgreernent to nonsuit, we will need discovery. :Cic;;c;sro advir,e whether you are in agreement to answer the discovery that vias served on you nearly 45 days ago, and if so, by what date you will be answering the discovery and physically providing us production (this is the 'jz,te you will physically have the production in the office NOT a date you will respond that we can send a copy service to Dallas). Additionally, we i!ii! n;eeci a hearing on our Notice of Nonsuit (and discovery or discovery ddidencies, if necessary). This hearing will need to be set prior to your ·e~11e:oted Sf)tting on a date about whether .. -. - ·-- · - - - - - - - - - - - - am e: 02/15/2015 '~scord ExhibitReport B - Page 037 Page: 2 iii~. ~ ::-L.. t: '.)F KLEiNHANS GRUBER, PLLC ····~-------------------------- d ·:;,.aJv, i arn still waiting on you to provide the documents that you told me ;·. :; 'i.'uuiti prnvide relating to the bar complaint filed by Levi Morin against ·: .i::

:.alendar to see the workload that I have at that time and to ''' ·:·: '"'"' !>ow long it will take me to review the discovery and allow me · · :·,: ··::!-, :im-.oo to draft a Motion to Compel if needed prior to the settings on ): : :-.;:!)tio;J to Compel/Motion for Discovery along with our Motion to ) -.:-:: ::·.!::e i'ionsuit/Strike Any Future Setting and in alt to Revoke Notice Sunday am  Exhibit B - Page 039 _______..___ Kim Kleinhans ~-~----,,~-->,;."t,!O:l.::LI='IU-';'~--~------------------ From: Lei'(\!--~~ <''-"if(o)o! a eals.com> Sent: Friday. h::bruarv 13, 2015 7:38 P To: Kirr>· !; Vir':::hans Gruber (kim@lawofficeofkg.com) Subject: KG ·I i\i\onn: Discovery; hearings Attachments: 1SU < 3Yre-motion disco resps.pdf; Morin0001-Morin0014.pdf; 150213.NOH on TCPA mojci·1.pdf JournaiPM: 1. I believe that I told you over the phone a while ago that the disciplinary counsel's office destroyed the file as part of their· file-retention policy. (I may be confusing that with a discussion I was havincJ vvith someone else on an unrelated bar-association event.) Levi doesn't have a copy. 2. My position on discovery h.•Jsn't changed: I don't think you're entitled to it. When we spoke over the phone, you 'Nel·en't willing to limit your requests or identify the ones that you thought most important. So l put together responses that appear to address the arguments that wil! comfc u:: :t c h.o·"lring on the motion to dismiss. They're attached. You should also be getting en e·s,?Tved copy. 3. And, speaking of the heari,:g: The absolute drop-dead date for the court to hear the motion to dismiss is Thursday, February 26, so I've set a hearing for that morning. That will leave you with no time for· discovery even if the judge thinks you deserve it. I can reset the hearing for somettn·H:: neObnurv 13, 2015. THE OLSON FIRM, PLLC Is/ Leif A. Olson Leif A. Olson State Bar No. 24032801 leif@olsonappeals.com PMB 188 4830 Wilson Road, Suite 300 Humble, Texas 77396 (281) 849-8382 Certificate of Service On Fd·:·%•·y i:l., 2015, I served this Morin's Voluntary Pre-dismissal Dis- tOl'ti)' Pt. • ) 1. L.·..:\·. ;\·t,:rtin '"·· _:C:_c:d·t L;: K:~rtbcriv Kleinhans ·_:, ;•_ :~J ; C\ L-: -ii;.;,;;:, L.c:,, OJJice ofKleinhans Grnberv. Morin Page2 oflS lvlor!~~~:> \-!Jluntar.,; Responses to Pre-dismissal Discovery  Exhibit B - Page 042 1 :\/fichaei Siegier .Scc{md -Fioor ~:{)():) [\)_ ;v;·upac Expressway ,\ l!stin 1 ·rc:xns ;·s731 lvlmin ,; cJr!) expert is his lawyer, LeifOlson, who will testify about the end 11cC(SSJry legal fees Morin incurred in this case. His re- '· j. .·' ~ ''ico'!''·"~~cs to Requests for Admissions :R:.:qu.csl ,(;;· .'\uu,is:·;ion No.1: On or around June 24, 2014 through Au- ;.'"''" .; _;, 2C <·', : . ,,; \\orin's Yelp review was posted online containing a st«rcmcm: :bat LeVI Iviorin was billed at $400.00 an hour. Response to Request No. 1: Admitted. Rec;ac:;t hr ;\dm;ss;<'ll N·o. 2: Law Office of Kleinhans Gruber, PLLC 1 l-:·:.;nt>H:~~-· to }{cqncst No.2: Admitted . .. ...... ---=:c---,---::---;o----c,.,..-,---:::--~ !..N I· l·' •\U''' ·.:. Lnr Office ofKleinhans Gruberv. Morin Page 3 oflS .\fc.·· " · ,,. · : '''' tn Pre-dismissal Discovery  Exhibit B - Page 043 J!.cqw:·;i i;\i· Admission No.3: Levi Morin is in possession of the contract •virh Lnv Of: icc of Kleinhans Gruber, PLLC. ;r,c.s~c;:s•.: lo Eqncst No.3: Denied. Req;;e.•:t rv· h.dmission No.4: On or around June 24, 2014 through Au- ,,. • :._,_;' Morin's Yelp review contained false statements ·'.·~:·: r.·.y cr•;,,e of Kleinhans Gruber, PLLC. ;t;:sponse tG H~qL:cst No.4: Denied. It contained one false statement, · "- •:n ., .. ,... ·· ·" ... i~cb·::r!y Kleinhans's billing rate. Reqty:s( frrr Adm!f's~o_n. No.5: Levi Morin,s Yelp review contains false ·•: ···•::·nv ''~''"·"'""''Office of Kleinhans Gruber, PLLC. Reqn~o-1 h: Admisshn No.6: Levi Morin knew that the Yelp review con- ' e1ind L;lse st~tcmcnts about Law Office of Kleinhans Gruber, PLLC. fl.·>Jl•J:!s•:. :•.; i<.•.:qncst No.6: Morin admits that during the span of ·" ... :·"·'' ··• :: '·'"'when Kleinhans told him that he had the wrong '·'"'--:: • ,,,. ,, ..,~ tlnt•cnded when he deleted the billing rate from the :cv'•::w, :,._. bH·w I hat the billing rate given in the review was false. i -~ ; -;·y\ ""'• . :o. Reones• i;,;· .'lc:litissim-. No.7: Levi Morin posted the Yelp review with ..,,,.,, io u•y.,, •':oancia! harm to Law Office of Kleinhans Gruber, i'LLC. T{esponsc to Rerp:est No.7: Denied. RcqLcs. /,.:;:;;i;,;;;i.,,, \/c. 8: Levi Morin posted the Yelp review with :.·:;c .• t :,; "'··'''' rcvJCational harm to Law Office of Kleinhans Gruber, ((espomes to Requests for Production Re0•••:< :<:: 1\·.,,,,ui:lic.., No.1: All written reports or other documenta- , :,,, c:"··r:u•·i ··c- "" fnct11ai observations, supporting data, calculations, · '" : •. <" · "• ··mi0ns of each such expert who may testifY and of ·: .·.1· ,., ,;,;,:]<:in; ''""errs whose work product has been reviewed by an C:"" "' •.;: .: :.: •:C.'.f• :•:. r_,,,_. Office ofKleinhans Gruberv. Morin Page 4 oflS \"lor!•; ·~ ·(_,;'n:o·;·, itify, including but not limited tO any reports pre- ::'•-1-'t:f:C ,Odi"t.J ,,., 01 undc.:· ci1c direction of such person, including any recording ,;r t1 <\n-~cril)"i::~ ,~;: ~-':'::: nral report. Kct;u.:•;; Prorillcinn No.2: Each and every written Statement or : Joc>n;· Prr>d·J.ct>o•l No.7: All emails in your possession to or from L:m Cnilc.: •if l<-icmhans Gruber, PLLC that support Your responses to ·• :.d:>J •.·;ts A through I. !'···. ,.,,. ..,, · · >:·. ·:"'No.7: See Response to Request No. 2 and An- ··e, .. ''!':~;''./ \'{Q.:....;1 Casl ,~; · · · ' ·" .: ·. "'' 0/Tice ofKleinhans Gmber v. Morin Page 5 oflS ,;\.foJ;:1.s \·, ., .... ,-,, to Pre·dismissal Discovery  Exhibit B - Page 045 Req·-·o' ~'" No, 8: All physical models, and all other exhibits · ha! ,.,. '''''''d '"trial by any witness, ·'·'>' " No.9: All documents you may use as demonstra- ·: ~; ..~ ,>· , -<-=.;__ ,._;:::t ~Hsc ,,,_, h'pr· Pny'•Jction No. 11: All published treatises, periodicals or •'tHnphkts qn the subject of history, medicine or other science or art •nt v•·•.• '· 'n; •o a reliable authority which may be used at the time l:;·. ;1,' ·_ · •. ,:•. :·.:o. n: See Response to Request No, 2, N•). 12: Any and all Documents which you con- . . . 'M onn ·u:no uc::r!101'SiTa~t. thar Levi . was not negI'tgent. i"i;;;,::;:;;::;c ·.: :; .:q :•·:;;t No. 12: See Response to Request No.2. Rcqw:c.:: P;·p,:.,~,,;,-;n No. 13: Any and all documents and things pre- :··~ red , shnvm to, relied upon, referred to and/or reviewed by any fact ·'""'•c:-.• or :r:::::·y>r; expert witness in preparation for or while giving ~,;,,., !3: See Response to Request No. 2. '?.t.'l." :p<:: · ,,, ''"'-". ,_,,,-•>·:• No. 14: Please produce copies of any letter, e- ··vii. '\i ''''"''·"'''·· •.!r otha written or electronic communication of any .,_ '"' ::• •· ,,., •·e·~::ived or read from anyone (excepting only your ,; , :.•ncy's staff) that describes or mentions the Inci- dent. :\.C.'Y· ;se "' Tccqc«:st No. 14: See Response to Request No.2. i1cc:•x•;,, ·" 2· "'··"','·''' ;\;,;, 15: Please produce any invoice and/or bill "''" ':h:·in 's attorney fees for this lawsuit. I ··r:. ,,. !. '. ,., :l(fce ofKleinhans Gmberv. Morin Page6 oflS t1; Pre-dismissal Discovery  Exhibit B - Page 046 Kec:.-,,_,_•,t · ,.:,· P,·,,_ c•.c·,·iml No. 16: Please produce the attorney fee contract ''' : · ; \; ,, ·,, \if;':':d with The Olson Firm, PLLC. "~"'·" "'"' '" '"'.:·G:•cst No. 16: Morin0001-0004. 'Zec:<''' h·oc:nc~_inn No. 17: A copy of any and all documents evi- .. '-'" '' .. ;,:-_, ,,,., ,;·t, ond/or relating to any time spent, work per- ,,·· ' ·~··nsc·s incurred by Levi Morin's attorneys on the · :•c! ,.umbered cause, including but not limited to :iml' ,:;!'ps, i;;•:oic?s, journal entries, expense reports, time reports and ... ·< :;;l :•To.17: To the extent this information can't be '"'- ,-,..,,-,, .. -,,,rin:JOOS-12, see Response to Request No.2. dr:n•:ir::: pJvmcnt for attorney fees to The Olson Firm, PLLC. •:c:; :·''·"'~'.l'-'St No. 18: Payments are reflected in the bills, \) ···~1~nnr: :~--·O~: l~. Otherwise, see Response to Request No. 2. Req:w.st fen· 'Pror'uctir>n No. 19: Any and all tape recordings in possession . :!1:1- .,..,t r?.in to any issues in this case. ·:;"·''i''·'"'·'~ '·" lZ;;.qncst No. 19: See Response to Reguest No.2. Rcquc;:; !;,.- l'.-,";,Juion No. 20: Any and all calendars, diaries or other · :.. '. 1: iv! orin that pertain to any issues in this case -''· -,.,,, '· ' \ ''F''''t No. 20: See Response to Reguest No. 2. Req.,<:s! i'(>r P:·oouctior, No. 21: Any and all Documents that support the ,.,-, '" '-'c:'p review that, "You will be doing the majority of .:·:sl No. 21: See Response to Request No.2. -'"· ·-· "" No. 22: Any and all Documents that support the ,,. ·"''' y·;!p re\'iew that, "her legal counsel consists of her ii.co:,v.'""'-', ~ :;· r:L;Vc!:t No. 22: See Response to Request No.2. Cast C~ : -C ' : -~- (~~-,~-.!;~·.,_ !,::J.~ c)~.Ji'ce ofKleinhans Gruberv. Morin Page 7 oflS ro Pre-dismissal Discovery  Exhibit B - Page 047 Rec:.1•:•: 'c,.,· ?: ·•:..".u:t!nn No. 23: Any and all Documents that support the ':C·f8''' r > L:L' \eip review that, "her legal counsel consist of ... hu:c;' ""'·"· '"sociates to court dates." :.c:;·.>:.:. "'" :_,, :.'. c·qc.er;t Nu. 23: See Response to Request No.2. Rec;:t~''' ~;,,. p,·oduu.>on No. 24: Any and all Documents that support the ·dk!:.a:ic.n in ·.:our Yelp review that, "As well as doing almost nothing '"" • 1'.: : ·, th· '-" ;i!'leading me through an overly complex legal system ,, '"'': ::.;krst:.md what's going on within it." · • 'e. ~o. 24: See Response to Request No. 2. ;;:,x • ... ·, .. c·.:.:;-: ·.":'.·._.,, Xo. 25: Any and all Documents that support the :;1: 1 ·: ··,·,·n::· '(:!D r•;view that," ... she does not even know the ba- ' ,. ;>.;; · · · :;!,,_ -:;',~_jnJs to specialize in." :.i ''''· ,, • ,,., · , i< ,·,'i''''"t No. 25: See Response to Request No. 2. Reqnes' inr Prccucccm No. 26: Any and all Documents that support the ··'~··:J::.,, i:· \' .• ,.... "eli' review that, "She told me to call the police and •hat ·"'·' '"c•::ld r:c:.k mv ex give me my son for our court appointed '""'' ·"". "io. 26: See Response to Request No. 2. Re.:;::""'' co•· '"···:".:x::•C•'.l No. 27: Any and all Documents that support the ·.-.''e;·::· :.,,. :.•1 .,.,1n YeiD review that Kimberly Kleinhans gave, "shitty .. i :·..':~-, :_ ~ .' ~ '· ·1 C' · :<:,;\ No. 27: See Response to Request No. 2. Rerycc:: "'" Prnc 'Krkn No. 28: Any and all Documents that support the Y.·iScs to Pre-dismissal Discovery  Exhibit B - Page 048 Answers to Interrogatories ' uf these interrogatories make them total more than 1110.7. Because discovery is stayed, that's currently not n1 bnt !\iocin will object if the stay is lifted or the motion to intc:-rn·;:c'"'·)· '·in. ! · ';;,re whether or not You have: ··:nd diligent search of all related documents, books, n·c '1100, photos and writings within your possession or 1.mdnr ':m;: wntro!, in order to obtain information with respect : u ' .;: s "' cl im1. If not, please explain why not. md diligent inquiry of your employees, friends, rel- ,,.,J I nose persons available to assist you in order to ob- .. n .. ,. ;.;·: :J.:irn with respect to this action. If not, please ex- ,.,,,.," ., io 1 nicrrngntory No. I: The Act doesn't require this or enti- r1c · '"' '''T'. to rhis information yet. Int inte!'mgatory No.2: LeifOlson helped. >;;,;( .. , '>. :~: '"'·'EC list all social networking websites, blogs, fo- ·;:,···,. .,,. ch•• ···c·nm~, i11Cluding but not limited to Facebook, MySpace, •.Her. Orkut, HiS, MeetUp.com, Google+, or Linkedln, "' ··:·;•. ': ··'I"' kvc ever posted created or currently maintain a profile or "'·' ·:Tm<' ''" i;:cbding, but not limited to, those that contained or cr~·;i i :r !j': c.:: '·:L :-ri~::-;s~~gcs, instant messages, updates, wall posts, emails, .... ""'' ,.,., +··, ,:::•HIS messages or other information related to the '·'"'F.,. made the basis of this lawsuit . . ..., · . , 'c ' ,.,. ,.,.,, ::>tnry No.3: See Answer to Interrogatory No.1. Jntc:·;o,.··; •:. 'ry[<;.,. ·f: Y<.:·.:•.r :mswer denies the allegations contained in rc1..: '·. ••w·•>' f',:s:)fJ!1'lCs tn Pre-dismissal Discovery  Exhibit B - Page 049 allc:;ations of the Plaintiff? If your answer is any- ,, '"' nnqualified "No," then for each and every such ',, ;<;;,,:ument, and item of evidence, please set forth the cksciption of the fact, observation, document, or ... ctnc that person's relationship to the parties herein. manner by which you obtained knowledge of nr 'n!iJrm,:tion, setting forth names, dates, times, places and ,:rr: r'et;:ils that relate to the manner in, which you ob- :;;incd :_;ucl: knovvledge. )), :[' ;he: ,,u:li•:ct information is documentary, will you please, ''"'' h'ltti resoect to all of the documents that You have nr tnJcler Your control that are relevant to the Inci- ~ ~' :: ,c.... ,__ ~ <·.. hs's of this lawsuit, please identify those docu- ,-,_,.,, ,:, '''·l' •e contain the following information: documents ,~'.o · 2 · ,,, '.h•? present that contain information that You a!- '" ' "' -----,----:-=:--:-:---;:--:--,-,--c----=-----:-;- CoS< ., · , .r , •i •• , , i ,,.,. (J/fite ofKlei>thans Gruber v. Morin Page 10 of 15 \ <. , :-:>:s w Pre-dismissal Discovery  Exhibit B - Page 050 '· ''' .•.r , ,,, , : h.cc ,:,c 'l'''unents that made up the June 24, 2014 Yelp --~, ~ . . .,.. , l., · Gruber, PLLC were true, including 'f:_c- of r~]einhans ·-z;t '"'' ' ,,. :he documents that support Your responses to Inter- •:J'•·• :'!n: ·;!nw k:rcachandeverysubpart: '. :·:''"'"' inciiccc1tc the types or categories of the documents (i.e . ... F• .. , . '-:C:mos, Reports, Contracts, Emails, Letters, etc.) in- ,,,,j ;;;;(';he c.pproxirnate number of each type. ",,Ldtc the location of the documents and the type of co mains them (i.e. Legal or Letter Size File Draw- c:·"· Dr,LWers, Boxes, etc.). Also, please indicate the ui ::tci'agc units that contain the documents. '"·' :r!cr:•.Jy those portions of the requested documents that c.rc cc< 'T'·:tcrized, or kept in any other digital, optical or elec- ,.,., ::-;; !; .. :~. :mJ indicate whether the original entries were bj• hand, or entered by way of voice recognition be names, addresses and relationships to the parties 1 ·' ::c;vns ti-<;m whom written statements concerning the i:v.:•.knt [or accident] have been taken; indicate the date '"" :.·:,.:!-; "'-tlccoH:nt was taken and the person who now pas- -\ nsw:':' '" >ntcrrop:ato!'y No.6: See Answer to Interrogatory No.1. 1: :,-,_ tk June 24, 2014 statements contained in your 'icl;: r::•. ·" ' ·.,_,. Uff',:c of Kleinhans Gruber, PLLC, you make the ,, rbe aiiegation, "You will be doing the majority of ''"' i'l .. " srate what work you allege you performed on the ·'"'" ;,. I"'· c:"e during your representation by Law Office of ·ul<:r, PLLC, and the dates you preformed the ?. '" '·:~;::rds to the allegation, "her legal counsel consists of her ·n:<:; ·c :' . " :: \· ou," ~tate the dates and format (email, letter, etc.) ;•,:l "'' ;-.:nc: cf the correspondence of any instance in which T"w Otfice of Kleinhans Gruber, PLLC was arguing ., '' .)jji.:~ofK/einhansGmberv.Morin Page 11 oflS -. ·: ·,;,; ·_: t,.., ;:'!··:-dismissal Discovery  Exhibit B - Page 051 '· "'"'""'-!' :o the allegation, "her legal counsel consist of ... .,,., i!•:;.; !nC~•g over associates to court dates," state all dates, in- ,., ,:,!c::: :•:•1 facts that you used to form your allegation that i). :; i. ;. Siegler was hung over and ii) that Kimberly Kleinhans ,.,.,,, ., . :• c rhat Michael Siegler was hung over, as you allege. :_), .;I to the allegation, "As well as doing almost nothing · "· J :. w:;y of leading me through an overly complex legal '·'" '\' :;tlpcng me understand what's going on within it," :,;·. · · ,·, •c :ud content of each instance You requested an · .li H; • i'tom ~aw Office of Kleinhans Gruber, PLLC con- . ~. :>it•;:. :iv.: kga! system, the process of your family law case, or ;;•)': q;;c:ti· i'' ,-~:-i-.:,, -:.:{n' r)[r!ce ofKieinhans Gruberv. Morin Page 12 oflS Lo Pre-dismissal Discovery  Exhibit B - Page 052 ,_,,,.,, ·. ''"-' \k,in\: supporting affidavit, to which the firm should :':.•:: rinl, see Answer to Interrogatory No.1. Intu ·:: ·: u the extent that you have not already done so, , ,.,m,. version and description of the events which are the :ubj:·c·< r!l' 1 ():·if•in~l Petition; include all of your personal observa- tions. f'·c:1sc i'F>\·idc all relevant times, dates, names and locations. Amwcr :·u 1 ·: tory No. 8: This is given in Morin's motion to di:~:r:;;:.:.:· :·-.:n;~·~crting affidavit. Other than that, see Answer to In- Jntc:·rn:.·:.;ir•t'\' ,,, '•'' J:kntifv all discoverable, consulting experts, that is, :.·o::::T' · ·: •: h;s:· work has been reviewed by the testifying ex- !:c:·i. :·:·:. 'c. Civ. P. l92.3(e). For each expert named, provide the · :·~ . · · ::. • >name, address, and telephone number. ·::. ·:·i·• ':current resume and bibliography. C. , knoll'n to the expert that relate to or form the basis of · ,,,. ',: m::ntu contend that there was any failure on the '""t ui •· " crr;,·e c.r Kleinhans Gruber, PLLC to mitigate their ·"',_,,,,.,.is anything other than an unqualified "No," · !coliowing information specifically and in detail: Cnsc D-1 ·C '. '·'' ,·.,,. -:'(!ice ofKleinhans Gruber v. Morin Page 13 oflS · ic. (re-di~missal Discovery  Exhibit B - Page 053 ',)-, mr.nner m which the Law Office of Kleinhans · ,,·u< • < PiLC f8iled to mitigate their damages. C> ·-'· :'..- !h •! :ch specific action that the Law Office of Kleinhans • :: ::1nuld have taken to mitigate or their damages. ''"' wu :,,, ) :; ' : · :·ocCiWry No. 10: Yes, the firm did not mitigate. The •:m· ·::<•u<' i·co·. •: po"Led a response to the review as soon as it be- <. am<.: "'·"''c ,,;· i;. lnstead, it waited for weeks to do so. lnterro1:1tr•<·y :'lo. U: ~'ursuant to Rule 192.3(b) of the Texas Rules of Civ- tho>e mailers exempt from disclosure by privilege, as •i'""·(,,, docs not apply), request is made that you describe ,,. . ,,_.,,,. :::w !i<'.turc of any existing document or tangible item • ·: ;i' u tc contain matters relevant to the subject matter IF indicating the custodian and location if the items ·,_~- nni ,., :;: ·-.,u-..;-' ~>i)SSe5slon, custody or control. J ::or/ No. 11: See Answer to Interrogatory No. 1. Jnv·•·r,:c::•.u~:Y ·,"'. i 1-: >'c•'·' comend that Your Yelp review of Law Office of -,_,.,' '"'. PI.LC contained statements of truth, substantial rruti; :Jr ,_l/nr cr;: iT\i0!1~ f{u·each statement contained in the Yelp review, S1 ••• '<- ···:• you allege the statement falls into: /cn:-w•.:.· co : :.:: •. :·w;:,;>t<}i'j No. 12: It's the firm's obligation to identity · •" >.• •.. """ l'• ,, <,,,_,;;eves are defamatory, not Morin's job to predict • •hi.:'·· '· ,,,.... ,, '!1 complain about. At any rate, this is covered in ·,;,.,. ,.,,,;,,, rc dismiss, and the firm should otherwise see An- ._,_;·,:·- '···------ >Io. 1. Interro'.'""'' , ,_. '· '· l.:i: II you have ever been convicted of a felony or a ':rnr·:· ... ,. ,. ''"'d turpitude, state the nature of the charge and the c:atc ·'''·· •.·: ,,,;-c't .md conviction. See Tex. R. Evid. 404(a)(l)(B), Case '!- 0 · ': ;: '!. :' .. ,. ':'.'ilce ~{Kleinhans Gmberv. Morin Page 14 oflS -- :-n;:;:;~-, ll~ Pre-dismissal Discovery  Exhibit B - Page 054 lnt~ this letter will call "the Lawsuit." The represen- t:at:nn ··.-: .. i;c·•,in uuc:.o: l have received a signed copy of this agreement atJc1 '- ''" , . ·- ,'-·r retainer described in Section C. It will end whc·'- .. ,_.,;,,,is limited to the Lawsuit. If you would like me '"' ';:,,[ lq;al help or represent you in another problem ·· '"'· imolving Kleinhans Gruber, we will need to sign :_: 1' . r..·,,·.unsibic for paying expenses. I don't charge for xr:·>c: ::c. : uion, I will require a retainer of $2,500. I will " '"Y trust account. This retainer may not drop be- ,_.,., you must replenish it to at least that amount. w]:duces the remaining amount of your retain- •:r u '" :,: L.: ·'" .•• ; .:<::, ,,,}c; must replenish the retainer to at least that :•. :! l:. :;L,gs exceed the amount of your remaining :c:<;.•ons:i:.ic for replenishing the retainer and paying 'dlC ·'' d :c b.i U Ercatcr than the retainer. '' '···'"'. ,,,.i.·ni·.:hnlcm or payment is more than 30 days after re- •..-:ct·,·;iL', t:.~, ;·fi'i.. d;:·;;_ •:tnlstitutcs good cause for me to end the repre- SCnl:i.UUiL ., ....., ,·> ;· ;·r.IU ·:,.-·:··).:'!".:!_....~,""'I comm,1nications .Lf .. · "• ,•- ·"' ·u'--· .... • ·,,_ · ·· :: ·xirh me in, and fulfill all of my reasonable re- quc,t'-.; •-.·''dr< .,, ,.,,, ''ork on the Lawsuit. This includes, for example, · · "'' ,,j •'':':"rrcn's or information, signing documents, pre- nan.,, ,,, ,, :' ':: ,kpnsitions and testimony, and participating at ,. -_.. :.,_:1, p;·i.\ dcgc r..--.~akes all of our communications, \\' !il.. ,,, ":.' ,., ;, •vriting, confidential. It is my duty as a law- ·:,, ·'"'''' 'c,;·""unications and their contents confidential. Be- ..;r,.' ,,!,,, {(>.cc1ling those communications or their con- ....... ·-· -------------::-----:-----:- PAGE20F4 Morln0002  Exhibit B - Page 057 :;'.'.: ! .. ' · '" . rc_,,_,lution of the Lawsuit, you also agrees to ,. • ; : !, u~ ,·u:nmr:;:ications confidentiaL This includes not re- f'-'··' •n:. .., L: kin:; ahGut them, sending them, or forwarding them ·~u ~-, . ; :, ,; tt. · .·;· gi>t m;ckc about the potential outcome of the Law- : ,.,., ,. ;.;.·,; .:cilcills o! opinion. I can't, and don't, guarantee any ._.. ··-·•· n>nc. You "grcc that I haven't represented that you will ·ncc·rnc or that a court will reach a particular judg- mer: _F. ~~~~f~\-:• L(~ .:;;-;d r~.:l ,-~·:-:entatton . .,,.,, ,,, '''"'• in my sole opinion, makes it impractical · >r t " ' ' > .... :n•. : .' i,cc:p r~presenting you, I can end the representa- .,,,_,,_ "' •, l \cil! ·c no further duty to handle the Dispute. I can .dsc• '::-·'.,,,.,;,;;.ion if I have good cause to do so. If I end the :··"[" ... ·"" ,, · gc><:d cmse or because of an ethical bar, I will still r,,,. rhc work I have performed . ., "'' •-· •'·- '<)rc:.cntation at any time. If you do so without .:;,u :',} •::i "'" cr:tlllc-:: co be paid for the work I have performed . .r ·-- · •:''I ;·e~.1incd funds remaining when the representation . sc,tc:ion, we can write to each other at our last 'i· :c.1l :·;ddrcsses. 1-, · ind•.:c!:·d c. cr•py of the Texas Lawyer's Creed; I handle all of m\' •·c•'tc -""''•"""' ;, accordance with it. I also support the State Bar's '"''''''~''"''''"' ''' J hcipliuary Rules, which ask me to tell you: ·· · '·.: ·;,· ·:•f 'fu:as investigates and prosecutes pro- 'L"·'"'''·'' ,.,i,;cu•·:cbcr committed by Texas lawyers. Al- n H.•~v~?;·-~·/ :_:omplaint against or dispute with a :·1·::·:: ;Jrolcssional misconduct, the State Bar's .... ':-.:,~ (;:.-ncc:!.l Counsel gives clients information •'' iilc a complaint about a lawyer. Clients !_;. :· P:\GE 3 OF 4 Morln0003  Exhibit B - Page 058 '·;,· \c:nc Bar's General Counsel toll-free at • -.; • r 'J ::,;: h.:-r IllOre information. ''":;c 1erms of representation, please sign this . ,. ."''·' < ,,,,, ;, t.:· me. Once I receive it, I will send you a •.:Of' ·. ;, : ., .. ,·,· ,.. ·. l· • ,: .. : ·r .. ::·:i >·.• \>.•orL:mg with you. If you have questions or con- -------- ... ------ _ ___ _____ , 10-10-2014 Date PAGE40F4 Morln0004  Exhibit B - Page 059 FIRtv\ PLLC Invoice No. 036-1 December 4, 2014 Levi Morin Matter: SLAPP case by Kleinhans Gruber 165 South l __, Finn matter number: 1419 San Marco: "' (,t s·~rvices .............. , ... through December 3, 2014 ____________ Legal work Date Task Hours Amount 10/7/2014 1.8 513.00 10/27/2014 n . ,. ,,,.,.,,.,. ::cr:;ljr-,;,:m"'Tc!l~- . I h ; te ep one con erence wtt ti .h .__.r.~: ~-;,·;~/;/~(:.h.~:\id-:J-i.n:.t~ic:n.~". . ./. ·~·'"·'~"-"''·"··~" "--~~ ""''"''"''t'-~f)j ;- · 3.3 940.50 :!i ''b special exceptions; ; reVIse ; file and serve answer; review send letter response to 11/25/2014 3.1 883.50 11/26/2014 2.8 798.00 11/29/2014 5.1 1453.50 :: :i rafting· 11/30/2014 '(i':'~:~~~]il; begin revisions and editing; 4.2 1197.00 ----------------- ··\ ·WO ,. •; ..\,;\LE, Tt_--:x-. :;·::-~96 · C0\·1 • (~f::: g4Cl-33B:2 MorlnOOOS  Exhibit B - Page 060 levi Morin r,,,_ :u :..J. Invoice No. 036-1 For ~t.>rvice.!' through December 3, 2014 ~~--~~.---·------------- 12/1/2014 6.8 1938.00 12/3/2014 · •.' , >:n of motion with attachments and 0.3 85.50 '~'' -0.3 ----·----- -85.50 Date Amount 10/27/2014 2.21 12/1/2014 2.21 12/3/2014 2.21 iiiotionlo dismiss -2.21 Total expenses for this invoice $ 4.42 Totals I tents Amount Balance Total fot '''' ~ . :·'.: 5 . ;:.:014 7,727.92 . 7,727.92 Outstar 0 0 Paymer · 0 Paymen'.' v ~i/:>014 5,695.42 trust ac,_·r~t; ~. -~, ..") ' 1,032.50 / (, '·~ ;!;,; .: your payment is for Invoice 036~.~-~--~~---~~~ P.~GE 2 OF 3 Morln0006  Exhibit B - Page 061 levi Morin Invoice No. 036-1 For st'rvices through Decernbcr 3, 2014 Irust Statement Date Amount .. ···----------------------- 11/6/2('1 2,500.00 12/4/2Ci -2,032.50 ....... --------------------- Trust account balance $467.50 Payment required to replenish deposit $ 1,032.50 Pr\G£ 3 OF :1 Morln0007  Exhibit B - Page 062 ~~~~:.· l RJ'v'\ Invoice No. 036-2 PLLC January 5, 2015 Levi Mo• ,, Matter: SLAPP case by Kleinhans Gruber Firm matter number: 1419 :••: (' :ce:o ''i'iYH' u~cember 4, 2014, through December 31, 2014 Legal work Date Hours Amount 12/8/2014 0.3 85,50 12/18/2014 0.1 28.50 12/22/2014 r':. i rid more than a dozen cases to jury verdict. Handled appeals before ,,-;; ,,~d courts across Texas and the nation. Work f-', : .-.' :-.:·:· 1D y . : ;:,·s ~~{experience in comntercial, appellate, and other complex \iz'!-~ '-\a:; :;-·rc-rn:ninr:Jl and boutique trial firms. ''-<'r.n·,.~~ i~1cludes: d) /':__r ~.:Ntl,i·-'' 1"'.:1·(-r."al from Texas Supreme Court, rejecting unanimous reasoning •,, :.,·· ,. 'lJ'pellate courts. ~ ( - ·-1 ~rdi n:nc d i:-;pc•sitJve motion and error-preservation strategies for high- p:·-~r;lc mulr!-hillion-dollar mass-ton case. Class certification denied and :;L nnu;-y iud~_mcnt rendered for client . .:, ·r crTirH:- ~try injunction for inventor of dietary supplement against former ' : ' :r·n~r,. Injunction affirmed on appeal; confidential settlement. ,,. \11_.·· _:;·1 i-;~;,-- . .-.: .;I client's counter-claim in cross-suits over multi-million- ~-.-i ,_-:-a.,:.c cc_,nuact. Affirn1ed on appeal. ·::. \rkn·s"!ng quc;rions of first impression in Texas, affirmation on appeal of ; :1 l:t \ .. ,?- .:Ji. client's counter-claim on multi-million-dollar real-estate ,, •;, ''"c''' v itd;.'CH'"t for defendant in multi-million-dollar breach-of- :. .-:JJpl."Jy:-;·_,__:r:_t-,:z:,r:Lr:L:r suit. No appeal. '.,+; ..,., d~ '"" dollar suit alleging groundwater contamination of ''""' .:.i ''r<>pcn:ics. Single-claim plaintiff nonsuited on morning of summary- ,;,,,,.,," '''~"''""'t. Confidential settlements with other plaintiffs following ,_ . _\;.,-;is•\'c nL;nn:1 prc;.cticc and preparation on class-action issues. " )(,·;m·:,cr:utirn d plaintiffs and defendants in statutory-fraud, deceptive trade . _., ~--- >;c~, (lcrivative, consumer, and other business-tort claims. Clerkship u. [.y,,' N. Hughes Edmcation ;_:" n, , , i:.' i i':h:u;.;o L1w School, J.D., 2001 ·r,.:, , "•:;; i.•', hJ,. c:an laude in Economics, 1998; Phi Beta Kappa Admissions and Certific1tion::-: ! ,, --r\·;, · (. ;,\, r;. :-or -~<:stern, Northern, and Southern Districts of Texas Morln0013  Exhibit B - Page 068 Selected ·· •, "' i r:,d to Appeal," TcxasBarCLE Federal Court Practice Speeches and .~ •. ~n·:'<;;;: dv1~!Y j(.. _:!.;"::i4) Publications i\r.r· •, :,;• <.·!! ,i!r•:;n,:s .wd the T,-ansition from Trial to Appeal, in FEDERAL c.r•i> • I'i_.\CriCJ: :!Cl4, ch. II, TexasBarCLE (2014) ·• !._ ); -..,.· -'~i: ;;-r:;.ctr.:c in Federal Court" and "Claims for Attorney Fees," T. '" t'U!-,.'0.:. i.•. i.\"'-·~.·r~ c A.. ssociation Ten Minute Mentor, available at .,._, .,!,._ ·;",,-._'-~ :·un~ (T'·-.'ovcmbcr 2013) '''"' • "' .,,; nc {,.,,,,.,Trial to Appeal-Post Trial Motions," TexasBarCLE Federal ·"'' .,,., ".<·•ninor (\'ley 24, 2013) ·.... _; ,., .; ! · in: •:' i''"' Testimony," TcxasBarCLE Success Strategies for Young ...,,l- ! .. ~\ hr~:h !, 2013) •r • .['<•·I:LE Federal Court Practice Seminar (May 25, 2012) i ii•· :•• · .;,, i.. Fi '·U: Ol'JvfiND: A GUIDE TO SUPPORTING SPECIAL KIDS WITH ·,,.,' '' '· !·J: ··or:.·;"'·"" ';'oung Lawyers Association (2010). "Sn; • .c;;i,·;cc 'lrcsp.;ss T;-,JOugh Hydraulic Fracture," State Bar of Texas Oil, Gas & En._-;-;:.~- _f~_,·scu;·r.:;:;:-, Scltion i 1Lnnual Meeting Gunc 16, 2006) /'»·Sui; surface T,-e!ipass Through Hydraulic Fractu,-e, OIL, GAS '·><. P IY., Dec. 2005, at 94 Professional t-:, ·;,: · ·· ·\•~ T ' L-;.\\ yc-rs Association, President, 2009-10 ''·'c.::.ug l.~;v.-ycr:i Association, Director, 2010-14 ~ 1 • r·:_ -; .-\,,.-;!rd l)f Jvlerit, 2013,2014 . n;,,.,·tor, Houston Lawyers Chapter, 2003-present ~ -! :;.ll' ~--;r:Ll ticrr;_, Life Fellow Morln0014  Exhibit B - Page 069 Kim Kleinhans ----------~~-",;:;'"''·~:tJl.on=,--------------------------- From: Le~f C:lson Sent: M To: Subject: Re: !(C; v. Morin: 2/26 alleged setting (not yet set but noticed at 9 pm 2/13) JournaiPM: The motion was filed on December i. The exhibits were flied on December 3. I'm happy to ask for a tinding of good cause. I'll see you Tuesday morning. Leif A. Olson The Olson Firm, PLLC (281) 849-83 82 leif@olsonapp,al~,com Sent from my mobile. so please excuse rnisspeilings. On Feb 15, 2015, at 7: 18 AM . "Kirn Kleinhans" wrote: Leif- 12/1 is a Mondav so 12/3 Vi<> ht: first deadllne. Re missing ·,_:he second dead!i:1e, tt·11': i·::· has been no agreement between us to extend it and no finding by the court. One or tne other;, rcqui:l'ci to have an extension past 1/30 deadline. If you ar•' nn• 'P •·hp )/26 setting despite the information herein, I will file all my motions (including "'nci:ions) ,.,-..j ,;et them Tuesday 2/17 at 9 am as set forth below as you have allowed us no ot:·,,~r ;);_~fen do·:d h.-~!\\?:_:;: icl,t d thjs '1•;.;.·;:.:;;~·: y,u ;.:n' hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is strictly pri nr;::•: 1~ L~v.· :"".1 ':;:_·~-- c,:· K!~. PL!.C From: Le!i OLson [[l1~!.U!.P~~-~jf2~~~r!sc:i_\:_TP.:~J~Qm] Sent: Saturday, February 14, )t.'lS 9:03 Pi"i To: Kim !'< 1.LJ !imc 1f· nr(··p;-l!\~ a reSpOnSe. 6. Thel"c ;,, 'oc· <"•r>pnr!imi'y tor a con!inunnce. February 26 is, by statute, the last day for this motion to be !1t:"rd. If you cb:idt: ro move for a continuance anyway, let the coordinator know that wc'r•: l"ine with" ·~·uesr'r,y morn>ng setting. The Act requires reimbursement for every fee incun·eci to ,kknd ;;gamst !he :;tritthrough dismissal, and I can reschedule my other Austin appointments to hand!e Lhcm " couple or days earlier, so I'm fine with putting it on my calendar as soon as l get li1c NOH. Hecanse l've got to make sure my calendar is set, we don't waive the three-d<1Y 110tic~ requ.,·c!ll<"L' '"the TC: ;\:c A·> •c•·,d (2) :-;tipulating to an a1,>Teed interlocutory appeal if the motion is denied ··· '·"'"'"" "" ... , Lu gi· : .•·:\' ,_;.,., "anw protc.:tions the Act gives him even though the hearing i•; l:~!e•- · l'n• hnp;·,- '" c!,;;cuss that. Otherwise, I'll be at the courthouse on the 26th. I hope t1v! ':t}U :n:d K~.·i!.h hT=.-~-' ;; "1..\'c:nckrfUl V8cation. Travel safely. LeifA. Ol"Gn Board Ccr:j.'ui, ,:·;, i' .:,-,pc. .u:· '""" ·· 7i.!xao· Board of Legal Specialization 1ei f({~t~~ l5!_7'I1 ~! J~p_t;Jd) ·-~~ ~Y-~! (281) ~j4t) .. (;:i ,, 2 Sent from m~J iP:.td. ·:n pic;\~:l~ ;~:~cT-:;~ rr+;·-Jpellings. 2  Exhibit B - Page 071 On Feb '. wrote: , : ·:·a: r.-cn' "J p.m. ii:ot night. First and foremost, you have """' :n 6\J days (December 1" was the due date and we ,. ~t ·:-!·, ti')l) D2r:ember 3n 1 !'··· ln addition/ you missed the second ). ·,,; set your Motion to Dismiss within 60 days of filing · i •' ':,,,: ,., :c: C • · ''•·-· rk.•diine for 2 12/1 timely filed motion would have been o:·: -:.r 3r~__.,_,nc! .';n\\Ui_\_ )J_L,~ .Jno stiil isn't seL according to the online database I "·:.•c' cd\ Pir•a:•e ar.Hs:,· h<:•w you plan to make a good faith argument that this setting F•.H•ner. ·/our •:c ·,tic"""'"'''"·,; <.o ,:a use delay by refusing to respond to my prior emails !'r!, · q,ics~:::. .;:.:·· ;_c- ,.:.:·' '': ·:!: ~~i~l-rt before we leave for noticed vacation to set the h:'';' , . ._,. :·!.--'n': .,_~,1J,:~,-; "·'"' ,... -: ba·k from out of the country is not only extremely !_!! ·ii :-; n;:· option othPr than going forward requesting :;, · -' · ,. ,., .,, ·" i. ·;, ' .. ; •'' ,; SL'iings befot ewe leave for noticed vacation (February j_,:, J) .-:._., ,.__, :·1!~;.\:r<·. ---:_ t:-_t·::_. -~Lt:Jle:;}. \Vh2n we r-eturn, we already have a deposition '' :.,:,,,.,·., nc: ·· ,. ;;e: .. ,.,,. l :··:·; i·:c"' Jlrsadv been rescheduled countless times and " ' ' " ' " ' ,ii· ~c:,;;,,;u:c• :.. .' , .. ,. u.·, 2 tight scheduling order. Additionally, opposing · ... " •:I' · ' , .. : · ,, , ' ' !:,•,: "'"'-'•' c•ut <111d dces not have availability to reschedule as ~-. ·· h~;'; Lc.: ., :.JS ;;·, · : '": ''-' f::;d out when our Motion for Continuance, Et AI. can !·: ;; ,.,:.: h:.:,n• :co ~e tentatively noticed for 9:00a.m. on Tuesday i-:-,.," ~· . ; .. , ,·,; 1,: ~:e-:- o s:, ·. ·-- ~ ··,·:c -·nnongst my other 2 other settings at a time convenient :·:::·t agree to set the Motion for Dismiss on Tuesday the ·,.; ~~, ,~ :· ... -•• _ 1.:.-;~, .•• ··-•:u: ;,r:d r.:<2rt2irdy not enough time to hire counsel, and/or ;J; e :::~;··c ;_~ ~"'-~ .:;.::c·r:~ •' ,-.. ,. ::-~'·;_).~··:..:_- -f:";!';:; setting that could dismiss our entire case if we i-c·' .:-.-.; n:.;:; :1.;; ·,o-·: :.·;: r =>:;r-1 he guar~mtccrl to be sccurcorerror-free. As long as recipient(s) named . b1 ·- !, ,·, -·· , . : 1. " '!-·:r! :·t':· :_~·~n·cn1cnt with Law Office of KG, PLLC, this e-mail correspondence may be ;1·:\" 1;, ; ,·! ;·1 ;O : " , (:. ' ,, : _;; ,, .· , ,r· :'\ic·!: ,:,:::!:., Gr:Jber, I'LL[, is registered in the state of Texas and the county of ~::,··:.;·n: l ..:,.i· .·.. --- .·:i':/'.~~~d~T.Ji3J2Pe~!s!_corn] ::>enL f-',-i.-_,,-/ 1 :-c:J 7:38PM ,,,-_. • • • , .• To: i(imh,-:·; hr F!:-~i;·1h2 c, ('jru!Y?.r G~!tDi~lavyofficeofkg.com) · i.t ,_;t:,, ::.r :c'entify tt;e ones that you thought most ,;:: ;·,t t l<.<;ether :·esponses that appear to address ·.::.:.•. , ·• .J:r '·"' ; :'' ,;ii: c(;me up at the hearing on the motion to c<;:':.'>.. . .• :·:.:;:.~:;.;•c..L YoL. should also be getting an e- /.:u. .. . ~::,e hc•aring: The absolute drop-dead date for •...:. •.;; \ u:• :,,,,; ··'''' :·;,Ji:i·~·n to dismiss is Thursday, February 2·~. ·:,c. '" ,,,,:t ,;, i\e.;;:·:,·,q !'or th::Jt morning. That will leave you mLh ,,·, l;;r:r_• >'c1 •.'>:c:v.!ve:·y evert if the judge thinks you deserve ., :. a:· , ~ . :.. " ·,e;_ii";,,g i'or sometime next week, which would q:v•.: yu..: ac it·ast :o bit of time. I would prefer to have the hearing ne:e out oi' tovvn. If you would rather have the c.; ,.;::G.: •. u ·"··'·" •. !c' _,.;,_·;,:,.~ before che hearing deadline, I'll reset it , :·.~: ;, i:eve; of a.rr~. or p.m. you prefer). Just let me ·; :'' _,  Exhibit B - Page 073 _:,' 5  Exhibit C - Page 001 At1sti11 Process 'LL(J~ Invoice #MST-2014003433 ~\ ~iff~ INVOICE 9/30/2014 ~ 'SP ! ·" Send Payments To: Law Offices of KG, PLLC Austin Process LLC 700 Lavaca Street 809 Nueces Suite 1400 Austin, TX 78701 Austin, TX 78701 Phone: (512) 480-8071 Fax: (512) 480-8072 Reference Number: KG v. Morin Your Contact: Kimberly G Kleinhans Case Number: Travis D-1-GN-14-003874 Plaintiff: Law Office of Kleinhans Gruber, PLLC Defendant: Levi Morin Received: 9/25/2014 Served: 9/30/2014 8:06am INDIVIDUAUPERSONAL To be served on: Levi Morin ITEMIZED LISTING Line Item Quantity Price Amount Process Service: Austin, TX 1.00 75.00 75.00 TOTAL CHARGED: $75.00 BALANCE DUE: $75.00 Thank you for your business! Make payments online through PayPal at WWW.AUSTINPROCESS.COM Please write invoice number on your check or enclose a copy of this invoice with your payment. Payments not received within thirty days will be assesed a $10.00 late fee. Copyright@ 1992-2011 Database Services. Inc. -Process Server's Toolbox V6.4t  Exhibit C - Page 002 C I T A T I 0 N T H E S T A T E 0 F T EX AS CAUSE NO. D-1-GN-14-003874 LAW OFFICE OF KLEINHANS GRUBER, PLLC , Plaintiff vs. LEVI MORIN , Defendant TO: LEVI MORIN 1901 ONION CREEK PARKWAY, #3107 AUSTIN, TEXAS 78748 Defendant, in the above styled and numbered cause : YOU HAVE BEEN SUED. You may employ an attorney. If you or y our attorney do n o t file a written answer with the c l e rk who i s sued thi s citation by 10 : 00 A.M. on the Monday n e xt fol lowing the expiration of twe nty day s after you wer e s erved this citat i on and peti tion , a d efault j udgment may be t aken a gains t you . Attached is a copy of the PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL PETITION, REQUEST FOREQUITABLE RELIEF & REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURE of the PLAINTIFF in the above styled and numbered cause, which was filed on SEPTEMBER 24, 2014 in the 201ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT of Travis County, Austin, Texas. ISSUED AND GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND SEAL of said Court at office, September 25. 2014., REQUESTED BY: KIMBERLY G. KLEINHANS 700 LAVACA STREET, SUITE 1400 AUSTIN, TEXAS 78701 TELEPHONE: (512) 961-8512 Travis County District Clerk FAX: (512) 623-7320 Travis County Courthouse 1 000 Guadalupe, P . O. Box 679003 (78767) Austin , TX 78701 PREPARED BY: BAR! HENSON RETURN Carne to hand on the day of ________ at -------- o'clock ____M., and executed at --------------------------------------------------- within the County of day of ________ , at ________ o' clock ____M. , ---------------------- on the by del i vering to the wit hin named , each in person, a true copy of this citation together with the PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL PETITION, REQUEST FOREQUITABLE RELIEF & REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURE AND LAWYER REFERRAL accompanying pleading, having first attached such copy of such citation to such copy of pleading and endorsed on such copy of citation the date of delivery. Service Fee: $ ~~~ . . , - - - - : : - : - - - ; - - - - : : - - - ; - - - - : - -- ~s;i._Wefiff I Constable I Authorized Person Sworn to and subscribed before me this the ~~~~ x'~ By= = - - , - - - - - -- - - -- --- - - day of ~~ ~;> AUSTIN PROCESS. LS -----z--(')':\.1\~.,.. nog "'UE1ES \C:'(.."\' ./,., Jftjmt.ed wne of Server ~, vI I I'd, / \ 7fJ71)'J Notary Public, THE STATE OF TEXAS - - -- - -- --e d f8W DiSYntf Court Fittrtem of Travis County, Texas D- 1-GN-14- 00 3874 POtEP ~'\f1014 SERVICE FEE NOT PAID 0 (jl Original EiJ service Copy At I : ~1..,? M. Amalia Rodriguez·Mendoza . Cler~  Exhibit C - Page 003 AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE j State of Texas County of Travis 201 st Judicial District coJrt \ Case Number: D-1-GN-14-003874 Plaintiff: Law Office of Kleinhans Gruber, PLLC vs. Defendant: Levi Morin For: Law Offices of KG, PLLC 700 Lavaca Street Suite 1400 Austin, TX 78701 Received by Austin Process LLC on the 25th day of September, 2014 at 4:10pm to be served on Levi Morin, 1901 Onion Creek Parkway #3107, Austin, TX 78748. I, Nicole M. Hybner, being duly sworn, depose and say that on the 30th day of September, 2014 at 8:06 am, 1: INDIVIDUALLY/PERSONALLY delivered a true and correct copy of the Citation, Plaintiffs Original Petition, Request for Equitable Relief & Request for Disclosure with Civil Case Information Sheet with the date of service endorsed thereon by me, to: Levi Morin at the address of: 1901 Onion Creek Parkway #3107, Austin, TX 78748, as an authorized agent of Austin Process, LLC, and informed said person of the contents therein, in compliance with state statutes. I certify that I am over the age of 18, of sound mind, have no interest in the above action, and am a Certified Process Server, in good standing, in the judicial circuit in which the process was delivered. The facts stated in this affadavit are within my personal knowledge and are true and correct. Subscribed and Sworn to before me on the 30th day icole M. Hybner of September, 2014 by the affiant who is personally SCH-9631, Exp. 4/30/15 known to me. ~i;2...Cz:c::; Austin Process LLC 809 Nueces NOTARY PUBLIC Austin, TX 78701 (512) 480-8071 Our Job Serial Number: MST-2014003433 Ref: KG v. Morin