Plaintiff's Motion To Disqualify Judge Fred W. Davis and Judge Melody M. Wilkinson

No.
017-217971-06
ROGER K. PARSONS, INDIVIDUALLY
AND AS THE INDEPENDENT
ADMINISTRATOR FOR THE ESTATE OF
ESTHER ANN KARTSOTIS PARSONS,
Plaintiff,
VS.
ROBERT M. GREENBERG;
LEGAL SERVICES P.C.,
ROBERT M. GREENBERG, A TIORNEY;
ROBERTE.MOTSENBOCKER
SHAFER, DAVIS, 0 'LEARY & STOKER,
INC. f/kla SHAFER, DAVIS, MCCOLLUM,
ASHLEY, O'LEARY & STOKER, INC.;
LISA A. BLUE BARON AS EXECUTRIX
OF THE ESTATE OF FREDERICK
M. BARON; BARON & BUDD, P.C.;
E. I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND
COMPANY; CONOCOPHILLIPS flkla
CONOCO, INC.;
RONALD WINDLE TURLEY; AND
LAW OFFICES OF WINDLE TURLEY,
P.C., a/kla TURLEY LAW FIRM, P.C.;
Defendants,

IN THE DISTRICT COURT

. '
C)"
r-
!
N
-0
rq' .. "
;a '!t
l
c' 0 -",
TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS
17th JUDICIAL DISTRICT
PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO DISQUALIFY
JUDGE FRED W. DAVIS AND JUDGE MELODY M. WILKINSON
TO THE HONORABLE MELODY M. WILKINSON,
TARRANT COUNTY DISTRICT JUDGE:
Roger K. Parsons, Individually and as the Independent Administrator of the
Estate of Esther Ann Kartsotis Parsons ("Parsons" or "Plaintiff') asks the judge of the
court to disqualify Judge Fred W. Davis and herself from sitting in judgment of this case.
JUDGE FRED W. DAVIS AND MELODY M. WILKINSON - Page 1 of 20
I.
INTRODUCTION
1.01 Plaintiff is Roger K. Parsons ("Parsons"), Individually and as the
Independent Administrator of the Estate of Esther Ann Kartsotis Parsons ("Ann
Parsons").
1.02 Defendants are:
a. Robert M. Greenberg ("Greenberg"), and Legal Services P.C. Robert M.
Greenberg, Attorney ("Legal Services"), referred to collectively as lithe
Greenberg Defendants" herein;
b. Robert E. Motsenbocker ("Motsenbocker"), and Shafer Davis, O'Leary &
Stoker, Inc. f/kla Shafer, Davis, McCollum, Ashley, O'Leary & Stoker, Inc.
("SDO&S"), referred to collectively as lithe Motsenbocker Defendants"
herein;
c. Lisa A. Blue Baron as the Executrix of the Estate of Frederick M. Baron
("Baron") and Baron & Budd, P.C. ("B&B"), referred to collectively as lithe
Baron Defendants" herein;
d. E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company ("DuPont") and ConocoPhillips
("Conoco"), referred to collectively as lithe DuPont/Conoco Defendants"
herein; and
e. Ronald Windle Turley ("Turley") and Law Offices of Windle Turley, P.C.
("LOWf") alkla Turley Law Firm, P.C., referred to collectively as lithe
Turley Defendants" herein.
II.
FACTS
2.01 This case is currently set for a jury trial beginning on October 26, 2009.
2.02 Plaintiff attaches hereto Exhibit A, Affidavit of Roger K. Parsons -
September 2, 2009, and Exhibit A-1 through Exhibit A-10 attached thereto, to establish
facts not apparent from the record and incorporates them herein by reference.
2.03 Plaintiffs former attorneys filed and prosecuted this lawsuit against the
Greenberg Defendants and the Motsenbocker Defendants for damages resulting from
their failure to timely prosecute fraud, breach of fiduciary duty and negligence claims
against the Turley Defendants; and to timely prosecute fraud on the federal court
claims, pursuant to FED.R.CIV.P. 60(b), against both the DuPontlConoco Defendants
and the Turley Defendants. The underlying "cases within the case" arose from the
discovery, in proceedings for a legal malpractice case against the Turley Defendants,
that the Turley Defendants had aided and abetted the Gardere & Wynne, L.L.P.
attorneys representing the DuPontlConoco Defendants in a conspiracy to defraud
Plaintiff and a federal court of evidence needed to decide the merits of Plaintiffs
wrongful death claims against the DuPontlConoco Defendants arising from the wrongful
death of Ann Parsons in the crash of a DuPont-owned and a Conoco-operated
corporate jet in Malaysia on September 4, 1991. The concealed and/or destroyed
evidence showed that the DuPontlConoco Defendants committed fraud against the
federal government before and after the jet crash, concealing evidence of the
companies' pilot's alcoholism and the companies' officers' subjective awareness of the
extreme risk of harm caused by the companies' officers' gross mismanagement.
2.04 In May 2007, when Plaintiff had his initial interview with M. Kevin Queenan
("Queenan") to take over the case, Plaintiff told Queenan that in addition to the claims
asserted in Plaintiffs Original Petition, Plaintiff wanted to hire a lawyer who was willing
to prosecute his claims against the Greenberg Defendants and the Motsenbocker
Defendants that arose from his lawyers' breaches of fiduciary duty and possibly fraud, in
not timely perfecting any of the legal claims that they had been hired to prosecute,
including an independent action, pursuant to FED.R.CIV.P. 60(b), that they
recommended Plaintiff prosecute seeking to set aside the final judgment in the
underlying federal case ("Parsons v. DuPonf') on grounds that newly discovered
evidence showed that the final judgment in Parsons v. DuPont would not have been
obtained, but for collaborative frauds upon the federal court that had been carried by the
DuPont/Conoco Defendants and the Turley Defendants.
2.05 In October 2007, after a five-month review of evidence the 117 file-boxes
of documentary evidence that Plaintiff provided to Queenan, Queenan filed Plaintiffs
First Amended Petition in this case adding breach of fiduciary duty, fraud and other
claims.
2.06 On February 14, 2008, Frederick M. Baron ("Baron") and Baron's wife,
Lisa A. Blue Baron ("Blue"), former Baron & Budd, P.C. ("B&B") President and Secretary
respectively, filed Entry of Appearance as attorneys of record for Greenberg in this
case.
2.07 On March 19,2008, Charla M. G. Aldous ("Aldous"), another former B&B
Director, filed Entry of Appearance as attorney of record for Legal Services P.C., Robert
M. Greenberg, Attorney.
2.08 Between June 6, and September 30, 2008, Judge Fred W. Davis signed
orders blocking Queenan's efforts to obtain admissible evidence needed to prove the
damages that the Greenberg Defendants and the Motsenbocker Defendants had
caused Plaintiff by not timely perfecting Plaintiffs independent action for fraud upon a
federal court against the DuPont/Conoco Defendants and the Turley Defendants.
2.09 Judge Davis' bias against Plaintiffs lawful objectives is exemplified by his
August 11, 2008, order stating that discovery would be limited to evidence showing only
the liability for and damages from the fruitless pursuit of only the legal malpractice
claims against the Turley Defendants. In the same order he signed on August 11, 2008,
Judge Davis ruled to exclude any evidence that could be used to prove the viability
and/or value (recoverable compensatory or punitive damages) of any underlying case
that would have been recovered, but for the actions or inactions of the Greenberg
Defendants and/or the Motsenbocker Defendants. Judge Davis stated:
"By Order entered June 6, 2008, the Court has previously granted
Defendants Robert E. Motsenbocker's and Shafer, Davis, O'Leary &
Stoker, P.C.'s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment and has ordered that
Plaintiff take nothing on his claims for lost punitive damages. Based upon
that ruling, the Court finds that the only alleged damages the Plaintiff is
entitled to recover in this case are the attorneys fees and expenses that
he paid to the Defendants and all other expenses Plaintiff paid to others,
including but not limited to, expert witness fees and investigator fees and
expenses in pursuing his claims against Windle Turley. Based upon the
Court's rulings, insofar as the proffered testimony of Plaintiffs proposed
experts are not relevant to Plaintiffs claims against these Defendants,
such testimony should be excluded at the trial of the case."
2.10 However, Judge Davis' June 6, 2008, order only granted the defendants'
motion for partial summary judgment relating only to the recoverability of lost punitive
damages arising from one cause of action, legal malpractice. Defendants' attorney's
fictitiously misconstrued the scope of Judge Davis' ruling in subsequent pleadings they
filed to obtain orders, like the one on August 11, 2008, in which Judge Davis dictates
that evidence Plaintiff requires to prove his damages claims is "irrelevant." Thereby
Judge Davis acted contrary to Texas law cutting off all discovery of evidence required to
prove the damages caused to Plaintiff through the loss of the two underlying cases
within this case.
1
Facts Relating to Grounds for Disqualifying Judge Fred W. Davis
2.11 After Judge Davis signed his order on August 11, 2008, Parsons began an
investigation into the underlying causes for what Parsons believed was an illogical
ruling, based upon the layman's understanding of Texas law he had developed in the
seventeen years he had devoted to the discovery and prosecution of his and his wife's
estate's the legal claims. Parsons did not tell Queenan about his investigation, however
Parsons instructed Queenan to prepare and file a mandamus action for relief from
Judge Davis' rulings oppressing Plaintiff's right to conduct discovery. Parsons also
instructed Queenan to prepare and file an amended petition, based upon new evidence
Parsons had discovered and provided to Queenan showing why the wave of former
B&B officers/attorneys (the Barons and Aldous) were suddenly making appearances on
behalf of the Greenberg Defendants, and showing that there was justification for joining
the Baron Defendants, under a liability of respondeat superior for the breaches of
fiduciary duty against Plaintiff by the Baron Defendants' employees - the Greenberg
Defendants and the Motsenbocker Defendants; and that there was justification for
joining the DuPont/Conoco Defendants and the Turley Defendants, under a liability
theory of unjust enrichment through unexercised liability insurance instruments that
were purchased specifically to cover Plaintiff's damages claims in the underlying cases
1 Mark Hackett v. Littlepage and Booth, Littlepage and Associates, P. C. and Michles &
Booth, No. 03-08-00056-CV (Tex. App.-Austin Third District, 2009) 2009 Tex. App. LEXIS
1166 and Brian Simon v. D. Miller & Associates, PLLC, Timothy John Clyne, Jamilah O. Driver,
and Ryan Bradley Bormaster, No. 14-07-000894-CV (Tex. App.-Houston, Fourteenth District,
2009) Tex. App. LEXIS 989.
against them for fraud upon a federal court, pursuant to FED.R.CIV.P. 60(b) ("the fraud
upon the federal court case").
2.12 In the hearing before Judge Davis on October 31, 2008, Judge Davis
interrogated Queenan about what he knew about Parsons' open records requests for
the personal financial statements of Judge Davis' wife, who serves as a Tarrant County
Justice of the Peace. Judge Davis insisted that Queenan ask Parsons why he wanted
this information. Judge Davis allowed Queenan a few minutes after the hearing to
confer with Parsons before reporting back to Judge Davis in his office. In his conference
with Queenan outside Judge Davis' courtroom, Parsons told Queenan why he was
gathering the information on the financial circumstances of Judge Davis' family, but that
Parsons had not yet received responses to any of his open records requests for the
personal financial reports filed with the Tarrant County Clerk by Judge Davis' wife, and
therefore could not answer the questions Judge Davis posed to Queenan in the hearing:
" ... are there any issues here that I'm not aware of that I need to be aware of ... " " ... 1 just
want to know if there is anything that I need to know about. .. " (October 31, 2008,
Hearing Transcript, pg. 5, In. 2-4 and 22-24, Exhibit 4, to Exhibit A-1, to Exhibit A,
Affidavit of Roger K. Parsons - September 2, 2009.) Parsons was never advised what
was said in the meeting between the attorneys in Judge Davis' office after the hearing.
2.13 On December 15, 2008, Parsons received a letter from Queenan (Exhibit
5, to Exhibit A-1, to Exhibit A, Affidavit of Roger K. Parsons - September 2, 2009).
Under the circumstances, Parsons believed that Queenan's letter was an extrajudicial
threat issued by Judge Davis that unless Parsons stopped his investigation of Judge
Davis' family's financial dealings, Judge Davis would retaliate against Parsons by
denying Plaintiff recovery on the only damages claims Judge Davis was allowing to go
forward after signing his August 11, 2008, order - disgorgement of approximately $1
million in fees and expenses Parsons paid out-of-pocket to or on behalf of the
Greenberg Defendants and the Motsenbocker Defendants during the eight years they
worked on Parsons' cases. On information and belief of the circumstances and timing of
Queenan's letter, Parsons suspected that in the meeting between the lawyers in Judge
Davis' office after the hearing on October 31, 2008, Judge Davis told Queenan to
deliver this treat to Parsons under the ruse of it being "legal advise."
2.14 Immediately after receiving Queenan's December 15, 2008, letter, and
Queenan's notice that he would not file an amended petition adding the new defendants
because he had a conflict of interest, Parsons drafted Plaintiffs Third Amended Petition
and filed it pro se on at 8:05 a.m. on December 22, 2008. A file-stamped copy of
Plaintiffs Third Amended Petition was hand-delivered to Queenan just before an
emergency hearing requested by the Greenberg Defendants at 9:00 a.m. that morning.
2.15 At the hearing Queenan told the attorneys and Judge Davis that I had filed
Plaintiffs Third Amended Petition pro se that morning and that the Baron Defendants,
the DuPontlConoco Defendants and the Turley Defendants had been joined as
defendants. (December 22, 2008, Hearing Transcript pg. 4, In. 21-25 and pg. 5, In. 1-8,
Exhibit A-2, to Exhibit A, Affidavit of Roger K. Parsons - September 2, 2009.)
"Morning, Your Honor. Kevin Queenan. I represent Roger Parsons. For
purposes of additional information for the Court, Mr. Parsons filed a third
amended petition at 8:05 this morning adding Fred Baron, the estate of
Fred Baron, DuPont, Conoco, Windle Turley and the Law Offices of
Windle Turley. I do not represent Mr. Parsons in connection with those
claims. He handed me this petition this morning and said that as a pro se
plaintiff, he was amenable to whatever to whatever the parties agreed to
or obviously whatever the Judge ruled on, but I want to make sure that the
for the purposes of my representation, that I represent Mr. Parsons for the
claims that were on file in the second amended petition."
2.16 At the end of the hearing on December 22, 2008, Judge Davis
acknowledged his understanding that Plaintiff's Third Amended Petition had made the
"new case" far more complex than the case upon which he had made his prior rulings,
stating " ... as far as the new lawsuit is concerned ... " ... 1 don't know if this is a smoke
screen. I don't know what it is. It's very strange. Until- until that situation works its way
out, I'm not going to worry about it." (December 22, 2008, Hearing Transcript pg. 15, In.
10-16, Exhibit A-2, to Exhibit A, Affidavit of Roger K. Parsons - September 2, 2009.)
Nevertheless, in oral ruling that he never followed up with a written order, Judge Davis
set the trial date for the "new case" as October 26, 2009. Judge Davis retired from the
bench nine days later on December 31, 2008.
2.17 At a hearing held on February 11, 2009, Judge Melody M. Wilkinson, who
replaced Judge Davis as the judge of the 1 th District Court, granted Queenan's motion
to withdraw as Plaintiff's attorney at the beginning of the hearing, and signed an agreed
scheduling order that was based upon Judge Davis' December 22, 2008, verbal ruling
setting the trail date for October 26,2009.
2.18 Although Judge Wilkinson had language included in the agreed
scheduling order that delayed the defendants barraging Plaintiff with discovery requests
until March 13, 2009, to give Parsons an opportunity to retain attorneys to handle his
complex case, Parsons knew from his seventeen years of experience hiring attorneys in
Texas that the month-long delay would not be sufficient time to interview and educate
prospective attorneys about the complex case one-on-one, and to conduct a conflict of
interest investigation on any attorneys who showed interest in taking on the complex
case against the celebrity attorneys at the Baron Defendants and the Turley Defendants
alleging that these famous attorneys had conspired to defraud their clients by intentional
breaches of the fiduciary duties that they owed their clients. Consequently, Parsons
developed a web site to provide interested attorneys with enough information about the
case for them to make an informed decision on their interest in the case and an
informed determination of any potential conflicts of interest that Parsons stated he
wanted to be advised about before Parsons would hire them. Although Parsons has
spent thousands of dollars each month to advertise his attorney-solicitation website in
print and online media throughout the United States, the only attorneys who have
showed any interest in taking on this complex case have conflicts of interest that
prohibit them from being zealous advocates for Plaintiffs claims.
2.19 In April 2009, Parsons obtained a copy of Judge Davis' 2008 Personal
Financial Statement from the Texas Ethics Commission ("TEC") (Exhibit 6, to Exhibit
A-1, to Exhibit A, Affidavit of Roger K. Parsons - September 2, 2009.) Judge Davis'
2008 Personal Financial Statement revealed that Judge Davis had filed a sworn
declaration that section Part 7B pertaining to his "Interests in Business Entities" was
"NOT APPLICABLE" to him. The timing and circumstances of Judge Davis' formation of
a business entity engaged in business activities Judge Davis has no prior training or
experience; Judge Davis' contemporaneously rulings in this case, based upon fictitious
pleadings filed by Joseph W. Spence ("Spence") and R. H. Wallace ("Wallace"),
attorneys currently associated with Shannon, Gracey, Ratliff & Miller, L.L.P. ("SGR&M");
and, Judge Davis' lying in an affidavit about his interest in the company he owns. Based
upon the discoveries made in his investigation of Judge Davis, Parsons filed a sworn
complaint on June 3,2009, with the TEC. (Exhibit A-1, to Exhibit A, Affidavit of Roger K.
Parsons - September 2, 2009.)2
2.20 Beginning on April 6, 2009, with the DuPont/Conoco Defendants' motion
to dismiss, and through to August 28, 2009, the deadline under the current scheduling
order for filing pretrial motions, with the DuPont/Conoco Defendants' and the Greenberg
Defendants' motions for summary judgment, Parsons has been barraged by motions to
dismiss and motions for summary judgment. Within six months of signing the scheduling
order on February 11, 2009, that were based upon Judge Davis' December 22, 2008,
oral trial setting for October 26,2009, Judge Wilkinson has:
a. denied Plaintiff's motion for continuance of hearings on Defendants'
motions for summary judgment (July 23, 2009);
b. denied Plaintiff's motion for leave of court to amend petition (July 24,
2009) (Exhibit A-10-a and Exhibit 10-b, Affidavit of Roger K. Parsons -
September 2, 2009);
c. granted the DuPont/Conoco Defendants' motion to dismiss (July 24,
2009);
d. granted the Baron Defendants' motions for summary judgment (July 24,
2009);
e. granted the Greenberg Defendants' motions for summary judgment (July
24,2009);
f. granted the Motsenbocker Defendants' motions for summary judgment
(July 24, 2009); and
g. granted the Turley Defendants' motions for summary judgment (August
17,2009).
2 Exhibit A-1, to Exhibit A, Affidavit of Roger K. Parsons - September 2, 2009, was made
part of the record in this case as Exhibit A-23, Affidavit of Roger K. Parsons - August 11, 2009,
attached as Exhibit A, Plaintiff's Amended Response to the Turley Defendants' Motions for
Summary Judgment and No Evidence Summary Judgment that is attached to Plaintiff's Motion
for Leave of Court to File Plaintiff's Amended Response to the Turley Defendants' Motions for
Summary Judgment and No Evidence Summary Judgment filed on August 11, 2009.
JUDGE FRED W. DAVIS AND MELODY M. WILKINSON - Page 11 of20
2.21 In his pleadings and oral arguments in response to Defendants' motions
for summary judgment and motions to dismiss, Parsons has repeatedly point out to the
court that the defendants attorneys had filed fictitious pleadings misrepresenting that the
only damages Plaintiff was seeking were the punitive damages lost only by legal
malpractice by the Turley Defendants, and then lost again only by legal malpractice by
the Greenberg Defendants and the Motsenbocker Defendants. Parsons has repeatedly
directed the courts attention to Plaintiffs Third Amended Petition that clearly articulates
that Plaintiffs damages claims include lost compensatory damages from two underlying
fraud cases, and clearly articulates that Plaintiffs liability claims in this case arise from
fraud and intentional breaches of the fiduciary duties that the Baron Defendants, the
Greenberg Defendants and the Motsenbocker Defendants owed to Plaintiff. However,
the court appears to have turned a blind-eye to Parsons' written and oral pleadings.
Facts Relating to Grounds for Disqualifying Judge Melody M. Wilkinson
2.22 On August 18, 2009, Parsons began an investigation into the background
and financial dealings of Judge Wilkinson. Parsons investigation included a reviewing
information in the 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2007 and 2008 Personal Financial
Statements Judge Wilkinson filed with the TEe; information on federal asbestos cases
for which Judge Wilkinson continues to act as defense counsel of record in
Pennsylvania while simultaneously sitting in judgment over claims of breach of fiduciary
duty and fraud against B&B and B&B corporate officers arising from allegations of
claims-trading between asbestos plaintiffs' and asbestos defendants' attorneys;
information on federal cases for which the Motsenbocker Defendants attorneys at
SGR&M have common interests with Judge Wilkinson; and information from Tarrant
County District Clerk records.
2.23 Parsons' review of the 1998, 1999, 2000 and 2001 Personal Financial
Statements Judge Wilkinson filed with the TEC (Respectively, Exhibit A-3-a, A-3-b, A-3-
c and A-3-d, to Exhibit A, Affidavit of Roger K. Parsons - September 2, 2009) found that
Judge Wilkinson was a partner in Cantey & Hanger, L.L.P. ("C&H") between 1998 and
2001 inclusive. Parsons' search of Tarrant County District Clerk records showed that
Judge Wilkinson remained at C&H until at least January 6, 2004. (Exhibit A-4, Affidavit
of Roger K. Parsons - September 2, 2009).
2.24 On February 9, 2007, C&H was sued by the trustee for the bankrupt Forth
Worth Osteopathic Hospital, Inc. ("FWOH") (Exhibit A-5-a and Exhibit A-5-b, Affidavit of
Roger K. Parsons - September 2, 2009) Adversary Proceeding # 07-04015 in the
United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth Division)
alleging breach of fiduciary duty, assisting or encouraging breaches of fiduciary duty,
unjust enrichment, conspiracy, trust fund liability and professional negligence by C&H
between 1999 and 2004, while C&H was employed as general corporate counsel for
FWOH, and while Judge Wilkinson shared in the C&W partnership profits.
2.25 On March 29, 2007, while serving simultaneously as counsel of record for
the Motsenbocker Defendants and for C&H, SGR&M attorney Wallace countersued the
FWOH bankruptcy trustee in Adams, et a/. v. Brown, Case No. 4:07-cv-00206-Y in the
United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth Division.
(Exhibit A-6, Affidavit of Roger K. Parsons - September 2, 2009)
2.26 SGR&M generally, and Wallace specifically, represent Judge Wilkinson's
pecuniary and personal financial interests in defeating a pending lawsuit that seeks to
recover C&H partnership distributions that unjustly enriched Judge Wilkinson and other
C&H partners, while C&H allegedly breached fiduciary duties owed to FWOH, assisted
or encouraged breaches of fiduciary duties that FWOH directors owed to FWOH, was
unjustly enriched by legal fees paid by FWOH, conspired with FWOH directors in
entrenchment and self-dealing to delay seeking bankruptcy protection that could have
saved FWOH from total ruin. Wallace and Judge Wilkinson know that in the FWOH
lawsuit Wallace is defending Judge Wilkinson's pecuniary and personal interests
against many of the same claims that Wallace is defending against in this lawsuit.
2.27 By March 10, 2004, Judge Wilkinson was entering appearances as
counsel for defendant A. W. Chesterton Company in many asbestos cases in both
federal and state courts. (Exhibit A-7-a, Exhibit A-7-b, Exhibit 7-c and Exhibit 7-d,
Affidavit of Roger K. Parsons - September 2, 2009) However, at this time, Judge
Wilkinson was employed as "Managing Attorney -- Fort Worth office" of the large
Boston, Massachusetts firm Cooley Manion Jones, L.L.P. ("CMJ,,).3 (Exhibit 3-e and
Exhibit 7 -f, Affidavit of Roger K. Parsons - September 2, 2009)
2.28 No later than December 28, 2007, Judge Wilkinson became opposing
counsel in asbestos litigation brought by the Baron Defendants in Case No. 4:07-cv-
04569 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston
Division, that was eventually transferred to Case No. 2:08-cv-73898-ER in the United
3 Because Judge Wilkinson did not file Personal Financial Statements with the TEC for
the years 2002 through 2006, inclusive, it is unknown if she held the title "Managing Attorney-
Fort Worth office" at CMJ between 2002 and 2006, as she later reported in her 2007 and 2008
Personal Financial Statements filed with the TEe.
~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia Division.
(Exhibit A-8-a and Exhibit A-8-b, Affidavit of Roger K. Parsons - September 2, 2009) In
this case and numerous others Judge Wilkinson remains to this day counsel of record
for A. W. Chesterton Company.4
2.29 On July 30, 2009, shortly after she granted the Baron Defendants motions
for summary judgment on July 24, 2009, Judge Wilkinson withdrew as counsel of record
for A. W. Chesterton Company in a pending case (Case No. 2-09-cv-71554-ER in
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia
Division). However, Judge Wilkinson remains as counsel for A. W. Chesterton in many
other asbestos cases still pending in Pennsylvania federal courts, including the one in
which she will now be in a position to negotiate a favorable settlement agreement with
the Baron Defendants.
5
(Exhibit A-9-a and Exhibit A-9-b, Affidavit of Roger K. Parsons-
September 2, 2009)
5 The attorney who substituted for Judge Wilkinson is a partner in Naman, Howell, Smith
& Lee, L.L.P. ("NHS&L"), the firm that Judge Wilkinson reports in her 2008 Personal Financial
Statement employed her in the same capacity CMJ had employed her, "Managing Attorney -
Fort Worth office." Exhibit A-9-a, shows that Judge Wilkinson used as a contact address in her
capacity as a CMJ employee the same address and telephone number (100 East 15
th
Street,
Suite 320, Fort Worth, Texas 76102-6565,817.870.1996), that listed for the Fort Worth offices
of NHS&L. (See http://www.namanhowell.com/fortworth.htm) Obviously, NHS&L was acting as
a front for a temporary CMJ operation in Texas that, according to records maintained by the
Texas Secretary of State, did not renew its registration as a limited liability partnership in 2008.
Apparently Judge Wilkinson and NHS&L represent A. W. Chesterton Company in defending the
numerous asbestos cases in Pennsylvania for which she remains counsel of record, while
simultaneously serving as a judge on a case against the Baron Defendants alleging conspiracy
to defraud, breaching fiduciary duties, and aiding and abetting the breaching of fiduciary duties
against clients of the Baron Defendants' captive/corporate counsels, the Greenberg Defendants
and the Motsenbocker Defendants.
III.
ARGUMENT & AUTHORITIES
3.01 Plaintiff incorporates mI 2.01-2.29 here, as if fully stated at length herein.
3.02 Under Texas Constitution article 5, section 11, a judge is disqualified from
sitting in judgment when the case is one in which the judge "may be interested." Tex.
Const. art. 5, 11; see Cameron v. Greenhill, 582 S.W.2d 775, 776 (Tex. 1979). The
interest must be a direct pecuniary or personal interest in the result of the case. See
Cameron, 582 S.W.2d at 776. Once an interest is established, the judge is disqualified
no matter how slight the interest. Gulf Marine Warehouse Co. v. Towers, 858 S.W.2d
556, 558 (Tex. App.-Beaumont 1993, writ denied). The facts demonstrated by the
evidence presented in mI 2.11-2.19 show Judge Davis' direct pecuniary or personal
interests in the results of this case. The facts demonstrated by the evidence presented
in ~ 1 l 2.22-2.29 show that Judge Wilkinson's direct pecuniary or personal interests in
the results of this case.
3.03 Under Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 18b(1), a judge is disqualified from
sitting in judgment when the judge knows that, individually or as a fiduciary, the judge
has an interest in the subject matter in controversy. Tex. R. Civ. P. 18b(1)(b).
3.04 The facts demonstrated by the evidence presented in ~ 1 l 2 . 1 1 - 2 . 1 9 show
Judge Davis' knowledge that, individually or as a fiduciary, he has an interest in the
subject matter in controversy. The facts demonstrated by the evidence presented in mI
2.22-2.29 show Judge Wilkinson's knowledge that, individually or as a fiduciary, she
has an interest in the subject matter in controversy.
JUDGE FRED W. DAVIS AND MELODY M. WILKINSON - Page 16 of20
IV.
NOTICE TO OTHER PARTIES
4.01 A copy of this motion is served on the other parties on the same day this
motion is filed. Plaintiff expects the motion to disqualify to be presented to Judge
Melody M. Wilkinson three days after it is filed, unless Judge Melody M. Wilkinson
orders otherwise. Tex. R. Civ. P. 18a(b).
V.
CONCLUSION
5.01 Based upon Plaintiff's information and belief that has been derived
through diligent investigation, Plaintiff must regrettably make this motion to disqualify
Judge Davis and Judge Wilkinson from sitting in judgment of this case.
5.02 The facts that are supported by the evidence presented herein shows that
Judge Davis and Judge Wilkinson each have direct pecuniary or personal interests in
the results of this case. Consequently, pursuant to Texas Constitution article 5, section
11, Judge Davis and Judge Wilkinson are disqualified from sitting in judgment in this
case.
5.03 The facts that are supported by the evidence presented herein shows that
Judge Davis and Judge Wilkinson know that, individually or as a fiduciary, they have an
interest in the subject matter in controversy in this case. Consequently, pursuant to
Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 18b(1), Judge Davis and Judge Wilkinson are disqualified
from sitting in judgment in this case.
VI.
PRAYER
For these reasons, Plaintiff asks the judge of the court either to disqualify herself,
and request that the presiding judge of this administrative judicial district assign another
judge to this case, or in the alternative, to refer this motion to the presiding judge of this
administrative district for a hearing on the motion.
Respectfully submitted,
~ ;1' '\)
By: . . . - ~ ~ \ ' - ' ' - - 1"-- " "--.,-'U-v-
Roger K:'-Parsons
P.M.B.739
2520 Avenue K, Suite 700
Plano, Texas 75074
(214) 649-8059
(972) 295-2776 (FAX)
PRO SE FOR PLAINTIFF
VERIFICATION
STATE OF TEXAS

COUNTY OF COLLIN
Before me, the undersigned notary, on this day appeared Roger K. Parsons,
Plaintiff in the above numbered and entitled cause of action, the affiant and a person
whose identity is known to me. After I administered an oath to affiant, affiant testified:
"My name is Roger K. Parsons. I am capable of making this verification. The
facts I have stated in the section 'I. INTRODUCTION' and the section 'II. FACTS' of my
Plaintiffs Motion to Disqualify Judge Fred W. Davis and Judge Melody M. Wilkinson are
within my personal knowledge and are true and correct."
Roger k. "Parsons
SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED BEFORE ME by the said Roger K. Parsons, on
this the 2
nd
day of September, 2009, to certify which witness my hand and seal of office.
MALIK M AHMED
Notary Public. State of Texas
My Commission Expires
Jyly 13. _?011
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
hereby certify that on September 2, 2009, a true and correct copy of the
foregoing document was served on the following counsel of record:
Jim Ross
Jim Ross & Associates, P.C.
420 E. Lamar Blvd. Suite 110
Arlington, Texas 76011
Counsel for Robert M. Greenberg, and
Legal Services, P.C. Robert M. Greenberg, Attorney
R. H. Wallace
Monika T. Cooper
Shannon, Gracey, Ratliff & Miller, L.L.P.
777 Main Street, Suite 3800
Fort Worth, Texas 76102-5304
Counsel for Robert E. Motsenbocker, and Shafer, Davis, O'Leary & Stoker, Inc.
William D. Cobb, Jr.
Cobb Martinez Woodward, P.L.L.C.
1700 Pacific Avenue, Suite 4545
Dallas, Texas 75201
Counsel for the Estate of Frederick M. Baron and Baron & Budd, P.C.
Martin E. Rose
Tammy H. Cole
Rose-Walker, L.L.P.
3500 Maple Avenue, Suite 900
Dallas, Texas 75219
Counsel for E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company and
ConocoPhillips f/kla Conoco, Inc.
Richard L. Smith, Jr.
Quilling, Selander, Cummiskey & Lownds, P.C.
2001 Bryan Street, Suite 1800
Dallas, Texas 75201
Counsel for Ronald Windle Turley and
Law Offices of Windle Turley, P.C. alkla Turley Law Firm, P.C.
Roger K. Parsons
EXHIBIT A
No. 017-217971-06
Plaintiff,
VS.

COMPANY; CONOCOPHILLIPS f/kla
CONOCO, INC.;
Defendants,

AFFIDAVIT OF ROGER K. PARSONS - SEPTEMBER 2. 2009
STATE OF TEXAS
COUNTY OF COLIN
Before me, the undersigned notary, on this day personally appeared Roger K.
Parsons, the affiant, a person whose identity is known to me. After I administered an
oath to affiant, affiant testified:
AFFIDAVIT OF ROGER K. PARSONS - SEPTEMBER 2, 2009 - Page 1 of 4
1. My name is Roger K. Parsons. I am over eighteen (18) years of age, I have
never been convicted of a felony, and I am of sound mind. I am competent to
testify to the matters stated herein and I am capable of making this affidavit. The
facts stated in this affidavit are within my personal knowledge and are true and
correct.
2. I am the Pro Se Plaintiff in this lawsuit.
3. On or about August 11, 2008, I began an investigation into the financial dealings
and circumstances of Judge Fred W. Davis ("Judge Davis").
4. I did not tell my former attorney, M. Kevin Queenan ("Queenan") about my
investigation of Judge Davis until Queenan asked me about my investigation at
the request of Judge Davis during a hearing in my case on October 31, 2008.
5. Exhibit A-1, attached hereto, is a true and correct copy of my business records of
all correspondence I have had with the TEC relating to the complaint I filed on
June 3, 2009, regarding Judge Davis. I made these business records part of the
record in my case as Exhibit A-23, to Exhibit A, Affidavit of Roger K. Parsons-
August 11, 2009, that was attached to Plaintiffs Amended Response to the
Turley Defendants' Motions for Summary Judgment and No Evidence Summary
Judgment, attached to Plaintiffs Motion for Leave of Court to File Plaintiffs
Amended Response to the Turley Defendants' Motions for Summary Judgment
and No Evidence Summary Judgment that I filed pro se on August 11, 2009.
6. Exhibit A-2, attached hereto, is a true and correct copy of the original transcript
for the December 22, 2008, hearing in my case that I paid Queenan to have
Shelley S. Curtis (CSR 4557), Deputy Official Court Reporter, 1th Judicial
District Court, to prepare, and that I located in Queenan's 23-box case-file
passed into my custody on March 16,2009.
7. On or about August 18, 2009, I began an investigation into the background and
financial dealings of Judge Melody M. Wilkinson ("Judge Wilkinson").
8. Exhibits A-3-a, A-3-b, A-3-c, A-3-d, A-3-e and A-3-f, attached hereto, are
respectively true and correct copies of 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2007 and
2008 Personal Financial Statements Judge Wilkinson has filed with the TEC that
I paid the TEC to send me on August 18, 2009.
9. Exhibit A-4, attached hereto, is a true and correct copy of the Plaintiffs Notice of
Non-Suit for Cause No. 048-192177-02 in the 48
th
District Court of Tarrant
County, Texas, that I downloaded from the Tarrant County District Clerk Judicial
Information Management System ("JIMS") on or about August 31, 2009.
10. Exhibit A-5-a and Exhibit A-5-b, attached hereto, are respectively a true and
correct copy of Docket Report and Original Complaint (Document No.1) for
Adversary Proceeding # 07-04015 in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the
Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth Division, that I downloaded from the
federal Public Access to Court Electronic Records ("PACER") information system
on or about August 26, 2009.
11. Exhibit A-6, attached hereto, is a true and correct copy of Docket Report for Case
# 4:07-cv-00206-Y in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
Texas, Fort Worth Division, that I downloaded from the federal Public Access to
Court Electronic Records ("PACER") information system on or about August 26,
2009.
12. Exhibit A-7-a, attached hereto, is a true and correct copy of the listing of cases in
which Judge Wilkinson has appeared as counsel of record in Tarrant County,
Texas, that downloaded from the Tarrant County District Clerk Judicial
Information Management System ("JIMS") on September 1, 2009.
13. Exhibit A-7 -b, attached hereto, is a true and correct copy of the listing of cases in
which "Melody M. Wilkinson" is listed as a party or as an attorney in cases before
United States federal court, that I downloaded from the federal Public Access to
2009.
14. Exhibit A-7-c, attached hereto, is a true and correct copy of Defendant A.w.
Chesterion's Motion for Substitution of Counsel for Cause No. 017-191174-02 in
the 17th District Court of Tarrant County, Texas, that I downloaded from the
Tarrant County District Clerk Judicial Information Management System ("JIMS")
on or about August 31, 2009.
15. Exhibit A-7-d, attached hereto, is a true and correct copy of Defendant A.w.
Chesterian's Motion for Substitution of Counsel (Document No. 77) for Case #
4:03-cv-01164-G in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
Texas, Fort Worth Division, that I downloaded from the federal Public Access to
2009.
16. Exhibit A-8-a, attached hereto, is a true and correct copy of Docket Report for
Case # 4:07-cv-04569 in the United States District Court for the Southern District
of Texas, Houston Division, that I downloaded from the federal Public Access to
2009.
17. Exhibit A-8-b, attached hereto, is a true and correct copy of Docket Report for
Case # 2:08-cv-73898-ER in the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia Division, that I downloaded from the federal
Public Access to Court Electronic Records ("PACER") information system on or
about August 29, 2009.
AFFIDAVIT OF ROGER K. PARSONS - SEPTEMBER 2,2009 - Page 3 of 4
correct copy of Docket Report and Notice of Substitution of Counsel (Document
No.5) for Case # 2:09-cv-71554-ER in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania,
Philadelphia Division, that I downloaded from the federal Public Access to Court
Electronic Records ("PACER") information system on or about August 29, 2009.
correct copy of Plaintiffs Motion for Leave of Court to Amend Petition and
Plaintiffs Sixth Amended Petition that was attached thereto, that I filed pro se on
July 16, 2009.
20. Further, affiant sayeth not.
Roger K. Parsons
Subscriber and sworn to before the undersigned Texas notary public on the 2
nd
day of September 2009.
\
Notary Public, State of Texas
No. 017-217971-06
Plaintiff,
VS.
COMPANY; CONOCOPHILLIPS f/kla
CONOCO, INC.;
Defendants,

ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO DISQUALIFY
After considering the motion by Pro Se Plaintiff Roger K. Parsons, Individually
and as Independent Administrator of the Estate of Esther Ann Kartsotis Parsons, titled
Plaintiffs Motion to Disqualify Judge Fred W Davis and Judge Melody M. Wilkinson, the
responses, the pleadings, and the affidavits, the trial judge
JUDGE FRED W. DAVIS AND JUDGE MELODY M. WILKINSON - Page 1 of 2
AGREES (1) that Judge Fred W. Davis, was disqualified from sitting in judgment
in this case, (2) to disqualify herself from hearing this case, and (3) to request that the
presiding judge of this administrative judicial district assign another judge to preside
over this case.
SIGNED on ______ , 2009.
PRESIDING JUDGE
JUDGE FRED W. DAVIS AND JUDGE MELODY M. WILKINSON - Page 2 of 2
No. 017-217971-06
Plaintiff,
VS.
ROBERT M. GREENBERG, ATTORNEY;
ROBERT E. MOTSENBOCKER
SHAFER, DAVIS, O'LEARY & STOKER,
INC . flkla SHAFER, DAVIS, MCCOLLUM,
ASHLEY, O' LEARY & STOKER, INC.;
COMPANY; CONOCOPHILLIPS fIKIa
coNoco, tNC.;
I-.AW OFFICES OF WINDLE TURLEY,
P.C., alklaTURLEY LAW FIRM, P.C.;
Defendants,
17Th JUDICIAL DISTRICT
PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT IN OPPOSITION TO THE TURLEY DEFENDANTS'
REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS
Roger K. Parsons, Individually and as the Independent Administrator of the
Estate of Esther Ann Kartsotis Parsons ("Parsons" or "Plaintiff') files this Plaintitrs
Statement in Opposition to the Turley Defendanfs'Reguest for Sanctions and would ask
this Court to deny the request for sanctions by Ronald Windle Turley and Law Offices of
lA/indle Turley, P.C. alkla Turley Law Firm.
-
Page 1 of 10
t.
INTRODUCTION
1.01 Plaintiff is Roger K. Parsons ("Parsons"), Individually and as the
Independent Administrator of the Estate of Esther Ann Kartsotis Parsons ('Ann
Parsons"). The defendants, referred to collectively as "the Defendants" herein, are:
a. Robert M. Greenberg ("Greenberg"), and Legal Services P.C. Robert M.
Greenberg, Attorney ("Legal Services"), referred to collectively as "the
Greenberg Defendants" herein;
b. Robert E. Motsenbocker ("Motsenbocker"), and Shafer Davis, O'Leary &
Stoker, lnc.flkla Shafer, Davis, Mccollum, Ashley, O'Leary & Stoker, Inc.
("SDO&S"), referred to collectively as
'the
Motsenbocker Defendants"
herein;
c. Lisa A. Blue Baron as the Executrix of the Estate of Frederick M. Baron
('Baron") and Baron & Budd, P.C. ("8&B"), referred to collectively as'the
Baron Defendants" herein;
d. E. l. du Pont de Nemours and Company ("DuPonf') and ConocoPhillips
("Gonoco"), referred to collectively as "the DuPonUConoco Defendants"
herein; and
e. Ronald \Mndle Turley ("Turley") and Law Offices of \Mndle Turley, P.C.
("LOWT") akla Turley Law Firm, P.G., referred to collectively as "the
Turley Defendants" herein.
1.02 Plaintiff sued the Defendants asserting claims against various defendants
for conspiracy to defraud, fraud, breach of fiduciary duty and other derivative claims to
these claims, including unjust enrichment constructive trust.
1.03 On September 2,2009, Plaintiff filed Plaintiffs Motion to Disqualify Judge
Fred W. Davis and Judge Melody M. Wlkinson based upon evidence that he had
discovered as he testified to tn Affidavit of Roger K. Parsons
-
Sepfember 2, 2009,
attached to his motion as ExhibitA.
-
Page 2 of 10
1.04 To establish facts not apparent from the record, Plaintiff incorporates
herein by reference Exhibit A, Affidavit of Roger K. Parsons
-
Sepfember 2, 2009,
attached to Plaintiffs Motion to Disqualify Judge Frcd W. Davis and Judge Melody M.
Wlkinsoni and ExhibitB, Affidavit of Roger K. Parsons
-
Sepfember 16, 2009, attached
to Plaintiffs Combined Supplemental Evidence as to Plaintiffs Motion to Disqualify
Judges Fred W. Davis and Melody M. Wlkinson, and Plaintiffs Statement in Opposition
to the Turley Defendanfs'Reguest for Sancfibns filed with this Court on September 16,
2009; and Exhibits A-1 through A-10, and Exhibits B-1 through B-8, that are attached to
Exhibits A and B respectively.
1.05 On September 9, 2009, Plaintiff was served with The Turley Defendants'
Statement Opposing Plaintiffs Motion to Disqualify and Reguesf for Sanctions. Plaintiff
subsequently continued his investigation into the financial dealings and circumstances
of Judge Melody M. \Mlkinson ("Judge \Mlkinson"), and discovered additional evidence,
supporting his motion, and this Plaintiffs Statement in Opposition to the Turley
Defendants' Request for Sancfibns. (See Exhibit B, Affidavit of Roger K. Parsons
-
Sepfembe r 1 6, 2009,
ll2.\
1.06 Plaintiffs information and belief is that the new evidence establishes that
Judge \Mlkinson has pecuniary interests in the outcome of this litigation through her
business associations with the American International Group, Inc. ('AlG") and/or
individuafs employed by or affiliated with AlG. AIG was identified in Plaintiffs Fifth
Amended Petition and Plaintiffs Sixth Amended Petition (Exhibit A-10-b to Exhibit A,
Affidavit of Roger K Parsons
-
Sepfember 2, 2009) as having issued insurance policies
to pay the specific
judgment
debts that would have been awarded on Plaintiffs
-
Page 3 of 10
underlying claims against the DuPonUConoco Defendants and the Turley Defendants
for fraud upon a federal court, pursuant to FED.R.CIV.PROC. 60(b), but for breaches of
fi d uciary d uty and frauds by Baron/Greenberg/Motsenbocker Defendants.
l l .
ADDITIONAL FACTS
2.01 The 2008 Personal Financial Statement that Judge \Mlkinson filed with the
Texas Ethics Commission ("TEG") shows that Judge \Mlkinson was Managing Attorney
for the Fort Worth office of Naman, Howell, Smith & Lee, L.L.P. ('NHS&L') (Exhibit B-1
to Exhibit B, Affidavit of Roger K. Parcons
-
Sepfember 16, 2009.)
2.02 The recent Martindale-Hubbell@ Lawyers.comsM profile for NHS&L
advertises that AIG is a major client of NHS&L. (Exhibit B-2 to Exhibit B, Affidavit of
Roger K. Parsons
-
September 16, 2009.)
2.03 Judge \Mlkinson remains counsel of record forA. W. Chesterton Company
in numerous asbestos liability cases, including cases brought by the Baron Defendants.
(Exhibit A-8-a, Exhibit A-8-b, A-9-a and Exhibit A-g-b, Affidavit of Roger K. Parcons
-
September 2, 2009) Judge Wilkinson continues to have a common pecuniary interests
with her clients AIG and A. W. Chesterton in minimizing the money that AIG negotiates
to pay on primary or excess policies
to settle claims brought by attorneys like the Baron
Defendants against defendants like A. W. Chesterton Company.
2.04 The 2008 Personal Financial Statement that Judge \Mlkinson filed with the
Texas Ethics Commission ("TEC") shows that Judge \Mlkinson declares a business
interest with the investment company Stockyards Meat Eaters Alliance of Texas, LLC
("SMEAT") and SMEAT Organizer, Registered Agent and Manager Jacky W. Brown
PIAINTIFF'S STATEMENT IN OPPOSITION TO THE TURLEY DEFENDANTS'
-
Page 4 of 10
("Brown"). (Exhibits B-3-a, B-3-b and B-3-c, Affidavit of Roger K. Parsons
-
Sepfember
16, 2009.). The fax transmittal stamp on the top of the
2.05 Brown is associated with AIG through his business relationship with AIG
captive accountant Frederick S. Hezer ("Heze/') who organized and serves as
registered agent for J\A/B Gonsulting Services, Inc for which Brown is sole manager.
(Exhibits B4-a, B-4-b, B-,4-c, B-8-a, B-8-b, B-8-c and B-8-d Affrdavit of Roger K.
Parsons
-
2.06 Herzer was co-director with AIG Cat Excess Liability President Geoffrey J.
Smith ("Smith")l tor 82 Systems Consulting, Inc. (f/Ua Ettendant.Net, Inc.) (Exhibits B-5-
a, B-S-b, and B-5-c, Affidavit of Roger K. Parcons
-
ilt.
ARGUMENT & AUTHORITIES
3.01 Plaintiff incorporates
ffi
2.01-2.06 here, as if fully stated at length herein.
3.02 Under Texas Constitution article 5, section 11, ajudge is disqualified from
sitting in
judgment
when the case is one in which the
judge "may be interested." Tex.
Gonst. art. 5,
$11;
see Camercn v. Greenhill,582 S.W.2d 775,776 (Tex. 1979). The
interest must be a direct pecuniary or personal interest in the result of the case. See
Cameron,582 S.W.2d at776. Once an interest is established, the
judge
is disqualified
no mafter how slight the interest. Gu/f Marine Warehouse Co. v. Towers, 858 S.W.2d
556, 558 (Tex. App.-Beaumont 1993, writ denied). The facts demonstrated by the
evidence presented in
l|il
2.01-2.00 show that Judge \Mlkinson's direct pecuniary or
personal interests in the results of this case.
1
Wth the demise of AlG, Smith has moved overseas, but was recently arrested in Bermuda on
drug charge. (Exhibits 8-6 and B-7, Affidavit of Roger K. Parsons- September 16, 2009.1
PI.AINTIFF'S STATEMENT IN OPPOSITION TO THE TURLEY DEFENDANTS'
-
Page 5 of 10
3.03 Under Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 18b(1), a
judge
is disqualified from
sitting in
judgment
when the
judge
knows that, individually or as a fiduciary, the
judge
has an interest in the subject matter in controversy. Tex. R. Civ. P. 18b(1xb).
3.04 The facts demonstrated by the evidene,e
presented in
llT
2.01-2.06 show
Judge \Mlkinson's knowledge that, individually or as a fiduciary, she has an interest in
the subject matter in controvery.
3.05 Plaintiffs Motion is based upon constitutional grounds and therefore can
be presented
at any time. See Buckholfs ISD v. Glaser,632 S.W.2d 146, 148 (Tex.
1982): Spigener v. Wallis,80 S.W.3d 174, 180 (Tex.App.-Waco 2002, no pet.); cf.
Iesco Am., lnc. v. Strong lndus.,221 S.W.3d 550, 552 (Tex. 2006) (motion to disqualiff
appellate court
justice
filed after appellate court
judgment).
3.06 Plaintiffs Motion clearly asserts the legal authority under which relief is
being sought (Plaintiffs Motion to Disqualify Judge Frcd W. Davis and
judge
Melody M.
W lkin son,
tlt[
3.02-3. 03) :
"3.02 Under Texas Constitution article 5, section 11, a
judge
is
disqualified from sifting in
judgment
when the case is one in which the
j udge' may
be i nterested." Tex. Gonst. art.5,
S11;
see Camercn v.
Greenhill,582 S.W.2d775,776 (Tex. 1979). The interest must be a direct
pecuniary
or personal interest in the result of the case. See Cameron,582
S.W.2d at776. Once an interest is established, the
judge
is disqualified no
matter how slight the interest. Gulf Marine Warchouse Co. v. Towers, 858
S.W.2d 556, 558 (Tex. App.-Beaumont 1993, writ denied). The facts
demonstrated by the evidence presented in
tlfl
2.11-2.19 show Judge
Davis'direct pecuniary
or personal interests in the results of this case. The
facts demonstrated by the evidence presented in
llT
2.22-2.29 show that
Judge \Mlkinson's direct pecuniary or personal interests in the results of
this case."
'3.03
Under Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 18b(1), a
judge
is
disqualified from sitting in
judgment
when the
judge
knows that,
individually or as a fiduciary, the
judge
has an interest in the subject
matter in controversy. Tex. R. Giv. P. 18b(1xb)."
PI-AINTIFF'S STATEMENT IN OPPOSITION TO THE TURLEY DEFENDANTS'
-
Page 6 of 10
V.
CONCLUSION
5.01 The facts that are supported by the evidence
presented herein and in
Plaintiffs Motion to Disqualify Judge Fred W. Davis and Judge Melody M. Wlkinson
shows that Judge Davis and Judge Wlkinson each have direct pecuniary or personal
interests in the results of this case. Gonsequently,
pursuant to Texas Constitution article
5, section 11, Judge Davis and Judge \Mlkinson are disqualified from sitting in
judgment
in this case.
5.02 The facts that are supported by the evidence presented herein and in
Plaintiffs Motion to Disqualify Judge Fred W. Davis and Judge Melody M. Wlkinson
shows that Judge Davis and Judge \Mlkinson know that, individually or as a fiduciary,
they have an interest in the subject matter in controversy in this case. Gonsequently,
pursuant to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 18b(1), Judge Davis and Judge Wilkinson are
disqualified from sitting in
judgment
in this case.
5.03 Consequently, the Turley Defendants' statements in opposition to
Plaintiffs Motion mischaracterize the basis for Plaintiffs Motion to DisqualifiT and the
Turley Defendants' request for sanctions should be denied.
vl.
PRAYER
For these reasons, Plaintiff asks the court, after a hearing, to deny the Turley
Defendants' request for sanctions, and for all relief, at law or in equity to which he may
be entitled.
-
Page 7 of 10
Respectfu lly submitted,
-
\ \ )
\ {' ' -r*
\ ' [ , \
\ -., \ --/
151 \ r?r*u{.*=r--
By:
Roger K. Parsons
P. M. B. 739
Plano, Texas 75074
(214) 649-8059
(972) 295-2776 (FAX)
REQUEST FOR SANGTIONS
-
Page 8 of 10
VERIFICATION
STATE OF TEXAS
COUNTY OF COLLIN
Before me, the undersigned notary, on this day appeared Roger K. Parsons,
Plaintiff in the above numbered and entitled cause of action, the affiant and a person
whose identity is known to me. After I administered an oath to affiant, affiant testified:
'My
name is Roger K. Parsons. I am capable of making this verification. The
facts I have stated in the section
'1.
INTRODUCTION'and the section
'll.
ADDITIONAL
FACTS' of my Plaintiffs Statement in Opposition to the Turley Defendants Request for
Sancfions are within my personal knowledge and are true and correct."
s
s
s
-\-z
\
-'-
Roger K. Parsons
SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED BEFORE ME by the said Roger K.
this the 16h day of September, 2009, to certiff which witness my hand
office.
PI.AINTIFF'S STATEMENT IN OPPOSITION TO THE TURLEY DEFENDANTS'
-
Page 9 of 10
Parsohs, on
and seal of
PAUIIJ. ANDREWS
MyOommission Epires
Marifi
(}9,
2011
e of Texas
I hereby certiff that on September 16, 2009, a true and correct copy of the
Jim Ross
420 E. Lamar Blvd. Suite 110
Arfington, Texas 76011
Counselfor Robert M. Greenberg, and
Legal Services, P.G. Robert M. Greenberg, Attorney
R. H. Wallace
Monika T. Cooper
Gounselfor Robert E. Motsenbocker, and Shafer, Davis, O'Leary & Stoker, Inc.
\Mlliam D. Cobb, Jr.
Gobb Martinez Woodward, P.L.L.C.
',700
Pacific Avenue, Suite 4545
Dallas, Texas 75201
Counsel for the Estate of Frederick M. Baron and Baron & Budd,
Martin E. Rose
Tammy H. Cole
Rose.Walker, L.L.P.
Dallas, Texas 75219
Counselfor E. l. du Pont de Nemours and Gompany and
ConocoPhillips f/Ua Gonoco, Inc.
Dalfas, Texas 75201
Counselfor Ronald \Mndle Turley and
Law Offices of \Mndle Turley, P.C. alklaTurley Law Firm, P.G.
'v--
D
\\ \\ r'\_-=;g*1.-
_ _,
Roger K. Parsons
PIAINTIFF'S STATEN'IENT IN OPPOSITION TO THE TURLEY DEFENDANTS'
-
Page 10 of 10
ONo. 017-217971-06
Plaintiff,
VS.
ROBERT E. MOTSENBOCKER;
SHAFER, DAVIS, O' LEARY & STOKER,
l NC.fl Va SHAFER, DAVIS, MCCOLLUM,
LISAA. BLUE BARON AS EXECUTRIX
COMPANY; CONOCOPHILLIPS flkla
coNoco, tNC.;
L.AWOFFICES OF WINDLE TURLEY,
P.C., al kl aTURLEY tAW FIRM, P.C.;
Defendants,
tr"! "
{,rt"'!'
"",
:T'1 ,.i ,
a t - - " I
'
{-; -
*1
-:
f , 3 "
$*
fT*t, "
q - t ' - -
eFx
ffi
TARRANT COUNry, TEXAS
PLAINTIFF'S COMBINED SUPPLEMENTAL EVIDENCE AS TO PLAINTIFF'S
MOTION TO DISQUALIFY JUDGES FRED W. DAVIS AND MELODY M. WILKINSON.
AND PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT IN OPPOSITION TO THE TURLEY DEFENDANTS'
COMEs now the Plaintiff ROGER K. PARSONS, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS THE
INDEPENDENT ADMINISTMTOR FOR THE ESTATE OF ESTHER ANN KARTSOTIS
PARSONS ("Plaintiff') and files this "P/arntiffs Combined Supplemental Evidence as fo
Plaintiffs Motion to Disqualify Judges Fred W. Davis and Melody M. Wlkinson, and
PLAINTIFF'S COMBINED SUPPLEMENTAL EVIDENCE AS TO PLAINTIFF'S
MOTION TO DISQUALIFYJDUGE FRED W. DAVIS AND MELODY M. WILKINSON,
-
Page 1 of 1
Plaintiffs Statement in Opposition to the Turtey Defendanfs' Reguest for Sancfions" in
support of the following motions filed with the court:
1. Plaintiffs Motion to Disqualify Judge Fred W. Davis and Melody M.
Wlkinson, filed on September 2,2009; and
2. Plaintiffs Statement in Opposition to the Turley Defendanfs' Reguest for
Sancfions, filed on September 16,2009.
In support of these pleadings,
Plaintiff respectfully directs the Court's attention to
Exhibit B, Affidavit of Roger K. Parsons
-
Sepfember 16, 2009, and the new evidence
verified therein:
Exhibit B-1
ExhibitB-2
Exhibit B-3-a
Exhibit B-3-b
Exhibit B-3-c
Exhibit B-4-a
Exhibit B-4-b
Exhibit B4-c
Exhibit B-S-a
Exhibit B-s-b
Exhibit B-S-c
2008 Personal Financial Statement Judge Wlkinson
Martindale-Hubbell@ Lawyers.comsM profile for Naman,
Howell, Smith & Lee, L.L.P.
Registered Agent page for Stockyards Meat Eaters Alliance
ofTexas, LLG
Articles of Incorporation for Stockyards Meat Eaters Alliance
ofTexas, LLC
Management page for Stockyards Meat Eaters Alliance of
Texas, LLC
Registered Agent page for JWB Consulting Services, Inc.
Articles of Incorporation for J\A/B Consulting Services, Inc.
Management page for JWB Gonsulting Services, Inc.
Registered Agent page for 82 Systems Gonsulting, Inc.
Articfes of Incorporation for 82 Systems Consulting, Inc.
Management page for 82 Systems Gonsulting, Inc.
PIAINTIFF'S COMBINED SUPPLEMENTAL EVIDENCE AS TO PLAINTIFF'S
MOTION TO DISQUALIFYJDUGE FRED W. DAVIS AND MELODY M. WILKINSON,
-
Page 2 ot 2
Exhibit 8-6
Exhibit B-7
Exhibit B-8-a
Exhibit B-8-b
Exhibit B-8-c
Exhibit B-8-d
January 15, 2009, press release by Bermuda-based
lronshore, Inc. all-risk insurer announcing the recruitment of
formerAlG Cat Excess Liability President Geoffrey J. Smith
January 23,2009, article in The Royal Gazette reporting the
arrest of former AIG Cat Excess Liability President Geoffrey
J. Smith in Bermuda for possession of illegal drugs.
Registered Agent page for Frederick S. Herzer, C.P.A., P.C.
Articles lncorporation for Frederick S. Hezer, C.P.A., P.C.
Articles of Amendment to the Articles of Incorporation for
Frederick S. Hezer, C.P.A., P.C.
Management page for Frederick S. Herzer, C.P.A., P.C.
Exhibit B, and Exhibit B-1 through Exhibit B-8 are not the only evidence that
been, or necessarily will be, submitted in support of these and/or other motions
with the court on this date.
Respectfully submitted,
By:
Roger K. Parsons
P. M. B. 739
Plano, Texas 75074
(214) 649-8059
(972) 295-2776 (FAX)
PLAINTIFF' S COMBINED SUPPLEMENTAL E\' IDENCE AS TO PLAINTIFF' S
MOTION TO DISQUALIFYJDUGE FRED W, DAVIS AND MELODY M. WLKINSON,
-
Page 3 of 4
has
filed
I hereby certiff that on September 16, 2009, a true and correct copy of the
Jim Ross
420 E. Lamar Blvd. Suite 1 10
R. H. Wallace
Monika T. Cooper
Counselfor Robert E. Motsenbocker, and Shafer, Davis, O'Leary & Stoker, Inc.
Dallas, Texas 75201
Counsel for the Estate of Frederick M. Baron and Baron & Budd, P.C'
Martin E. Rose
Tammy H. Cole
Rose.Walker, L.L.P.
Dallas, Texas 75219
Counsel for E. l. du Pont de Nemours and Company and
ConocoPhillips f/Ua Conoco, Inc.
Dallas, Texas 75201
Law Offices of \Mndle Turley, P.C. alWa Turley Law Firm, P.C.
" t
, . 1
\ ,
. y'
!" i--
\-' i ..
ti -
/)'
Roger K. Parsons
PI.AINTIFF'S COMBTNED SUPPLEMENTAL EVIDENCE AS TO PLAINTIFF'S
MOTION TO DISQUALIFY JDUGE FRED W. DAVIS AND MELODY M. WILKINSON,
AND PI-AINTIFF'S STATEMENT IN OPPOSITION TO THE TURLEY DEFENDANTS'
-
Page 4 of 4
EXHIBl T
No. 017-217971-06
Plaintiff,
VS.
SHAFER, DAVIS, O'LFARY & STOKER,
l NC.fl Wa SHAFER, DAVIS, MCCOLLUM,
COMPANY; CONOCOPHILLIPS ttkta
coNoco, tNC.;
I-AW OFFICES OF WINDLE TURLEY,
P.C., al kl aTURLEY l AW FIRM, P.C.;
Defendants,
AFFIDAVIT OF ROGER K. PARSONS
-
SEPTEMBER 16 2009
STATE OF TEXAS
COUNTY OF COLIN
Before me, the undersigned notary, on this day personally appeared Roger K.
Parsons, the affiant, a peftion whose identity is known to me. After I administered an
oath to affiant, affiant testified:
-
SEPTEMBER 16, 2009
-
Page 1 of 4
2.
3.
1. My name is Roger K. Parsons. I am over eighteen (18) years of age, I have
never been convicted of a felony, and I am of sound mind. I am competent to
testiff to the matters stated herein and I am capable of making this affidavit. The
facts stated in this affidavit are within my personal knowledge and are true and
correct.
I am the Pro Se Plaintiff in this lawsuit.
On September 2,2009, | filed Plaintiffs Motion to Disqualify Judge Fred W. Davis
and Melody M. Wlkinson in this lawsuit based upon evidence and beliel
informed by that evidence, testified about tn Affidavit of Roger K. Parsons
-
September 2, 2009, aftached thereto as Exhibit A.
On September 9, 2009, I was served with lhe Turley Defendants' Statement
Opposing Plaintiffs Motion to Disqualtfy and Reguesf for Sancfibns.
Subsequently, I continued my investigation into the financial dealings and
circumstances of Judge Melody M. \Mlkinson ("Judge \Mlkinson"). In my
continued investigation, I discovered additional evidence being presented to the
court through this affidavtt, Affidavit of Roger K. Parsons
-
September 16, 2009,
and Exhibit B-1 through Exhibit B-8 attached hereto, that supports my motion,
Plaintiffs Motion to Disqualify Judge Fred W. Davis and Melody M. Wlkinson,
and that I wiff incorporate by reference into Plaintiffs Statement in Opposition to
the Turley Defendanfs'Reguest for Sanctions
5. Exhibit B-1, attached hereto, is a true and correct copy of the 2008 Personal
Financial Statement Judge Wlkinson filed with the Texas Ethics Commission
('TEC") that I paid the TEG to send me on August 18, 2009.
Exhibit B-2, attached
lereto,
is a true and correct copy of the Martindale-
Hubbell@ Lawyers.comsM profile for Naman, Howell, Smith & Lee, L.L.P. that I
downfoaded on from the Lawyer.com website
@ftp://www.lavwerc.coml
on
September 13,2009.
Exhibits B-3-a, B-3-b and B-3-c, attached hereto, are true and correct copies
respectively of the Registered Agent page, the Articles of Incorporation and the
Management page for Stockyards Meat Eaters Alliance of Texas, LLC that I
obtained from the website http:/lv,nvnr.sos.state.tx.us/co
maintained by the Office of the Texas Secretary of State, Hope Andrade, on or
aboutAugust 27,2009.
Exhibits B-3-a, B-3-b and B-3-c, attached hereto, are true and correct copies
respectively of the Registered Agent page, the Articles of Incorporation and the
Management page for JWB Consulting Services, Inc. that I obtained from the
website hftp://rrwvr.sos.state.tx.u{m maintained by the
Office of the Texas Secretary of State, Hope Andrade, on or about September
10, 2009.
4.
6.
7.
8.
-
SEPTEMBER 16, 2009
-
Page2ot 4
9. Exhibits B-Sa, B-s-b and B-S-c, attached hereto, are true and correct copies
respectively of the Registered Agent page, the Articles of lncorporation, Articles
of Amendment to the Articles of Incorporation and Management page for 82
Systems Consulting, Inc. (flkla Ettendant.Net, Inc.) that I obtained from the
website http:l/wvvw.sos.state.U.uilm maintained by the
Office of the Texas Secretary of State, Hope Andrade, on or about September
10, 2009.
Exhibit 8-6, attached hereto, is a true and correct copy of a January 15, 2009,
press release by Bermuda-based all-risk insurance company lronshore, Inc. that
I obtained from the lronshore, Inc. website (http://vvvtw.ironshore.cod, on or
about September 13, 2009.
Exhibit B-7, attached hereto, is a true and correct copy of a news article by Tim
Smith published on January 23,2009, in The Royal Gazefte that I obtained from
The Royal Gazette website http:/lwtuw.rwalqazette.com ,
on or
about September 13, 2009.
Exhibits B-8-a, B-8-b, B-8-c and B-8-d, aftached hereto, are true and correct
copies respectively of the Registered Agent page, the Articles of lncorporation,
Articles of Amendment to the Articles of lncorporation and the Management page
for Frederick S. Herzer, C.P.A., P.C. that I obtained from the website
http:/ltrvwr.sos.stab.A.u{co maintained by the Office of
the Texas Secretary of State, Hope Andrade, on or about September 10, 2009.
On September 14,2009, I attempted to locate the Registered Agent of record for
J\AIB Consulting Services, Inc., Frederick S. Hezer, at Suite 1111,8144 Walnut
Hill Lane, Dallas, Texas. Upon diligent observation and inquiry, I discovered that
Suite 1111 does not exist in this office building. Based upon a subsequent
diligent search of the Dallas County Appraisal District ("DCAD") real property
records using the DCAD website http://vtww.dallascad.oruBe ,
I
concluded that Frederick S. Herzer does occupy this physical address.
On September 14,2009, I attempted to locate the Registered Agent, President,
Secretary and Director of record for Frederick S. Hezer, C.P.A., P.C., Frederick
S. Hezer, at Suite 200, 5445 La Sierra, Dallas, Texas, and discovered after
difigent observation and inquiry that Suite 2OO is vacant. Based upon a
subsequent diligent search of the Dallas County Appraisal District property
records using the DGAD website http:l/www.dallascad.o ,
I
discovered that the owner of the real property at Suite 200, 5445 La Sierra,
Dallas, Texas, is Frederick S. Herzer, C.P.A., P.C., who reports its address at the
vacant Suite 2O0,5445 La Sierra, Dallas, Texas, 752314139.
Further, affiant sayeth not.
71.
10.
12.
13.
14.
15.
-SEPTEMBER
16,2009
-
Page 3 of 4
\
--\
Subscriber and sworn
day of September 2009.
Roger K. Parsons
to before the undersigned Texas
;-\
i l - a
'i\
J
\ f/:'*1.as1.-,1-r-, r
notary public on the 16th
Notary Publi
,
State of Texas
-
SEPTEMBER 16, 2009
-
Page 4 of 4
Roger K. Parsons
PMB 739
2520 AVENUE K, SU]TE 7OO
PLANO, TE(AS 7 507 4-5342
TEL +1 214.649.8059
FAX +1 972.295.2776
September 21
,2009
The Honorable Thomas A. Wilder
Thnant Gounty District Glerk
Tanant County Justice Center, 3td Ffoor
401 W. Belknap
Fort Worth, Texas 761 96
Dear Clerk:
Please find enclosed for filing in the referenced cause:
1. Letter to the Honorable Judge Jeff Walker; 96th District Gourt dated September 21,2009;
2. Plaintiff's Motion to Supplement Evidence to Hearing on Plaintiffs Motion to Disqualify Judge
Fred W. Davis and Judge Melody M. Wlkinson;
S.Order on Plaintiff's Motion to Supplement Evidence to Hearing on Plaintiff's Motion to
Disqualify Judge Fred W. Davis and Judge Melody M. Wlkinson; and
4. Fiat for a hearing setting tor 2.
Sincerely;
* v - \
?
\ <. \ )
b*-
\
Roger K. Parsof,S, Pro Se
enclosures
cc: (1) Jim Ross
(2) R. H. Wallace and Monika T. Cooper
(3) Wifliam D. Cobb, Jr.
(4) Martin E. Rose and Tammy H. Cole
(5) Richard L. Smith, Jr.
B**-:
t l " . i
r*i.;.!
,f .,r=i
f l
r , i
*IF
Fts-r,
al
[*d'
{!.i,' t.61
6 . 6
lr"
rFii
l**rilt
Roger K. Parsons
PMB 739
2520 K AVENUE, SUITE 7OO
PI-ANO, TE(AS 7 507 4-5342
TEL +'l 214,649.8059
FAX +1 972.n5.2776
September 21
,2009
The Honorable Judge Jeff Walker
96th District Court
Tarrant County Justice Genter, 7th Floor
401 W. Belknap
Fort Worth, Texas 761 96-0223
Rq Cause No. 017-217971-06; Roger K. Pansons, et al. v. Robert M. Greenberg, et il.;
In the 17th District Court of Tarrant County, Texas
Dear Judge Walker:
I appreciated your kind consideration of Plaintiff's Motion to Disqualify Judge Fred W. Davis
and Melody M. Wilkinson last Friday afternoon. After reviewing my notes from the hearing, I
became aware of at least one mistake I made. At the beginning of the hearing, the Court stated
that my motion to recuse Judge Davis was mute because Judge Davis had retired. Although,
the Court acknowledge later in the hearing that my motion was to disquality and rather than
recuse Judge Davis, I understood the Court's earlier statement to be a ruling against my
motion to disqualify Judge Davis based upon the Court's review of my motion and my
affidavit, Affidavit of Roger K. Parsons
--
September 2,20O9, and the exhibits attached thereto.
Consequently when the Court gave me an opportunity to offer evidence for my motion, I did
not proffer Exhibit A-1 and Exhibit A-2 to Affidavit of Roger K. Parsons
--
September 2,2OAg,
because I wanted to comply with what I believed was with Court's prior ruling.
Now it occurs to me that I should have introduced Affidavit of Roger K. Parsons
--
September
2, 2009, and Affidavit of Roger K. Parsons
--
September 16, 2009, and all exhibits attached
thereto, including Exhibit A-1 and Exhibit A-2. I should have allowed the Court to rule on this
evidence in light of the Court's understanding that my motion was to disqualify Judge Davis
rather than to recuse him. To correct my mistake, I have enclosed Plaintiff's Motion to
Supplement Evidence to Hearing on Plaintiff's Motion to Disqualify Judge Fred W. Davis and
Melody M. Wilkinson, along with proposed orders granting the motion and setting a hearing on
the motion, if the Court feels that a hearing is necessary.
By copy of this letter, I have notified all of the attorneys present at the hearing and all the
attorneys of record in this cause.
Sincerely,
--\
\
\ 45..".^, \4 \ ?.*.-'*
Roger K. Parsons
Exclosures
c: Jim Ross
R. H. Wallace
Martin E. Rose
Page 2 of 2
No. 017-217971-06
Plaintiff,
VS.
l NC.fl Wa SHAFER, DAVIS, MCCOLLUM,
E. I . DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND
COMPANY; CONOCOPHILLIPS ftkl a
coNoco, tNC.;
P.C., al kl a TURLEY IAW FIRM, P.C.;
Defendants,
.l
{;l
-rO r-' t
I
' i . l i
'. '-*g, .*r'.-o+.
t,,1,:
-
.t ' i
, " . L' r l t
. . i s s E
G: ; t l _- a
* - ' $
. o. * . ' i ' E
ac:*il
. ' . ' - ' " t
q
i
t -
, i '
f' *' -i
I i | i . . . - . , , F
*- q
PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT EVIDENCE
TO HEARING ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO DISQUALIFY
TO THE HONOMBLE TARRANT COUNTY DISTRICT JUDGE:
Comes now Plaintiff Roger K. Parsons, Individually and as the Independent
Administrator of the Estate of Esther Ann Kartsotis Parsons ("Parsons" or "Plaintiff') and
fifes this Plaintiffs Motion to Supplement Evidence to Hearing on Plaintiffs Motion to
PLAINTIFF' S MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT EVIDENCE
-
Page 1 of 4
Disqualify Judge Fred W. Davis and Judge Melody M. Wlkinson, asking the Court to
consider as evidence for Plaintiffs Motion to Disqualify Judge Fred W. Davis and Judge
Melody M. Wtlkinson ("Plaintiffs Motion"), documents filed on September 2,2009, with
Plaintiffs Motion and documents filed on September 16, 2009, with Plaintiffs Combined
Supplemental Evidence as to Plaintiffs Motion to Disqualify Judges Fred W. Davis and
Melody M. Wlkinson, and Plaintiffs Statement in Opposition to the Tufley Defendants'
Reguesf for Sanctions. Plaintiff, pro se at the hearing, inadvertently failed to introduce
the following documents at the evidentiary hearing on Plaintiffs Motion that was held on
September 18, 2009:
Exhibit A (Affidavit of Roger K. Parsons
-
September 2, 2009) to Plaintiffs
Motion to Disqualify Judge Fred W. Davis and Judge Melody M. Wlkinson:
Exhibit A-1 to Affidavit of Roger K. Parsons
-
September 2,2009;
-
September 2,2009; and
Exhibit B, (Affidavit of Roger K. Parsons
-
September 16, 2009) to Plaintiffs
Combined Supplemental Evidence as to Plaintiffs Motion to Disqualify Judges
Fred W. Davis and Melody M. Wlkinson, and Plaintiffs Statement in Opposition
to the Turley Defendanfs'Reguest for Sanctions.
Plaintiff respectfully asks that the Court consider these documents, attached
hereto, and any objections to them as a supplement to the evidence Plaintiff introduced
at the hearing on Plaintiffs Motion to Disqualify Judge Fred W. Davis and Judge Melody
M. Wilkinson.
JUDGE FRED W' DAVIS AND JUDGE MELODY M. WILKINSON
-
Page 2 of 4
Respectfu I ly su bm itted,
' , :
\
By:
t
("1*\<.- i)*-
P. M. B. 739
252A Avenue K, Suite 700
Plano, Texas 75074
(214) 649-8059
(972) 295-2776 (FAX)
PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT EVIDENCE
-
Page 3 of 4
I hereby certiff that on September 21,2009, a true and correct copy of the
Jim Ross
Jim Ross & Associates, P.G.
420 E. Lamar Blvd. Suite 1 10
R. H. Wallace
Monika T. Coooer
77V Matn Street, Suite 3800
Counselfor Robert E. Motsenbocker, and Shafer, Davis, O'Leary & Stoker, Inc.
\Mlliam D. Cobb, Jr..
Dallas, Texas 75201
Counsel for the Estate of Frederick M. Baron and Baron & Budd,
p.C.
Martin E. Rose
Tammy H. Cole
Rose.Walker, L.L.P.
Dallas, Texas 75219
Counsel for E. l. du Pont de Nemours and Company and
ConocoPhillips f/k/a Conoco, lnc.
Daflas, Texas 75201
Law Offices of Windle Turley, P.C. alkla Turley Law Firm,
p.C.
\z [)
\'\
\..
-
6.*-=a-^-1 -
Roger K. Parsons
JUDGE FRED W. DAVIS AND JUDGE MELODY M. W|LK|NSON
- page
4 of 4
No. 017-217971-06
Plaintiff,
VS.
INC . flkla SHAFER, DAVIS, MCCOLLUM,
COMPANY; CONOCOPHILLIPS fl Wa
coNoco, tNC.;
P.C., al kl a TURLEY LAW FIRM, P.C.;
Defendants,
ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT EVIDENCE
After considering Plaintiffs Motion to Supplement Evidence to Hearing on
Plaintiffs Motion to Disqualify Judges Fred W. Davis and Melody M. Wlkinson
("Plaintiffs Motion"), and the objections the
judge
of this administrative
judicial
district:
GRANTS Plaintiffs Motion, and ADMITS the following evidence:
ORDER ON PLAINTIFF' S MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT EVIDENCE
-
Page 1 of 2
( 1)
Exhibit A (Affidavit of Roger K. Parsons
-
September 2,2009) to Plaintiffs
Motion to Disgualify Judge Fred W. Davis and Judge Melody M.
Wlkinson;
-
September 2,2009;
Exhibit A-2to Affidavit of Roger K. Parsons
-
September 2,2009; and
Exhibit B, (Affidavit of Roger K. Parsons
-
September 16, 2009) to
Plaintiffs Combined Supplemental Evidence as to Plaintiffs Motion to
Disqualtfy Judges Fred W. Davis and Melody M. Wlkinson, and Plaintiffs
Statement in Opposition to the Turley Defendanfs'Reguestfor Sanctions.
SI GNED on 2009.
PRESI DI NG JUDGE
(2)
(3)
(4)
ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT EVIDENCE
-
Page 2 of 2
No. 017-217971-06
Plaintiff,
VS.
ROBERT E. MOTSENBOCKER;
INC . flVa SHAFER, DAVIS, MCCOLLUM,
COMPANY; CONOCOPHILLIPS ftkta
coNoco, l NC.;
P.C., al kl a TURLEY IAW FIRM, P.C.;
Defendants.
FIAT
Plaintiffs Motion to Supplement Evidence to Hearing on Plaintiffs Motion to
Disqualify Judges Fred W. Davis and Melody M. Wlkinson will be heard at
o' cl ock .m. on the day of
2009. SI GNED on t hi s day of
JUDGE PRESI DI NG
,
2009.

Plaintiff's Motion To Disqualify Judge Fred W. Davis and Judge Melody M. Wilkinson

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Plaintiff's Motion To Disqualify Judge Fred W. Davis and Judge Melody M. Wilkinson

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

No.

You might also like