Robert Yurik v. Ernestine Phillips

FILED IN
RECEIVED In
The Court of Appeals The Court ofAppeals
Sixth District STATE OF TEXAS Sixth District
SEP 0 9 2015
SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
SEP 0 9 2015
Texarkana, Texas . Texarkana, Texas
Debra Autrey, Cierk
COURT OF APPEALS Debra K. Autrey, Gtetfk

APPELLATE CASE NUMBER 06-15-0026-CV

TRIAL COURT CASE NUMBER 80896

September 8, 2015

ROBERT YURIK PLANTIFF

VS.

ERNESTINE PHILLIPS DEFENDANT

THIS DOCUMENT AND ITS CONTENTS SHALL SERVE AS A MOTION BY THE
PLINTIFF TO DISPUTE THE CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE, STATEMENT OF FACTS
AND ARGUMENT SUBMITTED BY THE DEFENDANT, ERNESTINE PHILLIPS. A
FINAL CONCLUSION IS SUBMITTED BY THE PLAINTIFF TO THE COURT

v*\
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. STATEMENT OF FACTS
2. ARGUMENT
3. CONCLUSION
4. CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE
5. ATTACHMENTS/EVIDENCE
 MOTION TO DISPUTE THE DEFENDANT APPELLATE BRIEF
PLAINTIFF: ROBERT YURIK
DEFENDANT: ERNESTINE PHILLIPS

THE STATEMENT OF FACTS, REGARDING THE APPELLATE CASE REFERENCED ON THE COVER
PAGE OF THIS DOCUMENT, WAS SUBMITTED BY THE DEFENDANT TO THE COURT ON AUGUST
19, 2015, PERTHE CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE CERTIFIED BY THE DEFENDANT.

UPON RECEIPT OF THE DOCUMENT BY THE PLAINTIFF ON AUGUST 26, 2015, THIS MOTION WAS
IMMEDIATELY GENERATED AND IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED TO THE COURT FOR
CONSIDERATION. THE FOLLOWING FACTS ARE IN DISPUTE:

1. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE: THE CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE, SIGNED BY THE DEFENDANT,
CERTIFIES THAT THE COPY OF THE APPELLATE BRIEF WAS SUBMITTED BY THE
DEFENDANT TOTHE COURT AND THE PLAINTIFF ON AUGUST 19, 2015.
PER THE US POSTAL SERVICE STAMP ON THE ORIGINAL ENVELOPE ADDRESSED
TO THE PLAINTIFF, THE COPY WAS NOT SUBMITTED UNTIL 5 DAYS LATER, ON
AUGUST 24, 2015.

2. STATEMENT OF FACTS-1: 'THE SIGNATURES WERE REVIEWED BY JUDGE BENCH AND IT
WAS DETERMINED THAT ALL SIGNATURES WERE THE SAME AND ACCEPTED BY THE
INSURANCE COMPANY."
THE JUDGE DID NOT VALIDATE THE SIGNATURES TO BE THE SAME. THE
OUTCOME FROM THE ORIGINAL TRIAL WAS THAT THERE WAS NOT ENOUGH
EVIDENCE (IN ABSENCE OF A HANDWRITING EXPERT) TO INVALIDATE THE
AUTHENTICITY OF THE SIGNATURES. THE STATEMENT WAS MADE BY THE COURT
THAT THE SIGNATURES WERE SIMILAR, BUT YET DIFFERENT. AT NO TIME DID
THE COURT VALIDATE THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE SIGNATURES.

THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE SIGNATURES IS NOT WHAT IS UNDER APPEAL
SUBMITTED BY THE PLAINTIFF.

3. STATEMENT OF FACTS-2: "THE DATES WERE LISTED ON THE FINAL DOCUMENT WAS
NEVER IN QUESTION, JUST THE SIGNATURES. MR. YURIK PROVIDED NOT
DOCUMENTATION THAT FINAL SIGNATURE WAS NOT DARLENE TRAINOR'S."
THE DATES ON THE FINAL DOCUMENT WERE DISCUSSED SPECIFICALLY IN THE
INITIAL TRIAL. THE JUDGE NOTED THAT THE NUMBERS LISTED NEXT TO BOTH
SIGNATURES WERE NOT A VALID DATE, BUT JUST A RANDOM STRING OF
NUMBERS. THE JUDGE, HOWEVER, DID NOT RULE ON THE FACT THAT THE
DOCUMENT CLEARLY STATES THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE DOCUMENT TO BE
THE DATE OF THE SIGNATURE, BUT THERE IS NO APPARENT WAY TO DECIPHER
WHAT THAT DATE IS.
 MR. YURIK PRESENTED OTHER LEGAL DOCUMENTS REGARDING THE
QUESTIONABLE SIGNATURES AS COMPARISON. THE JUDGE STATED THAT IN
ABSENCE OF A HANDWRITING EXPERT, THE SIGNATURES COULD NOT BE
INVALIDATED BY THE COURT. THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE SIGNATURES IS NOT
WHAT IS UNDER APPEAL SUBMITTED BY THE PLAINTIFF.

4. STATEMENT OF FACTS-3: "DARLENE TRAINOR HAD TO CALL THE INSURANCE COMPANY
DIRECT TO GET THE FORM TO CHANGE THE BENEFICIARIES, AS SEEN BYTHE DATES THAT
THE INSURANCE COMPANY SENT THE FORM TO DARLENE TAINOR. ALSO NOTE THAT
ERNESTINE PHILLIPS WAS ON THE PREVIOUS BENEFIARY CHANGE AFTER THE DEATH OF
HER HUSBAND, THAT A CLEAR INDICATOR OF HER INTENT TO CHANGE HER
BENEFICARY."
THE ONLY DOCUMENT IN QUESTION HERE IS THE LAST SUBMITTED BENEFICIARY
CHANGE FORM. THERE WAS NO FORM "AFTER THE DEATH OF HER HUSBAND"
SUBMITTED TO THE COURT AT ALL THERE WAS ONE FORM SUBMITTED TO THE
COURT PRIOR TO THE ONE IN DISPUTE HERE, AND IT NAMED ROBERT YURIK AS
THE SOLE PRIMARY BENEFICIARY, WITH ERNESTINE PHILLIPS A CONTINGENT.

5. ARGUMENT: THE BENEFICIARY CHANGE FORM IS AN INSTRUMENT TO RECORD
CHANGES MADE TO THE LIFE INSURANCE POLICY, BUT AS EQUALLY AS INPORTANT, TO
DETERMINE WHEN THOSE CHANGES SHOULD BE ENFORCED. IN THIS CASE, MR. YURIK
CLAIMED THAT THE BENEFECIARY DOCUEMTS HAD BEEN FORGED. JUDGE BENCH
REVIEWED THE DOCUMENTS THAT WERE PROVIDED INTO EVIDENCE OF THE COURT.
JUDGE BENCH QUESTIONED THE PLAINTIFF AND THE DEFENDANT (THE DOCUMENTS
THAT WERE PROVIDED TO JUDGE BENCH HAVE BEEN ATTACHED TO THIS DOCUMENT).
AFTER REVIEW OF THE DOCUMENTS JUDGE BENCH RULED THAT THE SIGNATURES TO
THE HANDWRITING ON ALL OF THE DOCUMENTS WERE IN FACT DARLENE TRAINOR'S
AND THERE WAS NOT FORGED SIGNATURES. AT THAT TIME JUDGE BENCH RULED THAT
THE LAST BENEFICIARY CHANGE SHOULD BE UPHELD AND RULED IN FAVOR OF THE
DEFENDANT ERNESTINE PHILLIPS.

THIS STATEMENT VALIDATES MS. PHILLIPS' INTEREST IN THE IMPORTANCE OF
ENFORCABILITY WITH REGARD TO RECORDED CHANGES.

THE SIGNATURES WERE NOT RULED AS AUTHENTIC BY THE JUDGE. JUDGE
BENCH RULED THAT IN ABSENCE OF A HANDWRITING EXPERT, THE SIGNATURES
COULD NOT BE RULED AS INVALID.
 CONCLUSION

MS. PHILLIPS HAS EXAGGERATED THE FACTS IN HER BRIEF AND DELIBERATELY WITHHELD
SUBMISSION OF THE BRIEF TO THE PLAINTIFF. SHE IS ATTEMPTING TO RE-ARGUE THE RULING
BASED ON AUTHENTICITY OF SIGNATURES, WHICH IS NOT IN DISPUTE HERE. THE ORIGINAL
APPLICATION SUBMITTED WITH HER BRIEF WAS NOT SUBMITTED AT THE INITIAL TRIAL, WAS
NOT IN QUESTION AT THE INITIALTRIAL, AND IS NOT IN QUESTION IN THIS APPEAL.

THE PLAINTIFF RESPECFTULLY REQUESTS A RULING OF THE FORM TO BE INVALID BASED ON
THE ENFORCABILITY OF THE BENEFICIARY CHANGE FORM BASED ON A STRING OF NUMBERS
ENTERED INTO THE DOCUMENT UPON SIGNATURE WHICH DOES NOT REPRESENT ANY
RECOGNIZABLE DATE FORMAT. SINCE THE DOCUMENT DOES NOT STATE IT IS ENFORCEABLE
UPON RECORD OF RECEIPT BY THE INSURANCE COMPANY, BUT RATHER THE DATE UPON
SIGNATURE; AND THERE IS NO POLICY OR PRECIDENT SUBMITTED BY ANY PARTY STATING A
DEFAULT MEASURE; THE ENFORCABILITY OF THIS DOCUMENT IS IN QUESTION AND RELIEF IS
REQUESTED OF THE COURT.

THE PLAINTIFF IS REQUESTING THAT IF THIS DOCUMENT HAS NO ENFORCEABLE DATE/THE
FORM BE RULED AS INVALID AND THE PREVIOUS BENEFICIARY FORM, DATED DECEMBER OF
2002 BE RECOGNIZED AS THE LAST VALID FORM SUBMISSION.
 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT A COPY HAS BEEN FURNISHED TO THE COURT AND TO
ERNESTINE PHILLIPS BY MAIL DELIVERY ON September 8, 2015

ROBERT YURIK

i-.-
1004 JERNIGAN STREET

COMMERCE, TEXAS 75428

X

ROBERT YURIK

*
 -ni&fftiLri*fc^^-n;.^;Kft^*l*i^^'i,-_;^.^>^^ ,' ' -^- ,i~;__.

'!!•'-"

•1;

te1.

h

-«

:-ut

lv •

'"^
•i*e
 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT A COPY HAS BEEN FUNISHED TO STONEBRIDGE
LIFE INSURANCE COMPAN AND ROBERT YURIK BY MAIL DELIVERY ON
AUGUST 19, 2015

ERNSTINE PHILLIPS
104 MEADOW DR.
CONVERSE, TX 78109

BY: fc^rtagftZLs
ERNESTINE PHILLIPS
 ll,..u»» I
v.vi.mi r.w '"•

If.00 Monthly Pr^iare. ^E
XPenrunr L>fo bsmnev Coop*"/ FsHcy AfBount.
mat OlfMCfttfrt. «.
$ io,oco
Mnatttmiht Office
3m W. dee *•*»»
APPLICATION
NnU TSC75 FOB THE WHOLE lift PAm-g-AT-86 FLAM
DMate
t ES»BakB3iE_ rtfW IP 0* «42 1i S« H touts
Set O touli
J m mlB0»
4. Mnm P D BO* 235 eary
imr

m: m
• .,*:. - V- • '••£•£ •
-i^" '••:,' iv}0

n mm. hfmim^ nmiGMii «• untfeal ftMce. ntavnlton or tnstnrafa lor Men presson. wn

deficiency iiwrder or t«ttd posttm on a AtOS-rewrt Mooo wht.....-«„~....«.«««~-~. ,B" *-*
any ippOcitioo
f'. rm
tor•'• Ufc Aedfcnt or Stttmtt .www ,*cfiMAJ"*** ffggg,?,•'•••*-SSv
••••••——•*""»""""""""*"""""*w"
y„ n ». E*
—Z *
ntodtfi
4k* tfchnp iorlUtiotwmwQr«TOtty poltaytwkw ^£vQ;lbf[Bf

•sag»—if*** -•*•*«»•»t-n>y-»M 'ni^m».Tj---•- -_^±
^.f''«^**^*^-iS£S£

HKicaploft

^Hni-iwii*,Bniitir^wn.;ir' """~:--"',p 7i ^ -•—-i~-^^^^.-- - - •- —

1

YES 'JCftmeytCiSfHt Accoont OB
^ws.^^t" •-"
•: My ;jr^W^/(^l?;tei^riwber is: l)l0rttV]^fbd«i3;-^|
WBillHiM

':&'•••:

i-;:wai'

'.»-i
 \ *

<* *

{<^STONE BRIDGE LIFE Insurance Company
2700Vtetf Run Raitwqy • Ranq,1km ZSD7SS2D0
December 03,2002

DARLENE INEZ TRAINOR
11S42 RANCH LANE LOT86
FREDRrCKSaURG VA 22407

rf>- ".'y^.,'-:.'•;, '-C\•:"'.'•*"/."•:

Kr::^m]

Dear DARLENE WEZ TRAINOR

In order to change the beneficiary of your poBcyfcertBfcate, please provide the Wonnaflon roquested below,
make e copy ot tWs form for your raoords, and retum the completed fuiin.

bh prior benefioaflf; ——

itianefictty (of

a^afes*
-Sifftr-^

.' v.; •.
V ;KAbnrrtAvi

^ / pita'*'-*- / 3
<7sS TONEBRIDGE Injurine* Company
LIFE
2700 Wot PUno fofcway - Ptaoo, Texas 7SQ/S3200

March 30,2004

Important Insurance Information: Open Immediately
DARLENE !NE£ TRAINOR '"'-^
1004 JERNIGAN ST - I-
COMMERCE TX 75428 ' \CTloWCriMPLCTEG
APR 2 0 l«W
bMlNlSlhAMvfSU?POR
Portcy/Certiifcarte Numti*p^72L/794438 o'n the Lifeok DARLENE INE2 TRAINOR
Dear DARLENE INEZ

In order to change the bafty Afiy;
paymertt made by&frta>rn]^y pn^^.^mt:^i^^tl^6iia$in shall constituteprof^yyfftfe aSatsotite J >,'/^
^ytmwit ana st«nr dtecharge the CWnpany from IrablEty. if a triiSt or trustedbe^&aryfe jiarrieoV 8».
'$£S%SS! ^li^&W**!*110*** ftroat °*-«*e tti^-waw* hsyfoa. todetermtnoVmetheratestis frterteci :
aW^Unotber^
t&^^^B ^ B«ne^ry Cnatng>i a|tef it lias been recorded by tfte Company, «m f^ effect da Of the
rardmu pi-thisBijoeficiary Change witliw eJtected. r i •
Stooatufe of Primafv ifKnrflrt Data Sfgnature of Sdouct Batg

csza

•'--r^,rfe.V:
\ f)