Showing posts with label summary judgment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label summary judgment. Show all posts

Monday, August 9, 2010

Nikki Araguz Supporters Release New Video

Some associates of Nikki Araguz have published a brief portion of a recent interview with Nikki. Neither the location of the interview or the name of the woman asking Nikki questions were not disclosed in the video caption. In the interview, Nikki states that Heather Delgado, Simona Longoria and other members of their family were told about Nikki's medical history by Nikki and Thomas Araguz in April 2010. However, during the interview Nikki doesn't offer any supporting information or corroborating documents that could be used as evidence in court to support her statements about an apparent meeting between Nikki and her husband Thomas, and Thomas's family. The timing of that encounter is curious because it seems to coincide with the depositions that Thomas Araguz gave in the previous child custody lawsuit, in which they perjured themselves. It doesn't make sense that they perjured themselves after also having told Heather Delgado and Simona Longoria the truth, unless their disclosure preceded and instigated the child custody lawsuit. Later during the questions on the brief video below, when Nikki Araguz was asked if she considers herself "transgender", she replied that she believes she is female.



Given Nikki Araguz's recent admission that she and her husband Thomas committed perjury during an April 2010 deposition in a previous child custody lawsuit, it seems likely that Nikki may have a difficult time persuading a judge that her statements have credibility unless they are proffered with convincing supporting evidence. If some form of verifiable digital or written evidence exists to support her statements, such evidence might enable her to persuasively make statements during any new deposition, or future courtroom testimony, and provide documentary evidence that supports her statements, thereby enabling her to withstand challenges on cross examination that she has committed perjury previously and that she has a history of convictions for various petty crimes.

In any event, it doesn't seem like Nikki's revelation about the timing of the disclosures she and her husband made to Heather Delgado and Simona Longoria make much difference regarding the core foundation of her defense against them. The only claim of Heather Delgado's that it seems like the timing of the disclosures to them would be relevant to is the fraud cause of action against Nikki. However, the Fraud claim seems based upon Heather's Delgado's contention that Nikki defrauded Thomas with regard to their marriage. it doesn't seem like there is any fact pattern in the relationship between Nikki Araguz and Heather Delgado that could support a fraud claim involving their relationship. However, the best evidence that has been published thus far to document Nikki's contention that Thomas Araguz knew about Nikki's medical history are the October 2008 email messages between them while Nikki was in Trinidad, Colorado, where Marci Bowers, MD, apparently performed genital reconstruction surgery on Nikki to create a vagina for her. In addition, the mere timing of that surgery, and the post-surgical care involved with such surgery, would make it seem all but impossible for Thomas Araguz not to have been aware of what was going on medically with Nikki Araguz and her genitals.

However, even if the court views that evidence in a light most favorable to Nikki Araguz, she and her attorneys must still overcome what seems like a rather thin "common law" marriage assertion, based on the September 1, 2009 change in the Texas Marriage Statute to succeed with a claim that she was legally married to Thomas Araguz. Such a legal argument seems like an uphill battle, especially in a hostile Texas court. If Nikki Araguz and Thomas Araguz had applied for a marriage license after September 1, 2009, it seems like they would have a stronger case, although not one with any assurance of persuading a Texas judge to rule in her favor. A lawsuit like this one doesn't seem likely to be won or lost in a few weeks either. It seems like that at least some period of months will pass before either a summary judgment proceeding or a trial in this case. More than likely, either or both parties will file a motion for summary judgment before the court without a trial within a few months, rather than waiting to go to trial. What seems most important to understand about the process of this litigation, is that everything which happens in the trial court is only preparation for what is likely to be a case decided by one or more appeals courts. The attorneys for Nikki Araguz have a huge responsibility before them, which is to persuade the judge to allow them to fully develop and fully present their evidence and legal arguments thoroughly, so that the appellate process that follows has something adequate to work with, including all their factual, documentary evidence, appropriate expert medical evidence, and testimony from appropriate supporting witnesses.

The attorneys for Heather Delgado, the plaintiff, and biological mother of Thomas Araguz's two children, who are the actual parties at interest, seem primarily interested in obtaining a quick decision from the court. Those attorneys, Chad Ellis and Frank Mann, seem to have overlooked the likelihood that this case will be appealed no matter who obtains a favorable verdict, and the money at issue kept frozen in the interim until a final appeals court decision occurs, and that could take years.

It seems like Nikki Araguz and her local supporters could serve their interests better by publishing their own videos with copyright attribution, rather than allowing Nikki Araguz to be exploited and abused by the local television stations and newspapers. What would make better sense yet would be to have an appropriate and skilled representative speak on her behave, since every one of her direct statements could be used as evidence by the plaintiffs who give the impression of wanting to litigate aggressively.

Sunday, August 8, 2010

Upcoming Motion Hearing - August 16, 2010

Amidst the horrifically inaccurate and lurid newspaper and television reporting, a few new facts about upcoming events in the lawsuit have arisen.

Nikki Araguz
Defense attorneys for Nikki Araguz (left) have filed a Motion to Dismiss, apparently on the grounds that the plaintiffs have made claims upon which relief cannot be granted, a legal term of art. This is a normal and expected aspect of civil lawsuit proceedings. Although it does not seem likely that the judge will grant the defense motion, it is the duty of the defense attorneys to do so, and such a motion is a part of documenting the foundations of the defense case, one which seems likely to be considered by an appeals court in the future. As expected, Darrell Steidley, one of the attorneys for Nikki Araguz, has also filed a motion to have Simona Longoria removed from the lawsuit on the basis that she does not have standing to make a claim. The term standing means having the ability and the right to be party to a given lawsuit. Heather Delgado does have standing because she is the mother of the Thomas Araguz's sons, who are the actual party at interest in the probate lawsuit, but who cannot represent themselves or be parties to the lawsuit directly because they are minors. The defense motion  by attorneys for Nikki Araguz to dismiss the case is set for an oral hearing before the district court in Wharton, TX on Monday August 16, 2010. It seems likely that the court will also hear the defense motion on modification of the temporary restraining order, and begin consideration of other customary procedural matters. Altogether it seems likely that the judge will be asked to consider all these issues, and it appears that both sides have already filed their written motions and supporting briefs.

Attorneys for the plaintiffs, Heather Delgado and Simona Longoria, have meanwhile reported their intention to file a motion for Summary Judgment by the court without a trial, within the next two weeks. However, given the nature of civil lawsuit procedure, they will likely need to wait at least until the defense has filed an official written answer to the plaintiffs' petition, and the plaintiffs' attorneys will need to wait until a reasonable amount of discovery has been completed, otherwise the attorneys for Nikki Araguz can defend against the summary judgment motion with the argument that they need more time to gather evidence that would support their defense claims. The written answer the defense will need to file after the court hears its Motion to Dismiss, is a necessary formality that usually consists primarily of paragraph by paragraph denials of the plaintiffs' petition/complaint. Among the evidence it seems likely the defense will want to gather are medical records and testimony regarding the surgery Nikki Araguz has received, and the intersex/hermaphroditic condition she was born with, called Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome.

Among additional factual information that has been disclosed are that Thomas Araguz had apparently made an affidavit prior to his death containing the facts of his knowledge of Nikki Araguz, including Nikki's medical history and the potentially contentious nature of their marriage. The affidavit was apparently filed as an exhibit with the Motion to Dismiss the defense filed with the court on August 4, 2010. This means that, combined with the email messages Nikki and Thomas Araguz exchanged in October 2008 when Nikki was in Trinidad, Colorado have genital reconstruction surgery with Marci Bowers, MD, they seem to have ample evidence to establish that Thomas Araguz knew that Nikki Araguz was born with Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome (AIS), and although Nikki likely has an XY sex chromosome pair, the AIS condition meant that she could never function or reproduce as a male human being.

Another very important matter regarding the lawsuit does seem to have been informally settled by the parties regarding the various sums of money left to Nikki Araguz by Thomas Araguz. The plaintiffs are now agreeing with Nikki Araguz that a $60,000 retirement policy on which Thomas Araguz explicitly named Nikki Araguz the beneficiary and checked the "other" box regarding type of relationship does belong to Nikki Araguz and should not be contested as part of the lawsuit. However, the judge will probably need to sign off on this stipulation between the parties, since the judge had already frozen those and other funds as part of the previously entered temporary restraining order that prevents either party from accessing or spending any of the money the lawsuit is litigating over.