NO. 14-1080

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

•• «-•"

IN RE JOURDANTON HOSPITAL CORPORATION D/B/A SOUTH *" & TEXAS REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER,

RELATOR

Original Proceeding from the Fourth Court of Appeals at San Antonio, Texas Cause No. 04-14-00817-CV

RELATOR'S OPPOSED EMERGENCY MOTION TO STAY UNDERLYING PROCEEDINGS

Monte F. James State Bar No. 10547520 [email protected] Joshua A. Romero State Bar No. 24046754 [email protected] JACKSON WALKER L.L.P. Congress Avenue, Suite 1100 Austin, Texas 78701 (512) 236-2000 (512) 236-2002 - facsimile

COUNSEL FOR RELATOR

EMERGENCY RELIEF REQUESTED IDENTITY OF PARTIES AND COUNSEL

Defendant/Relator: Jourdanton Hospital Corporation d/b/a South Texas Regional Medical Center Appellate Counsel and Trial Counsel: Monte F. James State Bar No. 10547520 [email protected] Joshua A. Romero State Bar No. 224046754 [email protected] JACKSON WALKER L.L.P. Congress Avenue, Suite 1100 Austin, Texas 78701 Telephone: (512) 236-2000 Facsimile: (512) 236-2002

Co-Defendant: Edward Blackmon, Jr., M.D.

Trial Counsel: John S. Serpe State Bar No. 18037400 J [email protected] ChadJ. Castille State Bar No. 24031920 [email protected] Ryan Clement State Bar No. 24036371 [email protected] SERPE, JONES, ANDREWS, CALLENDER & BELL, PLLC American Tower 2929 Allen Parkway, Suite 1600 Houston, Texas 77019 Telephone: (713) 452-4400 Facsimile: (713) 452-4499

u Plaintiff/Real Party in Interest: Stacy Smith, individually and as next friend of Charles Lewis Smith Trial and Appellate Counsel: Marynell Maloney State Bar No. 12883200 [email protected] Michelle Maloney State Bar No. 24069099 [email protected] MARYNELL MALONEY LAW FIRM, PLLC E. Travis, Suite 1800 San Antonio, Texas 78205 Telephone: (210) 212-8000 Facsimile: (210) 212-8385

and

Ryan Krebs State Bar No. 00792088 [email protected] LAW OFFICES OF RYAN KREBS West 10lh Street, Suite 300 Austin, Texas 78701 Telephone: (512) 478-2072 Facsimile: (512) 494-0420

Respondent in the Court of Appeals:

Hon. Donna S. Rayes 81st District Court at Atascosa County, Texas #1 Courthouse Circle Dr., Suite 206 Jourdanton, Texas 78026 Telephone: (830) 769-3750 Facsimile: (830) 769-2841 [email protected] Respondent in the Supreme Court:

Fourth Court of Appeals at San Antonio Cadena-Reeves Justice Center Dolorosa, Suite 3200 San Antonio, Texas 78205-3037 Keith H. Hottle, Clerk of Court Telephone: (210) 335-2635 Facsimile: (210) 335-2762 [email protected]

IV TABLE OF CONTENTS

IDENTITY OF PARTIES AND COUNSEL ii TABLE OF CONTENTS v TABLE OF AUTHORITIES vi EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 FACTUAL BACKGROUND 2 ARGUMENT 4 A. Temporary Relief Is Permitted Under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 52.10 4 B. Temporary Relief Is Necessary To Prevent Prejudice To STRMC Pending Mandamus Review, Preserve This Court's Ability to Fashion Effective Relief, and Avoid Waste of Resources 5 PRAYER 6 RULE 9.4 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 7 RULE 52.10(a) CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE AND COMPLIANCE 8 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 9 APPENDICES 1. A true and correct copy of the Docket Control Order.

2. A true and correct copy of various correspondence between the parties' counsel.

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) Cases In re Bates, 429 S.W.3d 47 (Tex. App.—Houston [lstDist] 2014, no pet) 4 In re Kelleber, 999 S.W.2d 51 (Tex. App.—AmariUo 1999, no pet.) 4 In re Reed, 901 S.W.2d 604 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1995, no writ) 4 Republican Party of Texas v. Die 924 S.W.2d 932 {Tex. 1996) 5 Other Authorities Tex. R. App. P. 10.3(a)(3) 1 Tex. R. App. P. 52.10 1,4

VI TO THE HONORABLE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS: Pursuant to Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 10.3(a)(3) and 52.10(a), Relator Jourdanton Hospital Corporation d/b/a Soudi Texas Regional Medical Center

("STRMC") files this Opposed Emergency Motion to Stay the Underlying Proceedings, and requests the Court to temporarily stay all underlying proceedings in

the trial court until this Court rules on STRMC's Petition for Writ of Mandamus

("Petition").1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In this medical malpractice case, the Court is currendy considering whether

Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 204 permits a defendant to conduct an independent

medical examination of a plaintiff when (1) the plaintiff has designated numerous

experts to testify about his medical condition, and (2) the plaintiffs own experts

intend to conduct the same testing requested by the defendant.

In light of the Court's June 5, 2015 request for briefing on the merits and the

trial court's scheduling order, STRMC seeks to stay the underlying proceedings

pending the Court's mandamus review. The stay is requested in order to preserve

judicial resources and the parties' resources. As set forth below, the plaintiff has

continued to demand that STRMC promptly depose his experts even though this

Court has not issued a ruling, which means STRMC may need to depose those experts twice—once before the Court's ruling and once after the ruling (if mandamus relief is granted). And if STRMC refuses to undertake expert depositions immediately, and assuming the Court issues a ruling two months after the merits briefing deadline of August 11, 2015, the parties will be left to complete the requested examination,

analyze the test results, and take 23 expert depositions in the span of two months under the trial court's current scheduling order. Therefore, a stay is appropriate to maintain the status quo pending the Court's resolution of the Petition.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

The trial court denied STRMC's motion to examine the plaintiff on October 27, 2014, finding a "unique situation" because the plaintiff is a minor. MR Tab 2, p. 1; MR Tab 7, p. 17. On December 10, 2014, the Fourth Court of Appeals summarily denied STRMC's petition for writ of mandamus without opinion. MR Tab 8, p. 1.

STRMC filed its Petition with this Court on January 14, 2015, and the Court requested a response from plaintiff on February 27, 2015. The mandamus briefing was completed on April 24, 2015. Recently, on June 5, 2015, the Court requested

briefing on the merits, with final briefing due by August 11, 2015.

Plaintiff has continued to insist that STRMC prompdy depose his eight experts (three of which are located outside Texas), despite the fact that die Petition remains pending. See Appendix 2.2 STRMC has resisted this demand because conducting the depositions before the Court's ruling may necessitate re-deposing those experts— undoubtedly an expensive and time-consuming endeavor.3 If, on the other hand, STRMC postpones the expert depositions, and in light of this Court's recent request

for merits briefing and deadline of August 11, 2015, the parties will be in the untenable position of conducting the requested examination (if permitted), analyzing the test results, and deposing the parties' 23 expert witnesses in the span of two months under the current scheduling order.4 This, of course, conservatively assumes that die Court will issue a ruling two months after merits briefing. If the ruling does not issue until four months after merits briefing, the current discovery deadline of December 16, 2015, will have expired. JV<? Appendix 1.

JV* MR Tab 3, pp. 11,14,17.

ARGUMENT

To maintain the status quo pending this Court's mandamus review—thereby

protecting STRMC from irreparable harm, preserving the Court's ability to fashion

effective relief, and preventing the unnecessary waste of resources—the Court should stay the underlying proceedings until it rules on STRMC's Petition.

A. Temporary Relief Is Permitted Under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 52.10.

As explained in STRMC's Petition, mandamus relief is not only available, but

also necessary, to correct the Fourth Court of Appeals' abuse of discretion in this

case. See Petition at pp. 5-17. Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 52.10,

an appellate court "may grant 'any just relief pending the court's action on' a

mandamus petition, including a stay of all underlying proceedings in the trial court."

In re Bales, 429 S.W.3d 47, 53 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2014, no pet); see also

TEX.R.APP.P. 52.10.

The purpose of Rule 52.10 is to maintain the status quo and preserve an

appellate court's ability to fashion effective relief. See In re Kelkber, 999 S.W.2d 51, 52

(Tex. App.—Amarillo 1999, no pet.) ("That is, the power of the court to grant

emergency measure is ancillary to its power to adjudicate a pending petition for

extraordinary relief. Simply put, Rule 52.10 exists to afford the court opportunity to

address the dispute encompassed within a petition for mandamus (for instance) by

maintaining the status quo until it can address that dispute."); /// re Reed, 901 S.W.2d 604, 609 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1995, no writ) (involving predecessor to Rule 52.10). Temporary relief, moreover, should be granted in instances where a relator

will suffer prejudice pending mandamus renew, impairing an appellate court's ability

to provide full and effective relief. See Republican Party of Texas v. Diets^ 924 S.W.2d 932, 933 (Tex. 1996). As set forth below, that standard is amply met here.

B. Temporary Relief Is Necessary To Prevent Prejudice To STRMC Pending Mandamus Review, Preserve This Court's Ability to Fashion Effective Relief, and Avoid Waste of Resources.

As a threshold matter, a stay is necessary to prevent the continued waste of judicial resources, as well as the resources of the parties. For example, plaintiff has continued to demand that STRMC prompdy proceed with the depositions of plaintiffs testifying experts, even though the Court has not ruled on the Petition. See Appendix 2. This demand presents a situation in which STRMC may have to depose plaintiffs experts now, and then re-depose those same experts, three of which are located outside of Texas, if the Court permits the requested examination. This is undoubtedly a costly and time-consuming undertaking—and an unnecessary exercise if a stay is granted. On the other hand, if STRMC waits to conduct depositions until the Court issues a ruling (and assuming conservatively that a ruling issues two months after completion of merits briefing), the parties would have to conduct the requested examination, analyze the test results, and take 23 depositions in the span of two months under the current scheduling order. And if the Court's ruling issues four mondis after the completion of merits briefing, the current discovery deadline will have expired. See Appendix 1. Accordingly, a stay is warranted.

Furthermore, in the absence of a stay, the trial court will very likely have to address discovery disputes related to the experts and their depositions that will invariably arise again (in some form) in the second depositions.5 This would cause an unnecessary waste of judicial resources. Indeed, it is indisputable that the Court's ruling on STRMC's Petition will significandy influence the course and substance of this entire case, including the expert depositions (regardless of how the Court rules).

And most, if not all, experts deposed during the Court's mandamus review would have to be re-deposed after the Court's mandamus review if relief is granted. Aside from the extraordinarily prohibitive expense of such an endeavor, the futile exercise would almost assuredly result in the need for significant court time to resolve otherwise unnecessary discovery disputes.

PRAYER

Relator South Texas Regional Medical Center respectfully requests the Court to stay all underlying proceedings in the trial court until the Court rules on STRMC's Petition for Writ of Mandamus, and for all such other and further relief to which it may be jusdy entided.

Respectfully submitted,

I si Monte F. fames Monte F. James State Bar No. 10547520 mj ames@jw. com Joshua A. Romero State Bar No. 24046754 [email protected] JACKSON WALKER L.L.P. Congress Avenue, Suite 1100 Austin, Texas 78701 Telephone: 512-236-2000 Facsimile: 512-236-2002

ATTORNEYS FOR RELATOR JOURDANTON HOSPITAL CORPORATION D/B/A SOUTH TEXAS REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER

RULE 9.4 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE This document complies with the typeface requirements of Tex. R. App. P.

9.4(e) because it has been prepared in a conventional typeface (Garamond) no smaller than 14-point for text and 12-point for footnotes. This document also complies with the word-count limitations of Tex. R. App. P. 9.4(i), because it contains 1,272 words,

excluding any parts exempted by TEX. R. App. P. 9.4(i)(l).

Isi Joshua A. Romero Joshua A. Romero

RULE 52.10<V> CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE AND COMPLIANCE On June 10, 2015,1 conferred with Michelle Maloney and Ryan Krebs, counsel for Real Parties in Interest, regarding the merits of this Motion via email. On June 11, 2015, Ms. Maloney stated on behalf of Real Parties in Interest that this Motion is opposed. I certify that I have notified counsel for Real Parties in Interest, Michelle Maloney and Ryan Krebs, by expedited means via email concerning the filing of the foregoing Emergency Motion to Stay Underlying Proceedings on this 10th day of June, 2015. This Motion is not opposed by Defendant Edward Blackmon, M.D.

I si Joshua A. Romero Joshua A. Romero

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that a copy of the foregoing was served on the following counsel for

Real Part}7 in Interest via electronic service and on Respondents via certified mail, return receipt requested, on this 11th day ofJune, 2015: Respondents:

Keith H. Hottle, Clerk of Court Fourth Court of Appeals at San Antonio Cadena-Reeves Justice Center Dolorosa, Suite 3200 San Antonio, Texas 78205-3037

Hon. Donna S. Rayes 81st District Court at Atascosa County, Texas #1 Courthouse Circle Dr., Suite 206 Jourdanton, Texas 78026 Telephone: (830) 769-3750 Facsimile: (830) 769-2841 [email protected]

Counsel for Real Party in Interest Stacy Smith:

Marynell Maloncy Michelle Maloney MARYNELL MALONEY LAW FIRM, PLLC E. Travis, Suite 1800 San Antonio, Texas 78205 Telephone: (210) 212-8000 Facsimile: (210) 212-8385

Ryan Krebs LAW OFFICES OF RYAN KREBS West 10lh Street, Suite 300 Austin, Texas 78701 Telephone: (512) 478-2072 Facsimile: (512) 494-0420 Counsel for Defendant Edward Blackmon, Jr., M.D.: John S. Serpe ChadJ. Castillc Ryan Clement SERPE, JONES, ANDREWS, CALLENDER & BELL, PLLC American Tower 2929 Allen Parkway, Suite 1600 Houston, Texas 77019 Telephone: (713) 452-4400 Facsimile: (713) 452-4499

Isi loshua A.. Romero Joshua A. Romero

NO. 14-1080

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

IN RE JOURDANTON HOSPITAL CORPORATION D/B/A SOUTH TEXAS REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER,

RELATOR

APPENDIX TO RELATOR'S OPPOSED EMERGENCY MOTION TO STAY UNDERLYING PROCEEDINGS

1. A true and correct copy of the Docket Control Order.

2. A true and correct copy of various correspondence between the parties' counsel.

13553687v.5 Appendix 1 03/iMar. 5. 201!> 8:39AM22362oo2 • No. 9788 P. l)2/oo3

Caw* NO. 12.12-1063-CVA IN THfc DISTRICT COURT OF VS. COUNTY, TEXAS JmidmWo Boiplul CononUan <VW» Saudi Tow Hiakmal Madkal Ctftttr Mri E<hwd Btmn 8»w / 21818 JUDICIAL D1STRICT8 ' Bl«eta»fl.A.M.l).

DOCKET CONTROL ORDER The following docket control order ih«l| apply to this case unites modified by Ike court IT no date U given below, the lum fs ■evented by the Texas Rule* ofCMl Procedure.

T. ' JOiOTER, AMpertlesinuslbced<WBndserved,wheitobyaw^ this due. THE PARTY CAUSING THEJOINDER SHALL PROVIDE A COPY OF THIS SCHEOULINQ ORDER ATTHBTIME OP SERVICE.

EXPERT WITNESS DESIGNATION. Expert wimps designations we required end mut b» """" served by the following dues. The deslgnalion mutt Include do Information listed In Rule |942tf).

Failure to timely respond will be jovtmed by Rule 193.6. (0 _ . Expert* rcrputlejsatl%arritTnitlvo relief. . All other experts.

ZZ DISCOVERY LJMJTATION&Tr* discovery linlutlons orRule!90.2. If eppUeablo, w etherwlse of Rvle ISPJ apply unless changed below: ) _; Total hours per side for oral deposltienc, Niwibtr or lnlerropioclesthitmsy be served by cwhpany on my other party, w 4. ALTERNATIVE DUPUTBRlSOLimON.

Bythl»dsrt4»p\riesmiWdther(I)niomeareeirrentfe#ADR«stlngthefcTOofADRitqii^ and niJTie of in apetd mdlMor. If aspllcable; or (2) leton objerton to ADRWitoagjeerewtor abjecdon It filed, the couit may sbjn en ADR order.

IMH5 0) AOR eondocKd punuiat to the ipeancnl ofthe ptrdes must be completed by IbU date, 5. DISCOVERY PERIOD ENDS. AJdlseiivery mustbeemidotttdbeibrjuVendorihedlstovety . period. Pntiti S4«klhg dlxovery mull serve requests inffieleath/ til in advance of the end ofthe JB ■ J -m ■ m,K * t Jfl t mt *Mt mm. ft 1 L ^ ■■*(aLI aL mii mM^km^m mA^m^m\ m m*.m^mttw%Jl i^^mf^ t^mm^mt!m tV^mt%

condud dlieovery beyond dill deadline by ignorant. lncompltJ«dlfeovwy will hoi deity thttrt»l.

I-39-l( DISPOSITIVE MOTJON AND PLEAS. Mun be id. for beirlnj or submission M IblJowi: Olipoi|llve motloni or pieu subject l» tft tmerlooulory tppal must be set by Oils ditt.

Svmmeiy Judgfneol mcUnw not subject to *n Inteilooutory.eppttl mart be set by this dete.

Rule 166u(i)>ao«ioniBitiy not be let before Ihll d»te. ' 7. CRALUtNGEa TO EXPERf TESTIMONY. All motions to otoludstKibnony md evidence ehdlenget lo expert testimony must be Otod by U»k date, unless emended by leave of eoort.

1-11-16 PLKADINCS. All imwdmeoisind supplements must be filed bythk dele. ThU order does not 8.

PweluUe prompt BlfngofpleeiJIngidireotlyitsjionslvetoiihj'thBely filed pletdlagu PWm!tLlLCONreRENCTd*()D0C1(WCALUTWlhJlbTtp*» («) aspects oftrial Wllh the court on tWi dslc All hearings begin et ?:00 wn., unless specified otherwise by the courl Failure to appear will btgrmindi fordlsmtsaal for want of prosecution.

TRIAL. ' • Jury Trial Requested? Date Paid: TypeotCese Esrimiied lenftH orTrUI

MTORNEyTOR. PLA1NTIFP Addrcic: B05W, IQth Street, Sullc 300 U ad Amtln.TX 78701 Phone: 7<>->\ utt. Phoha; *SrY 2 Fax: Fax! 5/L ^4 Appendix 2 Romero, Josh From: Michelle Maioney <[email protected]> Sent Thursday, June 04, 2015 10:50 AM To: Romero, Josh; Ryan Krebs ([email protected]) ([email protected]) Cc: Allie Brown; Samantha Booker; Wyman, Michelle; Ryan Clement; Chad Castille; James, Monte; Celeste Malaise Subject: RE: Smith v. STRMC and Blackmon

Hi Josh, Please do get us dates to run by our experts. Our opinion is that you're discovering our experts - it has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not you get an exam.

Thanks,

Michelle

Michelle M. Maioney Maryneli Maioney Law l-irm. IJLLC Hast Travis St.. Stc. 1800 San Antonio, Texas 78205 T: 210.212.8000 F: 210.212.8.185 [email protected]

JT Please consider the environment before printing this cmnil Think green...

This communication contains confidential information intended for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed, if the reader or this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. Any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this email without consent of the originator is strictly prohibited, Ifyou have received this email in error, please immediately notify Maryneli Maioney Law Firm, PLLC by telephone at 210-212-8000.

From: Romero, Josh [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2015 10:12 AM To: Michelle Maioney; Ryan Krebs ([email protected]) ([email protected]) Cc: Allie Brown; Samantha Booker; Wyman, Michelle; Ryan Clement; Chad Castille; James, Monte; Celeste Malaise Subject: RE: Smith v. STRMC and Blackmon Michelle—

We can provide you dates, but the problem is the pending Texas Supreme Court case. If we depose the experts before the decision (and the decision permits the requested examination), we would need to depose your experts again. We are trying to avoid deposing your experts twice. What are your thoughts on this?

Thanks,

Josh

From: Michelle Maioney fmailto:[email protected] Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2015 10:09 AM l To: Romero, Josh; Ryan Krebs (ryan®ryankrebsmdjd.com) ([email protected]) Cc: Allie Brown; Samantha Booker; Wyman, Michelle; Ryan Clement; Chad Castille; James, Monte; Celeste Malaise Subject: RE: Smith v. STRMC and Blackmon Importance: High

Josh and Ryan -1 already emailed on this April 23rd but I follow up again.

Please immediately let me know your dates of availability to complete the depositions of Plaintiffs experts as requested below. Rather than getting dates from my experts that prove unworkable for either one of you, and then having to go back to my experts with other dates, I would rather present them with dates that all counsel are already available. Since we'll have to travel out of Texas for Bennetts, Cokely, and Rice, I would prefer to schedule these depos first and then schedule Hunter (Houston) and Nelson (Austin), and then Trevino and Wegner to take place in San Antonio.

Thanks, Michelle

Michelle M. MhIoiicv Maryncll Maloney Law firm. PIJ.C East Travis Si., Ste. 1800 San Antonio. Texas 78205 T: 210.212.8000 I": 210.212.8385 m ichel lefoimarvne I Imaloney lawfirm .com

1 Please consider the environment before priming this email Think green .

This communication contains confidential information intended for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible lo deliver it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disseminaiion, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. Any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this email without consent of the originator is strictly prohibited, If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify Maryncll Mnloney Low Finn. IU.I.C by telephone at 210-212-8000.

115 East Travis St.. Ste. 1800 San Antonio, Texas 78205 T: 210.212.8000 F: 210.212.8385 [email protected]

l Please consider die environment befote printing this email. Think green ..

Tliis communication contains confidential information intended for the use ofthc individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. Any use. dissemination, forwnrding, printing, or copying of this email without consent of the originator is strictly prohibited, If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify Marynell Maloney Law Firm, PLLC by telephone at 210-212-8000.

From: Michelle Maloney Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2015 3:56 PM To: 'Romero, Josh'; Ryan Krebs frvancarvankrebsmdtd.com) fryanairyankrebsmdid.com) Cc: Allie Brown; Samantha Booker; Wyman, Michelle; Ryan Clement; Chad Castille; James, Monte; Celeste Malaise Subject: RE: Smith v. STRMC and Blackmon Importance: High

Josh and Ryan,

Please let me know your dates of availability to complete the depositions of Plaintiffs experts as requested below. Rather than getting dates from my experts that prove unworkable for cither one of you, and then having to go back to my experts with other dates, I would rather present them with dates that all counsel are already available. Since we'll have to travel out of Texas for Bennetts, Cokely, and Rice, I would prefer to schedule these depos first and then schedule Hunter (Houston) and Nelson (Austin), and then Trevino and Wegner to take place in San Antonio.

Thanks,

Michelle Michelle M. Maloney Marynell Maloney Law Firm. PLLC East Travis St.. Ste. 1800 San Antonio, Texas 78205 T: 210.212.8000 F: 210.212.8385 [email protected]

JT Please consider Ihc environment bcfuie priming ihis email. Think green..

This communication contains confidential infonnation intended for the use ofthc individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibiled. Any use. disscminntion, forwarding, priniing, or copying of this email without consent of the originator is strictly prohibited, If you have received this emuil in error, please immediately notify Marynell Maloney Law Firm, PLLC by telephone at 210-212-8000.

From: Romero, Josh rmallto:JromerogBiw.com1 Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2015 3:04 PM To: Michelle Maloney; Ryan Krebs [email protected]) (ryan(3)ryankrebsmdid.com) Cc: Allie Brown; Samantha Booker; Wyman, Michelle; Ryan Clement; Chad Castille; James, Monte; Celeste Malaise Subject: RE: Smith v. STRMC and Blackmon