CAUSE NO. PLAINTIFFS APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND TEMPORARY INJUNCTION

Similar documents
PLAINTIFFS' ORIGINAL PETITION AND APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND TEMPORARY INJUNCTION AND REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURE

19-CV-0222 CAUSE NO. Plaintiff, v. GALVESTON COUNTY, TEXAS

UnofficialCopyOfficeofChrisDanielDistrictClerk

PLAINTIFF S ORIGINAL PETITION, RULE 194 REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURES AND RULE NOTICE

CAUSE NO. MELANIE MENDOZA, IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF Plaintiff, VS. HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS

Case 4:14-cv Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 09/08/14 Page 1 of 6

For Preview Only - Please Do Not Copy

Case 3:14-cv B Document 8-2 Filed 03/11/14 Page 1 of 24 PageID 68 EXHIBIT B

PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL PETITION & REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURE. COMES NOW, JANE DOE, Plaintiff, complaining of SEA WORLD PARKS &

APPENDIX I SAMPLE INTERROGATORIES

PREVIEW PLEASE DO NOT COPY THIS DOCUMENT THANK YOU. LegalFormsForTexas.Com

DC NO. PLAINTIFFS' ORIGINAL PETITION AND REQUEST FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER

CAUSE NO. Mark S. Wolfe, in his Official Capacity as Texas State Historic Preservation

CAUSE NO. SUSAN DAVIS and IN THE DISTRICT COURT PRASHANTH MAGADI

Plaintiffs OF DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS v. Defendants JUDICIAL DISTRICT PLAINTIFFS ORIGINAL PETITION, JURY DEMAND AND REQUEST FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

/ Court: 055

CAUSE NO V. HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 3:18-cv M Document 62 Filed 03/09/18 Page 1 of 10 PageID 1084

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ALEXANDRIA DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) VERIFIED COMPLAINT

CAUSE NUMBER PLAINTIFF S FIRST AMENDED ORIGNAL PETITION AND REQUEST FOR DISCOVERY AND REQUEST FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER

Case 1:16-cv Document 1 Filed 03/04/16 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1

No. D-1-GN

Information or instructions: Motion Consent of Client & Order to substitute counsel PREVIEW

For Preview Only - Please Do Not Copy

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

Case 6:19-cv ADA-JCM Document 1 Filed 01/22/19 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS WACO DIVISION

PLAINTIFF S ORIGINAL PETITION

PLAINTIFF RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT LINDA LAJOIE FIRST REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION

CAUSE NO. INTERNATIONAL CENTER IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF DEVELOPMENT, IX, LTD., VS DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS. Defendant JUDICIAL DISTRICT

Case 2:16-cv RWS Document 1 Filed 10/14/16 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1

Request For Production Of Documents

Case 5:15-cv RWS Document 1 Filed 07/14/15 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 1

Filing # E-Filed 05/08/ :47:12 PM

Case 2:17-cv Document 1 Filed 01/12/17 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 1

NO CV. IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON, TEXAS Clerk

For Preview Only - Please Do Not Copy

Notice Of Interrogatories

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK COMPLAINT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CAUSE NO. JANE DOE, Individually and as IN THE DISTRICT COURT Next Friend of JOHN DOE, a Minor Child, Plaintiffs,

Case 1:17-cv SS Document 1 Filed 12/20/17 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION

Case 3:11-cv CRW-TJS Document 1 Filed 04/06/11 Page 1 of 7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION CASE NO. v. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

Case 1:17-cv LY Document 1 Filed 03/17/17 Page 1 of 22 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CAUSE NO. C E RICARDO DIAZ MIRANDA IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF. vs. HIDALGO COUNTY, TEXAS SECOND AMENDED ORIGINAL ANSWER OF PLAINSCAPITAL BANK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION

C CAUSE NO. ARBUCKLE MOUNTAIN RANCH IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF TEXAS, INC.,

Defendants Motion to Dissolve Temporary Restraining Order. Defendants Annise Parker and the City of Houston ( the City ), (collectively

I. DISCOVERY CONTROL PLAN

Case 4:15-cv DLH-CSM Document 5 Filed 05/05/15 Page 1 of 11

CV. In the Court of Appeals For the Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

Case 3:14-cv AA Document 1 Filed 06/02/14 Page 1 of 14 Page ID#: 1

Case 4:14-cv RAS Document 1 Filed 09/23/14 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Filing # E-Filed 03/07/ :02:15 AM

Information or instructions: Plea in abatement motion & Order to quash service Alternate Form

Case 2:15-cv Document 1 Filed 04/14/15 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION

2016CI21911 CAUSE NO. v. JUDICIAL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF S ORIGINAL PETITION. COMES NOW GRUPO INTEGRADORA SOLAR, SAPI DE CV (hereinafter, GIS ),

Case 1:17-cv UNA Document 1 Filed 07/26/17 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE COMPLAINT

IN THE IOWA DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR DUBUQUE COUNTY. Plaintiffs, Case No: PETITION THE PARTIES

Case 4:17-cv Document 1-2 Filed in TXSD on 11/15/17 Page 2 of NO.

Case 3:10-cv P-BN Document 76 Filed 07/27/11 Page 1 of 11 PageID 995

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SECOND JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR LEON COUNTY, FLORIDA. v. Case No.: 2012 CA

Case 8:04-cv SCB-TBM Document 32 Filed 10/07/2005 Page 1 of 6

Case 4:11-cv Document 102 Filed in TXSD on 09/11/12 Page 1 of 8

Case 3:14-cv L Document 1 Filed 06/18/14 Page 1 of 6 PageID 1

Case 3:17-cv M Document 1 Filed 07/26/17 Page 1 of 7 PageID 1

hcm Doc#303 Filed 06/24/15 Entered 06/24/15 13:51:06 Main Document Pg 1 of 7

UnofficialCopyOfficeofChrisDanielDistrictClerk

Case 9:16-cv RLR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2016 Page 1 of 6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION. Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:18-cv-3055

Unofficial Copy Office of Loren Jackson District Clerk

Case 2:15-cv Document 1 Filed 04/14/15 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION

NO. THE STATE OF TEXAS, IN THE DISTRICT COURT Plaintiff

DC PLAINTIFFS' ORIGINAL PETITION COME NOW, PLAINTIFFS DEE VOIGT, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS

Information or instructions: Combined discovery requests, admissions, production of documents and interrogatories

) I ClV a S - BUN. 18 This is an action under Title VII ofthe Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title I of the Civil

Case 4:15-cv A Document 1 Filed 05/20/15 Page 1 of 8 PageID 1

PLAINTIFFS ORIGINAL PETITION & REQUESTS FOR DISCLOSURE

Case 6:15-cv Document 1 Filed 04/06/15 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 1

Case 4:17-cv Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 07/20/17 Page 1 of 8

Case 1:18-cv RM Document 1 Filed 04/30/18 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 26 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

NO. V. JUDICIAL DISTRICT. CORRIE LONG, DAVID TANG AND MICHAEL P. FLEMING & ASSOCIATES, P.C. Defendants. OF HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS

Case 2:16-cv Document 1 Filed 04/25/16 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Case No.: Plaintiff, v.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION. Plaintiff, Case No: COMPLAINT

DENISE CANTU, IN THE DISTRICT COURT. VS. JUDICIAL DISTRICT JP MORGAN CHASE & CO., LIONOR DE LA FUENTE and CARLOS I. URESTI

Case 1:11-cv REB Document 1 Filed 12/15/11 Page 1 of 5

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION Case No: 5:11-cv ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA

NO. DC V. 160TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COLLIN COUNTY COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT, DEFENDANT. DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

Unofficial Copy Office of Chris Daniel District Clerk

Information & Instructions: Seizure of debtor's property prior to judgment

Transcription:

5/20/2018 5:32 PM Chris Daniel - District Clerk Harris County Envelope No. 24720251 By: Walter Eldridge Filed: 5/21/2018 12:00 AM JOSE CASAS, MIRTHA I. GONZALEZ, JESUS G. LEDEZMA, IVAN LEIJA and WENDY ST. SURIN, Plaintiffs CAUSE NO. VS. KURARAY AMERICA, INC., KURARAY EVAL PLANT and KURARAY AMERICA, INC. RESEARCH AND TECHNICAL CENTER Defendants 1 IN THE DISTRICT COURT HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PLAINTIFFS APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND TEMPORARY INJUNCTION COMES NOW, JOSE CASES, MIRTHA I. GONZALEZ, JESUS G. LEDEZMA, IVAN LEIJA and WENDY ST. SURIN ( Plaintiffs ), and files this Application for Temporary Restraining Order and Temporary Injunction against KURARAY AMERICA, INC., KURARAY EVAL PLANT and KURARAY AMERICA, INC. RESEARCH AND TECHINICAL CENTER ( Defendants ), and in support would show the following: I. PARTIES Plaintiff, Jose Casas, in a resident of Harris County, Texas. Plaintiff, Mirtha I. Gonzalez, is a resident of Harris County, Texas. Plaintiff, Jesus G. Ledezma, is a resident of Harris County, Texas. Plaintiff, Ivan Leija, is a resident of Harris County, Texas. Plaintiff, Wendy St. Surin, is a resident of Palm Beach County, Florida.

Defendant, Kuraray America, Inc., is a Foreign Corporation with its headquarters located in Houston, Harris County, Texas. This defendant may be served with process through its registered agent, CT Corporation System, 1999 Bryan Street, Suite 900, Dallas, Texas 75201-3136, or wherever this defendant and/or registered agent may be found. Plaintiffs specifically invoke the right to institute this action against whatever entity was conducting business using the assumed or common name of Kuraray America, Inc. with regard to the events described in this Petition. Plaintiffs expressly invoke their right under Rule 28 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure to have the true name of this party substituted at a later time upon the motion of any party or of the Court. Defendant, Kuraray EVAL Plant is a corporation doing business in the State of Texas any may be served with process through its registered agent, CT Corporation System, 1999 Bryan Street, Suite 900, Dallas, Texas 75201-3136, or wherever this defendant and/or registered agent may be found. Plaintiffs specifically invoke the right to institute this action against whatever entity was conducting business using the assumed or common name of Kuraray EVAL Plant with regard to the events described in this Petition. Plaintiffs expressly invoke their right under Rule 28 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure to have the true name of this party substituted at a later time upon the motion of any party or of the Court. Defendant, Kuraray America, Inc. Research and Technical Center, is a corporation doing business in the State of Texas any may be served with process through its registered agent, CT Corporation System, 1999 Bryan Street, Suite 900, Dallas, Texas 75201-3136, or wherever this defendant and/or registered agent may be found. 2

Plaintiffs specifically invoke the right to institute this action against whatever entity was conducting business using the assumed or common name of Kuraray America, Inc. Research and Technical Center with regard to the events described in this Petition. Plaintiffs expressly invoke their right under Rule 28 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure to have the true name of this party substituted at a later time upon the motion of any party or of the Court. II. VENUE AND JURISDICTION The court has jurisdiction of the subject matter of this action and the amount in controversy is above the minimum jurisdictional limits of this Honorable Court. Plaintiffs are seeking monetary relief over $1,000,000.00. Venue is proper in Harris County, Texas pursuant to TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE 15.002(a)(3) because it is the county of Defendant Kuraray America, Inc. s principal office in this state and Defendant is not a natural person. III. NATURE OF ACTION On February 19, 2018, an explosion and subsequent fire occurred at the Kuraray EVAL Plant located at 11500 Bay Area Boulevard in Pasadena, Texas. Defendant, Kuraray America, Inc., is the owner of the plant. As a result of the explosion and subsequent fire, Plaintiffs sustained serious injuries and suffered damages. IV. PRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE Plaintiffs hereby request and demand that Defendants and their agents, attorneys, and insurers preserve and maintain all evidence pertaining to any claim or defense related to the 3

incident made the basis of this action, or the damages resulting therefrom, including but not limited to photographs, videotapes, audiotapes, recordings, correspondence, memoranda, files, facsimiles, email, voice mail, text messages, or cellular telephone records. Failure to maintain such items will constitute spoliation of the evidence and may subject Defendants to sanctions. V. APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF Based on reasonable information and belief, Plaintiffs assert that the Defendants may change, alter, destroy or modify the evidence related to the explosion, including, but not limited to, the valve that potentially malfunctioned in an operating unit at the plant, unless this Court enters a Temporary Restraining Order, restraining Defendants from changing, altering, destroying or modifying any physical evidence, as the evidence constitutes tangible, relevant evidence materially related to the incident complained of having resulted in severe injuries to the Plaintiffs. In order for the Plaintiffs to properly investigate and pursue their claim, and recover damages and see that justice is done, this Court should restrain the Defendants, their agents, servants, employees, contractors, contract employees, attorneys and those acting in concert with or in representation of said Defendants from changing, altering, destroying or modifying the evidence related to the explosion, including, but not limited to, the valve that potentially malfunctioned in an operating unit at the plant. If the Defendants are permitted to change, alter, destroy or modify any evidence related to the explosion, the Plaintiffs in this lawsuit will lose the opportunity to inspect the evidence, and will be unable to prosecute their claim and thus will be deprived of adequate remedies at law. 4

There is no adequate remedy at law available to the Plaintiffs to prevent the Defendants from changing, altering, modifying, or destroying evidence, unless the Court grants immediate relief restraining such conduct. Plaintiffs would pray that this Court enter a Temporary Restraining Order preserving the status quo by restraining Defendants from in any way changing, altering, destroying or modifying, the evidence related to the explosion and subsequent fire, including, but not limited to, the valve that potentially malfunctioned in an operating unit at the plant, as well as moving, removing, or altering any and all tangible evidence within the plant in question. Plaintiffs also seek an order preserving: Any and all photographs and videotapes of the scene of the incident, parties or equipment involved in the incident; Any and all stickers, safety slogans, warnings, etc. attached to or placed on any equipment involved in the incident; Any and all documents/communications regarding the scene of the incident, parties or equipment involved in the incident; Any and all documents/records relating to the incident, including but not limited to OSHA records; Any and all emails, electronic data, documents, statements, diaries, calendar entries, memos, incident reports, call slips or telephone messages, text messages, facsimiles, voicemail messages and correspondence related to the incident; and Any and all maintenance logs, maintenance and repair records, inspection reports, annual inspection reports, operating manuals, actual audiotape recording or any transcript of any recorded statements, mobile radio and dispatch records pertaining to the incident. The foregoing tangible and physical evidence is relevant and reasonably necessary to determine the cause of the incident made the basis of this suit, the loss of which would irreparably harm Plaintiffs. 5

VI. REQUEST FOR HEARING ON TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER Plaintiffs would further pray for this Court to set a hearing on Plaintiffs= Application for Temporary Restraining Order and subsequent injunctive relief in this matter. VII. REQUEST FOR INSPECTION Plaintiffs also pray that this Court issue an Order permitting the Plaintiffs attorneys and investigative staff, including but not limited to, consulting experts, to have access to the incident scene and operating unit where the explosion occurred to inspect, photographs, and film the scene. Such access for the purpose of inspection, photographing and filming is essential in order for the Plaintiffs to prepare their cause and to see that justice is done. VIII. PRAYER For these reasons, Plaintiff prays that the Court grant the motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Temporary Injunction. Respectfully submitted, ABRAHAM, WATKINS, NICHOLS, SORRELS, AGOSTO & AZIZ /s/ Muhammad S. Aziz MUHAMMAD S. AZIZ State Bar No. 24043538 800 Commerce Street Houston, Texas 77002 (713) 222-7211 (713) 225-0827 Facsimile maziz@abrahamwatkins.com -AND- 6

/s/ Jose Luis Orihuela Jose Luis Orihuela State Bar No. 24066526 ORIHUELA & ASSOCIATES, P.L.L.C. P.O. Box 569 League City, Texas 77574 832-425-0239 (office) 832-553-2762 (facsimile) PainInTheCarWreck.Com ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS 7