Eric Drake v. Seana Willing ( 2015 )

CAUSE NO: 13-14-00665-CV
ERIC DRAKE § THIRD COURT
§
Appellant §
§
VS § March 2, 2015
§
KASTL LAW P.C. ET AL § AUSTIN TEXAS
Defendants
APPELLANTS' MOTION TO RECUSE AND DISQUALIFY
JUSTICE DAVID PURYEAR AND JEFF L. ROSE
*to02 9g
TO HONORABLE SAID JUDGE: $5£W6U^
COMES NOW, Appellant, Eric Drake and respectfully request that
Justices David Puryear and Jeff Rose of this Court, recuse themselves.
1. Appellant files this motion at least ten days before this case is
set for a oral argument, or hearing.
2. It is Appellant's opinion that Justice David Puryear and Jeff L.
Rose should be recused from hearing or acting on any parts of the above
cause of action because of the possibility of impartiality. It is Appellant
Drake understanding that both Justice Puryear and Rose were employed with
the Texas Attorney General's Office in Austin or in Texas at one time. The
APPELLANTS MOTION TO RECUSE/DISQUALIFY PURYEAR AND ROSE PAGE 1
/
above cause of action is directly related to the actions of an assistant attorney
general by the name of Scot Graydon. Mr. Graydon perjured himself before
the trial court to get Judge Charles Ramsay on August 19, 2014 to sign an
order declaring the Appellant as a vexatious litigant wrongfully.
3. Graydon's actions are a violation of his attorney-sworn duties,
and he committed a felony crime. Appellant is going to file a massive
federal lawsuit, which Graydon will be the prime defendant. He need not try
to rely on any immunity because as pled in Appellant's brief, criminal
actions waive any immunity. Out of an abundance of caution, Appellant will
seek injunctive relief from Justice Puryear and Rose in the federal suit.
4. Under the Texas Constitution, it provides three grounds for
disqualifying a judge from hearing a case, Appellant will focus on just one
of the three grounds: the judge "may be interested'' in the outcome of the
case. §3.1 Texas Appeals. It is reasonable, sensible, and logical that Justices
Puryear and Rose would be interested in the above cause of action because
of their past relationship with attorney general's office—especially, given
the fact that the Appellant is making a claim that Mr. Graydon committed a
crime which he could be disbarred and terminated. An ordinary person
would believe that Justices Puryear and Rose would be believe Graydon
APPELLANTS MOTION TO RECUSE/DISQUALIFY PURYEAR AND ROSE PAGE 2
more so than the Appellant, thus the interest in the out come of the above
cause in Justices Puryear and Rose whether they wish to admit it or not.
Additionally, both of them would desire to protect him—which would
prejudice Appellant Drake. The Texas Constitution does not call for
"absolute proof that Justices Puryear and Rose is interested, but that they
might be interested.
5. Pursuant to §4.1 of the Texas Appeals, a judge must recuse
herself if her impartiality "might reasonably be questioned." TRCP
18b(b)(l); Williams v. Viswanathan, 65 S.W.3d 685, 687 (Tex.App.—
Amarillo 2001, order); Sears v. Olivarez, 28 S.W.3d 611, 615 (Tex.App.—
Corpus Christi 200, order).
6. A judge must recuse herself if she has a personal bias or
prejudice about the subject matter of the case or a party. TRCP 18b(b)(2). It
is apparent that this Court is prejudice against Appellant. The Court posted
Appellant's figuring his living expenses online were ignorant and vicious.
But it shows a deep-seated racism and bias, and unveils a 1950s KKK hatred
towards Appellant. All of the clerks of this Court will be sued for posting
such on line in federal court. Appellant has sued several judges for their bias
and racially motivated behavior. It is the Appellant's opinion that a jury of
APPELLANTS MOTION TO RECUSE/DISQUALIFY PURYEAR AND ROSE PAGE 3
his peers would not believe that Justices Puryear and Rose would be able to
impartially decide the above cause of action with such allegations made
against a "white" fellow attorney. Rule 18b(2)(a) does not require a showing
of bias (partiality) arising form the bias has to come from an extrajudicial
source that is outside the judicial proceeding. Kniatt v. State, 239 S.W.3d
910, 920 (Tex.App.—San Antonio 1990, writ denied).
7. The possibility of the Appellant receiving a fair and impartial
hearing or judgment from David Puryear or Jeff L. Rose appears to be
extremely unlikely. The due process clauses of both the Texas and the
United States Constitutions guarantee a party an impartial and disinterested
tribunal in civil cases. Metzger v. Sebek, 892 S.W.2d 20, 37-38.
8. There is a conflict of interest in the Appellant's opinion when
justices who was previously employed with the office of attorney general is
judging another attorney Scot Graydon (who is also employed with the
TAGO) for Mr. Graydon's violations of the law. Because of the seriousness
of the Appellant's claims against the Texas Attorney General's Office, and
one of its attorneys, Appellant sees no possibility that Justices David Puryear
and Jeff L. Rose in all likelihood could evaluate his cases against fairly and
impartially. It's just not humanly possible. Moreover, the fact that Appellant
APPELLANTS MOTION TO RECUSE/DISQUALIFY PURYEAR AND ROSE PAGE 4
is suing Greg Abbot creates even greater possibilities that Puryear and Rose
will presumably assist Graydon who has committed an actual crime. Mr.
Abbot was both David Puryear and Jeff L. Rose superior and the governor.
9. In addition, Appellant will be deprived of a fair trial in violation
of the due process clauses of both the state and federal constitutional rights
and Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 18b because as said David Puryear and
Jeff L. Rose impartiality might reasonably be questioned. Woodruff v.
Wright, 51 S.W.3d 727, 735-36 (Tex. App.-Texarkana 2001) and Justices
Puryear and Rose interest in the above cause. [A direct personal interest in
the result of the case is a disqualifying interestl. Cameron, 582 S.W.2d at
776; Sun Oil, 483 S.W.2d at 823.
10. The inquiry the court must make is whether a reasonable
member of the public, knowing all the facts in the public domain, would
have a reasonable doubt that David Puryear or Jeff L. Rose is actually
impartial. Sears v. Olivarez, 28 S.W.3d 611,613.
11. Further, without taking the depositions of Justices David
Puryear and Jeff L. Rose, Appellant does not know what personal
relationships that Justice Puryear and Rose have with Scot Graydon and their
wives and family—which would just increase the possibility of impartiality
APPELLANTS MOTION TO RECUSE/DISQUALIFY PURYEAR AND ROSE PAGE 5
and interest in the above cause by Justice Puryear and Rose. Not to mention,
they would certainly come to Mr. Graydon's recuse if he is in the position of
loosing his license to practice, which I believe he should be stripped of his
license to practice law permanently and prosecuted.
12. Appellant likewise objects to Melissa Goodwin hearing or
acting on the above cause because she most likely are friends with the judges
whom the Appellant is about to sue, and for all the reasons Appellant has
given to recuse Justices Puryear and Rose.
13. Appellant suggest that his case is moved to another judicial
district appeals court where there are not blatant personal relationships
between an assistant attorney general who has committed a crime and
justices on this panel and the attorney general's office. Thus, Appellant also
have filed with this motion to recuse a motion to transfer.
14. Therefore, Appellant Eric Drake respectfully request that
Justices David Puryear and Jeff L. Rose recuse and disqualify themselves
from the above entitled, numbered and styled cause of action.
APPELLANTS MOTION TO RECUSE/DISQUALIFY PURYEAR AND ROSE PAGE 6
Respectfully submitted,
Eric Drake
PO Box 833688
Richardson, Texas 75083
214-477-9288
APPELLANTS MOTION TO RECUSE/DISQUALIFY PURYEAR AND ROSE PAGE 7
CERTIFCATION OF CONFERENCE
Plaintiff, Eric Drake attempted to conference with Kristina Kastl of Kastl
Law Firm by she has repeatedly refused to conference with the Plaintiff. After the
third requests, Plaintiff submits this motion to the Court for its determination.
Plaintiff also attempted to conference with Scot Graydon, but Mr. Graydon has
repeatedly refused likewise to conference with the Plaintiff. David Harris, is
representing a judge in Dallas County, but it would appear that Mr. Harris is no
longer an assistant attorney general—at least from the information Plaintiff
received. Frank Waite has repeatedly conference with the Plaintiff and has
repeatedly said that he has no objections in the Plaintiffs filing, as he has
acknowledged that he has no objections to this motion filed in this Court on
February 23,2015.
Eric Drake
APPELLANTS MOTION TO RECUSE/DISQUALIFY PURYEAR AND ROSE PAGE 8
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on March 2, 2015, I served the foregoing "MOTION
TO RECUSE," by causing one paper copy Hand Delivered to the Clerk of the
Court of the Travis County Clerk of Court in Austin, and a copy forwarded to all
other parties or defendants through their legal counsel by U.S. Mail that are named
herein.
Scot Graydon
300 West 15™ Street, Ste 2
Austin, Texas 78701
512-475-4413
David Harris
300 West 15th Street, Ste 2
Austin, Texas 78701
Telephone: 512-475-4413
Kastl Law P.C.
4144 N. Central Expressway
Ste 300, Dallas, Texas 75204
Telephone: 214-821-0230
Vikki Ogden
411 Elm Street, Ste 500
Dallas, Texas 75202
Telephone: 214-653-7568
Eric Drake
APPELLANTS MOTION TO RECUSE/DISQUALIFY PURYEAR AND ROSE PAGE 9
VERIFICATION
STATE OF TEXAS
COUNTY OF DALLAS
BEFORE ME, the undersigned Notary Public personally appeared,
Eric Drake pro se, who being by me duly sworn upon oath deposed and said
that he is the Petitioner in the above entitled and numbered cause; that he has
read the above and foregoing motion; and that every statement contained
herein is within his personal knowledge, true and correct.
Subscribed and sworn to before me on the 3-5 day of February,
2015, to certify which witness and official seal.
yvC^/ti^Cr*^'
NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR THE
STATE OF TEXAS
v*» -*- -*• -• - -
KEVIN BILOTTI
My Commission Expires
December 12. 2018
My Commission Expires:
CAUSE NO: 13-14-00665-CV
ERIC DRAKE § THIRD COURT OF APPEALS
§
Appellant §
§
VS §
§
KASTL LAW P.C. ET AL § AUSTIN TEXAS
Defendants
ORDER ON APPELLANT'S MOTION TO
RECUSE JUSTICE DAVID PURYEAR
After considering Appellant's Eric Drake, Motion to
Recuse/Disqualify Justice David Puryear:
o AGREES to recuse himself or
o REFUSES to recuse himself and refer this motion to another
judge to hear the matter.
Signed this day of , 2015, Austin,
(Travis County) Texas.
JUSTICE DAVID PURYEAR
Solo Page
CAUSE NO: 13-14-00665-CV
ERIC DRAKE § THIRD COURT OF APPEALS
§
Appellant §
VS |
§
KASTL LAW P.C. ET AL § AUSTIN TEXAS
Defendants
ORDER ON APPELLANT'S MOTION TO
RECUSE .niSTirF TFFF L. ROSF
After considering Appellant's Eric Drake, Motion to
Recuse/Disqualify Justice Jeff L. Rose:
o AGREES to recuse himself or
o REFUSES to recuse himself and refer this motion to another
judge to hear the matter.
Signed this day of , 2015, Austin,
(Travis County)Texas.
JUSTICE JEFF L.ROSE
Solo Page
CAUSE NO: 13-14-00583-CV
ERIC DRAKE § THIRD COURT OF APPEALS
§
Appellant §
§
VS §
§
KASTL LAW P.C. ET AL § AUSTIN TEXAS
Defendants
FIAT
Hearing on Appellant's, Eric Drake, Motion to Recuse/Disqualify
David Puryear and Jeff L. Rose is set for A.M./P.M. on the
day of , 2015.
Signed this the day of 2015,
Austin (Travis County) Texas.
JUDGE PRESIDING
Solo Page