DEFENDANT’s RESPONSES AND MARK BURKE’s REPLIES AND COMMENTS
Upon initial review of your submissions via e-serve I have the following questions, which are not exhaustive, but for the purposes of this email are suffice;
(i) Why was Defendant’s response and objection to Initial Disclosures not e-filed as well as e-served so it may be addressed by my reply, and include the court?
(ii) In Ms Andrews Dec. 27 response, she claimed the “office was closed” as reasoning why counsel for HCA did not respond to my email(s), including the Thursday, Dec. 22 early morning email questioning the sum and substance of the Initial Disclosures, which I find insincere. The reason I find Ms Andrew’s response insincere is because any vacation time, including office closures should be noticed to the court and the parties, and to avoid surprise. The court was open when you claim your office was closed. There was no notice to Plaintiff and the court your office was closed, so clearly that argument is unavailing.
(iii) My original petition states at page 42, “Count IV, Stalking”, which is wholly related to Imposter Doctor, Dr. Aguilar. Under what non-frivolous argument could you possibly claim Chapter 74 protection for a Chapter 85 claim, namely relying upon the need for a mandated medical report to refuse supplying a response (Defendant’s Objection)? And furthermore, the fact that “Dr. Aguilar” is not listed in your Initial Disclosures and responses as an employee of HCA Healthcare Inc., under what premise is Plaintiff legally obliged to furnish an Expert Report regarding an “Imposter Doctor’s” visits?
(iv) Response to (7): How can you refuse to supply details of your liability insurance in the initial disclosures, including the response “if any” when the record and my responses show you have $5m per claim coverage via HCA’s own insurance company?
In the abundance of caution, I also write to state on the record that I am extremely concerned about ongoing communications. In particular, since the date you filed your malicious counterclaim, Ms Madison Addicks and Ms Nicole Andrews have elected to directly respond to my emails, despite the fraudulent criminal assertions that I am “stalking and harassing”, including all employees of Serpe Andrews, PLLC, and HCA, including affiliates, family et al.
As such, I question herein how you have not elected to add pro hac vice counsel on the court docket to allow for an independent lawyer to broker and respond to my emails and inquiries as you continue to pursue your stalking and harassment claims, including injunctive relief?
I certainly do not wish to be deemed a “threat” by Defendant(s) for conferring, asking questions and responding to filings via email. Since I did not make these outrageous and fraudulent allegations, the legal burden is on you.
Please let me know if you wish to continue responding to the above questions and future correspondence related to these legal proceeding. If you continue to respond directly, I will view this as Defendant(s) having admitted to filing a frivolous counterclaim and applications for injunctive relief.
If you do not wish to respond directly going forward, silence is not a defense, so I anticipate a response on how you plan to timely address my questions and ability to confer, without prejudicing my case, my property and liberty, and/or causing further unnecessary delay.
Cheers
Mark Burke
CAUSE: 2022-68307, Burke, Mark v. HCA Houston Healthcare Kingwood
I refer to my recent e-filings, namely the
Dec. 20 filing, “Plaintiff’s Reply To HCA Houston Healthcare Kingwood’s Response To Plaintiff’s Plea In Abatement”,
the Dec. 25 filing “First Amended Motion for Sanctions, to Disqualify Serpe Andrews PLLC, Nicole G. Andrews and Madison J. Addicks and Order Release of Video Surveillance Footage to Plaintiff”
and
the Dec. 27 filing “Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Defendants KPH-Consolidation, Inc. d/b/a HCA Houston Healthcare Kingwood to Produce Rule 194.2 Initial Disclosures”
which are appearing on the docket, but not with any acceptance notice by the state e-file service to my registered email, browserweb@gmail.com, which has been normal in the past.
Could you advise why acceptance notices have stopped for the last 3 filings as stated above and as shown in the screenshot image attached as evidence, from my gmail account?
Secondly, I would like to withdraw the Motion to Compel (Dec. 27 filing above) as Initial Disclosures have been received. I have included opposing counsel in this email for transparency and notice.
Thank you for your assistance.
Cheers
Mark Burke
Cell: +1 (832) 781-6887
Fax: +1 (866) 705-0576
Email: doctor@kingwooddr.com
Web: KingwoodDr.com
The public ‘gripe site’ at KingwoodDr.com maintains a record of all communications between HCA Healthcare Inc., and myself in this matter, along with other articles of public concern, including “HCA holds the record for the largest Health Care FRAUD in American history”. This article confirms Congress is currently seeking another federal probe into HCA (as at Sept 2022).
DEFENDANT HCA HOUSTON HEALTHCARE KINGWOOD’S OBJECTION AND RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION AND INSPECTION
TO: PLAINTIFF, Mark Burke, 46 Kingwood Greens Drive, Kingwood, TX 77339
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 196, Defendant HCA Houston Healthcare Kingwood (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant”), serves their Objection and Response to Plaintiff’s Request for Production and Inspection:
[SIGNATURE ON NEXT PAGE]
Respectfully submitted,
SERPE ANDREWS, PLLC
By: /s/ Nicole G. Andrews
Nicole Andrews
Texas Bar No. 00792335 nandrews@serpeandrews.com Ben E. Hamel
Texas Bar No. 24103198 bhamel@serpeandrews.com Madison J. Addicks
Texas Bar No. 24132017 maddicks@serpeandrews.com
America Tower
2929 Allen Parkway, Suite 1600
Houston, TX 77019
(713) 452-4400 – Telephone
(713) 452-4499 – Facsimile
ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT
HCA HOUSTON HEALTHCARE KINGWOOD
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
This will certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document has been forwarded to all counsel of record pursuant to the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure on the 19th day of December 2022.
/s/ Nicole G. Andrews
Nicole Andrews
DEFENDANT HCA HOUSTON HEALTHCARE KINGWOOD’S OBJECTION AND RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION AND INSPECTION
Request 1: Production of electronic data in the form of video surveillance footage from August 9, 2022 through August 13, 2022 in .mp4 video format.
RESPONSE: Because Plaintiff has not produced a compliant expert report per Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 74.351(s), this request is premature and exceeds the scope of discovery. Pursuant to Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 74.351(s), “all discovery in a health care liability claim is stayed except for the acquisition by the claimant of information, including medical or hospital records or other documents or tangible things, related to the patient’s health care.”
Automated Certificate of eService
This automated certificate of service was created by the efiling system. The filer served this document via email generated by the efiling system on the date and to the persons listed below. The rules governing certificates of service have not changed. Filers must still provide a certificate of service that complies with all applicable rules.
Amanda Johnson on behalf of Madison Addicks Bar No. 24132017
ajohnson@serpeandrews.com Envelope ID: 71154461
Status as of 12/19/2022 5:41 PM CST
Case Contacts
| Name | BarNumber | TimestampSubmitted | Status | |
| Nicole G.Andrews | nandrews@serpeandrews.com | 12/19/2022 5:41:19 PM | SENT | |
| Priscilla Martinez | pmartinez@serpeandrews.com | 12/19/2022 5:41:19 PM | SENT | |
| Amanda Johnson | ajohnson@serpeandrews.com | 12/19/2022 5:41:19 PM | SENT | |
| Madison Addicks | maddicks@serpeandrews.com | 12/19/2022 5:41:19 PM | SENT | |
| Mark Burke | browserweb@gmail.com | 12/19/2022 5:41:19 PM | SENT | |
| Benjamin Hamel | bhamel@serpeandrews.com | 12/19/2022 5:41:19 PM | SENT |
- The correct names of the parties to this lawsuit;
RESPONSE: Defendant is named correctly.
- The name, address, and telephone number of any potential parties;
RESPONSE: None known at this time. Defendant will amend, if needed.
- The legal theories and, in general, the factual bases of the responding party’s claims or defenses (the responding party need not marshal all evidence that may be offered at trial);
RESPONSE: Please see Defendant’s most recent Answer.
- The amount and any method of calculating economic damages;
RESPONSE: Defendant is not seeking economic damages at this time. Defendant denies that Plaintiff is entitled to economic damages that are not established as reasonable and necessary by competent, relevant, and reliable expert testimony. Plaintiff’s damages, if any, are limited by Chapter 41 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code.
- The name, address, and telephone number of persons having knowledge of relevant facts and a brief statement of each identified person’s connection with the case;
RESPONSE: See Defendant’s Exhibit A. Defendant will supplement this Exhibit A in the event additional materials become available to Defendant and prior to the close of discovery, in accordance with the Court’s Scheduling Order.
Further, Defendant incorporates by reference all persons identified by any party, former party, or settling party as a person having knowledge of relevant facts and specifically reserves the right to call such person(s) to trial to testify in this matter.
Additionally, Defendant incorporates by reference all the parties to this lawsuit, all of the doctors and hospital personnel referred to in the medical and hospital records of Plaintiff relating to the incident made the basis of this lawsuit, any and all close friends and family members of Plaintiff, any and all persons identified in any party, former party, or settling party’s (1) answers to interrogatories, (2) responses to requests for production, (3) responses to requests for disclosure, (4) fact witness list, (5) designation of experts, and (6) any depositions which have or may be taken in this matter.
Defendant will also supplement by identifying testifying expert witnesses in accordance with Rule 195.5 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure.
- A copy – or a description by category and location – of all documents, electronically stored information, and tangible things that the responding party has in its possession, custody, or control, and may use to support its claims or defenses, unless the use would be solely for impeachment;
RESPONSE: The following is a description by category of documents, electronically stored information, and tangible things in Defendant’s possession, custody, or control that Defendant may use to support his claims or defenses:
- Medical records herein produced, Bates labeled and numbered BURKE KINGWOOD 000001 – 000202.
- Billing records herein produced, Bates labeled and numbered BURKE KINGWOOD 000203 – 000209.
- Radiology records herein produced, Bates labeled and numbered BURKE KINGWOOD 000210.
Please also see any documents produced by the parties and/or obtained through non- party discovery.
- Any indemnity and insuring agreements described in Rule 3(f);
RESPONSE: Defendant will supplement as these materials, if any, become available to Defendant and prior to the close of discovery, in accordance with the Court’s Scheduling Order.
- Any settlement statements described in Rule 3(g);
RESPONSE: None.
- Any witness statements described in Rule 3(h);
RESPONSE: Please refer to statements contained in MARK BURKE’S medical records, any party’s discovery responses, and/or in the depositions taken at any time during this litigation. Will supplement, if any.
- In a suit alleging physical or mental injury and damages from the occurrence that is the subject of the case, all medical records and bills that are reasonably related to the injuries or damages asserted or, in lieu thereof, an authorization permitting the disclosure of such medical records and bills;
RESPONSE: Any and all medical records/bills obtained by Defendant by virtue of an authorization will be made available to Plaintiff through Defendant’s record service and/or will be available for inspection and/or copying, at Plaintiff’s expense, at the law offices of Serpe | Andrews, PLLC, at a mutually agreeable date and time.
- In a suit alleging physical or mental injury or damages from the occurrence that is the subject of the case, all medical records and bills obtained by the responding party by virtue of an authorization furnished by the requesting party; and
RESPONSE: Any and all medical records/bills obtained by Defendant by virtue of an authorization will be made available through Defendant’s record service or will be available for inspection or copying, at the requesting party’s expense, at the law offices of Serpe | Andrews, PLLC, at a mutually agreeable date and time.
- The name, address, and telephone number of any person who may be designated as a responsible third party.
RESPONSE: None known at this time. Defendant reserves the right to supplement or amend this response, if needed, as this information becomes available to Defendant and prior to the close of discovery, in accordance with the Court’s Scheduling Order.
Automated Certificate of eService
This automated certificate of service was created by the efiling system. The filer served this document via email generated by the efiling system on the date and to the persons listed below. The rules governing certificates of service have not changed. Filers must still provide a certificate of service that complies with all applicable rules.
Amanda Johnson on behalf of Madison Addicks Bar No. 24132017
ajohnson@serpeandrews.com Envelope ID: 71154461
Status as of 12/19/2022 5:41 PM CST
Case Contacts
| Name | BarNumber | TimestampSubmitted | Status | |
| Nicole G.Andrews | nandrews@serpeandrews.com | 12/19/2022 5:41:19 PM | SENT | |
| Priscilla Martinez | pmartinez@serpeandrews.com | 12/19/2022 5:41:19 PM | SENT | |
| Amanda Johnson | ajohnson@serpeandrews.com | 12/19/2022 5:41:19 PM | SENT | |
| Madison Addicks | maddicks@serpeandrews.com | 12/19/2022 5:41:19 PM | SENT | |
| Mark Burke | browserweb@gmail.com | 12/19/2022 5:41:19 PM | SENT | |
| Benjamin Hamel | bhamel@serpeandrews.com | 12/19/2022 5:41:19 PM | SENT |
Parties
Mark Burke
By and through his attorney of record: Mark Burke
Pro Se
46 Kingwood Greens Drive Kingwood, TX 77339
(832) 781-6887
Plaintiff
Employees, Agents, Representatives and Custodian of Records:
HCA Houston Healthcare Kingwood
By and through its attorneys of record: Nicole G. Andrews
Ben E. Hamel, Madison J. Addicks
Serpe Andrews, PLLC
America Tower
2929 Allen Parkway, Suite 1600
Houston, Texas 77019
(713) 452-4400
Defendant/Healthcare Provider Including, but not limited to:
Briggs, Quiana T., NT Chaoui, Geno, RN Emanuel, Esther, LVN Flores, Tabatha, RN Gabriana, Romulo, RN Gimenez, Inna, RN, Goglas-cummings, Trac RN, Harris-Montgomery, Dariana, RN, Hernandez, Carlos, EMT Hosaini, Zahra, RN, Landry, Sheridan, NT Lawrence, Carrie, Diet Leger, Alleigh, Rad Tech Love, Tametris, LVN Lover, Tametris, LVN Luong, Jeremy, Rad Tech Kemp Wyall, Regina, RN Ngo, Ngoc, Rad Tech Palmer, Chrislelyn, RN Perez, Olivia, Regim Elizabeth, RN Rubaine, Selma, RN Seiffert, Michelle Simmons, Eric, RT (R, CT) Smith, Aunterior, LVN Slolordijk, Marisa, DS Solis, Iliana, RN,Souder, Samantha Tyson, Tracey, RT Watson, Daleila, CM
Non-Party Witnesses
Joanna Burke
Mother of Mark Burke
(281) 812-9591
Healthcare Providers
Employees, Agents, Representatives and Custodian of Records:
Avila Castillo, Daniel, MD R1
22999 Highway 59 N
Kingwood, TX 77339
(713) 852-1750
Internal Medicine Resident/Healthcare Provider
Employees, Agents, Representatives and Custodian of Records:
Barton, James, MD (Note; ER Doctor)
22999 Highway 59 N
Kingwood, TX 77339
(281) 348-8000
Emergency Medicine /Healthcare Provider
Employees, Agents, Representatives and Custodian of Records:
Chen, Phebe, MD
12121 Richmond Ave
Houston, TX 77082
(281) 558-3444
Radiology/Healthcare Provider
Employees, Agents, Representatives and Custodian of Records:
Chung, Randy, MD
(Claimed to be Lead Doc., conflicted by Imposter Doctor, Dr. Aguilar’s assertion and his reporting to Dr. Mowla)
310 Kingwood Executive Drive B Kingwood, TX 77339
(281) 764-9500
Gastroenterologist/Healthcare Provider
Employees, Agents, Representatives and Custodian of Records:
Dionee, Amy, APRNNP
22999 Highway 59 N, Suite 419
Kingwood, TX 77339
(281) 348-8560
Family Nurse Practitioner/Healthcare Provider
Employees, Agents, Representatives and Custodian of Records:
Ehsan, Sana, MD
(Note: Told to leave as Dr Aguilar et al my Doctors)
6467 Woodlans Pky
The Woodlands, TX 77381 (713) 461-2915
Family Medicine/Healthcare Provider
Employees, Agents, Representatives and Custodian of Records:
Hang, Robert, MD
21214 Northwest Fwy
Cypress, TX 77429
(832) 912-3500
Radiology/Healthcare Provider
Employees, Agents, Representatives and Custodian of Records:
Huong, Hoang, MD (my GP)
7821 FM 1960
Atascocita, TX 77346
(281) 500-9719
Family Practice/Healthcare Provider
Employees, Agents, Representatives and Custodian of Records:
Ilyas, Muzna, MD
22999 Highway 59 N, Ste #218
Kingwood, TX 77339
(713) 505-3433
Internal Medicine/Healthcare Provider
Employees, Agents, Representatives and Custodian of Records:
La, Ton, MD
22999 Highway 59 North, Suite 105
Humble, TX 77339
(281) 348-8000
Internal Medicine Resident/Healthcare Provider
Employees, Agents, Representatives and Custodian of Records:
Mowla, Mohammed, MD
( appeared to report to this Doc.)
9250 Pinecroft Drive
Shenandoah, TX 77380
(713) 897-7590
Internal Medicine/Healthcare Provider
Employees, Agents, Representatives and Custodian of Records:
Rahimi, Jamal, MD
22999 Highway 59 N
Humble, TX 77339
(281) 348-8000
Emergency Medicine/Healthcare Provider
Employees, Agents, Representatives and Custodian of Records:
Tatineni, Lakshmi, MD R2
22999 Highway 59 N
Kingwood, TX 77339
(281) 348-8934
Resident/Healthcare Provider
Employees, Agents, Representatives and Custodian of Records:
Wong, Mike MD R1
(Jr. Doc., would arrive shortly after Imposter Doctor, Dr. Aguilar each morning, except Friday, when Aguilar was a no show)
22999 Highway 59 N
Kingwood, TX 77339
(281) 348-8000
Resident/Healthcare Provider
Other
Employees, Agents, Representatives and Custodian of Records:
Friday Hix
PO Box 194
Sidney, NE 69162
(844) 451-4444
Insurance Provider
Further, Defendant incorporates by reference all persons identified by any party, former party, and/or settling party as a person having knowledge of relevant facts, and specifically reserves the right to call such person(s) to testify at the trial of this matter.
Additionally, Defendant incorporates by reference all the parties to this lawsuit, all physicians and hospital personnel referred to in the medical and hospital records of Plaintiff relating to the incident made the basis of this lawsuit, any and all close friends and family members of Plaintiff, any and all persons identified in any party, former party, and/or settling party’s (1) answers to Interrogatories, (2) responses to Request for Production, (3) responses to Request for Disclosure, (4) fact witness list, (5) designation of experts, and (6) any depositions which may be taken in this matter.
Automated Certificate of eService
This automated certificate of service was created by the efiling system. The filer served this document via email generated by the efiling system on the date and to the persons listed below. The rules governing certificates of service have not changed. Filers must still provide a certificate of service that complies with all applicable rules.
Amanda Johnson on behalf of Madison Addicks Bar No. 24132017
ajohnson@serpeandrews.com Envelope ID: 71154461
Status as of 12/19/2022 5:41 PM CST
Case Contacts
| Name | BarNumber | TimestampSubmitted | Status | |
| Nicole G.Andrews | nandrews@serpeandrews.com | 12/19/2022 5:41:19 PM | SENT | |
| Priscilla Martinez | pmartinez@serpeandrews.com | 12/19/2022 5:41:19 PM | SENT | |
| Amanda Johnson | ajohnson@serpeandrews.com | 12/19/2022 5:41:19 PM | SENT | |
| Madison Addicks | maddicks@serpeandrews.com | 12/19/2022 5:41:19 PM | SENT | |
| Mark Burke | browserweb@gmail.com | 12/19/2022 5:41:19 PM | SENT | |
| Benjamin Hamel | bhamel@serpeandrews.com | 12/19/2022 5:41:19 PM | SENT |
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPEL DEFENDANTS KPH-CONSOLIDATION, INC. D/B/A HCA HOUSTON HEALTHCARE KINGWOOD TO PRODUCE RULE 194.2 INITIAL DISCLOSURES
Originally Published: Dec. 27, 2022 | Republished: Dec. 27, 2022
Mark Burke, Plaintiff, files this Motion to Compel HCA’s Initial Disclosures, due on December 19, 2022. Defendant has failed to provide to Plaintiff the information or material required by Rule 194.2 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure.
VIOLATION OF RULE 194.2 MANDATORY INITIAL DISCLOSURES
In this Case, the Unscrupulous Delay Tactics Keep Coming
Defendant(s) have failed to provide mandatory initial disclosures in the 30 day timeline allowed. See; In re Modern Senior Living, LLC, No. 05-22-00283-CV, at *1 n.1 (Tex. App. June 17, 2022) (“Rule 194.2, “Initial Disclosures,” was amended in 2020, but the changes are effective only for cases filed after January 1, 2021. See Misc. Dkt. No. 20-9153 (Tex. Dec. 23, 2020).”).
After process of service was completed, and “Affidavit of Service – KPH-CONSOLIDATION INC” recorded on the docket on Nov. 2, 2022, a response was also recorded on the docket on Nov. 17, 2022, “Defendant HCA Houston Healthcare Kingwood’s Original Answer and Jury Demand”.
This starts the 30 day clock to provide the Mandatory Initial Disclosures, which would be due on or before Monday, December 19, 2022. HCA Lawyers sent two emails to Plaintiff on the deadline day, referencing a link to Mark Burke’s medical records and a second email with password to access those records. On Thursday, Dec. 22, 2022, Plaintiff emailed HCA Lawyers[1];
“Top of the morn’ to y’all,
I have received and downloaded the medical records you securely emailed.
The USPS delivery was attempted but failed. I shall collect the same from USPS, but acknowledge you’ve mailed what I assume to be the radiology imaging referred to in Ms. Johnson’s email dated Dec. 19.[2]
Question, is this to be construed as your entire Rule 194 disclosure response? If not, when can I expect to receive your response?
Cheers, Mark Burke”
In what has become standard practice, this email has unsurprisingly been snubbed by HCA Lawyers, with no response received by the time of this filing. It is yet another contemptible Rules Violation by HCA Lawyers, trading as Serpe Andrews, PLLC.
Plaintiff is Not Alone as HCA and HCA Lawyers Defy Compliance with the Rules
The unchecked, contemptuous, and persistent abuses of Texas Rules of Procedure by Defendant(s) for the purpose of delay is clear and obvious. See; Motion to Compel[3] HCA and HCA Lawyers (Serpe Andrews, PLLC)[4] to Provide Initial Disclosures, Including $1,000 in Attorney Fees Requested by Zar Law Firm in Cause No. 2022-66824 – WILLIS, THERESA (INDIVIDUALLY AND AS SURVIVING SPOUSE AND NEXT FRIEND vs. KPH-CONSOLIDATION INC (DBA HCA HOUSTON HEALTHCARE KINGWOOD) (Court 133).
APPLICABLE AUTHORITIES
Except as exempted by Rule 194.2(d) or as otherwise agreed by the parties or ordered by the court, a party must, without awaiting a discovery request, provide to the other parties the information or material described in Rule 194.2, 194.3, and 194.4. Tex. R. Civ. P. 194.1.
A party must make the initial disclosures within 30 days after the filing of the first answer or general appearance unless a different time is set by the parties’ agreement or court order. Tex. R. Civ. P. 194.2(a).
A party that is first served or otherwise joined after the filing of the first answer or general appearance must make the initial disclosures within 30 days after being served or joined, unless a different time is set by the parties’ agreement or court order.
Defendant has not provided to Plaintiff their required disclosures. Based on these reasons, Plaintiff respectfully requests the Court to compel Defendant to provide Plaintiff with their required disclosures.
RELIEF REQUESTED
Plaintiff respectfully requests the Court to compel Defendant to produce their Rule 194.2 Initial Disclosures.
Plaintiff requests the court admonish Defendant(s) for refusing to communicate and compel Defendant’s [new] counsel to immediately comply fully with Rule 194.2, so as to prevent further delay as detailed in Plaintiff’s “FIRST AMENDED MOTION FOR SANCTIONS, TO DISQUALIFY SERPE ANDREWS PLLC, NICOLE G. ANDREWS, AND MADISON J. ADDICKS AND ORDER RELEASE OF VIDEO SURVEILLANCE FOOTAGE TO PLAINTIFF”, submitted to this court on Dec. 25, 2022.
Finally, any and all other relief this court may introduce, including addressing the repetitive Rule violations by Serpe Andrews, PLLC.
CONCLUSION
In Delaney v. University of Houston, 835 S.W.2d 56, 65 (Tex. 1992) (“Texas Lawyer’s Creed — A Mandate for Professionalism (adopted November 7, 1989), which states:
“Lawyers and judges are equally responsible to protect the dignity and independence of the Court and the profession.””).
The Texas Supreme Court states;
“Members of the legal profession have agreed to live under rules proclaiming that it is “a lawyer’s duty to uphold legal process,” that “[a] lawyer’s conduct should conform to the requirements of the law,” and that “[a] lawyer should demonstrate respect for the legal system and for those who serve it . . . .”
The continued viability of the rule of law depends on the bench and bar adhering faithfully to these obligations. To do otherwise impugns the integrity of our judicial institutions and undermines the public’s trust in their objectivity and reliability.
As judges and lawyers, we bear a sacred obligation to uphold the rule of law even when the law does not conform to what we believe it should be.
That duty includes withstanding the temptation to bend and abuse legal process to collect an earnestly desired result the law simply does not provide.
Those who underhandedly indulge that temptation dishonor both our profession and the rule of law.”
– In re Texas, No. 15-0139, at *5 (Tex. Apr. 15, 2016).
For the foregoing reasons, the Plaintiff’s Motion should be granted.
RESPECTFULLY submitted this 27th day of December, 2022.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct (Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code 132.001)
__________________
Mark Burke
State of Texas / Pro Se
[1] Exhibit: “Email to SA on Dec22 re Mandatory Initial Disclosures“.
[2] This mail item was determined to be the radiology imaging, which Mark Burke collected directly from USPS in Kingwood on Friday morning, Dec. 23, 2022.
[3] Exhibit: “Motion to Compel: Violation of Rule 194.2 in a Recent HCA and Serpe Andrews PLLC Lawsuit in HCDC, CAUSE NO. 2022-66824”
[4] Exhibit: “Serpe Andrews Team per Website, as at Dec. 8, 2022“, Bates No. SA009TEAM.
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 191.2 and Local Rule 3.3.6, I hereby certify that prior to filing this motion, I conferred with Defense counsel regarding Defendants’ required disclosure through email, but Defense counsel never responded.
I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing first amended motion has been forwarded to:
Nicole G. Andrews
Madison J. Addicks
Serpe Andrews, PLLC
2929 Allen Pkwy
Suite 1600
Houston, TX 77019
by electronic filing notification and/or electronic mail and/or facsimile and/or certified mail, return receipt requested, this the 27th day of December, 2022.
doctor
