THE STATE OF TEXAS CAUSE NO.

Transcription

1 THE STATE OF TEXAS CAUSE NO. SANDRA MATA, as Heir of the Estate of RUDY RICARDO MATA, vs. Plaintiff, PIONEER PAWN, ROBERT FURR, and, PAMELA FURR Defendants. IN THE DISTRICT COURT TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS JUDICIAL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF S ORIGINAL PETITION AND REQUESTS FOR DISCLOSURE TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF THE COURT: 1. Plaintiff SANDRA MATA, HEIR OF THE ESTATE OF RUDY RICARDO MATA, Deceased, asserts the following claims against PIONEER PAWN, ROBERT FURR, and, PAMELA FURR, hereinafter referred to as Defendants, and would show the court the following: RULE (47) 1. Pursuant to Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff states the following: Plaintiff demands a jury trial on the matters set forth in this petition and Plaintiff has paid the requisite fee. Because the Rules of Civil Procedure require Plaintiff to plead the damages sought in this case for the pain and suffering and economic harm endured because of 1

2 Defendant s clear negligence, gross negligence and unlawful conduct, Plaintiff pleads damages above $1,000,000 at this time. Parties 2. Plaintiff, SANDRA MATA ( Sandy ), who resides at 1209 Vera Lane, Kennedale, Texas 76060, brings this action as Heir of the Estate of RUDY RICARDO MATA ( Decedent or Rudy ). No action was taken with respect to the Decedent s estate until On September 17, 2014, the Decedent s Last Will and Testament ( Will ) was probated at a muniment of title proceeding in Probate Court Number 1 of Tarrant County, Texas. Probate Court Number 1 of Tarrant County, Texas has determined that administration of the Decedent s estate is not necessary. No administration of the estate is pending. Sandy was the sole beneficiary under the Decedent s Will. 3. Defendant, PIONEER PAWN, is a business located at 2701 W. Pioneer Parkway, Arlington, Texas Defendant, ROBERT FURR owns Pioneer Pawn and the Federal Firearms License registered to Pioneer Pawn. He resides at 63 Lake Shore Road, Gordonville, TX Defendant, PAMELA FURR, owns Pioneer Pawn and the Federal Firearms License registered to Pioneer Pawn. She resides at 63 Lake Shore Road, Gordonville, TX Jurisdiction & Venue 6. The Court has jurisdiction of this controversy by nature of the subject matter and amount in controversy. Plaintiff seeks damages in an amount within the Court s jurisdictional 2

3 limits. Venue is proper in Tarrant County because this is the county where the acts and omissions leading up to the causes of action accrued. Notice of Claim 7. The Plaintiff has performed all conditions precedent necessary to the filing of this suit. Facts 8. This is a civil action stemming from the tragic shooting death of Rudy Ricardo Mata, a devoted family man and acclaimed musician. 9. On the evening of September 25, 2012, Rudy was shot five times and killed by David Merrill ( Merrill ), a drug addicted domestic abuser who was married to Rudy s stepdaughter, Trisha Forton ( Trisha ). 10. Merrill obtained the Glock handgun he used to kill Rudy from Defendants mere hours before the murder. 11. Merrill had previously informed one of Defendants employees that he intended to kill his wife, Trisha. 12. Merrill made multiple visits to Pioneer Pawn in the months leading up to the murder, during which time he was becoming increasingly violent and paranoid, and abusing violence-inducing illegal drugs such as Methamphetamine, aka Crystal Meth, and Amphetamine, aka Speed. 13. Defendants ignored Merrill s professed intent to commit murder and the obvious signs of his drug addiction and violent, paranoid tendencies, and gave him the Glock handgun on September 25, Defendants and their employees and/or agents unlawfully transferred the Glock handgun used to kill Rudy to Merrill. 3

4 15. Defendants negligently and unlawfully transferred the Glock handgun to Merrill despite knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that Merrill intended to commit a crime of violence, and posed a substantial and highly foreseeable risk of causing harm with the Glock handgun. 16. Defendants were aware of facts and circumstances sufficient for them to have known or to have had reasonable cause to believe that Merrill was a dangerous person who intended to use the Glock handgun to commit a crime of violence. 17. Defendants were aware of facts and circumstances sufficient for them to have known that Merrill was an illegal user of violence-inducing drugs including Crystal Meth and Speed. 18. But for the wrongful conduct of Defendants, Merrill would not have been in possession of the Glock handgun he used to kill Rudy, and Rudy would not have been shot and killed. 19. Plaintiff s lawsuit does not in any way challenge the rights of law-abiding, responsible citizens to keep and bear arms, nor does it challenge responsible gun dealers proper and lawful operation of their business of selling guns to law-abiding, responsible citizens. 20. The complaint seeks damages against Defendants, jointly and severally, for negligence, negligent entrustment and negligence per se, which proximately and directly led to the death of Rudy Mata. Merrill Informed Pioneer Pawn that He Intended to Commit Murder 21. Merrill pawned his Glock handgun to Defendants a few months before September 25, In the intervening months, Merrill returned to Pioneer Pawn on multiple occasions to make installment payments on the Glock handgun. 4

5 23. During one of his prior visits, Merrill made comments about killing his wife to an employee of Defendants. The employee believed that the statement was not made in jest. According to the police report filed after Merrill shot Rudy, Merrill said he was joking but [Defendants employee] was concerned about the way he said it. 24. However, upon information and belief, Defendants took no additional precautions in response to this statement, or to ensure that Defendants would not transfer a firearm to Merrill given his homicidal intent. Upon information and belief, Defendants did not alert or inform Defendants staff that Merrill, a man with an expressed homicidal intent, may be returning to obtain a firearm and the staff should not transfer a firearm to him for that reason. Defendants did not call the police or attempt to warn Merrill s target of his murderous intent. Defendants did not undertake any additional investigation into Merrill s intent or mental state. 25. Rather, ignoring the concern raised by Merrill s threat to kill his wife, Defendants continued the process of transferring the Glock handgun back to Merrill, and subsequently continued to allow him to make payments to redeem the Glock handgun. 26. On September 25, 2012, Merrill made his final payment of $385 to Defendants and Defendants transferred, supplied, and entrusted the Glock handgun to Merrill. 27. Upon information and belief, Merrill made this final payment of $385 for the Glock handgun with money he had taken from Trisha s bank account earlier that day. 28. Upon information and belief, Defendants did not take any reasonable precautions when supplying Merrill with the Glock handgun on September 25, 2012, despite knowing he had previously threatened to shoot and kill his wife with the gun. Defendants did not alert the police to the fact that Merrill, a man who had previously expressed intent to kill, 5

6 had gained possession of his desired deadly weapon. Defendants did not attempt to locate or warn Merrill s intended victim. Rather, Defendants simply enabled Merrill to arm himself and let him walk out the door. 29. On September 25, 2012, before Defendants transferred, supplied, and entrusted the Glock handgun to Merrill, they knew or reasonably should have known that Merrill intended to use the Glock handgun to kill someone. 30. Before Defendants transferred, supplied, and entrusted the Glock handgun to Merrill, they knew or reasonably should have known that they could not transfer the Glock handgun to Merrill if the transfer was in violation of state or federal law. 31. Defendants knowingly violated federal firearms laws by transferring the Glock handgun to someone who stated a clear intent to use it to commit a crime of violence. Merrill s Substance Abuse and Volatile, Violent Nature Were Immediately Apparent 32. Merrill visited Pioneer Pawn on multiple occasions prior to September 25, Due to the frequency of his visits, Merrill was known to the manager of Pioneer Pawn, such that the manager of Pioneer Pawn recognized Merrill from news reports about Rudy s murder. 34. During the time period in which Merrill was visiting Pioneer Pawn, he was suffering from extreme paranoia, addicted to illegal drugs, and prone to making violent threats, and his behavior and appearance were increasingly disturbing to those around him. 35. During this time period, Merrill was habitually abusing violence-inducing illegal drugs such as Crystal Meth and Speed. 36. Merrill s substance abuse was clearly apparent, manifested in an unkempt appearance, sunken cheekbones, glazed eyes, and paranoid, violent, and aggressive behavior. 6

7 37. During this time period, Defendants knew or reasonably should have known or had reasonable cause to believe that Merrill was abusing illegal drugs and had a volatile, dangerous personality. 38. Defendants knowingly violated federal firearms laws by transferring the Glock handgun to someone who they knew or had reasonable cause to believe was an unlawful user of a controlled substance. 39. During this time period, Merrill also grew increasingly violent, physically abusing Trisha. 40. On or about September 10, 2012, Merrill slapped Trisha across the face in front of her daughter. Trisha locked herself in the bathroom and told Merrill to leave. Sandy and Rudy Mata removed Trisha s and Merrill s children from the apartment she shared with Merrill out of concern for their safety. However, Trisha stayed at the apartment to collect their possessions. 41. On Sunday, September 23, 2012, two days before the murder, Trisha left Merrill s apartment for good and moved to Sandy and Rudy s home to stay with her children. Merrill Shot Rudy With the Glock Handgun Obtained from Pioneer Pawn 42. On September 25, 2012, the same day that Defendants transferred, supplied, and entrusted Merrill with the Glock handgun, Rudy went to talk to Merrill at Merrill s residence. 43. During the interaction, Merrill shot Rudy five times with the Glock handgun he had just obtained from Defendants. 44. Rudy was found lying on his back on Merrill s floor, his chest covered in blood. 45. Rudy sustained multiple gunshot wounds, including shots to his abdomen. 7

8 46. Despite sustaining multiple gunshots from a powerful weapon, Rudy initially survived. Two of Merrill s neighbors rushed into his apartment to perform CPR on Rudy and try to save his life. EMS and law enforcement subsequently administered aid after arriving on the scene. Rudy was rushed to the hospital, where doctors tried to save him. The doctors were unable to save Rudy, and he was pronounced dead about an hour after the shooting. 47. Upon information and belief, before his death, Rudy suffered excruciating pain and mental anguish as a result of the gunshots and the fear that Merrill would next try to kill Rudy s family. Defendants Knew of the Danger that Firearms Pose When Possessed by Individuals Who Intend to Commit a Crime of Violence 48. Defendants knew or should have known that supplying firearms to persons who are dangerous because they intend to commit a crime of violence or are addicted to illegal drugs poses a serious risk of death or injury. 49. Defendant Pioneer Pawn is a retail store operating since 1988 and is engaged in the business of selling firearms, including handguns. Pioneer Pawn is a federally licensed firearms dealer. Defendants Robert Furr and Pamela Furr are the owners of Pioneer Pawn. 50. As experienced firearms dealers, Defendants knew or should have known that firearms should not be supplied to persons who may pose a foreseeable risk of harm, including persons abusing illegal drugs or intending to commit a crime of violence such as Merrill. 51. Firearms dealers play an important role in keeping guns out of dangerous hands. In fact, federally-licensed firearms dealers have the responsibility to [e]nsure that, in the course of sales or other dispositions..., weapons [are not] obtained by individuals whose 8

9 possession of them would be contrary to the public interest. Abramski v. United States, 134 S. Ct. 2259, 2273 (2014). 52. Defendants knew or reasonably should have known that a federally licensed gun dealer is not required to supply a firearm to someone if the dealer is suspicious that the transfer may be unlawful or the person may be dangerous. 53. Defendants knew or reasonably should have known that, to the contrary, a federally licensed firearms dealer should not supply a firearm if the dealer is suspicious that the transfer may be unlawful or the person may be dangerous. CAUSES OF ACTION COUNT I -- NEGLIGENCE AS TO ALL DEFENDANTS PIONEER PAWN, ROBERT FURR, AND PAMELA FURR 54. Plaintiff incorporates and re-alleges the above paragraphs as if stated fully here. 55. Defendants were subject to the general duty imposed on all persons and businesses not to expose others to reasonably foreseeable risks of injury, and had a duty to exercise reasonable care in transferring firearms and to refrain from engaging in any activity creating reasonably foreseeable risks of injury to others. 56. Defendants breached their duty in one or more of the following ways: a. In negligently supplying a dangerous, drug-addicted man, who had threatened to shoot his wife, with a Glock handgun. b. In failing to pay attention or reasonably respond to Merrill s threats to kill his wife. 9

10 c. In failing to pay attention or reasonably respond to indications that Merrill was using illegal, dangerous, and violence-inducing drugs. d. In employing deficient questioning and screening of customers, including, but not limited to, failing to determine whether it was reasonable to transfer a handgun, and failing to adequately train and supervise employees to properly, reasonably, and legally transfer firearms. 57. Defendants knew or should have known that their employees and agents were well within their rights, and in fact, were obligated to use their individual judgment to refuse to transfer a firearm to a buyer where there were indicators that the buyer was likely to use the firearm in a dangerous manner. 58. Defendants knew or should have known that their employees and agents had discretion to refuse to transfer a firearm. 59. In claiming that he intended to kill his wife, Merrill provided Defendants with specific information which could make criminal activity reasonably foreseeable. 60. Defendants nonetheless transferred the Glock handgun to Merrill, which he used to kill Rudy Mata mere hours later. 61. Each of the above facts or omissions by Defendants constitutes negligence, and that negligence proximately caused Rudy Mata s injuries and death. COUNT II - NEGLIGENT ENTRUSTMENT AS TO ALL DEFENDANTS PIONEER PAWN, ROBERT FURR, AND PAMELA FURR 62. Plaintiff incorporates and re-alleges the above paragraphs as if stated fully here. 63. Merrill was an incompetent entrustee for a Glock handgun since he was a homicidal substance abuser. As described in detail above, Merrill s substance abuse manifested in 10

11 an unkempt appearance, sunken cheekbones, glazed eyes, as well as paranoid, violent, and aggressive behavior. 64. Further, in the months before Merrill redeemed the Glock handgun on September 25, 2012, family members had noted his increasingly violent and paranoid behavior. To wit, Sandy and Rudy Mata removed their grandchildren from the home that Merrill shared with Trisha, before Trisha, herself, left the home. 65. During the same period in which Merrill was abusing drugs and becoming increasingly violent, he was making repeat visits to Pioneer Pawn. During at least one of these visits, Merrill told one of Defendants employees that he intended to murder his wife. 66. A reasonably prudent gun seller would have recognized that Merrill was an incompetent trustee for a Glock handgun, as there was an unreasonable and foreseeable risk that Merrill s possession of the Glock handgun would likely result in serious injury or death. 67. Defendants had, at all material times, control of the Glock handgun it transferred to Merrill and Merrill became entitled to possess the Glock handgun only by consent of Defendants. 68. A firearm is an exceedingly dangerous article to place in the hands of a homicidal substance abuser with a history of domestic violence and the specific and expressed intent to kill, such as Merrill. 69. Defendants knew or reasonably should have known that by withholding consent to transfer the Glock handgun to Merrill, it could prevent him from possessing and dangerously using the gun against himself or an innocent third party such as Rudy. 11

12 70. Defendants had a non-discriminatory, specific, and articulable reason to not complete the transfer of the Glock handgun to Merrill, because Merrill told a Pioneer Pawn employee that he intended to kill his wife. 71. Defendants knew or should have known that their employees and agents were well within their rights, and in fact, obligated to use their individual judgment as firearms dealers to refuse to transfer a firearm to a buyer who was likely to use the firearm in a dangerous manner. 72. Defendants knew or should have known that its employees and agents had discretion to refuse to transfer a firearm. 73. Defendants nonetheless transferred the Glock handgun to Merrill, knowing or having reason to know, that Merrill would use the product in a manner involving unreasonable risk of physical injury to himself or others. 74. Defendants negligent entrustment of the Glock handgun to Merrill directly and proximately caused the wrongful death of Rudy later that day. COUNT III - NEGLIGENCE PER SE AS TO ALL DEFENDANTS PIONEER PAWN, ROBERT FURR, AND PAMELA FURR 75. Plaintiff incorporates and re-alleges the above paragraphs as if stated fully here. 76. Federal law prohibits the sale of firearms to certain individuals, including those who are unlawful users of, or addicted to, any controlled substances. 18 U.S.C. 922(d). 77. As detailed above, Merrill was addicted to, and abused a variety of controlled substances, including Crystal Meth and Speed. When Merrill was visiting Pioneer Pawn, his drug abuse had physical manifestations, resulting in, amongst other things, an unkempt and unhealthy appearance, paranoid behaviors, and aggressive conduct. 12

13 78. Federal law also prohibits the knowing transfer of a firearm if the person knows the firearm will be used to commit a crime of violence. 18 USC 924(h). 79. As detailed above, Defendants transferred the Glock handgun to Merrill knowing that he intended to commit murder. 80. Defendants engaged in a deliberate and intentional course of action, which constituted violations of federal laws by transferring Merrill the Glock handgun. 81. In transferring Merrill the Glock handgun, Defendants knowingly violated federal firearms laws, including 18 USC 922(d) and 924(h). 82. As a direct and proximate cause of Defendants knowing violation of 18 U.S.C. 922(d) and 924(h) Rudy Mata was shot and killed. 83. Rudy Mata s death was exactly the type of injury that 18 USC 922(d) and 924(h) were designed to prevent. 84. Rudy Mata was in the class of persons for whose protection 18 USC 922(d) and 924(h) were enacted. DAMAGES 85. Plaintiff, Sandy Mata, as Heir of the Estate of Rudy Mata, brings this survival action pursuant to Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code , because of serious injuries suffered by the decedent, which resulted in death, based upon the facts and legal theories more fully set out above. Defendants acts and omissions were each a proximate cause of the death of Rudy. As a result thereof, Plaintiff has suffered damages, including the following elements: a. Medical expenses; b. Burial expenses; 13

14 c. Lost wages; d. Physical pain and suffering; and, e. Mental anguish. 86. Considering each of these elements of damages, Plaintiff has been damages in an amount in excess of the minimum jurisdictional limits of this Court. EXEMPLARY/PUNITIVE DAMAGES 87. At the time Pioneer Pawn transferred the Glock handgun to Merrill, Defendants were acting with reckless disregard for the safety of others. Pioneer Pawn possessed information that alerted them that Merrill was going to commit a crime of violence. The gross negligence of Defendants was a proximate cause of the damages to Plaintiff, and Plaintiff is entitled to recover exemplary or punitive damages. 88. Defendants conduct, when reviewed objectively from Defendants standpoint at the time of the conduct, involved an extreme degree of risk, considering the probability and magnitude of the potential harm to others, and Defendants were actually, subjectively aware of the risk involved, but nevertheless proceeded with conscious indifference to the rights, safety, or welfare of others. REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURE 89. Under Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 194, Plaintiff requests that the Defendants disclose, within 50 days of the service of this request, the information or material described in Tex. R. Civ. P (a)-(l). Plaintiffs intend to conduct discovery in accordance with Level Three (3) of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure as set forth in Tex. R. Civ. P

15 PRAYER 90. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Defendants be cited to appear and answer herein and that upon final hearing, Plaintiff has judgment against the Defendants as follows: a. Judgment against Defendants for all damages sought by Plaintiff, including all claims for actual and exemplary damages; b. Pre-judgment and post-judgment interest at the highest allowable rates on the appropriate elements of damages for the time period allowed by law; c. All reasonable and necessary attorneys fees, costs and expenses; and d. Such other and further relief, general or special, as the Court deems just and proper. Dated: September 24,

16 Respectfully submitted By: /s/ Jeff Edwards Jeff Edwards State Bar No Scott Medlock State Bar No Edwards Law The Haehnel Building 1101 East 11 th Street Austin, TX [phone] [fax] -and- By: /s/ Jonathan E. Lowy Jonathan E. Lowy (pro hac vice application to be filed) District of Columbia Bar No Robert B. Wilcox, Jr. (pro hac vice application to be filed) New York State Bar No Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence 840 First St., NE Washington, D.C [phone] [fax] -and- By: /s/ Christopher Boehning H. Christopher Boehning (pro hac vice application to be filed) New York State Bar No Kaveri Vaid (pro hac vice application to be filed) New York State Bar No

17 Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, LLP 1285 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY [phone] [fax] 17