Read Aloud the Text Content

This audio was created by Woord's Text to Speech service by content creators from all around the world.

Text Content or SSML code:

07-23-00159-CV SEVENTH COURT OF APPEALS AMARILLO, TEXAS FELICIA BROWN/APPELLANT v. ELYSIUM GRAND APARTMENTS/APPELLEE MOTION TO VACATE ORDER PURSUANT TO RULE 60(b)3 FRAUD UPON THE COURT Metlyn Realty Corp. v. Esmark, Inc., 763 F.2d 826, 832 (7th Cir. 1985) (holding that a Rule 60(b)(3) motion allows a party to overturn a final judgment based upon “fraud” so long as it is filed within one year from the date of judgment) COMES NOW, the Defendant, Felicia Joy Brown, and respectfully asks this Court to impose sanctions against the Plaintiff and authorized representative, Luciana Lucio and counsel Daniel C. Steppick and Zshana Workman for being in violation of rule 60(d)3, a fraud upon the Court. Wyle v. R.J. Reynolds Indus., Inc., 709 F.2d 585, 589 (9th Cir. 1983) (“[C]ourts have inherent power to dismiss an action when a party has willfully de- ceived the court and engaged in conduct utterly inconsistent with the orderly administration of justice.”); Eppes v. Snowden, 656 F. Supp. 1267, 1279 (E.D. Ky. 1986) (finding that where fraud is committed upon the court, the court’s power to dismiss is inherent “to protect the integrity of its proceedings”). The Defendant respectfully implores the Court to impose sanctions pursuant to Rule 60(d)(3) as I will demonstrate that the Plaintiff has committed a fraud upon the court. On 2/13/23, the Plaintiff, their authorized representative Luciana Lucio, and their counsel Mr. Daniel C. Steppick and Ms. Zshona Workman conspired to manipulate the court process in order to gain an unfair and unjust advantage. They removed my argument and evidence from the court record. PERTINENT BACKGROUND On 10/7/22, Lucio sent me another harassing notice stating that I did not turn in my fire extinguisher to the office. Lucio stated that maintenance would be entering my home and I would be fined if I refused to allow maintenance to retrieve my fire extinguisher. I emailed Lucio back and informed her that I did indeed leave my fire extinguisher nearly two weeks ago in front of the front office as I walked my children to the bus stop around 7am the morning that they were due. I informed Lucio I placed the fire extinguisher with the other extinguishers on the ground since the office did not open until 9am and the deadline to turn in the extinguisher was 9am. I went to the office to clear up this matter as Lucio was claiming that she did not receive one from me. After Lucio handed me a new extinguisher claiming I must have turned one in without a tag on it, I asked Lucio why the notice to vacate was not attached to the eviction citation that she had filed with the JP court. Lucio brushes off the question but then informs me that if I appeal then I would be “hit with everything”. I then told Lucio that she never fixed my daughter's bedroom light despite my first requests being nearly two years prior and after bringing this up to her multiple times in the prior two years. I informed her that the malfunctioned light is considered a fire and safety hazard and told Lucio that she never followed through with her promises to ever fix the light. Lucio claimed that she thought the malfunctioned light had been repaired already. Lucio then once again becomes outraged and begins yelling at me and waving her finger at me telling me that if I didn’t leave the office that she was going to call the Austin Police Department and have me arrested. Lucio then insinuates that she has a close relationship with the APD and states that “‘they are up here all the time” and “‘could be here in no time”. Despite the fact that I never spoke to Lucio in any disrespectful manner, never raised my voice and only brought up her failure to repair Lucio felt she had a right to threaten me with some close connection she has with the APD. I calmly left the office and went back to my apartment. Approximately thirty minutes later, Lucio sends me an email marked Exhibit AA that I entered into evidence on 2/7/23, where Lucio for the first time stated that while I was in the office I had mentioned some maintenance repairs and claimed that she had not seen any maintenance requests come into the office for me as of yet. Lucio then recites the Lease and states I’m required to inform her through the resident portal or in writing or mail. I was taken back that Lucio was now denying ever receiving any maintenance requests from me at all. Lucio then denied that I was ever a registered tenant in the resident portal despite having access to the resident portal for about a month back in March 2022 until after Lucio and I had our 4/6/22 meeting where I called Lucio out for stealing my rent money and was demanding to see the master water utility bill that T.A.C Title 16 Part 2 Chapter 24, affords to tenants living in sub-metered properties. I lost access to my portal immediately afterwards in which I was never given access again and the portal was stating they had no record of me. Lucio then claimed that I had never informed her that I needed a code for my resident portal despite Lucio knowing this was not true and that she had promised me in January 2023 and despite my 3/7/22 email to her stating that I had just finally logged into my resident portal after finding an old link through RentCafe that allowed me to login to the portal since I had been registered with another property through RentCafe because the code that Lucio stated she would send me two months previously had not been sent. After Lucio began to deny all of these events that took place throughout my tenancy I knew what “angle” Lucio was attempting to take regarding my tenancy and regarding how she was going to handle this appeal. I chose not to interact with her any further and after her threats of arrest with the APD for simply bringing up her failure to repair, I chose not to allow Lucio in my apartment which is why I sent her the ‘CEASE ALL ENTRY’ after Lucio sent a maintenance man to my apartment who was attempting to come into my apartment on this day in November 2022. The maintenance man was trying to essentially push his way into my apartment while he was holding a notice that stated that the “‘maintenance inspection for all of building two” would be taking place the following day. I felt very uncomfortable and the maintenance worker then handed me the notice. I emailed Lucio informing her that the maintenance man just tried to enter my apartment without the required 24 hour notice. I inform Lucio that I would like to have someone present with me due to her repeated threats and that I would allow maintenance inside if I had someone with me to ensure my safety and to ensure that maintenance did not try to do anything malicious. The following morning after a night of anxiety and worry due to the harassment I had been receiving by Lucio I reached out to Kara Lazano from the TDHCA who was handling my complaint I had made to the TDHCA, not Mr. Rios. I expressed to Ms. Lozano my safety concerns and asked her if she had sent maintenance to fix the light. I told Ms. Lozano if someone did have maintenance to fix the light then I would let in because I did not want to hinder the investigation. Ms. Lozano stated that there should be something in my Lease that says whether I have to let the plaintiff into my apartment. Ms. Lozano did not state to me that the TDHCA had sent maintenance to fix the light. The following morning I made the decision, and in hindsight it was absolutely the right decision given the level of harassment my family and I have endured, I sent Lucio a ‘CEASE ALL ENTRY’. The plaintiff in the PLF9 did not present the cease notice but I have attached it below. The facts will show that on 2/7/23, Ms. Amanda Green, the Travis County Clerk, Director of Civil Division, rejected my successful submission of my evidence marked ‘Defendant’s Exhibits-2-7-23.pdf (envelope number 72527589) (See Exhibit 1), two hours after all parties had received the successful submission with all eighty-eight (88) pages uploaded and served upon both parties. The successful submission lost my case after the judge stated that I could not argue retaliation. The Judge made this decision based solely on the evidence and pleadings as stated in his final judgment signed on 2/17/23.