In Re Nonparty Patient No. 1, Nonparty Patient No. 2, Nonparty Patient No. 3, Nonparty Patient No. 4, Nonparty Patient No. 5, Nonparty Patient No. 6, Nonparty Patient No. 7, Nonparty Patient No. 8, Nonparty Patient No. 9, Nonparty Patient No. 10, and Nonparty Patient No. 11 v. the State of Texas
Opinion
ACCEPTED 15-25-00032-CV FIFTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 4/2/2025 9:07 PM No. 15-25-00032-CV CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE CLERK FILED IN IN THE FIFTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS 15th COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS AUSTIN, TEXAS 4/2/2025 9:07:44 PM CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE Clerk In re Nonparty Patient No. 1, Nonparty Patient No. 2, Nonparty Patient No. 3, Nonparty Patient No. 4, Nonparty Patient No. 5, Nonparty Patient No. 6, Nonparty Patient No. 7, Nonparty Patient No. 8, Nonparty Patient No. 9, Nonparty Patient No. 10, and Nonparty Patient No. 11, Relators
On Petition for a Writ of Mandamus From the 493rd District Court of Collin County, Texas, Cause No. 493-08026-2024 The Honorable Judge Christina A. Nowak, Presiding
DECLARATION OF THANH D. NGUYEN IN SUPPORT OF RELATORS’ SECOND EMERGENCY MOTION TO STAY
Jervonne D. Newsome (Lead Counsel) William M. Logan Texas Bar No. 24094869 Texas Bar No. 24106214 jnewsome@winston.com wlogan@winston.com Thanh D. Nguyen Evan D. Lewis Texas Bar No. 24126931 edlewis@winston.com tdnguyen@winston.com Texas Bar No. 24116670 Jonathan Hung Olivia A. Wogon Texas Bar No. 24143033 Texas Bar No. 24137299 johung@winston.com owogon@winston.com WINSTON & STRAWN LLP WINSTON & STRAWN LLP 2121 N. Pearl St., 9th Floor 800 Capitol Street, Suite 2400 Dallas, TX 75201 Houston, TX 77002 Telephone: (214) 453-6500 Telephone: (713) 651-2600
1 1. My name is Thanh D. Nguyen. I represent Relators in this Petition for
a Writ of Mandamus. I am a member in good standing of the State Bar of Texas. I
provide this Declaration in support of Relators’ Second Emergency Motion to Stay.
I have personal knowledge of the facts stated herein, and I could and would testify
thereto if called as a witness in this matter.
2. On March 26, 2025, the 493rd District Court held a hearing on two
motions: the State of Texas’s Motion to Seal Court Records and Nonparty Children’s
Health System of Texas’s (“Children’s”) Unopposed Motion to Seal Court Records.
The hearing was noticed for 8:30 a.m. The motions were not opposed by any party
or nonparty.
3. Regrettably, I arrived at the hearing about ten minutes late.
4. When I walked into the courtroom, the hearing had already begun, and
I sat in the gallery. The court’s bailiff approached me, and I let him know that I was
there to observe the hearings. I also conveyed that I was an attorney for the Relators,
but I did not anticipate having a speaking role.
5. I decided not to stand up, interrupt the proceedings, and ask that my
appearance be noted on the record.
2 6. I abstained from doing so because only two unopposed, uncontroversial
motions were set to be heard, my clients did not oppose the motion, and the
proceedings were unfolding smoothly.
7. Attached to Relators’ Second Emergency Motion to Stay as Exhibit A
is a true and correct copy of the Intervenor Texas Attorney General’s Verified
Motion to Show Authority in Cause No. 493-08026-2024.
8. Attached to Relators’ Second Emergency Motion to Stay as Exhibit B
is a true and correct copy of the transcript of the hearing held on March 26, 2025 in
the 493rd District Court.
9. Attached to Relators’ Second Emergency Motion to Stay as Exhibit C
is a true and correct copy of an email chain between counsel for the parties and
Relators in Cause Nos. 493-07676-2024, 493-08026-2024 concerning UTSW’s
production requirements.
10. Attached to Relators’ Second Emergency Motion to Stay as Exhibit D
is a true and correct copy of an email chain between counsel for the parties and
Relators in Cause Nos. 493-07676-2024, 493-08026-2024 and Ms. Amy Patterson,
Court Coordinator for the 493rd District Court.
11. Attached to Relators’ Second Emergency Motion to Stay as Exhibit E
is a true and correct copy of an email chain between counsel for the parties and
Relators in Cause Nos. 493-07676-2024, 493-08026-2024 concerning the
3 production of documents by UTSW. Pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 9.9, I have redacted
a URL that connects a user to the Box website that stored patient records.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed in Dallas County, State of Texas, on the 2nd day of April, 2025.
/s/ Thanh D. Nguyen Thanh D. Nguyen
4 Exhibit A CAUSE NO. 493-08026-2024
THE STATE OF TEXAS, § IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF Plaintiff, § § § v. § COLLIN COUNTY, TEXAS § § M. BRETT COOPER, M.D., § Defendant. § 493rd JUDICIAL DISTRICT
INTERVENOR TEXAS ATTORNEY GENERAL’S VERIFIED MOTION TO SHOW AUTHORITY
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 12, Ken Paxton, in his official capacity as the
Attorney General of Texas, files this Motion to Show Authority and challenges the authority of
retained counsel to appear on behalf of non-party University of Texas Southwestern Medical
Center (“UT Southwestern”) in this matter.
Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 12 authorizes any party to challenge an attorney’s authority
to represent a party in a lawsuit. 1 The burden of proof is on the challenged attorney to demonstrate
such authority. Tex. R. Civ. P. 12.
“Except as authorized by other law, a contract for legal services between an attorney, other
than a full-time employee of the agency, and a state agency in the executive department, other than
an agency established by the Texas Constitution, must be approved by the attorney general to be
valid.” Tex. Gov’t Code § 402.0212(a). The Texas Legislature reinforces this requirement in the
General Appropriations Act passed in each legislative session: “[a] state governmental entity may
not initiate the process of selecting outside legal counsel prior to receiving the approval of the
1 Here, UT Southwestern has indicated its intent to participate in this litigation as the subject of a subpoena, which may include appearing before this Court. See Tex. R. Civ. P. 176.6(d), (e).
Intervenor’s Motion to Show Authority Page 1 Attorney General to retain outside legal counsel.” General Appropriations Act (“GAA”), 88th
Leg., R.S., H.B. 1, ch. 1170, 2023 Tex. Gen. Laws (art. XI, § 16.01(a)(5)). For purposes of this
section, “state governmental entity” means a board, commission, department, office, or other
agency in the executive branch of state government created under the constitution or a statute,
including an institution of higher education. Id. at § 16.01(k) (emphasis added).
UT Southwestern is part of the University of Texas (“UT”) System. 2 UT System does
not dispute that Intervenor must grant permission to retain outside counsel: “By law, the Texas
Attorney General’s Office must approve all state agency contracts for outside legal services.
Within the UT System, every contract is approved by the Vice Chancellor and General Counsel.
For this reason, the Office of General Counsel coordinates all requests to the Texas Attorney
General for permission to retain counsel.” 3
Following the law and UT System policy, on or about January 21, 2025, UT Southwestern,
through UT System, requested permission from Intervenor to retain outside counsel to represent
it in responding to discovery in this lawsuit. See Exhibit A at pp. 1–2. That request was denied on
or about February 20, 2025. See id. at pp. 3–4.
Despite not receiving the permission required to retain outside counsel, it appears UT
Southwestern, in violation of state law, retained David Walsh of Kershaw Anderson King, PLLC
to represent it in this matter. Specifically, on or about March 3, 2025, Mr. Walsh represented to
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
ACCEPTED 15-25-00032-CV FIFTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 4/2/2025 9:07 PM No. 15-25-00032-CV CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE CLERK FILED IN IN THE FIFTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS 15th COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS AUSTIN, TEXAS 4/2/2025 9:07:44 PM CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE Clerk In re Nonparty Patient No. 1, Nonparty Patient No. 2, Nonparty Patient No. 3, Nonparty Patient No. 4, Nonparty Patient No. 5, Nonparty Patient No. 6, Nonparty Patient No. 7, Nonparty Patient No. 8, Nonparty Patient No. 9, Nonparty Patient No. 10, and Nonparty Patient No. 11, Relators
On Petition for a Writ of Mandamus From the 493rd District Court of Collin County, Texas, Cause No. 493-08026-2024 The Honorable Judge Christina A. Nowak, Presiding
DECLARATION OF THANH D. NGUYEN IN SUPPORT OF RELATORS’ SECOND EMERGENCY MOTION TO STAY
Jervonne D. Newsome (Lead Counsel) William M. Logan Texas Bar No. 24094869 Texas Bar No. 24106214 jnewsome@winston.com wlogan@winston.com Thanh D. Nguyen Evan D. Lewis Texas Bar No. 24126931 edlewis@winston.com tdnguyen@winston.com Texas Bar No. 24116670 Jonathan Hung Olivia A. Wogon Texas Bar No. 24143033 Texas Bar No. 24137299 johung@winston.com owogon@winston.com WINSTON & STRAWN LLP WINSTON & STRAWN LLP 2121 N. Pearl St., 9th Floor 800 Capitol Street, Suite 2400 Dallas, TX 75201 Houston, TX 77002 Telephone: (214) 453-6500 Telephone: (713) 651-2600
1 1. My name is Thanh D. Nguyen. I represent Relators in this Petition for
a Writ of Mandamus. I am a member in good standing of the State Bar of Texas. I
provide this Declaration in support of Relators’ Second Emergency Motion to Stay.
I have personal knowledge of the facts stated herein, and I could and would testify
thereto if called as a witness in this matter.
2. On March 26, 2025, the 493rd District Court held a hearing on two
motions: the State of Texas’s Motion to Seal Court Records and Nonparty Children’s
Health System of Texas’s (“Children’s”) Unopposed Motion to Seal Court Records.
The hearing was noticed for 8:30 a.m. The motions were not opposed by any party
or nonparty.
3. Regrettably, I arrived at the hearing about ten minutes late.
4. When I walked into the courtroom, the hearing had already begun, and
I sat in the gallery. The court’s bailiff approached me, and I let him know that I was
there to observe the hearings. I also conveyed that I was an attorney for the Relators,
but I did not anticipate having a speaking role.
5. I decided not to stand up, interrupt the proceedings, and ask that my
appearance be noted on the record.
2 6. I abstained from doing so because only two unopposed, uncontroversial
motions were set to be heard, my clients did not oppose the motion, and the
proceedings were unfolding smoothly.
7. Attached to Relators’ Second Emergency Motion to Stay as Exhibit A
is a true and correct copy of the Intervenor Texas Attorney General’s Verified
Motion to Show Authority in Cause No. 493-08026-2024.
8. Attached to Relators’ Second Emergency Motion to Stay as Exhibit B
is a true and correct copy of the transcript of the hearing held on March 26, 2025 in
the 493rd District Court.
9. Attached to Relators’ Second Emergency Motion to Stay as Exhibit C
is a true and correct copy of an email chain between counsel for the parties and
Relators in Cause Nos. 493-07676-2024, 493-08026-2024 concerning UTSW’s
production requirements.
10. Attached to Relators’ Second Emergency Motion to Stay as Exhibit D
is a true and correct copy of an email chain between counsel for the parties and
Relators in Cause Nos. 493-07676-2024, 493-08026-2024 and Ms. Amy Patterson,
Court Coordinator for the 493rd District Court.
11. Attached to Relators’ Second Emergency Motion to Stay as Exhibit E
is a true and correct copy of an email chain between counsel for the parties and
Relators in Cause Nos. 493-07676-2024, 493-08026-2024 concerning the
3 production of documents by UTSW. Pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 9.9, I have redacted
a URL that connects a user to the Box website that stored patient records.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed in Dallas County, State of Texas, on the 2nd day of April, 2025.
/s/ Thanh D. Nguyen Thanh D. Nguyen
4 Exhibit A CAUSE NO. 493-08026-2024
THE STATE OF TEXAS, § IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF Plaintiff, § § § v. § COLLIN COUNTY, TEXAS § § M. BRETT COOPER, M.D., § Defendant. § 493rd JUDICIAL DISTRICT
INTERVENOR TEXAS ATTORNEY GENERAL’S VERIFIED MOTION TO SHOW AUTHORITY
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 12, Ken Paxton, in his official capacity as the
Attorney General of Texas, files this Motion to Show Authority and challenges the authority of
retained counsel to appear on behalf of non-party University of Texas Southwestern Medical
Center (“UT Southwestern”) in this matter.
Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 12 authorizes any party to challenge an attorney’s authority
to represent a party in a lawsuit. 1 The burden of proof is on the challenged attorney to demonstrate
such authority. Tex. R. Civ. P. 12.
“Except as authorized by other law, a contract for legal services between an attorney, other
than a full-time employee of the agency, and a state agency in the executive department, other than
an agency established by the Texas Constitution, must be approved by the attorney general to be
valid.” Tex. Gov’t Code § 402.0212(a). The Texas Legislature reinforces this requirement in the
General Appropriations Act passed in each legislative session: “[a] state governmental entity may
not initiate the process of selecting outside legal counsel prior to receiving the approval of the
1 Here, UT Southwestern has indicated its intent to participate in this litigation as the subject of a subpoena, which may include appearing before this Court. See Tex. R. Civ. P. 176.6(d), (e).
Intervenor’s Motion to Show Authority Page 1 Attorney General to retain outside legal counsel.” General Appropriations Act (“GAA”), 88th
Leg., R.S., H.B. 1, ch. 1170, 2023 Tex. Gen. Laws (art. XI, § 16.01(a)(5)). For purposes of this
section, “state governmental entity” means a board, commission, department, office, or other
agency in the executive branch of state government created under the constitution or a statute,
including an institution of higher education. Id. at § 16.01(k) (emphasis added).
UT Southwestern is part of the University of Texas (“UT”) System. 2 UT System does
not dispute that Intervenor must grant permission to retain outside counsel: “By law, the Texas
Attorney General’s Office must approve all state agency contracts for outside legal services.
Within the UT System, every contract is approved by the Vice Chancellor and General Counsel.
For this reason, the Office of General Counsel coordinates all requests to the Texas Attorney
General for permission to retain counsel.” 3
Following the law and UT System policy, on or about January 21, 2025, UT Southwestern,
through UT System, requested permission from Intervenor to retain outside counsel to represent
it in responding to discovery in this lawsuit. See Exhibit A at pp. 1–2. That request was denied on
or about February 20, 2025. See id. at pp. 3–4.
Despite not receiving the permission required to retain outside counsel, it appears UT
Southwestern, in violation of state law, retained David Walsh of Kershaw Anderson King, PLLC
to represent it in this matter. Specifically, on or about March 3, 2025, Mr. Walsh represented to
counsel for Plaintiff that he had been retained to represent non-party UT Southwestern in response
to a subpoena served by Plaintiff. See Exhibit B. It cannot be reasonably disputed that UT
Southwestern acted in contravention of state law as it did not get permission to retain Mr. Walsh
2 UT System Institutions, https://www.utsystem.edu/institutions, last accessed Mar. 4, 2025. 3 Outside Counsel, https://www.utsystem.edu/offices/general-counsel/outside-counsel, last accessed Mar. 4, 2025.
Intervenor’s Motion to Show Authority Page 2 or any other outside counsel. GAA § 16.01(b). Nor does this matter—representing UT
Southwestern in responding to a discovery subpoena in a case where UT Southwestern is not a
defendant—permit expenditure of appropriated monies for outside legal counsel without first
obtaining Intervenor’s permission to do so. See id. § 16.01(h).
Intervenor asks that the Court grant his Verified Motion and require UT Southwestern’s
attorney to show his authority to represent UT Southwestern in this matter and, should UT
Southwestern’s attorney fail to show such authority, that he be prevented from appearing on behalf
of UT Southwestern in this matter, and for such other and further relief, both general and special,
at law or in equity, to which he may show himself to be justly entitled.
Intervenor’s Motion to Show Authority Page 3 Respectfully submitted,
KEN PAXTON Attorney General
BRENT WEBSTER First Assistant Attorney General
RALPH MOLINA Deputy First Assistant Attorney General
AUSTIN KINGHORN Deputy Attorney General for Civil Litigation
KIMBERLY GDULA Chief, General Litigation Division
/s/ Kimberly Gdula Kimberly Gdula Texas Bar No. 24052209 Chief Brianna M. Krominga Texas Bar No. 24103252 Assistant Attorney General General Litigation Division P.O. Box 12548 Austin, Texas 78711 (512) 475-4071 – Phone (512) 320-0667 – Fax kimberly.gdula@oag.texas.gov brianna.krominga@oag.texas.gov ATTORNEYS FOR INTERVENOR
Intervenor’s Motion to Show Authority Page 4 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on the 4th day of March 2025, a copy of the foregoing document was served to all counsel of record in accordance with the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. Additionally, a copy of this document was sent via electronic delivery to:
David Walsh Kershaw Anderson King, PLLC dwalsh@kaktxlaw.com
/s/ Kimberly Gdula KIMBERLY GDULA Chief
Intervenor’s Motion to Show Authority Page 5 DECLARATION OF KIMBERLY GDULA IN SUPPORT OF VERIFIED MOTION TO SHOW AUTHORITY
State of Texas County of Travis My name is Kimberly Gdula. I am counsel for Intervenor, and I am over the age of 18 years, competent to make this declaration, and have personal knowledge of the facts herein stated or have gained knowledge through a review of records maintained by the Office of the Texas Attorney General. I declare under penalty of perjury that the facts contained in the Intervenor’s Motion to Show Authority are true and correct. My name is Kimberly Gdula, and I am an employee of the following governmental agency: Office of the Texas Attorney General. I am executing this declaration as part of my assigned duties and responsibilities. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in Travis County, State of Texas, on the 4th day of March 2025.
/s/ Kimberly Gdula Declarant
Intervenor’s Motion to Show Authority Page 6 EXHIBIT “A” EXHIBIT “B” From: David Walsh To: Johnathan Stone Subject: FW: State v. Cooper/Lau and Nonparty Patients v. State Date: Monday, March 3, 2025 5:59:21 PM
Johnathan – my email below bounced back because of a typo in your email address. Please see below.
David M. Walsh IV | Partner Board Certified Civil Appellate Law Texas Board of Legal Specialization KERSHAW ANDERSON KING, PLLC 12400 Coit Rd., Ste. 800, Dallas, Texas 75251 Main: 214.347.4993 Email: dwalsh@kaktxlaw.com www.kershawandersonking.com
From: David Walsh Sent: Monday, March 3, 2025 5:53 PM To: jonathan.stone@oag.texas.gov; matt.kennedy@oag.texas.gov; rob.farquharson@oag.texas.gov; david.shatto@oag.texas.gov Subject: State v. Cooper/Lau and Nonparty Patients v. State
All -- Good evening. I have been retained to represent UT Southwestern related to the State’s cases against Drs. Lau and Cooper as well as the Nonparty Patients’ issues regarding discovery of their medical records. UTSW views itself as a neutral third party in this matter, but it does have obligations to the underlying patients, particularly regarding their privacy, under federal and state law as well as institutional privileges that may need to be asserted—as they would in any litigation. To that end, in the coming days, I will be responding on behalf of UTSW to the subpoenas issued by the State as well as addressing the Court’s orders from last week. When you have a moment, can you please give me a call to discuss the discovery addressed to UTSW? I look forward to working with you on these discovery issues.
dmw
David M. Walsh IV | Partner Board Certified Civil Appellate Law Texas Board of Legal Specialization KERSHAW ANDERSON KING, PLLC 12400 Coit Rd., Ste. 800, Dallas, Texas 75251 Main: 214.347.4993 Email: dwalsh@kaktxlaw.com www.kershawandersonking.com Exhibit B 1
2 TRIAL COURT CAUSE NO. 493-07676-2024 TRIAL COURT CAUSE NO. 493-08026-2024 3
4 THE STATE OF TEXAS, § IN THE DISTRICT COURT § 5 § Plaintiff, § 6 § VS. § 7 § 493RD JUDICIAL DISTRICT § 8 MAY C. LAU, M.D., § § 9 § Defendant. § COLLIN COUNTY, TEXAS 10
11 THE STATE OF TEXAS, § IN THE DISTRICT COURT 12 § § 13 Plaintiff, § § 14 VS. § § 493RD JUDICIAL DISTRICT 15 § M. BRETT COOPER, M.D., § 16 § § 17 Defendant. § COLLIN COUNTY, TEXAS
19 ***********************
21 ***********************
22 On the 26th day of March, 2025, the following proceedings came on to be heard in the above-entitled 23 and numbered cause before the Honorable Christine Nowak, Judge presiding, held in McKinney, Collin County, Texas; 24 Proceedings reported by machine shorthand. 25 2
2 FOR THE PLAINTIFF, THE STATE OF TEXAS:
(VIA ZOOM) 4 SBOT: #24104114 OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 5 PO Box 12548 Austin, Texas 78711 6 Phone: 512-936-2613 David.shatto@oag.texas.gov 7
SBOT: #24100550 PO Box 12548 10 Austin, Texas 78711 Phone: 512-936-2613 11 Robert.farquharson@oag.texas.gov
12 FOR THE DEFENDANT, MAY C. LAU, M.D.: 13 MR. JOHN V. TREVINO, JR. 14 SBOT: #24003082 LEBOEUF LAW, PLLC 15 325 North Saint Paul Street Suite 3400 16 Dallas, Texas 75201 Phone: 214-624-9803 17 Info@leboeuflaw.com
18 FOR THE DEFENDANT, M. BRETT COOPER, M.D.: 19 MS. ANIKA HOLLAND 20 (VIA ZOOM) CA Bar#336071 333 Bush Street 22 Floor 34 San Francisco, California 94104 23 Phone: 415-858-7411 Aholland@willkie.com 24 - AND - 25 3
(VIA ZOOM) 2 CA Bar#347453 Willkie Farr & Gallagher, LLP 3 333 Bush Street Floor 34 4 San Francisco, California 94104 Phone: 415-858-7411 5 Zpackman@willkie.com
6 FOR THE CHILDREN'S HEALTH NONPARTY PATIENTS: 7 MS. JACKIE COOPER 8 SBOT: #24050861 COOPER & SCULLY, PC 9 900 Jackson Street Suite 100 10 Dallas, Texas 75202 214-712-9500 11 Jackie.Cooper@cooperscully.com
25 4
2 (MOTION TO SEAL)
3 3/26/25 Page Vol
4 Appearances.................................... 2
5 Proceedings................................... 5
6 Movant's Motion to Seal....................... 6 7 Court's Ruling................................ 7
8 Plaintiff's Motion to Seal.................... 8 Court's Ruling................................ 9 9 Reporter's Certificate......................... 13 10
25 5
2 THE COURT: At this time the Court calls
3 the following Cause Numbers: 493-07676-2024. This is
4 the State of Texas versus May C. Lau. As well the Court
5 calls 493-08026-2024. This is the State of Texas versus
6 M. Brett Cooper, M.D. In connection with each of these
7 cases, there is a pending sealing request which we're
8 here to address today.
9 The Court will just note for purposes of
10 the record, we -- the hearing today was properly
11 noticed. The Court has called both the hall and the
12 courtroom. There are no persons from the public that
13 are present. So we'll go ahead and address, first,
14 Children's motion.
15 If I could have an appearance on behalf of
16 counsel present here in the courtroom.
17 MS. COOPER: This is Jackie Cooper for
18 non-party movant, Children's Health.
19 THE COURT: Thank you.
20 MR. FARQUHARSON: And Rob Farquharson for
21 the State.
22 THE COURT: Thank you.
23 MR. TREVINO: John Trevino for Dr. Lau.
24 THE COURT: And with us via Zoom.
25 MS. HOLLAND: Anika Holland for Dr. Cooper. 6
1 MS. PACKMAN: Zoe Packman for Dr. Cooper.
2 MR. SHATTO: And David Shatto with the
3 State.
4 THE COURT: All right. Thank you,
5 everyone. Again, I'm just going to note for purposes of
6 the record, the public was properly noticed in
7 connection with today's hearing. As well, all persons
8 associated with this cause were noticed that we were
9 having the hearing on the sealing request today. So
10 with that, I'm going to turn this over to Children's.
11 MS. COOPER: Thank you, Your Honor. I
12 think the request is pretty simple. We filed a Rule 76A
13 and the Court has ordered a temporary order -- or sorry
14 -- a temporary sealing of the court record in question.
15 We're not asking for the entire document to be sealed
16 but rather just the exhibit that contains confidential
17 information. So this is -- the permanent request is a
18 little bit more narrow than the temporary request.
19 And I brought orders for the Court to
20 review and for the State and whoever else wants to look
21 at it, but it tracks almost exactly the language of the
22 court's temporary order just changing it to exhibit
23 versus the whole filing.
24 THE COURT: Again, I have noted that there
25 are no persons present from the public, and thus there 7
1 are no public members who object. Let me ask at this
2 time for all counsel who are present here today, do any
3 of you have any objection whatsoever to permanently
4 seal? If so, speak now.
5 MR. FARQUHARSON: None from the State.
6 MR. TREVINO: None, Your Honor, from
7 Dr. Lau.
8 THE COURT: Dr. Cooper?
9 MR. SHATTO: None from Dr. Cooper.
10 THE COURT: All right. So that covering
11 all counsel for parties who are present, the Court finds
12 it's proper and appropriate to grant the request to
13 permanently seal, and at this time, Counsel, I'll ask
14 you to bring the proposed order forward.
15 While the Court's receiving that order, I'm
16 just going to note as well for purposes of the record,
17 the Court was provided two agreed orders which it has
18 already executed between the AG and UT Southwestern,
19 which the Court believes resolved the Rule 12 issue as
20 well as the intervention.
21 Related to that as well are certain
22 requests from Dr. Cooper's counsel to strike the
23 intervention and certain requests by the State related
24 to clawback and sanctions. I believe that the
25 agreements between the AG's office and UT Southwestern 8
1 resolve all those issues. I would ask for the parties
2 to confirm that I am correct and as well to provide the
3 Court an order that says, in light of the execution of
4 the agreed orders, all parties agreed the following
5 motions are now moot and no longer relief is requested.
6 In light of the fact that UT Southwestern
7 does now have counsel, obviously the Court stayed any
8 protection from UT Southwestern pending them having
9 counsel of record. Now that they will have counsel, the
10 Court hereby reinstates its prior order to UT
11 Southwestern to produce the relevant documents that have
12 been ordered in connection with roll one.
13 Let me go ahead and just ask at this time,
14 Children's, is there anything further that I can do for
15 you?
16 MS. COOPER: No. Thank you, Your Honor.
17 THE COURT: Okay. State?
18 MR. FARQUHARSON: Thank you, Judge.
19 Similar to Children's, the State also has a motion to
20 seal on file, and it is relatively simple for the
21 reasons that we set forth in our motion. We would ask
22 that the documents represented therein be sealed.
23 THE COURT: All right. Again, I'll just
24 note for purposes of the record, no persons are present
25 from the public who object to the request for sealing. 9
1 Let me go ahead and just ask for all counsel who are
2 present, is there any opposition or objection to the
3 Court sealing pursuant to the State's request?
4 Childrens's?
5 MS. COOPER: No, Your Honor.
6 THE COURT: Lau?
7 MR. TREVINO: No, Your Honor.
8 THE COURT: Cooper?
9 MS. HOLLAND: No, Your Honor.
10 THE COURT: All right. In light thereof,
11 the Court hereby as well grants the State's request, and
12 I'll ask if you'll please bring an order forward for the
13 Court's execution at this time.
14 All right. Lastly, do you have a proposed
15 order?
16 MR. FARQUHARSON: I believe David -- Mr.
17 Shatto is going to e-mail one to the Court here
18 momentarily.
19 THE COURT: Mr. Shatto, is that correct?
20 MR. SHATTO: That is correct. I can e-mail
21 one to you in a moment.
22 THE COURT: Okay. So I just want to make
23 sure. Mr. Miller is out of the office today, so please
24 make sure that you're utilizing the 493rd and/or Ms.
25 Patterson's e-mail, okay? 10
1 MR. SHATTO: Yes, Your Honor.
2 THE COURT: Okay. One final item that I
3 just want to delineate. The parties have provided the
4 Court a contact list, right? And I asked for everyone
5 to identify two counsel of record per party or nonparty.
6 Ms. Patterson, when she's sending out e-mails is going
7 to continue to send e-mails to that contact list. If
8 you want the information from the Court further
9 disseminated past the two people who are on the contact
10 list, it is y'all's responsibility to do so.
11 So if you have any additional members of
12 your team -- so, for example, Dr. Lau, Dr. Cooper, for
13 the State, you have more than those two lawyers, it's
14 y'all's responsibility to send it out further than that.
15 The number of lawyers at this juncture is too unwieldy
16 for Ms. Patterson to be the laboring ore on those
17 communications. So we'll take responsibility for
18 notifying the contact list, but separate and beyond
19 that, the responsibility is on y'all. I just wanted to
20 make sure that I reiterated that while we were on the
21 record.
22 Let me go ahead and ask at this time,
23 Children's, anything else we should address in
24 connection with today's hearing?
25 MS. COOPER: No. Thank you, Your Honor. 11
1 THE COURT: State?
2 MR. FARQUHARSON: I'm just curious. Last
3 time -- I'm trying to remember where -- with respect to
4 UT Southwestern and their obligations that came back up,
5 had the Court ordered a certain date for production from
6 them?
7 THE COURT: For Children's I had ordered
8 production to begin on a rolling basis as of March 21st,
9 and since we've already past the March 21 date, UT
10 Southwestern's obligations would kick in now as well as
11 a rolling production.
12 MR. FARQUHARSON: Okay. Thank you, Judge.
13 THE COURT: Dr. Lau, anything further?
14 MR. TREVINO: No, Your Honor.
15 THE COURT: And Dr. Cooper?
16 MR. SHATTO: No, Your Honor.
17 THE COURT: Okay. Well, it was lovely to
18 see everyone so early on this gloomy day. If there's
19 nothing further, then we'll go ahead and be adjourned,
20 and I am having Ms. Patterson e-file each of the orders
21 from today's hearing so that they'll be available to you
22 readily, quickly. And again, we'll get an e-mail out to
23 y'all asking for y'all to confirm the motions that are
24 now moot and providing the Court a proposed order
25 related to that. And with that we'll be adjourned. 12
1 (Proceedings concluded)
25 13
COUNTY OF COLLIN ) 3
4 I, Ashley Boyd, Official Court Reporter in and for
5 the 493rd District Court of Collin County, State of
6 Texas, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing
7 contains a true and correct transcription of all
8 portions of evidence and other proceedings requested in
9 writing by counsel for the parties to be included in
10 this volume of the Reporter's Record, in the
11 above-styled and numbered cause, all of which occurred
12 in open court or in chambers and were reported by me.
13 I further certify that this Reporter's Record of
14 the proceedings truly and correctly reflects the
15 exhibits, if any, admitted by the respective parties.
16 I further certify that the total cost for the
17 preparation of this EXPEDITED Reporter's Record is
18 $210.00 and was paid by Winston & Strawn.
19 WITNESS MY OFFICIAL HAND this the 28th day of
20 March, 2025.
22 /s/ Ashley Boyd Ashley Boyd, Texas CSR 11998 23 Expiration Date: 09/30/2025 Official Court Reporter 24 493rd District Court 2100 Bloomdale Road 25 Collin County, Texas McKinney, Texas Exhibit C Lewis, Evan
From: Patrick Todd
Rob,
Thank you. We will work as expeditiously as possible to get you an answer as soon as we can.
Sincerely,
Patrick
Patrick Todd Assistant Attorney General, Administrative Law Division OƯice of the Attorney General P.O. Box 12548 Austin, Texas 78711-2548 (512) 936-1660
From: Rob Farquharson
We can agree to a one-week suspension of your obligation to produce the documents, but would ask that you confirm the segregation/commingling issue as expediently as possible, so as to help all parties avoid the need for additional appellate proceedings. 1 Rob Farquharson Assistant Attorney General Consumer Protection Division Office of the Attorney General of Texas
From: Patrick Todd
Hi Rob,
We can’t yet confirm one way or the other about whether they are segregated or commingled without first reviewing them. (Hence why we are asking for a one week extension.) Believe me, there is nobody more interested to know this answer than I.
Best,
Patrick
From: Rob Farquharson
Mr. Todd:
I am sympathetic to your position, but I hope you can understand ours too. The Court made its order this morning fully aware of the fact that you had just entered into the case. On top of that, we have been seeking these records for more than two months and have already given UTSW extensions to comply.
2 With all of this said, Mr. Logan has suggested that he may be planning to file a mandamus based on his belief that UTSW patient records are somehow comingled amongst themselves. We are not aware of any basis for this claim, and indeed, if he is correct, UTSW may have bigger problems in terms of HIPAA.
If we agree to an extension, as an initial matter, can you confirm with your client and/or its former counsel whether UTSW’s relevant patient records are either segregated by patient or commingled?
With this information, we may be able to work something out.
All the best,
Rob
Rob Farquharson Assistant Attorney General Consumer Protection Division Office of the Attorney General of Texas
From: Sutker, Cory
I am not sure Children’s has a say in this, but, to the extent it matters, we have no opposition
Cory Sutker
900 Jackson St. #100, Dallas, TX 75202 Direct: 214.712.9558 | Main: 214.712.9500 | Fax: 214.712.9540 Email: Cory.Sutker@cooperscully.com | www.cooperscully.com .
This correspondence is for the named persons' use only, and it contains confidential or legally privileged information or both. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mis-transmission. If you receive this correspondence in error, please immediately notify the sender and delete it from your system. You must not disclose, copy or rely on any part of this correspondence if you are not the intended recipient. .
From: Holland, Anika
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Agreed (on behalf of Dr. Cooper).
Anika Holland Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP 333 Bush St | San Francisco, CA 94104 Direct: +1 415 858 7411 | Fax: +1 415 858 7599 aholland@willkie.com | vCard | www.willkie.com bio Pronouns: she, her, hers
From: Logan, William
*** EXTERNAL EMAIL ***
For our part, we believe giving UTSW's counsel a week to get up to speed on the case before it decides how to proceed is appropriate and more than reasonable.
From: Patrick Todd
Dear Counsel,
We (Martin and myself) were assigned to represent UTSW this morning. We were not afforded the opportunity to be at the hearing this morning and are still trying to get up to speed on what has happened so far in this case. We haven’t been able to confer with our client yet or former counsel. We have also not been able to review the responsive records. As such, we cannot approve as to form the proposed order since we don’t know what the court ordered at the hearing today.
We respectfully ask if the parties will agree to a one week delay to April 2, 2025, before UTSW is required to begin producing records to allow us to confer with our client, confer with former counsel, and review the records.
We would graciously appreciate extending us this professional courtesy.
Sincerely,
Patrick Todd
Patrick Todd Assistant Attorney General, Administrative Law Division Office of the Attorney General P.O. Box 12548 Austin, Texas 78711-2548 (512) 936-1660
From: Logan, William
Mr Walsh said so during one of our many conferences about productions in this matter.
While we're confirming things, can you please confirm service of all the unrepresented patients as required under Rule 205? 5 From: Rob Farquharson
I do not recall Mr. Walsh (or even Mr. Sutker) saying that. Was it something he said in court?
Rob Farquharson Assistant Attorney General Consumer Protection Division Office of the Attorney General of Texas
From: Logan, William
Rob,
We're not going to relitigate the bases for our petition and moving to stay via email, but to be clear, our clients' records were ordered produced beginning on March 21. As to whether UTSW may have co-mingled documents, UTSW's prior counsel, David Walsh, confirmed it was possible co-mingled records exist. We believe resolving the extent of such records, and how they should be dealt with, are questions in the first instance for the Dallas County Court.
Thanks, William
From: Rob Farquharson
William:
My understanding of your emergency 15 COA filing (and its order, which was based purely on your allegations) was that the basis of your urgency was your allegation that Childrens’ patient records are somehow comingled amongst themselves. Do you have a basis to claim that the same applies to UTSW’s records?
The Court had already ordered these to be prepared and ready for production on 3/21.
All the best,
Rob
Rob Farquharson Assistant Attorney General Consumer Protection Division Office of the Attorney General of Texas
From: Logan, William
Counsel for UTSW:
Would you please advise on your position regarding the draft proposed orders and the Court's oral order today? Does UTSW intend to begin producing documents despite the stay from the 15th Court of Appeals? We need to know so we can decide whether to seek further relief from that Court.
Thanks, William
7 From: Rob Farquharson
They are on the chain: Patrick Todd and Martin Cohick.
Rob Farquharson Assistant Attorney General Consumer Protection Division Office of the Attorney General of Texas
From: Holland, Anika
Rob—it doesn’t look like UTSW’s new counsel is on this thread either. Shouldn’t they be a part of this conversation given that UTSW is the subject of this order? Or did you already get their agreement separately?
Anika Holland Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP 333 Bush St | San Francisco, CA 94104 Direct: +1 415 858 7411 | Fax: +1 415 858 7599 aholland@willkie.com | vCard | www.willkie.com bio Pronouns: she, her, hers
From: Logan, William
*** EXTERNAL EMAIL ***
Rob, thank you for agreeing to add counsel for Dr. Lau. We should also confer on the Court’s request for a position regarding whether the April 16 hearing should go forward. Given the stay from the 15th Court of Appeals, the Nonparty Patients’ position is that it should be vacated.
William Logan Associate Attorney Winston & Strawn LLP T: +1 713-651-2600 D: +1 713-651-2766 F: +1 713-651-2700 Email | winston.com Pronouns: He, Him, His
From: Rob Farquharson
No problem. But, to clarify, Mr. Wolf represents Dr. Lau and has been on all of the emails.
Rob Farquharson Assistant Attorney General Consumer Protection Division Office of the Attorney General of Texas
9 From: Holland, Anika
I am adding Dr. Lau’s counsel to this thread. They were omitted earlier.
Anika Holland Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP 333 Bush St | San Francisco, CA 94104 Direct: +1 415 858 7411 | Fax: +1 415 858 7599 aholland@willkie.com | vCard | www.willkie.com bio Pronouns: she, her, hers
From: Rob Farquharson
*** EXTERNAL EMAIL ***
Sure. Please let us know by 2pm if there are any comments from Dr. Lau or Dr. Cooper’s counsel.
Rob Farquharson Assistant Attorney General Consumer Protection Division Office of the Attorney General of Texas
From: Logan, William
I believe we should give the other parties and nonparties an opportunity to weigh in before we send anything else to the Court.
William Logan Associate Attorney Winston & Strawn LLP T: +1 713-651-2600 D: +1 713-651-2766 F: +1 713-651-2700 Email | winston.com Pronouns: He, Him, His
From: Rob Farquharson
If I missed them, I apologize, there was nobody other than Childrens’ counsel, Dr. Lau’s counsel, and myself in the courtroom. And the only folks on Zoom were two attorneys for Dr. Cooper and Mr. Shatto. The Court also asked if anybody was present for the Non-Party Patients and nobody said anything.
I don’t believe that this captures the Court’s oral orders, but I will include it in my email to the Court and note our disagreement.
Rob Farquharson Assistant Attorney General Consumer Protection Division Office of the Attorney General of Texas
11 From: Logan, William
Thanks Rob. Setting aside that none of these issues were noticed for the hearing this morning, we had an attorney present. Sorry we missed you. Proposed edits attached. Are there any different thoughts from the doctors’ counsel or counsel for UTSW?
William Logan Associate Attorney Winston & Strawn LLP T: +1 713-651-2600 D: +1 713-651-2766 F: +1 713-651-2700 Email | winston.com Pronouns: He, Him, His
From: Rob Farquharson
My only objective with the written order is to capture what the Court already orally ordered this morning. I understand that you are likely not in agreement with the substance of the Court’s order, but the question is only as to the form.
The Court opened the hearing for counsel to attend via Zoom, but you did not appear. Given that you were not present to hear the Court’s orders, I find it difficult to understand what form objections you might have. Nevertheless, with that said, if you have suggested revisions to the form of the order, please send them.
12 Rob Farquharson Assistant Attorney General Consumer Protection Division Office of the Attorney General of Texas
From: Logan, William
Hi Rob,
It is not agreed. If we understand the order the Court is suggesting, it is that the agreed stay of productions for UTSW under the February 28 order (as modified on March 20) is lifted. It should not be written as a new order for production to UTSW.
Many thanks, William
William Logan Associate Attorney Winston & Strawn LLP T: +1 713-651-2600 D: +1 713-651-2766 F: +1 713-651-2700 Email | winston.com Pronouns: He, Him, His
From: Rob Farquharson
13
All:
Please let me know if this order is agreed as to form.
All the best,
Rob
Rob Farquharson Assistant Attorney General Consumer Protection Division Office of the Attorney General of Texas
From: Rob Farquharson Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2025 12:34 PM To: 'Amy Patterson'
We have not discussed that. I will drop you off and open the floor.
Rob Farquharson Assistant Attorney General Consumer Protection Division Office of the Attorney General of Texas
From: Amy Patterson
Thank you, Amy Patterson Court Coordinator, 493rd District Court Ph#214-491-4870
You MUST appear for your hearings unless the Court tells you otherwise. Please send all scheduling request to 493@co.collin.tx.us for a faster response time.
From: Rob Farquharson
***** WARNING: External Email. Do not click links or open attachments that are unsafe. *****
Thank you, Ms. Patterson. Attached is the proposed order that the Court requested this morning. We will also be submitting it through e-file shortly.
All the best,
Rob
Rob Farquharson Assistant Attorney General Consumer Protection Division Office of the Attorney General of Texas
From: Amy Patterson
All – At today’s sealing hearings, the Court broached in open Court the execution of the Agreed Order related to the representation of UTSW. The Court believes this resolves/moots a number of pending motions in this cause including Rule 12, Motion to Strike Intervention, etc. To keep the record clean, Judge Nowak would prefer an order memorializing this fact. As such, the Court directs the Parties/Non Parties to provide an Agreed Order memorializing the motions impacted and confirming the same are rendered moot by the Agreed Order.
In addition, we have not received from the Parties/Non Parties a proposed Order reflecting the Court’s ruling on the Nonparty Patients Expedited Motion for Partial Stay, which was granted in part and denied in part. It seems likely the Parties/NonParties would desire a written order given the proceedings pending in the 15th Court. Do the Parties/NonParties anticipate providing one for the Court to sign which may be sent to the 15th Court of Appeals in connection with the mandamus proceeding?
Further, in light of Agreed Order stay of production by UTSW is lifted and the Court believes that UTSW, like Children’s, would be subject to the Feb. 28 Order, as modified. The Court noted this at hearing today so that the Parties/NonParties may determine whether any additional steps are needed to ensure that you are pursuing one proceeding with the 15th Court of Appeals, instead of two, related to production issues. Please let us know if you need anything further from the Court to most efficiently move the proceedings with the 15th Court forward.
Lastly, at present, we have a hearing scheduled in these causes on April 16. Do the Parties/NonParties agree as to whether that hearing may proceed pending the 15th Court proceedings? Please advise.
Thank you, Amy Patterson Court Coordinator, 493rd District Court Ph#214-491-4870
You MUST appear for your hearings unless the Court tells you otherwise. Please send all scheduling request to 493@co.collin.tx.us for a faster response time.
The contents of this message may be privileged and confidential. If this message has been received in error, please delete it without reading it. Your receipt of this message is not intended to waive any applicable privilege. Please do not disseminate this message without the permission of the author. Any tax advice contained in this email was not intended to be used, and cannot be used, by you (or any other taxpayer) to avoid penalties under applicable tax laws and regulations.
Important Notice: This email message is intended to be received only by persons entitled to receive the confidential information it may contain. Email messages to clients of Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP presumptively contain information that is confidential and legally privileged; email messages to non-clients are normally confidential and may also be legally privileged. Please do not read, copy, forward or store this message unless you are an intended recipient of it. If you have received this message in error, please forward it back. Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP is a limited liability partnership organized in the United States under the laws of the State of Delaware, which laws limit the personal liability of partners.
Important Notice: This email message is intended to be received only by persons entitled to receive the confidential information it may contain. Email messages to clients of Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP presumptively contain information 16 that is confidential and legally privileged; email messages to non-clients are normally confidential and may also be legally privileged. Please do not read, copy, forward or store this message unless you are an intended recipient of it. If you have received this message in error, please forward it back. Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP is a limited liability partnership organized in the United States under the laws of the State of Delaware, which laws limit the personal liability of partners.
Important Notice: This email message is intended to be received only by persons entitled to receive the confidential information it may contain. Email messages to clients of Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP presumptively contain information that is confidential and legally privileged; email messages to non- clients are normally confidential and may also be legally privileged. Please do not read, copy, forward or store this message unless you are an intended recipient of it. If you have received this message in error, please forward it back. Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP is a limited liability partnership organized in the United States under the laws of the State of Delaware, which laws limit the personal liability of partners.
17 Exhibit D Lewis, Evan
From: Amy Patterson
Counsel- The Court merely intended to clarify at the hearing on the motion to seal which it had anticipated all parties would be present at that in light of the resolution of the Rule 12 motion it believed UTSW was subject to the same production requirements applicable to Children’s. The Court is aware of the stay in light of the mandamus proceeding the court is just merely trying to ensure that any issues with UTSW and Children’s are moving forward on the same track. I hope that is helpful please advise if you need anything from the Court at this time.
Thank you, Amy Patterson Court Coordinator, 493rd District Court Ph#214-491-4870
You MUST appear for your hearings unless the Court tells you otherwise. Please send all scheduling request to 493@co.collin.tx.us for a faster response time.
From: Patrick Todd
***** WARNING: External Email. Do not click links or open attachments that are unsafe. *****
Ms. Patterson, 1 UTSW would like a written order. Given that we were not in attendance, and also have not yet been able to obtain a copy of the hearing transcript, we would like a written order. We respectfully ask that the written order clarify whether it abrogates the written orders signed March 25, 2025, (attached) and address the orders from the Fifteenth Court. We’re just trying to have clarity on what we’re being ordered to do and there are seemingly multiple different and somewhat contradictory orders in effect.
Sincerely,
Patrick Todd
Patrick Todd Assistant Attorney General, Administrative Law Division OƯice of the Attorney General P.O. Box 12548 Austin, Texas 78711-2548 (512) 936-1660
From: Logan, William
Ms. Patterson,
The Nonparty Patients also believe that UTSW should weigh in on whether a written order or further clarification is needed. We understand that UTSW was not at the hearing where the oral order was made and does not have the benefit of a written order or a transcript as this point.
Thanks, William
From: Rob Farquharson
Ms. Patterson:
The State is comfortable relying on the transcript. The Nonparty Patients believe there should be a written order.
All the best,
Rob
Rob Farquharson Assistant Attorney General Consumer Protection Division Office of the Attorney General of Texas
From: Amy Patterson
I will notify Judge Nowak that there is no agreement and after I speak with her I will circle back to you. My understanding from my conversation with her is that all of you would want an order from the prior hearing. If the parties are comfortable standing on the transcript we will proceed without a formal written order.
Thank you, Amy Patterson Court Coordinator, 493rd District Court Ph#214-491-4870 3 You MUST appear for your hearings unless the Court tells you otherwise. Please send all scheduling request to 493@co.collin.tx.us for a faster response time.
From: Rob Farquharson
***** WARNING: External Email. Do not click links or open attachments that are unsafe. *****
Ms. Patterson:
In a separate email chain (attached), Mr. Logan asked for Dr. Lau and Dr. Cooper’s attorneys to have an opportunity to respond, to which the State agreed.
But given that Mr. Logan is advancing the issue anyways, I will report back that the Non-Party Patients do not agree to the proposed order that we have submitted to the Court. Our alternative versions are both attached here.
I will also note that Dr. Cooper’s counsel has responded to the email chain without any substantive comments on our proposed order. We have not heard from Dr. Lau’s counsel.
All the best,
Rob
Rob Farquharson Assistant Attorney General Consumer Protection Division Office of the Attorney General of Texas
From: Logan, William
Ms. Patterson,
The Nonparty Patients are willing to undertake drafting a proposed written order memorializing the Court’s oral ruling granting in part and denying in part the Nonparty Patients’ Expedited Motion for Partial Stay. However, the Nonparty Patients would need some guidance from the Court regarding which portions of the motion were granted. As we understand it, the Court has not stayed any production orders in response to that motion.
As to the Court’s lifting today of the agreed order between the AG and UTSW to stay production by UTSW under the February 28 order (as modified by oral order on March 20, 2025), we note that we had no notice these issues would be taken up today at a hearing solely set on a motion to seal records by Children’s. Nonetheless, the February 28 order (including as modified on March 20) is already before the 15th Court of Appeals in the current mandamus petitions. That includes regarding UTSW being ordered to produce documents under the March 20 modifications to the February 28 order, and the Court’s denial of the Nonparty Patients’ motion to stay productions, such as those ordered from UTSW in the February 28 order and its subsequent modification.
On March 21, 2025, the 15th Court of Appeals stayed any productions under the Court’s March 20 order that modified the February 28 order. The Nonparty Patients are therefore unaware of any actions that need to be taken, unless UTSW intends to violate the orders from the 15th Court of Appeals. If UTSW or the other parties disagree, we believe the parties and the nonparties should confer before any productions take place so that we can hopefully avoid the need to burden the 15th Court of Appeals with a request for further relief, when its intention is plain to us that productions should not take place while the mandamus petitions are pending.
Thanks, William
William Logan Associate Attorney Winston & Strawn LLP T: +1 713-651-2600 D: +1 713-651-2766 F: +1 713-651-2700 Email | winston.com Pronouns: He, Him, His
From: Amy Patterson
5 Subject: 493-07676-2024 & 493-08026-2024 Importance: High
All – At today’s sealing hearings, the Court broached in open Court the execution of the Agreed Order related to the representation of UTSW. The Court believes this resolves/moots a number of pending motions in this cause including Rule 12, Motion to Strike Intervention, etc. To keep the record clean, Judge Nowak would prefer an order memorializing this fact. As such, the Court directs the Parties/Non Parties to provide an Agreed Order memorializing the motions impacted and confirming the same are rendered moot by the Agreed Order.
In addition, we have not received from the Parties/Non Parties a proposed Order reflecting the Court’s ruling on the Nonparty Patients Expedited Motion for Partial Stay, which was granted in part and denied in part. It seems likely the Parties/NonParties would desire a written order given the proceedings pending in the 15th Court. Do the Parties/NonParties anticipate providing one for the Court to sign which may be sent to the 15th Court of Appeals in connection with the mandamus proceeding?
Further, in light of Agreed Order stay of production by UTSW is lifted and the Court believes that UTSW, like Children’s, would be subject to the Feb. 28 Order, as modified. The Court noted this at hearing today so that the Parties/NonParties may determine whether any additional steps are needed to ensure that you are pursuing one proceeding with the 15th Court of Appeals, instead of two, related to production issues. Please let us know if you need anything further from the Court to most efficiently move the proceedings with the 15th Court forward.
Lastly, at present, we have a hearing scheduled in these causes on April 16. Do the Parties/NonParties agree as to whether that hearing may proceed pending the 15th Court proceedings? Please advise.
Thank you, Amy Patterson Court Coordinator, 493rd District Court Ph#214-491-4870
You MUST appear for your hearings unless the Court tells you otherwise. Please send all scheduling request to 493@co.collin.tx.us for a faster response time.
The contents of this message may be privileged and confidential. If this message has been received in error, please delete it without reading it. Your receipt of this message is not intended to waive any applicable privilege. Please do not disseminate this message without the permission of the author. Any tax advice contained in this email was not intended to be used, and cannot be used, by you (or any other taxpayer) to avoid penalties under applicable tax laws and regulations.
6 Exhibit E Lewis, Evan
From: Rob Farquharson
Confirmed. We will destroy any such materials.
Rob Farquharson Assistant Attorney General Consumer Protection Division Office of the Attorney General of Texas
From: Lewis, Evan
Counsel,
This appears to be an inadvertent disclosure of privileged material. Under the Protective Order and under TRCP 193.3(d), please confirm that you either have either not accessed the production, return any materials you have collected, or confirm that you have destroyed any such materials. Please reply to this email with your confirmation.
Sincerely, Evan
Evan Lewis Associate Attorney Winston & Strawn LLP 800 Capitol St., Suite 2400 Houston, TX 77002-2925 D: +1 713-651-2785 F: +1 713-651-2700 VCard | Email | winston.com
1 From: Patrick Todd
Counsel,
The State was on the email for notification purposes only. Nevertheless, I have been informed that the Box link was not secure and that the State could access the files. I directed my legal assistant to take down the Box links, and he has done so.
In terms of the order, it is UTSW’s position that the stay of discovery ordered by the 15th Court applies only to Children’s, not UTSW. Indeed, the 493rd is aware of the orders issued by the 15th Court, and nevertheless ordered this:
THE COURT: For Children's I had ordered production to begin on a rolling basis as of March 21st, and since we've already past the March 21 date, UT Southwestern's obligations would kick in now as well as a rolling production.
So, it seems to me that the court wants UTSW to produce the records. I understand that Patient’s Counsel will likely seek further relief.
Sincerely,
Patrick Todd
From: Lewis, Evan
Patrick – I cannot access these records. What are they?
As the Court clarified in Ms. Patterson’s March 28, 2025 email, UTSW is subject to the same production requirements applicable to Children’s, including the stay in effect from the 15th Court of Appeals. UTSW is stayed from producing documents under that order.
In any instance, producing these documents directly to the State and without allowing counsel for the non-party patients or counsel for the doctors to assert their applicable privileges directly contravenes the 493rd Court’s discovery orders. 2 Please confirm that this is your understanding as well.
Best, Evan
Evan Lewis Associate Attorney Winston & Strawn LLP 800 Capitol St., Suite 2400 Houston, TX 77002-2925 D: +1 713-651-2785 F: +1 713-651-2700 VCard | Email | winston.com
From: Jeff Lutz
Please see the Box link below to access UTSW records. Let us know if there are any issues accessing them.
Jeff Lutz Legal Assistant Administrative Law Division OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL P.O. Box 12548 Austin, Texas 78711-2548 (512) 475-4133 (512) 320-0167 fax jeff.lutz@oag.texas.gov
This message may be confidential and/or privileged under Government Code sections 552.101, 552.103, 552.107, and 552.111 and should not be disclosed without the express authorization of the Attorney General.
The contents of this message may be privileged and confidential. If this message has been received in error, please delete it without reading it. Your receipt of this message is not intended to waive any applicable privilege. Please do not disseminate this message without the permission of the author. Any tax advice contained in this email was not intended to be used, and cannot be used, by you (or any other taxpayer) to avoid penalties under applicable tax laws and regulations.
3 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.
Sarah Shelby on behalf of Evan Lewis Bar No. 24116670 SShelby@winston.com Envelope ID: 99215365 Filing Code Description: Motion for Emergency Relief Filing Description: Nonparty Patients' Second Emergency Motion to Stay Pending Petition for Writ of Mandamus Status as of 4/3/2025 7:04 AM CST
Associated Case Party: NonParty Patient No. 1
Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status
Thanh Nguyen TDNguyen@winston.com 4/2/2025 9:07:44 PM SENT
William Logan WLogan@winston.com 4/2/2025 9:07:44 PM SENT
Evan Lewis edlewis@winston.com 4/2/2025 9:07:44 PM SENT
Olivia Wogon owogon@winston.com 4/2/2025 9:07:44 PM SENT
Jervonne Newsome JNewsome@winston.com 4/2/2025 9:07:44 PM SENT
Case Contacts
Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status
Pauline Sisson pauline.sisson@oag.texas.gov 4/2/2025 9:07:44 PM SENT
David G. Shatto david.shatto@oag.texas.gov 4/2/2025 9:07:44 PM SENT
Rob Farquharson rob.farquharson@oag.texas.gov 4/2/2025 9:07:44 PM SENT
Abby Smith abby.smith@oag.texas.gov 4/2/2025 9:07:44 PM SENT
Emily Samuels emily.samuels@oag.texas.gov 4/2/2025 9:07:44 PM SENT
Houston Docketing ecf_houston@winston.com 4/2/2025 9:07:44 PM SENT
Jamie Vargo JVargo@winston.com 4/2/2025 9:07:44 PM SENT
Johnathan Stone johnathan.stone@oag.texas.gov 4/2/2025 9:07:44 PM SENT
Melinda Pate melinda.pate@oag.texas.gov 4/2/2025 9:07:44 PM SENT
Amy Pletscher amy.pletscher@oag.texas.gov 4/2/2025 9:07:44 PM SENT
In Re Nonparty Patient No. 1, Nonparty Patient No. 2, Nonparty Patient No. 3, Nonparty Patient No. 4, Nonparty Patient No. 5, Nonparty Patient No. 6, Nonparty Patient No. 7, Nonparty Patient No. 8, Nonparty Patient No. 9, Nonparty Patient No. 10, and Nonparty Patient No. 11 v. the State of Texas (In Re Nonparty Patient No. 1, Nonparty Patient No. 2, Nonparty Patient No. 3, Nonparty Patient No. 4, Nonparty Patient No. 5, Nonparty Patient No. 6, Nonparty Patient No. 7, Nonparty Patient No. 8, Nonparty Patient No. 9, Nonparty Patient No. 10, and Nonparty Patient No. 11 v. the State of Texas) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.