TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-17-00777-CV
Arthur J. Lawrence, Jr., Appellant
v.
Cody Treybig, Appellee
FROM THE 353RD DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY
NO. D-1-GN-16-001856, THE HONORABLE KARIN CRUMP, JUDGE PRESIDING
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pro se appellant Arthur J. Lawrence, Jr. appeals from the trial court’s final
judgment, entered following a jury trial, that awarded nominal damages of $4.00 to appellee
Cody Treybig 1 and imposed a permanent injunction barring Lawrence from coming within 1,000
feet of Cody or contacting him or any member of his family. 2 Lawrence complains that the trial
court lacked jurisdiction over the case under the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment,
see U.S. Const. amend. I; Tex. Const. art. I, § 6, and that the jury erroneously evaluated the
evidence. We will affirm the trial court’s judgment.
1
For the sake of clarity, we will refer to Cody Treybig by his first name in this opinion.
2
Cody asserted a cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress and
sought injunctive relief and exemplary damages.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL SUMMARY 3
In 2005, when Cody was nine years old, his parents hired Lawrence as a private
basketball coach. Lawrence continued in that role for six years, until Cody was fifteen, and they
formed a relationship that eventually rose to a level of discomfort and concern to Cody’s parents,
ultimately leading to the underlying suit. 4
Cody testified that over the years Lawrence was employed by the Treybigs, he
told Cody that Jimmy Treybig, Cody’s father, was a high-level member of an evil society called
the Illuminati; that Cody’s school, his hometown of Austin, and colleges in general were full of
evil Illuminati members; that the rapture was imminent; that Cody’s parents intended to have an
RFID 5 chip implanted into Cody’s body, which would damn him to hell; that the RFID chip
would control Cody’s mind and would contain cyanide that could be used to kill him if he
resisted; and that Cody’s parents and brother hated him and were evil. Lawrence also showed
Cody videos of beheadings, saying that something similar would happen if Cody did not “save
[his] soul” first. Cody said that Lawrence made Cody feel isolated from his friends by telling
him “over and over” that they were evil and influenced by the devil. Asked about whether he
came to believe his father was part of the Illuminati, Cody said, “I was absolutely convinced. It
was the truth for me, and at the time, it was factual that Mr. Lawrence told it to me. He knew
God. God had told him, and that it was absolutely the case.”
In 2009, when Cody was about twelve, he went to his parents in tears, telling
them that that he was frightened because Lawrence had said that Cody would go to hell for
3
Our summary of the evidence is taken from the testimony and exhibits presented at trial.
4
At the time of trial, Cody was twenty-one years old.
5
“RFID” stands for “radio-frequency identification.”
2
playing a particular video game. Cody’s parents both confronted Lawrence and told him not to
discuss religious matters with their son, and they testified that Lawrence apologized and agreed
to refrain from such discussions. Cody testified that despite those assurances, Lawrence
continued to talk about his religious beliefs, telling Cody to keep the discussions secret from his
parents and to lie about the content of their conversations. Cody said that Lawrence “had a way
of using his words to make me feel like he had done so much [for] me and I owed him so much.”
The discussions took place during coaching sessions, in phone calls, and in text messages, and
Cody said Lawrence had a way of luring him into asking about Lawrence’s views on religion. 6
Cody explained that he and Lawrence developed a code to conceal that they were continuing to
have conversations about Lawrence’s religious beliefs.
Cody testified that Lawrence “was always trying to convince me that he needed
my parents to pay him more.” He also said that Lawrence tried to plant ideas of financial
misdeeds, at one point telling Cody to get $1,000 from cash that Lawrence believed Cody’s
father kept in the house and “loan” it to Lawrence. Cody followed Lawrence’s instructions but
was unable to find any money. In 2012, Lawrence told Cody that he would soon be fired by
Cody’s father; that Mr. Treybig would pay Lawrence $250,000 in the process to make him leave
Cody alone; that Lawrence would keep most of the money in reserve for Cody’s needs after the
rapture; and that Cody would have to make a false report of child abuse to get away from his
parents so that he could go live with Lawrence and Lawrence’s followers.
Drew Treybig, Cody’s mother, testified that after she told Lawrence to refrain
from discussing his views on religion, Cody and Lawrence continued to ask if they could talk
6
The record reflects that Lawrence would tease the fact that he had additional
information, asking Cody if he was ready to hear it or if he was sure he wanted to know more.
3
about religion, but that “[t]he answer was no. Every single time, and Cody would get upset with
me, . . . but it was no.” In September 2011, Cody’s older brother told Mrs. Treybig that Cody
and Lawrence were still having those discussions, but Cody and Lawrence denied it when she
asked. In early 2012, a friend showed Cody’s mother “some very distressing” Skype text
transcripts she had found between the friend’s child and Lawrence. Cody’s mother said that
when she read them, “I was panic-stricken. Sheer panic took over me.” She raced home and
looked at Cody’s computer, “and the Skype transcripts were just right there, and, um, I just
started to read, and it—it was abject terror.” Cody’s father also testified about reading the text
conversations between Cody and Lawrence:
Well, when I read the Skype, I realized three things: One thing, Mr. Lawrence
was evil. That all this time that I had been paying him; working with him, he had
been teaching that I was the devil. And that’s just the start and you’ve heard the
rest of it. The second thing was he talked about going away with Cody. And
he—and I don’t remember, yeah, he [was] going away with Cody, taking him
away. And the third thing, um, was, um, he implied that people paid him to leave
Cody alone or leave the child alone.
Transcripts of Skype texts between Lawrence and Cody, dated between
January 14 and February 3, 2012, were introduced into evidence and confirm much of Cody’s
testimony. 7 In the transcripts, Cody said that his parents were angry and then asked Lawrence if
he should give them his phone. Lawrence replied, “Delete everything and give it to them.”
About two weeks later, Lawrence texted, “FYI, Its here! . . . . R F I D.” He further wrote that the
chip “is inserted into the hand, preferably the right hand or forehead,” and asked if that sounded
familiar, and Cody replied, “yes sounds very familiar. In a nice book I read,” explaining at trial
7
Any errors in the quotations that follow are found in the Skype transcripts or in the
letters sent to the Treybigs by Lawrence after he was fired.
4
that they were referring to the Bible. Lawrence told Cody to stay away from people who have
the chip, and when Cody asked “what do they do to ur body,” Lawrence said, “you lose mind
control.” Lawrence told Cody, “Its imperative that you know what this chip does,” because his
brother and parents will “accept it” and will “eventually obligate you to take it or either they will
be disown you!” For that reason, Lawrence wrote, it was necessary for Cody to “become
INDEPENDENT ASAP!” When Cody said he would “rather die than get” the chip, Lawrence
urged him to test himself by not eating for two days, acknowledging that it would anger Cody’s
parents and cause him to miss school and his activities.
Lawrence went on to ask where Cody would live and what he would live on if he
ran away instead of accepting the chip. Cody said he had “20000 in my bank,” and Lawrence
replied that Cody’s account was restricted to withdrawals by his parents. Lawrence said that he
had “been working on [a plan] ever since [Cody’s mother] said she doesn’t want you reading the
bible.” He explained that the Treybigs would fire him because of “RELIGION RELIGION
RELIGION” and would “pay me off with a large lump sum of money, like $250,000 or more to
have me come up with some excuse to leave.” Lawrence told Cody that he would “put it into a
safe and wait for you to come and get it.” Cody responded, “so your plan is..to accept it..and
when I have to leave I can use it to sustain myself as long as Im independent?” Lawrence said,
“EXACTLY! CPS![ 8] You can easily claim abuse! . . . ONE PHONE CALL! 911.” Cody
asked what he could tell CPS, and Lawrence replied, “Fear of pain, yelling, humiliation, etc.
Which is not a lie because they would be forcing you into h_ _ _. CPS ALWAYS takes the side
8
Child Protective Services.
5
of the child.” He also said, “Tell CPS nothing about the chip, stress potential harm to your body
and yelling,” adding that if Cody’s “acting sucks,” he would be handed back to his parents.
In the course of their texting, Cody said, “I think that I hate school. Its not
important. Its just keeping me from learning about what really important. everyone at my
school are just sheep waiting to be slaughtered. I think that I will die before I get this.”
Lawrence asked Cody if he “want[ed] more,” and then told Cody there was a computer in
Belgium that would be used to detain people who “don’t accept the new world order which is the
chip.” Lawrence said that Cody’s parents were part of the new world order and were “influenced
by the other side” and that the Illuminati “will kill you if you don’t do as your told.” He also
scolded Cody for not studying the Bible enough and said God had sent Lawrence to Cody
because Cody had been “chosen.”
The Treybigs fired Lawrence the day they found the transcripts, telling him to
cease all contact with Cody. Despite the Treybigs’ request, Lawrence continued to have contact
with Cody for some time, sending Cody text messages through friends and speaking on the
phone when Cody called. He also sent Cody’s father two letters in April and May 2012,
criticizing the Treybigs’ parenting and asserting that Cody had turned to Lawrence because their
parental advice “came up void.”
In the first letter, which is eleven pages long, Lawrence took issue with Cody’s
parents signing him up for a certain basketball team “behind my back” and without
“consult[ing]” Lawrence. Lawrence also discussed the family’s money at length, saying that the
issue “needs to be addressed” because the Treybigs had said contradictory things about their
financial resources, which “confuses Cody because it sounds as if you and Drew are trying to
make Cody believe you are not very wealthy.” Lawrence called Cody’s father a “dictator” and
6
“arrogant, boastful, self centered.” Lawrence also said, “I began to remember what other rich
families did when I didn’t sip their kool-aid. I never did anything wrong that would justify why
my services should be terminated, so two families in the past have tried to get me to leave on so
called good terms by bribing me.” In those cases, Lawrence said, he “told their children the truth
and just left the family and did not contact those individuals until they were in there early
twenties.” In the second letter, Lawrence gave advice about Cody’s coaching needs and said
Cody’s father should communicate better with Cody. He closed the letter by saying, “Please DO
NOT obligate Cody to go to the Olympics this year, MESSAGE! [Want] to know why? All you
have to do is ask and I will show you, but please be sure to prepare your mind for some
information that will go beyond anything else that you have EVER encountered; or have you
already?”
Mr. Treybig was asked at trial about his interpretation of those letters, and he
replied that Lawrence “very clearly stated, again, that Cody really belonged to him.” Mrs.
Treybig testified similarly, saying about the letters, “I believe that it was his intent to intimidate
us. It was his way to continue to stalk Cody, indirectly, um, and it was also his intent to frighten
us, that—he was—no matter what happened to Jimmy and I, even if we left this world, he was
going to come back for Cody . . . when he was over 18.”
Cody’s mother said that in the days and weeks after Lawrence was fired,
I thought we had lost our child. Um, he was crying all the time and sobbing all
the time. He couldn’t get out of bed. Often times he was curled up in a ball in a
catatonic—I’m not medically diagnosing as catatonic but very unresponsive.
Um—he couldn’t eat; he couldn’t focus. He tried. Um, I would take him to
school. He couldn’t—he stopped driving at that point so I was taking him to
school on the days he could go. I was picking him up early because he couldn’t
stay. Um, he couldn’t focus on his tests. He was getting 30s and 40s on tests.
7
The family had planned to go to the 2012 Summer Olympics, but when it was time for them to
leave, Mr. Treybig said, Cody “was so frightened that he would die. He had been taught by Mr.
Lawrence that he would die at the Olympics.” As a result of Cody’s fear, the family canceled the
trip. Cody’s mother testified about Cody’s reaction to their preparing to leave for the Olympics:
So the suitcases were packed. We were ready to go to the airport and I go to get
Cody in his room, and, um, I walk in the door; the lights are out; he’s in bed; the
blankets are over him over his head, he’s curled up. He’s barely responsive. I
can hardly hear what he’s saying to me—he’s crying, though—and, uh, I couldn’t
get him to talk to me, so the only thing I could think of was to lay down next to
him and I put my arms around him. I remember this really well and, um, I finally
got him to tell me what he was so afraid of. And he was terrified that if he left for
the Olympics, someone would come to our hotel room, and my husband and I
would hold him down and they would kill him. So the only thing that I could
think to try to save him in that moment was to tell him if anybody came to the
door, they could take me. I would let them kill me. Nothing would ever happen
to him again, ever, um, but it wasn’t good enough. We didn’t go and we
cancelled the tickets, about that time.
Cody’s parents started sending him to psychiatrist James Maynard soon after
Lawrence was fired. Dr. Maynard testified that he believed Cody “was a normal kid, um, prior
to his relationship with Mr. Lawrence,” that Cody was a “people pleaser,” and that Cody “loved
Mr. Lawrence, that he worshipped him.” He explained that when Cody first met Lawrence,
Cody was in “the latency age of development,” during which phase “children are compliant”
“rule followers” and are not yet asking questions or challenging what they are told. Dr. Maynard
said that “as a result of his interactions with Mr. Lawrence,” Cody had distanced himself from
his friends and was afraid of his parents and his school.
Dr. Maynard testified that at the beginning of his treatment, Cody was suffering
from severe anxiety and moderate depression. He was upset over the severing of his relationship
with Lawrence and was “terrified that his parents were evil, that they were part of the Illuminati,
8
and that because they had money, they were evil.” Cody was also “extremely anxious” about
school because he thought that “if he participated in studying evolution, that he would burn in
hell.” Dr. Maynard said that Cody could not bring himself to call Mr. Treybig “father” and
instead “had to call him the Man Who Gave Birth to Me,” and that Cody had “learned these
things or was afraid of these things because of his relationship with Mr. Lawrence.”
Cody testified that Lawrence had isolated and cut him off from his friends and
family, causing him lasting emotional trauma and making him distrustful of others. He said that
he became afraid of the dark, his parents, and school. As a result of his emotional distress, he
had to take a medical leave of absence from school during his junior year of high school. He
also became unable to sleep in his own bed and slept in his parents’ room during his senior year
of high school.
Cody eventually went to Rice University but had difficulty because Lawrence had
taught him that colleges were full of evil people and that the owl, which is the Rice mascot, was
a symbol of the Illuminati. Cody testified that although he no longer believed everything
Lawrence had told him, “what Mr. Lawrence did to me is destroyed the subconscious part of my
brain to the point where, even if I understood that Rice was fine, it was so engrained within me,
that just being there still hurt me and made me afraid and anxious.” At Rice, Cody found that he
still could not sleep in his bed because he was afraid Lawrence would “get him.” He began
sleeping under it, in a space his mother described as “a cave,” and eventually took a second
medical leave of absence in April of his freshman year of college.
Cody testified that at the time of trial, he had returned to Rice and was doing well.
He was still seeing Dr. Maynard at the time of trial and testified that he would continue to need
weekly therapy for another year or two. Cody was asked about the lasting effects of Lawrence’s
9
conduct, and he said, “It’s especially hard for me to talk about my family and having to cope
with the fact that this man made me hate my family. I do not know how to describe how that
makes me feel.” He further said that he has lingering feelings of anxiety or depression, although
he can manage it most of the time. However, “every time I talk to somebody in my life, it’s hard
for me, every single time because it just—I cannot describe the effect it has on the mind when
somebody wraps you around their finger and gains—and gains control of you. It—it’s just hard
to ever be the same and you have to work so hard at it.” Cody testified:
I don’t care what belief system you have or how you convince a child that their
parents hate them, that their brother is evil, that their parents are evil, that they
need to file a false CPS report to go live with you, that they need to try and help to
extort $250,000 from your parents, I don’t care how you convince a child that that
is true, that is going to have lasting and real psychological damage.
He further said, when asked if Lawrence had used religion as a coaching “tool”:
I just don’t know of any religions that tell you to come through a family; tear it
apart; isolate the kid; lie to CPS. I don’t know of any religion or belief system
that includes that, so I don’t know—it was a tool and so it was present there but I
don’t know if I can say for sure that it was—it was just religion what the sessions
were about. It was about isolation. That was what the sessions were really about.
It was about terrifying me and trying to tear my family apart. That’s what the
sessions were really about.
Cody’s mother testified that she often thought of her son and “the daily abuse that
he had to suffer, that Mr. Lawrence piled onto him,” saying that Lawrence made Cody “fear for
his life” and that she did not think “any child should be betrayed like this.” Cody’s parents
testified that Lawrence had recently moved within four to six miles of the Treybigs’ home, into a
neighborhood where one of Cody’s best friends lived. Cody’s father said that makes him
10
uncomfortable “because we’re afraid of him,” and his mother testified that the family now has
concerns about running into Lawrence in stores or elsewhere in the community.
For his part, Lawrence testified and denied much of the Treybigs’ testimony. For
instance, Lawrence said that although Cody’s mother initially barred him from discussing
religion in 2009 after Cody got upset about the video game, the next day she told him, “I don’t
really mind if you talk to Cody about the Bible and religion, as long as you only tell him the
good stuff.” Lawrence said he instead stopped talking about religion altogether, and that when
Cody would occasionally bring it up, Lawrence would remind him that his mother had said not
to talk about the Bible. Lawrence further testified that Mrs. Treybig “rescinded” her prohibition
on religious discussions when Cody was in eighth grade when, he said, the Treybigs asked
Lawrence to help Cody with a project for his theology class. 9 He said that he did not tell Cody
about the rapture, the Illuminati, or RFID chips until Cody was in eighth grade and that Cody
was lying when he testified to the contrary. He denied ever saying Mr. Treybig was evil or a
member of the Illuminati, saying, “I believe I have maybe testified that we have all done evil or
unrighteous things in the eyes of the father.” He further denied keeping secrets from Cody’s
parents, telling Cody that something bad would happen during the 2012 Olympics, or showing
Cody videos of beheadings or other religious materials during Skype chats. He said that their
discussions about money and running away with Cody to avoid an RFID chip were all “based on
three hypothetical situations.” Finally, he denied that his post-firing letters were an attempt to
get additional money from the family.
9
The Treybigs all testified that Mrs. Treybig gave Lawrence permission to help with one
or two specific theology projects, after repeated requests by Cody, and that he was not given
blanket permission to discuss his views on religion.
11
DISCUSSION
Lawrence asserts that the trial court lacked jurisdiction over the underlying
lawsuit, arguing that his conduct that allegedly caused Cody’s emotional distress was based upon
his religious views and thus protected by the First Amendment.
A plaintiff suing for intentional infliction of emotional distress must show that the
defendant acted intentionally or recklessly and that the defendant’s conduct was extreme and
outrageous and caused the plaintiff severe emotional distress. Twyman v. Twyman, 855 S.W.2d
619, 621 (Tex. 1993). The conduct must have been so outrageous in character and so extreme in
degree “as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency, and to be regarded as atrocious, and
utterly intolerable in a civilized community.” Id. (cleaned up).
Both our federal and state constitutions provide broad protection for the free
exercise of religion. Tilton v. Marshall, 925 S.W.2d 672, 677 (Tex. 1996) (orig. proceeding); see
U.S. Const. amend. I; Tex. Const. art. I, § 6. “Although the Free Exercise Clause does not
categorically insulate religious conduct from judicial scrutiny, it prohibits courts from deciding
issues of religious doctrine.” Pleasant Glade Assembly of God v. Schubert, 264 S.W.3d 1, 11
(Tex. 2008). “Thus when a plaintiff’s suit implicates a defendant’s free exercise rights, the
defendant may assert the First Amendment as an affirmative defense.” Tilton, 925 S.W.2d
at 677. “One seeking an exemption based on faith from a facially neutral, generally applicable
statute, regulation, or common law principle must first demonstrate to the court that the
application thereof would substantially burden his or her free exercise of religion.” Id. That
determination generally requires the defendant to establish that his beliefs are both religious in
nature and sincerely held. Id. at 678. And while courts can consider the sincerity of a person’s
beliefs, they cannot weigh the “veracity of religious tenets.” Id. However, courts distinguish
12
between the absolute right to believe and “the freedom to act, which remains subject to
regulation for the protection of society.” Id. at 677 (cleaned up).
Lawrence argues that the jury could not determine whether his conduct was
extreme and outrageous without weighing the veracity of his religious beliefs and that the trial
court therefore should have dismissed Cody’s claims. However, whether Lawrence’s views are
sincerely held or whether he believed that he was helping to save Cody from damnation is
irrelevant under the facts of this case, in which Lawrence’s conduct, no matter its motivation,
was extreme and outrageous.
First, Cody’s claims against Lawrence do not resemble the claims discussed in
Tilton or Schubert. This case does not present claims made against a religious leader by a
follower related to the leader’s conduct of his religious duties. 10 See Tilton, 925 S.W.2d at 681.
Nor is it a case in which an adherent of a church is accused of misconduct against another
adherent related to or arising out of the beliefs of their common religion. 11 See Schubert,
264 S.W.3d at 3-4.
10
In Tilton, the plaintiffs sued, inter alia, for fraud and intentional infliction of emotional
distress arising from a pastor’s allegedly making insincere religious representations and
breaching his promises to read, touch, and pray over prayer requests and tithes. Tilton v.
Marshall, 925 S.W.2d 672, 681 (Tex. 1996) (orig. proceeding). The court held that an inquiry
into whether the pastor’s espoused religious beliefs were true would be required in considering
whether his conduct rose to the level of intentional infliction of emotional distress, an inquiry the
First Amendment “strictly prohibit[ed].” Id. The court held that the same inquiry would be
required in considering claims of fraud arising out of his allegedly insincere religious
representations. Id. at 679-80. Thus, the court held that the trial court had abused its discretion
in refusing to dismiss the claims for intentional infliction of emotional distress and fraud claims
that involved the veracity of the pastor’s religious doctrines or beliefs. Id. at 679, 682.
11
In Schubert, the plaintiffs sued for emotional damages arising out of an attempt by
members of the victim’s former church to cast out demons that they believed were possessing the
victim. Pleasant Glade Assembly of God v. Schubert, 264 S.W.3d 1, 3-4 (Tex. 2008). The court
ordered the suit dismissed because “the psychological effect of church belief in demons and the
13
Instead, Lawrence was hired for the purely secular purpose of coaching Cody in
basketball. In secret and in direct contravention of his employers’ instructions, Lawrence
inflicted his belief system on the parents’ minor child, who was not a member of Lawrence’s
religious organization, with no regard for the parents’ beliefs or desires. “[T]he values of
parental direction of the religious upbringing and education of their children in their early and
formative years have a high place in our society,” Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205, 213-14,
217-18 (1972), and Lawrence was not entitled to exert his influence to persuade Cody to join in
Lawrence’s religious beliefs—those decisions were for Drew and Jimmy Treybig to make.
Further, Lawrence coached Cody to hate and fear his parents, his brother, his friends, his
teachers, and his city. Lawrence worked to convince Cody that his father was evil and a member
of the Illuminati. He instructed Cody to lie to his parents, lie to a governmental entity (CPS),
and steal money from his parents. Regardless of Lawrence’s motives or sincerity, his conduct
caused lasting, deep trauma on a child and chaos and discord within Cody’s family. The jury did
not have to consider the veracity of Lawrence’s beliefs to conclude that his conduct was so
extreme in degree and outrageous in character that it exceeded the bounds of decency. See
Twyman, 855 S.W.2d at 621. The trial court did not err in refusing to exercise jurisdiction over
Cody’s suit. We overrule Lawrence’s first issue on appeal.
In his second, third, and fourth issues, Lawrence attacks the jury’s evaluation of
the evidence and the weight it should have given to the testimony. He argues that the Treybigs
contradicted each other and themselves and thus were not credible witnesses and that the jury
erred in its verdict because the jurors did not understand Lawrence’s view of religion. However,
appropriateness of its belief in ‘laying hands’ are at issue,” and awarding damages for
“religiously motivated emotional distress . . . would require us to take sides in what is essentially
a religious controversy.” Id. at 13.
14
Lawrence provides no authority to support his contentions and instead simply gives his own
summary of the evidence. He further provides little in the way of record citations and sometimes
makes factual assertions that are not taken from the trial evidence at all. He has thus not
sufficiently briefed those issues. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.1(h); Oxford v. Pinckney, No. 03-13-
00109-CV, 2014 WL 858863, at *2 (Tex. App.—Austin Feb. 25, 2014, no pet.) (mem. op.)
(although we review pro se pleadings liberally and with patience, pro se litigants must comply
with applicable laws and rules of procedure). Furthermore, even if we were to ignore the
insufficient briefing on these issues, Lawrence is essentially attacking the jury’s evaluation of
witness credibility and demeanor, which are issues exclusively within the jurors’ domain. Jurors
“are the sole judges of the credibility of the witnesses and the weight to give their testimony” and
may “believe one witness and disbelieve another,” and we, as the reviewing court, cannot impose
our opinions to the contrary. City of Keller v. Wilson, 168 S.W.3d 802, 819 (Tex. 2005). We
overrule Lawrence’s second, third, and fourth issues.
CONCLUSION
Having overruled Lawrence’s appellate issues, we affirm the trial court’s
judgment.
__________________________________________
Jeff Rose, Chief Justice
Before Chief Justice Rose, Justices Triana and Kelly
Affirmed
Filed: June 20, 2019
15