Kb Realtron Management v. Stephanie Deleon

Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided April 21, 2015·No. 13-13-00411-CV·Published

Opinion

ACCEPTED 13-13-00411-CV FILED THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS IN THE 13TH COURT OF APPEALS 4/21/2015 10:23:31 PM CORPUS CHRISTI DORIAN RAMIREZ CLERK 4/21/15 DORIAN E. RAMIREZ, CLERK 13-13-00411-CV BY DTello IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TEXAS RECEIVED IN THIRTEENTH DISTRICT 13th COURT OF APPEALS CORPUS CHRISTI/EDINBURG, TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI 4/21/2015 10:23:31 PM DORIAN E. RAMIREZ Clerk KBREALTRON MANAGEMENT Appellant

v. STEPHANIE DELEON Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law # 1 Travis County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. C-1-V-12-002167

APPELLANT'S BRIEF

Kevin Bierwirth 13276 Research Blvd. Ste. 204 Austin, Texas 78750 (512) 825-0331 IDENTITY OF THE PARTIES

Appellant

Kevin Bierwirth 13276 Research Blvd. Ste. 204 Austin, Texas 78750

Appellee

Stephanie DeLeon 4108 Kilgore Lane Austin, Texas 78727

Attorney for Appellee in JP Court and ancillary proceedings

Matthew J. Wagner Hall Attorneys, P.C. 701 Brazos, Suite 500 Austin, Texas 78701

11 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Identity of Parties and COllllsel.. .......................................................... .ii

Table of Contents .... .. ... ... .... ..... ... ...... ... .... ..... ... .... ..... ...... ....... ...... .. ..iii

Table of Authorities ........................................................................... v

Statement ofJurisdiction ................ .. ......... .. .. ...... .. .............................. 1

Statement of the Case ............ ... ... ...... .. . ......... ... ...... .. . ............... .. . ....... 1

Issues Presented ............................................................................... 1

ISSUE 1 DID APPELLANT PROVE THAT HE WAS ENTITLED TO THE RELIEF REQUESTED?

ISSUE 2 DID THE PRESIDING JUDGE VIOLATE CANONS OF THE TEXAS CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT

ISSUE 3 WAS APPELLANT DENIED DUE PROCESS BY A JUDGE WHO WAS BIASED AND PREJUDICED

Statement of Facts ......... ......... ............... ......... ......... ......... ............... 2

Summary of Argument. ..... ... .... .. ... .. ... .... ... ... .... .. ... .. ... ....... .... .. .... .... .5

Arguments and Authorities ................................................................ 6

Conclusion ... ... .. ....... .. . ......... .. ................... .. .......... .... ..... .. ..... .. ..... 16

Prayer. .. .. . ...... ... ... ........ .. .. ... .. .. ...... ... ........ .. .. ........ .. .. ..... .. .. .......... 16

Certificate of Service ......... .. .......... .. . ......... .. .......... .. . ......... .. ..... .. .... 17

Certificate of Compliance ... .. ... .... ... ... .. .. .. ... .. ... .... ... ... ...... .. ... .... ... ... .17

111 Appendix

IV TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

Cases

In re Thoma, 873 S.W.2d 477, (Tex.I994) ... .. . ... .... .. ... ... .. ...... .... ..... ... ... 15

United States v. Bray, 546 F.2d 851 (lOth Cir. 1976) ................................ 14

United States v. Haywood, 411 F.2d 555 (5 th Cir. 1969) .... . , ....... .. ..... .... .... 14

United States v. Lanham, 416 F.2d 1140 (56 th Cir. 1969) ........ , ... .. .. ... .. .. ... 14

Vaughn v. State, 3 Tenn.Crim.App. 54,456 S.W.2d 879, 883 ...................... 15

Statutes

Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code §51.012 ......... ... ...... ... ...... ... ...... .. 1

Texas Local Government Code §I92.001.. ....... .. .......... .... .. .. ....... .. . ....... .1

Constitution

Texas Constitution, Art. 1, Sec. 13 ......... .. .......... .. . ......... .. .............. .. . .15

Texas Constitution, Art. 1, Sec. 19 ..................................................... 15

Texas Constitution, Art. 5, Sec. 6 ............. .. ................... .. .. .. ... .. .. .......... 1

Authorities

Texas Code ofJudiciaI Conduct, Canon 1 and Canon 2 ........... , ... .... .... ... .... 6

v STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

This Court has jurisdiction of the appeal because Appellant appeals a final

Judgment from the Travis County Court at Law #1, Travis County, Texas. Texas

Civil Practice & Remedies Code §5l.0l2, Texas Local Government Code

§192.00l, and Texas Constitution, Art. 5, Sec. 6.

This Court has jurisdiction concerning appeal of forcible detainer

proceedings, Texas Property Code, Chapter 5l.

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

This is an appeal of a Motion for Possession of Property and Unpaid Rent

from County Court which was preceded by an action for forcible detainer from the

justice court. The trial occurred on February 2, 2012 and judgment was rendered

on February 2,2012 and timely appealed.

ISSUES PRESENTED

ISSUE 1 DID APPELLANT PROVE THAT HE WAS ENTITLED TO THE RELIEF REQUESTED?

ISSUE 2 DID THE PRESIDING JUDGE VIOLATE CANONS OF THE TEXAS CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT

ISSUE 3 WAS APPELLANT DENIED DUE PROCESS BY A JUDGE WHO WAS BIASED AND PREJUDICED

1 STATEMENT OF FACTS

Kevin Bierwirth d/b/a! KBRealtron Management, (hereinafter Appellant) is

a man who, after suffering an economic downturn, studied and became very aware

of the rampant fraud in mortgage foreclosures and, as a result, has availed himself

of his due process rights in fighting mortgage fraud in his own cases.

As a result of his actions in the courts against unlawful acts, such a robo-

signing, incomplete chain of title, etc., attorneys for mortgage companies have

libeled and slandered his name. These very same bar card members have access to

and relationships with the bar card carrying attorneys who have attained the rank of

judge.

There is no way that Appellant can successfully staunch the rumor campaign

which takes place behind his back. It is however, a fact that it is practiced and it is

a fact that the rumors have an effect on the opinions of the judges.

Appellant believes that the Court will see the expression of that prejudice in

his appeal.

Appellant has, for many years, had a d/b/a of KBRealtron Management. In

this capacity, Appellant manages rental properties for landlords and sometimes for

his own properties. It was in the latter capacity that he leased a property to

Appellee.

2 Before Appellee signed the lease, (CR p.146-159, RR Vol. 2, Plaintiff's

Exhibit 1, RR Vol. 3), Appellee was fully informed that the property had been the

subject of a foreclosure, which was on appeal, and that should Appellant lose

possession, she would have to vacate the premises on short notice which would

automatically facilitate the return of her deposit.

Appellee, after having the benefit of full disclosure, nonetheless elected to

lease the premises.

Appellant inadvertently mislaid the $1200 certified check for the deposit,

notified the Appellee and she cancelled the check. These were to be the only funds

Appellant was to receive for the duration oftime Appellee occupied the premises.

Appellee refused to make payments pursuant to the lease, and after notice to

Appellee, Appellant filed for forcible detainer. Appellee hired an attorney,

Matthew J. Wagner, to defend her position at the forcible detainer case at the

Justice level.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Kb Realtron Management v. Stephanie Deleon, (Tex. Ct. App. 2015).

Kb Realtron Management v. Stephanie Deleon (Kb Realtron Management v. Stephanie Deleon) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States v. Clifton Thirley Haywood
411 F.2d 555 (Fifth Circuit, 1969)
United States v. Luther Lee Lanham
416 F.2d 1140 (Fifth Circuit, 1969)
United States v. Karl J. Bray
546 F.2d 851 (Tenth Circuit, 1976)
Goggins v. Leo
849 S.W.2d 373 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1993)
Vaughn v. State
456 S.W.2d 879 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee, 1970)
In Re Thoma
873 S.W.2d 477 (Texas Supreme Court, 1994)
Baker v. West
7 S.W.2d 634 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1928)