v.
the State of Texas
ACCEPTED 15-25-00019-CV FIFTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 3/21/2025 10:35 AM NO. 15-25-00019-CV CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE CLERK IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FILED IN FIFTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN 15th COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 3/21/2025 10:35:12 AM In Re T. BENTLY DURANT, THOMAS R. DURANT, THE DURANT CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE CLASSIC DYNASTY TRUST, MICHAEL A. WARD, 8100 PARTNERS, Clerk LTD., 8100, MANAGEMENT LLC, 8705 PARTNERS, LTD., 8705 MANAGEMENT LLC, CLASSIC CHEVROLET SUGAR LAND, LLC, CLASSIC CHEVROLET WEST HOUSTON, LLC, CLASSIC ELITE BUICK GMC, INC., AND 16835 CADET PARTNERS, LLC., Relators.
Original Proceeding from the Business Court of the State of Texas, Eleventh Division Cause No. 25-BC11A-0001 Honorable Stacy Rogers Sharp, Judge of the Texas Business Court Fourth Division, Sitting by Assignment
RELATORS’ RESPONSE TO REAL-PARTIES-IN-INTEREST’S EMERGENCY MOTION TO RECONSIDER THE STAY GRANTED BY THE COURT SHACKELFORD, MCKINLEY & NORTON, LLP Attorneys for Relators K. Elizabeth Swan Timothy D. Zeiger State Bar No. 24071218 State Bar No. 22255950 [email protected] [email protected] Derek D. Rollins 2600 Via Fortuna, Suite 150 State Bar No. 24029803 Austin, Texas 78746 [email protected] Telephone: (512) 469-0900 Lucas Peterson Facsimile: (512) 469-0930 State Bar No. 24121468 [email protected] 9201 N. Central Expy., 4th Floor, Dallas, Texas 75231 Telephone: (214) 780-1400 Facsimile: (214) 780-1401
FACTS
In this original proceeding, Relators seek mandamus review of the business court’s order remanding a removed commercial action (Cause No. 25-BC11A-0001, the “Business Court Action”) to the 387th District Court of Fort Bend County, Texas (Cause No. 24-DCV-318087, the “Divorce Action”). On February 21, 2025, this Court issued an Order staying all proceedings in both the Business Court Action and the Divorce Action (the “Stay”) and requesting a response and reply to Relators’ Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
The status quo ante at the time of the Stay was that Relators controlled and managed the operations of the Classic Dealerships without interference from the Sebastians, as they had for approximately seven (7) months. App.A:4, 9, 252-254. Jeff Sebastian was terminated from employment at the dealerships in July 2024 and Tiffany was terminated in September 2024, 1 prior to their initiation of any lawsuit against Relators. MR:391; MR:509-510 (¶¶2, 8-9); Motion p. 3.
The Sebastians jointly filed pleadings in the Divorce Action seeking to upend that status quo, including a request to appoint a receiver over virtually all dealership operations, and their February 21, 2025 request for an ex parte temporary restraining order “enjoin[ing] any interference with Jeff’s legal right to control all management decisions” of the Classic Dealerships – which compelled Relators to seek a Stay from this Court. MR:401-404, 514-515, 556-7. This Court’s Stay preserved the status quo of the peaceable operation of the Classic Dealerships and, pending mandamus review, prevented the Sebastians from obtaining court orders from the Divorce Court that would hamper or eliminate this Court’s ability to afford relief in the event this Court determines that the business court improperly remanded the Business Court Action.
[*2]The day after the Stay was imposed, on February 22, 2025, the Sebastians unilaterally held a Special Meeting of the Managers of Relator Classic Chevrolet West Houston, LLC (“Classic West Houston”). App.A:252, 304-305; App.B:2-12. At that “meeting” – where Jeff was the sole member in attendance – Jeff purported to remove Relator Thomas R. Durant as Manager and President and appoint Tiffany as Manager and himself as President.[2] App.A:304; App.B:5-7. The Sebastians further purported to set each of their base compensation at $15,000 per month plus 2% of the dealership’s gross revenues. App.A:304; App.B:7-9. The meeting was improper and ineffective for multiple reasons. App.A:6, 253-254; App.G.
After waiting almost three weeks, and despite the Stay and notice that Relators disputed the effectiveness of the actions taken at the purported meeting, the Sebastians then attempted to implement the unauthorized changes from their improper meeting, causing significant disruption to the dealership operations. App.A:253-254; App.G. On March 12, 2025, Jeff Sebastian contacted Classic West Houston’s Controller, holding himself out as the Manager of that dealership. Jeff demanded the Controller implement the Sebastians’ unilaterally dictated compensation structure and give the Sebastians access to email, financial reports and documents, keys, login access to systems, and other information. App.B. The Sebastians further entered the dealership property to “work” – despite both stating in their pleadings they were terminated months earlier. App.A:7; MR:391; Motion p. 3. Despite clear notice their status was disputed and the subject of pending litigation, they erroneously held themselves out as managers to the dealership employees, causing confusion and dissension and forcing Classic West Houston to significantly curtail operations, resulting in lost profits and reputational damage. Id. The Sebastians refused to leave when requested and affirmatively stated through counsel an intent to continue to disrupt Relators’ business and return the next day. Id.
[*3]These actions gave rise to a new and independent cause of action for Classic West Houston for conduct occurring after the filing of this original proceeding and issuance of the Stay. While the Stay prevented the Sebastians’ efforts to litigate a business dispute in the Divorce Court, it does not prevent these extrajudicial actions because they were taken outside of the judicial process entirely. Faced with either allowing the disruption of its business to continue indefinitely or seeking temporary relief while the Mandamus Petition is pending, Classic West Houston sought relief in Tarrant County—a proper venue for that matter3—to protect the status quo and ability of Classic West Houston to operate until the Petition for Writ of Mandamus is resolved. App.A; Motion Ex.[1].
[*4]Accordingly, Classic West Houston filed a verified petition and application for temporary injunction against the Sebastians under Cause No. 236-362746-25, in the 236th District Court of Tarrant County (the “Tarrant County Litigation”). Motion Ex.[1]; App.A. In doing so, Classic West Houston fully disclosed the procedural history of this case to the Tarrant County District Court, including the existence of the Stay. App.A: 6-7, 302-303; Motion Ex.[1]:5-6.
[*5]On March 13, 2025, the 236th District Court of Tarrant County granted a Temporary Restraining Order (App.C, the “TRO”) which maintained the status quo of dealership operations by enjoining the Sebastians from:
1) effecting or enforcing any of the purported actions taken at the February 22, 2025 special meeting (which occurred after the Stay was imposed);
2) attempting to call, or otherwise participate in, any meetings of the dealership’s members; and 3) attempting to vote or engage in any managerial function associated with their membership interest(s), including without limitation, entering the dealership, giving instruction, direction, or orders to dealership employees, or accessing or attempting to access any financial records of the dealership. App.C.
The Sebastians filed a joint motion to dissolve the TRO and a supplemental motion seeking a stay of the Tarrant County Litigation because of the pending mandamus proceeding and this Court’s Stay. App.D; App.E:9. A hearing was conducted on March 20, 2025, and the Tarrant County District Court granted the motion, dissolved the TRO, and stayed the Tarrant County Litigation “pending the actions of the 15th Court of Appeals, or until further order of the Court.” App.G.
ARGUMENT I. The Sebastians have not articulated any emergency warranting lifting of the Stay. The Sebastians’ Motion is now moot. The TRO has been dissolved, the injunction hearing canceled, and all proceedings involving any of the parties to this mandamus proceeding have been stayed in deference to this Court. App.D. There is no impending event or emergency that warrants lifting the Stay.
[*6]The Stay maintained the status quo of dealership operations and preserved the Court’s jurisdiction to review Relators’ Mandamus Petition. The basis for the Stay remains unchanged by the (now-dissolved) TRO. It is no more appropriate now to allow an improper court to render orders without jurisdiction than it was when the Stay was issued. This Court’s determination of which court will preside over this action, and which claims will make up that action, must precede further proceedings on the claims that are subject to that determination. The Court’s decision is important to the jurisprudence of this State and the Court’s jurisdiction to make that decision must be preserved.
The Sebastians’ Motion does not recite any emergency or harm they will suffer if the Stay is maintained. The Classic Dealerships are being managed by Relators, as they have been for the seven (7) months following the Sebastians’ termination and prior to imposition of the Stay and the issuance of the TRO. App.A:4, 9, 252-254. Far from causing an emergency, the Stay ensures that status quo will continue without interference by the business court or the Divorce Court – although it has not prevented the Sebastians from unilateral extrajudicial interference. The Sebastians’ desperation to wrest control from Relators and install themselves or a third-party receiver over all dealership operations prior to final trial is not an emergency that warrants lifting the Stay. The Sebastians have not argued, much less demonstrated, any prejudice or harm that would result from Relators continuing to run their own businesses, as they have for the last seven months, pending mandamus review. Any request to change the party in control of dealership operations must be heard and decided by a court of proper jurisdiction, and proceedings in the business court and the Divorce Court must remain stayed until this Court can complete its review of that jurisdictional issue.
[*7]The Sebastians’ Motion does confirm that, if the Stay is lifted, they intend to proceed with their requests for receivership and/or a temporary restraining order from the Divorce Court and attempt to usurp Relators’ peaceable operation of the Classic Dealerships pending review by this Court. That illustrates why the Stay should remain in place. Relators would be irreparably harmed if they were to be divested of control of their businesses by a court of improper jurisdiction, including control over expenditures, financial obligations and debts, contracts, and personnel decisions such as hiring and firing. MR:555-558; see In re Lisa Laser USA, Inc., 310 S.W.3d 880, 883 (Tex. 2010) (forum selection clause).
Lifting the Stay and allowing the Sebastians to proceed with receivership or other action in the Divorce Court would further be harmful because the Family Code does not permit the appointment of a receiver over property owned by third parties. See Mallou v. Payne & Vendig, 750 S.W.2d 251, 254–55 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1988, writ denied); Miles v. Miles, No. 05-24-00740-CV, 2025 WL 863479 (Tex. App.— Dallas March 19, 2025, no hist.) (reliance on Section 64.001 of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code and its requirements is misplaced; Family Code, and not Section 64.001, controls the division of property on divorce). And mandatory venue of any receivership proceeding is at the Classic Dealerships’ principal place of business, which is not Fort Bend County. App.F:15; see TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE § 15.004 (“In a suit in which a plaintiff properly joins two or more claims or causes of action arising from the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences, and one of the claims or causes of action is governed by [a] mandatory venue provision[] … the suit shall be brought in the county required by the mandatory venue provision.”). A party may petition the appropriate appellate court for a writ of mandamus to enforce mandatory venue. TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE § 15.0642; see also Perryman v. Spartan Tex. Six Capital Partners, Ltd., 546 S.W.3d 110, 130 (Tex. 2018) (“A trial court’s erroneous denial of a motion to transfer venue requires the judgment’s reversal and a remand for new trial.”). Lifting the Stay and allowing the Sebastians to proceed in an improper court while the case is being reviewed would only result in questionably valid orders and likely necessitate further appellate action.
[*8][*9]There is no impending harm, prejudice, or emergency requiring the Court to lift the Stay. To the contrary, harm and prejudice to Relators would result if the Stay were lifted.
II. The now-dissolved TRO merely maintained the status quo of dealership operations pending mandamus review, consistent with the Stay. The TRO has been dissolved in apparent deference to this Court’s impending action, and the Sebastians’ Motion is moot. App.G. However, the TRO was requested in good faith, out of necessity to preserve the status quo of Classic West Houston’s operations, consistent with the spirit of the Stay. In fact, in the absence of the TRO, Classic West Houston is nearly certain to suffer further harm because of the Sebastians’ extrajudicial actions.
The Sebastians have sought a TRO in the Divorce Court based on the premise that the BuySell is valid, enforceable, and requires their interest in the Classic Dealerships to be bought under its terms. MR:512. Accordingly, the other parties to the BuySell have claims to equitable ownership of the interest the Sebastians claim gives them control over Classic West Houston. Goswami v. Metropolitan Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 751 S.W.2d 487, 489 (Tex.1988) (option contract gave optionee equitable interest in property and standing to contest validity of foreclosure sale). Despite this, the Sebastians are seeking immediate changes to the management and control of the Classic Dealerships, prior to trial, and even prior to this Court’s determination of which trial court has proper jurisdiction to make such changes. The Stay prevents both the business court and the Divorce Court from issuing orders of any kind, including orders granting the Sebastians’ request for changes in management and control of the dealerships. The spirit of the Stay is to prevent disruption of the status quo pending review.
[*10]With the Stay in place, the Sebastians decided to take matters into their own hands, outside of any judicial process, by unilaterally attempting to implement changes to the management and control of Relators’ dealerships. The Stay prevented both the business court and the Divorce Court from authorizing the exact actions the Sebastians unilaterally took without court authorization following the Stay. MR:401-404, 514-515 (the Sebastians requested the Divorce Court to transfer management and control of the dealerships from Relators to the Sebastians and/or a receiver, which was prevented by the Stay); App.A:252, 304- 305; App.B:2-12 (the Sebastians purported to unilaterally transfer management and control of the dealerships from Relators to the Sebastians).
The Stay did prevent the Sebastians from interfering with dealership operations through the Business Court Action or the Divorce Action, but it was not enough to prevent their extrajudicial interference with the status quo. When the Sebastians could not get immediate control over the dealerships through legal channels in the Divorce Court, they attempted to unilaterally usurp the majority owners’ management and control of Classic West Houston and take control by trespass – including entering the dealership and attempting to physically take control of Classic West Houston property. Classic West Houston was forced to seek additional relief as a result.
[*11]Classic West Houston did not act immediately after the improper meeting out of deference to this Court’s impending decision on the merits of this proceeding. However, when the Sebastians escalated by entering Classic West Houston’s premises without prior notice or authorization and demanding access to the company’s internal files, the emergency necessitating legal action arose.
The TRO did not implement any changes to the management or control of Classic West Houston and merely preserved what had been the status quo for over six months with Relators managing the Classic Dealerships without input, interference, or intrusion from the Sebastians. App.C. It temporarily restrained the Sebastians from acting on any of the improper actions taken at the February 22, 2025 “special meeting.” Id.; App.A:253-254. It temporarily prevented the Sebastians taking further improper action, such as calling additional meetings or attempting to vote or engage in management of the dealership, consistent with the status quo. Id. Finally, the TRO prevented the terminated Sebastians from continuing to engage in the irrational behavior of physically entering the dealership, giving instructions or orders to the employees, and unilaterally attempting to access financial records outside the proper discovery process. Id. The Sebastians were extremely disruptive of Relators’ business operations. Given their behavior, the immediate necessity for relief, the Stay applicable to both the Divorce Action and the Business Court Action, and with venue not being proper in Fort Bend County, Relators had no choice but to seek relief in Tarrant County, where the principal office of Classic West Houston is located.
[*12]III. Obtaining the TRO was not inconsistent with the merits of the pending mandamus petition. Classic West Houston’s claims in the Tarrant County Litigation arise solely from the actions taken after the Stay was imposed. App.A. It asserted a new cause of action separate and apart from the claims at issue in the Business Court Action and Divorce Action, which entirely accrued after the Stay. The relief requested in the Tarrant County Litigation has not been requested in either the business court or the Divorce Court and was not foreclosed by the Stay of those actions.
Nor did Relators’ request for a TRO and injunctive relief from a Tarrant County District Court somehow waive their timely request for mandamus review of the business court’s Remand Order. Waiver is an intentional relinquishment of a known right or intentional conduct inconsistent with claiming that right. Jernigan v. Langley, 111 S.W.3d 153, 156 (Tex. 2003) (per curiam). Waiver is largely a matter of intent, and for implied waiver to be found through a party’s actions, intent must be clearly demonstrated by the surrounding facts and circumstances. Id.
[*13]Relators’ continued intent to pursue mandamus relief is unmistakable. The same day the TRO was issued, Relators filed with this Court a 30-page Reply in support of their Petition for Writ of Mandamus, maintaining their position that the Remand Order was improper and evidencing their continued request for the business court to adjudicate the claims against them. Waiver cannot be implied in light of Relators’ clear pursuit of mandamus review.
Despite Relators’ continued position that the business court should hear the Sebastians’ claims against them, the status quo is that the business court has refused to exercise jurisdiction, the Business Court Action is stayed, and it is currently impossible for Relators to seek a TRO or injunctive relief against the Sebastians in that venue. Relators cannot be penalized for seeking emergency relief elsewhere when they tried unsuccessfully to have the business court hear this dispute and are actively pursuing mandamus review of the business court’s refusal to do so.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
Relators respectfully request that the Court deny the Sebastians’ Emergency Motion to Reconsider the Stay Granted by the Court. Relators pray for all other appropriate relief.
[*14]Respectfully submitted, SHACKELFORD, MCKINLEY & NORTON, LLP
K. Elizabeth Swan State Bar No. 24071218 [email protected] Derek D. Rollins State Bar No. 24029803 [email protected] Lucas Peterson State Bar No. 24121469 [email protected] 9201 N. Central Expressway, 4th Floor Dallas, Texas 75231 Telephone (214) 780-1400 Facsimile (214) 780-1401 Timothy D. Zeiger State Bar No. 22255950 [email protected] 2600 Via Fortuna, Suite 150 Austin, Texas 78746 Telephone (512) 469-0900 Facsimile (512) 469-0930 ATTORNEYS FOR RELATORS T. Bently Durant, Thomas R. Durant, The Durant Classic Dynasty Trust, Michael A. Ward, 8100 Partners, Ltd., 8100 Management LLC, 8705 Partners, Ltd., and 8705 Management LLC, Classic Chevrolet Sugar Land, LLC, Classic Chevrolet West Houston, LLC, Classic Elite Buick GMC, Inc., and 16835 Cadet Partners, LLC 15 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document has been served on the parties through their counsel of record listed below on this March 21, 2025, in accordance with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.5. BOHREER LAW FIRM PLLC SCHEEF & STONE, LLP E. Michelle Bohreer Byron K. Henry [email protected] [email protected] Pritesh Soni Walker Steven Young [email protected] [email protected] 777 Post Oak Blvd., Suite 950 J. Mitch Little Houston, Texas 77056 [email protected] Counsel for Real Party in Interest Steven Ovando Michael Jeffrey Sebastian, [email protected] Individually and on behalf of the 2600 Network Blvd., Suite 400 Sebastian Community Estate, and Frisco, Texas 75034 Derivatively on behalf of the Classic Dealerships DICECCO LAW PARTNERS, PLLC John Coselli, III Hon. Stacy Rogers Sharp [email protected] Judge of the Texas Business Court, Jill K. Evangelista Fourth Division, Sitting by [email protected] Assignment Joseph W. DeCecco [email protected] [email protected] William P. Clements Building 777 Post Oak Blvd., Ste. 900 300 West 15th Street, Suite 606 Houston, Texas 77056 Austin, Texas 78701 Respondent Counsel for Real Party in Interest Tiffany Lynn Sebastian K. Elizabeth Swan DECLARATION OF K. ELIZABETH SWAN STATE OF TEXAS § § COUNTY OF DALLAS §
[*16]“My name is K. Elizabeth Swan. I am an attorney with the law firm of Shackelford, McKinley & Norton, LLP, and I am one of the attorneys for Relators in this case. I am fully qualified and capable of making this Declaration.
I have reviewed the foregoing Relators’ Response to Real-Parties-In- Interest’s Emergency Motion to Reconsider the Stay Granted by the Court, and Appendix Tabs A through H to the Motion. I hereby affirm the following:
A. Appendix Tab A is a true and correct copy of Plaintiff’s Verified First Amended Petition and Application for Temporary Injunction filed in the Tarrant County Litigation.
B. Appendix Tab B is a true and correct copy of the March 12, 2025 Email from Jeff Sebastian to Ulises Duran, with attachment, as it was provided to me.
C. Appendix Tab C is a true and correct copy of the Temporary Restraining Order and Order Setting Hearing issued in the Tarrant County Litigation.
D. Appendix Tab D is a true and correct copy of Defendants’ Joint Motion to Transfer Venue and, Subject Thereto, Emergency Motion to Dissolve Temporary Restraining Order and for Action on Bond filed in the Tarrant County Litigation.
E. Appendix Tab E is a true and correct copy of Defendants’ Supplemental Emergency Motion to Dissolve Temporary Restraining Order and for Action on Bond, and Motion for Temporary Stay filed in the Tarrant County Litigation.
F. Appendix Tab F is a true and correct copy of Plaintiff’s Response to Defendants’ Joint Motion to Transfer Venue and to Dissolve Temporary Restraining Order filed in the Tarrant County Litigation.
[*17]G. Appendix Tab G is a true and correct copy of the Order Granting Defendants’ Emergency Motion to Dissolve Temporary Restraining Order and Stay of Proceedings issued in the Tarrant County Litigation.
H. Appendix Tab H is a true and correct copy of the March 12, 2025 Letter from Relators’ counsel to Jeff Sebastian’s Counsel.
I have reviewed all factual statements in the foregoing Motion, and hereby certify that such statements are supported by competent evidence in the mandamus record and/or documents in the Appendix hereto.
My name is K. Elizabeth Swan, my date of birth is April 2, 1984, and my office address is 9201 N. Central Expressway, Fourth Floor, Dallas, TX 75231. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.”
Executed in Dallas County, State of Texas, on this 21st day of March, 2025.
K. Elizabeth Swan
[*18]INDEX TO APPENDIX
Tab Item A. Plaintiff’s Verified First Amended Petition and Application for Temporary Injunction B. March 12, 2025 Email from Jeff Sebastian to Ulises Duran, with attachment C. Temporary Restraining Order and Order Setting Hearing D. Defendants’ Joint Motion to Transfer Venue and, Subject Thereto, Emergency Motion to Dissolve Temporary Restraining Order and for Action on Bond E. Defendants’ Supplemental Emergency Motion to Dissolve Temporary Restraining Order and for Action on Bond, and Motion for Temporary Stay F. Plaintiff’s Response to Defendants’ Joint Motion to Transfer Venue and to Dissolve Temporary Restraining Order G. Order Granting Defendants’ Emergency Motion to Dissolve Temporary Restraining Order and Stay of Proceedings H. March 12, 2025 Letter from Relators’ counsel to Jeff Sebastian’s Counsel FILED TARRANT COUNTY 236-362746-25 3/19/2025 5:43 PM THOMAS A. WILDER DISTRICT CLERK CAUSE NO. 236-362746-25 CLASSIC CHEVROLET WEST § IN THE DISTRICT COURT HOUSTON, LLC, § § Plaintiff, § § v. § 236th JUDICIAL DISTRICT § MICHAEL JEFFREY SEBASTIAN AND § TIFFANY SEBASTIAN, § § Defendants. § TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS
[*19]PLAINTIFF’S VERIFIED FIRST AMENDED PETITION AND APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY INJUNCTION TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:
Plaintiff Classic Chevrolet West Houston, LLC (“Plaintiff”) files its First Amended Verified Petition and Application for Temporary Injunction against Defendants Michael Jeffrey Sebastian (“Jeff”) and Tiffany Lynn Sebastian (“Tiffany”) (collectively “Defendants”), and would respectfully show the Court the following:
Discovery Control Plan
1. Plaintiff intends that discovery be conducted under Level 3.
Rule 47 Statement App.A 0096
76099.
App.A 0097 10. 8100 Partners, LTD. (“8100 Partners”) is a Nominal Third Party and a Texas limited partnership. 8100 Partners can be served through its registered agent, Thomas R. Durant, or any officer or director of 8100 Partners, at 1101 State Highway 114, Grapevine, Texas 76099, or wherever they may be found. [11]. 8100 Management LLC (“8100 Management”) is a Nominal Third Party and a Texas limited liability company. 8100 Management can be served through its registered agent, Thomas R. Durant, or any officer or director of 8100 Management, at 1101 State Highway 114, Grapevine, Texas 76099, or wherever they may be found.
IV. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 12. The Court has subject-matter jurisdiction over the lawsuit because the amount in controversy exceeds the minimum jurisdictional limits of this Court. [13]. The Court has personal jurisdiction over all parties to the litigation because they are individual residents of Texas, or are legal entities organized and exist under the laws of the state of Texas that are registered to and conduct business in Texas. [14]. Venue is property in Fort Bend County, Texas pursuant to Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code §§ 15.002 and 15.005, as it is the county in which the underlying divorce is pending and it is where all or a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred.
V. FACTUAL BACKGROUND 15. Jeff and Tiffany Sebastian are spouses who have been married for more than twenty years prior to the filing of this divorce proceeding. They met one another in Houston in 1998 at a time when they both were launching careers in the local automotive industry. In fact, Tiffany started App.A 0098 work at a small used car dealership on the west side of town that summer and Jeff joined her shortly thereafter. [16]. By the following year, the Sebastians were married and had worked hard to ensure that, separately and together, they were a recognized force in the automotive sales industry. As the decades subsequently passed, they continued to develop a massive talent for sales, management, and economics, and created a vast professional network and strong reputations for driving growth and profit. [17]. In 2016, that dedication and ambition led Jeff Sebastian to accept a position as General Manager of Classic Chevrolet Sugar Land. At that time, the Sugar Land dealership was principally owned by Defendant Tom Durant and suffered from poor performance under current management.[1] Accordingly, the Sebastians identified it as an opportunity to further prove their effectiveness in the Houston market with the anticipation that such efforts would generate an opportunity for partnership. With that goal in mind, the Sebastians set to work (Jeff serving as the name General Manager and Tiffany working directly alongside him) and ultimately caused Classic Chevrolet Sugar Land to tectonically shift from a struggling enterprise to a dominant industry presence. In fact, after only a few short years of exponential growth under the Sebastians’ management, Classic Chevrolet Sugar Land became one of the top performing Chevrolet dealers in the entire country. [18]. Based on that success, the Sebastians were invited to become owners of Classic Chevrolet Sugar Land, LLC and acquired a Membership Interest in the company in 2018.2 (The Class A App.A 0099 Members became Jeff Sebastian, Defendant Tom Durant, and Defendant Bently Durant, and the Class B Members became Jeff Sebastian, Defendant Dynasty Trust, Defendant Tom Durant, and Defendant Bently Durant. Meanwhile, both Sebastians continued to operate the dealership, with Jeff being elevated to managing partner and Dealer-Operator.) 19. The Sebastians also located, spear-headed, and became partners with the Durant Defendants in the purchase and management of Classic Chevrolet West Houston, LLC in 2019.3 At that time, Classic Chevrolet West Houston was an AutoNation dealership in total collapse. However, given the Sebastians’ tireless pursuit of efficiency and growth, it quickly became a Top 10 performing Chevrolet dealer in Houston. (The Class A Members became Jeff Sebastian and Defendant Tom Durant, and the Class B Members became Jeff Sebastian, Defendant Tom Durant, and Defendant Dynasty Trust. Meanwhile, both Sebastians operated the dealership, with Tiffany Sebastian serving as Executive Manager until 2023—when she became Executive Manager of Classic Elite Buick GMC, Inc.—and Jeff Sebastian serving as Dealer-Operator.) 20. The Sebastians were also integral in the purchase and management of Classic Elite Buick GMC, Inc., another Houston dealership, in 2023.4 And, like the other dealerships the Sebastians operate, the GMC store became a Top performing Houston GMC dealer. (The Class A Shareholders became Jeff Sebastian and Defendant Tom Durant, and the Class B Shareholders became Jeff Sebastian, Tiffany Sebastian, and Defendant Dynasty Trust. Meanwhile, both Sebastians operated the dealership, with Tiffany Sebastian serving as Executive Manager and Jeff Sebastian served as Dealer-Operator.)
3 On November 29, 2019, Jeff Sebastian (and the Sebastian Estate) purchased a 51% Class A Membership Interest, and a 39.49% Class B Membership Interest, in Classic Chevrolet West Houston, LLC. [4] On January 26, 2023, Jeff Sebastian (and the Sebastian Estate) purchased a 51% Class A Membership Interest, and a 19.49% Class B Membership Interest, in Classic Elite Buick GMC, Inc.
App.A 0100 21. On May 1, 2023, Classic Elite Buick GMC, Inc. entered into a Lease Agreement (“Lease”) with 16835 Cadet Partners, LLC which is the owner of the real property upon which the Classic Dealership operates at 16835 Katy Freeway. (The Class A Shareholders of Cadet are Jeff Sebastian and Defendant Tom Durant, and the Class B Shareholders of Cadet are Jeff Sebastian, Tiffany Sebastian, and Defendant Dynasty Trust). 22. By 2024, the Sebastians were far and away the most successful and profitable partners within the whole Durant Organization. The Sebastians and the dealerships they operated received numerous prestigious accolades and awards from the manufacturers and the Durant Organization. Neither Jeff nor Tiffany Sebastian had ever received a warning or as much as a write up. In fact, the Sebastians were commonly recognized as one of the best partners within the Durant Organization. Indeed, the Sebastians co-owned and operated a total of three dealerships—that were staffed with approximately 600 trained employees, preferred by the manufacturers, and generating incredible profits—as well as the Cadet property. (The Sebastians’ interest in the Classic Dealerships, 16835 Cadet Partners and 8100 Partners represent the largest community assets in the pending divorce and mandate protection against reductions is fair market value). 23. Unfortunately, however, the Sebastians soon learned that great success can also generate greed. [24]. In this case, the Durant Defendants began to work with one another to expel the Sebastians from Cadet and the Classic Dealerships in contravention of their governing agreements and applicable law. The initiative actually developed into a complete plan to strip the Sebastians of 100% of their Member/Shareholder Interests in Cadet and the Classic Dealerships without payment of just compensation therefore, in a scheme to divert millions of dollars in equity and App.A 0101 profits owed to the Sebastians over to the Durant Defendants. Moreover, the Durant Defendants actually began to implement their plan in the summer of 2024. 25. By way of example, the Durant Defendants began reaching out to the Sebastians individually with the intent of separating and dividing the couple and increasing conflict among them. In fact, the Durant Defendants relocated Mike Ward, a general manager, from Dallas to Houston and planted him in the Classic Dealerships with a mission of creating division, dissension, and relaying personal information about the Sebastians back to the Durant Defendants. The Durant Defendants then utilized that information and division to disparage the Sebastians’ character and capabilities, both publically and privately, endeavoring to erode/diminish the Sebastians’ control of the Classic Dealerships. The defendants also chose to execute expensive and unnecessary service contracts, cut ties with local vendors, fire experienced staff members, hire new staff members, restructure operations, and re-allocate time and resources to wasteful projects. [26]. Eventually, the Durant Defendants unceremoniously purported to fire Jeff Sebastian on July 22, 2024, followed by Tiffany Sebastian on September 13, 2024, and replaced them with select loyalists, including the same individual that spear-headed the dissension, Mike Ward. The Durant Defendants then completely ignored the Sebastians’ management control and immediately caused the Sebastians’ access to all Cadet and Classic Dealership information to be severed (Jeff Sebastian lost access on July 22, 2024)—including access to all books and records, account information, budgets, inventory and sales data, payroll records, and emails—and Durant Defendants refused to make required payments and approved distributions to the Sebastians as owners. Instead, the Durant Defendants quickly began diverting millions of dollars in distributable revenues and rents back to themselves, including via by pouring money into needless capital improvements at the Classic Dealership locations (several of which properties are majority-owned App.A 0102 by the Durant Defendants and leased back to the Classic Dealerships on a Net-Net-Net basis). These illegal and self-interested measures constitute an effort, in part, to cause a short-term devaluation of the Classic Dealerships and to diminish the Sebastians’ contractually anticipated financial liquidity in order to leverage their cooperation. On numerous occasions, Jeff Sebastian asked to speak directly with Tom Durant, but was told by Bently Durant, that in no way shape or form would he be allowed to do so. Jeff also pleaded for access to his emails, communication threads, and basic financial information. However, on each occasion, he was denied and told that the Durant Defendants wanted him to stay away from the business and the dealerships. [27]. Now, the Durant Defendants have demanded that the Sebastians relinquish 100% of their Membership/Shareholder Interests in Cadet, 8100 Partners and all three Classic Dealerships for a pithy fraction of their true value in violation of a myriad of contractual obligations, including applicable company/operating agreements, and a Buy-Sell Agreement the parties executed dated effective May 1, 2023. Therefore, the Sebastians, Cadet, and the Classic Dealerships seek relief therefrom, including via the issuance of a declaratory judgment.
VI. CAUSES OF ACTION Count 1 - Breach of Contract 28. All of the preceding paragraphs are incorporated herein as though fully set forth below.
a. The Management Agreements 29. The Durant Defendants and the Sebastians entered into a number of valid and enforceable contracts that govern the management and operation of the Classic Dealerships. Those agreements include the Limited Liability Company Agreement for Classic Chevrolet Sugar Land, LLC (“Sugar Land Agreement”), the Company Agreement of Classic Chevrolet West Houston, LLC (“West App.A 0103 Houston Agreement”), the Bylaws of Classic Buick GMC of Houston, Inc. (“GMC Bylaws”), and the Limited Liability Company Agreement for 16835 Cadet Partners, LLC (“Cadet Agreement”) (collectively, the “Management Agreements”). However, the Durant Defendants proceeded to materially breach terms of those Management Agreements at great cost to the Sebastians, Cadet, and the Classic Dealerships. [30]. Particularly, and without limitation, the Durant Defendants caused the Sebastians to be removed from their employment/management positions at Cadet and the Classic Dealerships without complying with the voting and approval requirements set forth in the Management Agreements. The Durant Defendants have also caused Cadet and the Classic Dealerships to engage in acts and expenditures that are directly adverse to the necessary and/or advisable interests of the Sebastians, Cadet, and the Classic Dealerships, and in breach of the Management Agreements, including (i) causing the Classic Dealerships to spend millions of dollars on wasteful capital improvements to properties that the Classic Dealerships do not own (and which are instead majority-owned by the Durant Defendants), (ii) preventing Cadet and the Classic Dealerships from paying dividends/distributions to their owners, (iii) decreasing the Classic Dealerships’ revenue and profitability, and (iv) damaging the Classic Dealerships’ valuable relationships and ability to transact business within the industry. [31]. The Durant Defendants’ material breaches of the Management Agreements have caused, and continue to cause, in excess of $10,000,000 in damages to the Sebastians (including the Sebastian Estate), Cadet, and the Classic Dealerships.
b. The Buy-Sell Agreement 32. Defendant Tom Durant, Defendant Dynasty Trust, and the Sebastians are also parties to a Buy-Sell Agreement for Interests in Classic Chevrolet Sugar Land, LLC, Classic Chevrolet West App.A 0104 Houston, LLC, Classic Elite Buick GMC, Inc., and 16835 Cadet Partners, LLC (the “Buy-Sell Agreement”). The Buy-Sell Agreement governs certain rights and restrictions pertaining to the sale or transfer of the parties’ ownership interests in Cadet and the Classic Dealerships, including a rendition of the purchase options and the means/methods of determining share price if such options are validly exercised. In particular, the Buy-Sell Agreement stipulates that an option to purchase the Sebastians’ interest in Cadet and the Classic Dealerships shall arise upon the occurrence of certain events, including “the cessation of the performance of the Dealership Business Duties of the Sebastians (including termination of either of the Sebastians as an officer or Manager of the LLC)”. Jeff Sebastian was terminated on July 22, 2024, which, by contract, which alleged termination would have expressly triggered the applicable Buy-Sell Agreement and established the Valuation Date. [33]. In October, 2024, incident to the Sebastians’ unlawful firing/exclusion, Defendant Dynasty Trust, by and through its Trustee, Mark Escamilla, issued an “Exercise of Option to Purchase” letter (“Exercise Notice”) to the Sebastians stating that it was electing to repurchase all of the Sebastians’ interest in Cadet and the Classic Dealerships. However, no valid triggering event had occurred that would render that kind of involuntary repurchase demand an available option for Defendant Dynasty Trust. Furthermore, the repurchase price demanded was and is directly opposed to the valuation method dictated by the Buy-Sell Agreement. [34]. As such, the repurchase demand made by Defendant Dynasty Trust is in direct breach and violation of the Buy-Sell Agreement and has caused, and continues to cause, direct financial damage to the Sebastians for which they seek recovery by this lawsuit. Count 2 - Suit for Declaratory Judgment 35. All of the preceding paragraphs are incorporated herein as though fully set forth below.
App.A 0105 36. Pursuant to the Exercise Notice, Defendant Dynasty Trust demands that the Sebastians relinquish 100% of their Shareholder/Membership interests in Cadet and the Classic Dealerships for a small fraction of what the applicable Buy-Sell Agreement requires. 37. Particularly, Defendant Dynasty Trust refuses to recognize the fact that, in the event of a buy-out, the Sebastians are entitled to payment of fair market value for all of their shares in Cadet and each of the Classic Dealerships.[5] Instead, Defendant Dynasty Trust alleges the Sebastians’ shares in Classic Chevrolet West Houston are the only ones that should receive such valuation and that the Sebastians’ shares in Cadet and the other Classic Dealerships merely entitle them to a return of their capital contributions to those entities. 38. The Buy-Sell Agreement dictates that the Sebastians are entitled to fair market value for all of their member shares in Cadet and the Classic Dealerships unless certain loans that Defendant Dynasty Trust extended to the Sebastians remain unpaid.[6] The Sebastians, however, paid their loans associated with Classic Chevrolet Sugar Land and Classic Chevrolet West Houston in full on or before September 1, 2023. The Sebastians also diligently made repeated efforts to pay the loans associated with Classic Elite Buick GMC and Cadet after the loans were made, but were consistently denied any documentation of the loans or a way to repay them. (Many such requests were made directly to Defendant Bently Durant or Defendant Tom Durant). Consequently, the Durant Defendants are estopped from now denying the Sebastians fair market value for their App.A 0106 member shares in Classic Elite Buick GMC and/or Cadet by reason of their concerted acts in furtherance thereof. 39. The Buy-Sell Agreement additionally specifies that the Durant Defendants’ option to re- purchase the Sebastians’ member shares in the Classic Dealerships vests “upon the occurrence of a specified event” (e.g. Jeff’s forced cessation of duty). Accordingly, in the event of a buy-out, the Sebastians are entitled to fair market value for their shares as of July 22, 2024 (i.e. the date Jeff was evicted from Cadet and the Classic Dealerships and prevented from continuing to perform his Dealership Business Duties). 40. Therefore, in accordance with Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code Sections 37.003 and 37.004, the Sebastians seek an affirmative judgment from the court declaring: (a) their right under the Buy-Sell Agreement to receive fair market value for all of their member shares in Classic Dealership and Cadet upon a buyout by any of the Durant Defendants, including Defendant Dynasty Trust; and (b) that the valuation date for all shares subject to the buy-out is July 22, 2024. 41. A justiciable controversy related to the valuation and pricing of the Sebastians’ Classic Dealership and Cadet shares exists and will be resolved by the declaration sought.
VII. ENTITLEMENT TO ATTORNEY FEES 42. All of the preceding paragraphs are incorporated herein as though fully set forth below. 43. The actions of the Durant Defendants have required the retention of the undersigned counsel to prosecute, defend, and enforce the Third Party Plaintiffs’ legal and equitable interests. Therefore, the Third Party Plaintiffs’ are additionally entitled to an award of their reasonable and necessary attorney fees against the Durant Defendants, jointly and severally, pursuant to Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code Section 38.001.
App.A 0107
IX. CONDITIONS PRECEDENT 44. All conditions precedent to the Third Party Plaintiffs’ claims for relief have been performed or occurred.
App.A 0108 App.A 0109
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. Lisa Lim on behalf of Joseph DiCecco Bar No. 5812520 [email protected] Envelope ID: 94904449 Filing Code Description: Counter Claim/Cross Action/Interpleader/Intervention/Third Party Filing Description: Third-Party Petition Status as of 12/4/2024 11:46 AM CST Associated Case Party: TiffanyLynnSebastian Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status Haley K.Burnside [email protected] 12/3/2024 6:31:31 PM SENT Nicole Ross [email protected] 12/3/2024 6:31:31 PM SENT Eliza Cabrera [email protected] 12/3/2024 6:31:31 PM SENT Bobby Newman [email protected] 12/3/2024 6:31:31 PM SENT Exhibit 6 App.A 0112
I. DISCOVERY PLAN 1. Third-Party Plaintiffs intend to conduct discovery under Level 2 of Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 190.
II. CLAIM FOR RELIEF 2. Third-Party Plaintiffs seek monetary relief of over $1,000,000 and non-monetary relief under Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 47.
III. PARTIES Third-Party Plaintiffs 3. This suit is brought by Michael Jeffrey Sebastian (“Jeff Sebastian”), individually, and as a member of the community estate of Jeff Sebastian and Tiffany Sebastian (the “Sebastian Estate”). Jeff Sebastian is a natural person who resides in Fort Bend County, Texas, and may be served through the undersigned counsel. [4]. This suit is also brought by Tiffany Sebastian (“Tiffany Sebastian”), individually, and as a member of the Sebastian Estate. Tiffany Sebastian is a natural person who resides in Fort Bend County, Texas, and may be served through the undersigned counsel. Tiffany Sebastian and Jeff Sebastian are sometimes referred to collectively herein as “the Sebastians.” 5. This suit is additionally brought by the Sebastians derivatively, on behalf of the following entities (collectively, the “Classic Dealerships”) against the Third-Party Defendants named herein. a. CLASSIC CHEVROLET SUGAR LAND, LLC, a Texas limited liability company whose registered office is located at 1101 State Highway 114, Grapevine, Texas
76099 and whose principal office is located at 13115 Southwest Freeway, Sugar
Land, TX 77478.
App.A 0113 b. CLASSIC CHEVROLET WEST HOUSTON, LLC, a Texas limited liability
company whose registered office is located at 1101 State Highway 114, Grapevine, Texas 76099 and whose principal office is located at 8100 S Texas 6, Houston, TX
77083. c. CLASSIC ELITE BUICK GMC, INC., a Texas corporation whose registered office is located at 1101 State Highway 114, Grapevine, Texas 76099 and whose principal
office is located at 16835 Katy Fwy, Houston, TX 77094. 6. This suit is additionally brought by the Sebastians derivatively, on behalf of 16835 Cadet Partners, LLC (“Cadet”), a Texas limited liability company whose registered office is located at 1101 State Highway 114, Grapevine, Texas 76099. Third-Party Defendants 7. T. Bently Durant (“Bently Durant”) is Third-Party Defendant herein and a natural person who is a resident of Tarrant County, Texas. Bently Durant may be served at 1101 State Highway 114, Grapevine, Texas 76099, or wherever he may be found. [8]. Thomas R. Durant (“Tom Durant”) is a Third-Party Defendant herein and a natural person who is a resident of Tarrant County, Texas. Bently Durant may be served at 1101 State Highway 114, Grapevine, Texas 76099, or wherever he may be found. [9]. The Durant Classic Dynasty Trust (“Dynasty Trust”) is a Third-Party Defendant and a Texas trust. The Dynasty Trust may be served with process by serving its Trustee, Marin “Mark” Escamilla, at 1101 State Highway 114, Grapevine, Texas 76099, or wherever Trustee may be found. Bently Durant, Tom Durant, and the Dynasty Trust are sometimes collectively referred to herein as “the Durant Defendants.”
App.A 0114 10. Michael A. Ward (“Mike Ward”) is a Third-Party Defendant herein and a natural person who is a resident of Denton County, Texas. Mike Ward may be served at 1422 Amherst Drive, Denton, Texas 76201, or wherever he may be found. [11]. 8100 Partners, LTD. (“8100 Partners”) is a Third-Party Defendant and a Texas limited partnership. 8100 Partners can be served through its registered agent, Thomas R. Durant, or any officer, director, or partner of 8100 Partners, at 1101 State Highway 114, Grapevine, Texas 76099, or wherever they may be found. [12]. 8100 Management LLC (“8100 Management”) is a Third-Party Defendant and a Texas limited liability company. 8100 Management can be served through its registered agent, Thomas R. Durant, or any officer or director of 8100 Management, at 1101 State Highway 114, Grapevine, Texas 76099, or wherever they may be found. [13]. 8705 Partners, LTD. (“8705 Partners”) is a Third-Party Defendant and a Texas limited partnership. 8705 Partners can be served through its registered agent, Thomas R. Durant, or any officer, director, or partner of 8705 Partners, at 1101 State Highway 114, Grapevine, Texas 76099, or wherever they may be found. [14]. 8705 Management LLC (“8705 Management”) is a Third-Party Defendant and a Texas limited liability company. 8100 Management can be served through its registered agent, Thomas R. Durant, or any officer or director of 8100 Management, at 1101 State Highway 114, Grapevine, Texas 76099, or wherever they may be found. 8100 Partners, 8100 Management, 8705 Partners, and 8705 Management are sometimes collectively referred to herein as “the Real Estate Defendants.”
App.A 0115
IV. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 15. The Court has subject-matter jurisdiction over the lawsuit because the amount in controversy exceeds the minimum jurisdictional limits of this Court. [16]. The Court has personal jurisdiction over all parties to the litigation because they are individual residents of Texas, or are legal entities organized and exist under the laws of the state of Texas that are registered to and conduct business in Texas. [17]. Venue is proper in Fort Bend County, Texas pursuant to Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code sections 15.002 and 15.005, as it is the county in which the underlying divorce occurred, and it is where all or a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred. [18]. Venue is mandatory in Fort Bend County, Texas under Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code section 64.071 and Texas Business Organizations Code section 11.402 because this is a suit to appoint a receiver for a corporation (or corporations) with property in Texas, and this is the county where the principal office of the corporation is located. Concerning venue, “’[p]rincipal office’” means a principal office of the corporation, unincorporated association, or partnership in this state in which the decision makers of the organization within this state conduct the daily affairs of the organization. Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 15.001(a). This suit seeks to appoint a receiver for the Classic Dealerships and Cadet, the principal offices of which for the purposes of venue are in Fort Bend County, Texas.
V. FACTUAL BACKGROUND 19. Jeff and Tiffany Sebastian are spouses who have been married for more than twenty years prior to the filing of this divorce proceeding. They met one another in Houston in 1998 at a time when they both were launching careers in the local automotive industry. In fact, Tiffany started App.A 0116 work at a small used car dealership on the west side of town that summer and Jeff joined her shortly thereafter. [20]. By the following year, the Sebastians were married and had worked hard to ensure that, separately and together, they were a recognized force in the automotive sales industry. As the decades subsequently passed, they continued to develop a massive talent for sales, management, and economics, and created a vast professional network and strong reputations for driving growth and profit. Classic Chevrolet Sugar Land 21. In 2016, that dedication and ambition led Jeff Sebastian to accept a position as General Manager of Classic Chevrolet Sugar Land. At that time, the Sugar Land dealership was principally owned by Defendant Tom Durant and suffered from poor performance under current management.[1] Accordingly, the Sebastians identified it as an opportunity to further prove their effectiveness in the Houston market with the anticipation that such efforts would generate an opportunity for partnership. With that goal in mind, the Sebastians set to work with Jeff serving as the name General Manager and Tiffany working directly alongside him. Through their combined efforts, the Sebastians ultimately caused Classic Chevrolet Sugar Land to tectonically shift from a struggling enterprise to a dominant industry presence. In fact, after only a few short years of exponential growth under the Sebastians’ management, Classic Chevrolet Sugar Land became one of the top performing Chevrolet dealers in the entire country. [22]. Based on that success, the Sebastians were invited to become owners of Classic Chevrolet Sugar Land, LLC and acquired a Membership Interest in the company in 2018.2 The Class A
1 The other Member of Classic Chevrolet Sugar Land, LLC were/are Defendants Bently Durant and the Durant Classic Dynasty Trust. [2] On January 1, 2018, Jeff Sebastian (and the Sebastian Estate) purchased a 30% Class A Membership App.A 0117 Members of Classic Chevrolet Sugar Land became Jeff Sebastian, Defendant Tom Durant, and Defendant Bently Durant, and the Class B Members became Jeff Sebastian, Defendant Dynasty Trust, Defendant Tom Durant, and Defendant Bently Durant. Meanwhile, both Sebastians continued to operate the dealership, with Jeff being elevated to managing partner and Dealer- Operator. Classic Chevrolet West Houston 23. The Sebastians also located, spear-headed, and became partners with the Durant Defendants in the purchase and management of Classic Chevrolet West Houston, LLC in 2019.3 At that time, Classic Chevrolet West Houston was an AutoNation dealership in total collapse. However, given the Sebastians’ tireless pursuit of efficiency and growth, it quickly became a Top 10 performing Chevrolet dealer in Houston. [24]. The Class A Members of Classic Chevrolet West Houston became Jeff Sebastian and Defendant Tom Durant, and the Class B Members became Jeff Sebastian, Defendant Tom Durant, and Defendant Dynasty Trust. Meanwhile, both Sebastians operated the dealership, with Tiffany Sebastian serving as Executive Manager until 2023—when she became Executive Manager of Classic Elite Buick GMC, Inc.—and Jeff Sebastian serving as Dealer-Operator. Classic Elite Buick GMC 25. The Sebastians were also integral in the purchase and management of Classic Elite Buick GMC, Inc., another Houston dealership, in 2023.4 And, like the other dealerships the Sebastians App.A 0118 operate, the GMC store became a top performing Houston GMC dealer. The Class A Shareholders of Classic Elite Buick GMC became Jeff Sebastian and Defendant Tom Durant, and the Class B Shareholders became Jeff Sebastian, Tiffany Sebastian, and Defendant Dynasty Trust. Meanwhile, both Sebastians operated the dealership, with Tiffany Sebastian serving as Executive Manager and Jeff Sebastian served as Dealer-Operator. [26]. On May 1, 2023, Classic Elite Buick GMC, Inc. entered into a Lease Agreement (“Lease”) with 16835 Cadet Partners, LLC which is the owner of the real property upon which the Classic Dealership operates at 16835 Katy Freeway. The Class A Shareholders of Cadet are Jeff Sebastian and Defendant Tom Durant, and the Class B Shareholders of Cadet are Jeff Sebastian, Tiffany Sebastian, and Defendant Dynasty Trust. Accolades for the Sebastians and Community Property 27. By 2024, the Sebastians were far and away the most successful and profitable partners within the whole Durant Organization. The Sebastians and the dealerships they operated received numerous prestigious accolades and awards from the manufacturers and the Durant Organization. Neither Jeff nor Tiffany Sebastian had ever received a warning or as much as a write up. In fact, the Sebastians were commonly recognized as one of the best partners within the Durant Organization. Indeed, the Sebastians co-owned and operated a total of three dealerships—that were staffed with approximately 600 trained employees, preferred by the manufacturers, and generating incredible profits—as well as the Cadet property. The Sebastians’ interest in the Classic Dealerships, 16835 Cadet Partners and 8100 Partners represent the largest community assets in the pending divorce and mandate protection against reductions their fair market value and the consequent diminution of the value of the community estate.
App.A 0119 28. Unfortunately, however, the Sebastians soon learned that success and money can also generate greed and theft. The Durant Conspiracy and Scheme 29. In this case, the Durant Defendants began to conspire with one another, as well as one of their local operators, Defendant Mike Ward, to unjustifiably expel the Sebastians from Cadet and the Classic Dealerships in contravention of the entities’ governing agreements and applicable law. The conspiracy actually developed into a complete plan to strip the Sebastians of 100% of their Member/Shareholder Interests in Cadet and the Classic Dealerships without payment of just compensation therefore, in a scheme to divert millions of dollars in equity and profits owed to the Sebastians over to the Durant Defendants. Moreover, the Durant Defendants and Mike Ward began to implement their plan in the summer of 2024. 30. By way of example, the Durant Defendants began reaching out to the Sebastians individually with the intent of separating and dividing the couple and increasing conflict among them. In fact, after ousting Jeff Sebastian in late July 2024, the Durant Defendants relocated Mike Ward, a general manager, from Dallas to Houston and planted him in the Classic Dealerships with a mission of creating division, dissension, and relaying personal information about the Sebastians back to the Durant Defendants. The Durant Defendants then worked with Mike Ward to utilize that information to disparage the Sebastians’ character and capabilities, both publicly and privately, endeavoring to erode/diminish the Sebastians’ control of the Classic Dealerships and the Sebastians’ professional reputation. The Durant Defendants and Mike Ward also executed expensive and unnecessary service contracts, cut ties with local vendors, fired experienced staff members, hired new staff members, restructured operations, and re-allocated time and resources to wasteful projects over the objections of the Sebastians. Upon information and belief, the Durant App.A 0120 Defendants and Mike Ward continue to aggressively pursue such activities, which cripple and irreparably damage the Classic Dealerships, Cadet, and the Sebastians. [31]. Eventually and unceremoniously, after the Durant Defendants purported to fire Jeff Sebastian on July 22, 2024, they then followed by illegally terminating Tiffany Sebastian on September 13, 2024, and replaced Jeff and Tiffany with select loyalists, including the same individual who helped orchestrate their scheme, Mike Ward. The Durant Defendants and Mike Ward then completely ignored the Sebastians’ management and control, immediately causing the Sebastians’ access to all Cadet and Classic Dealership information to be severed at the time of their purported terminations—including access to all books and records, account information, budgets, inventory and sales data, payroll records, and emails—and then refusing to make required payments and distributions to the Sebastians in their capacity as owners. Instead, the Durant Defendants quickly began diverting millions of dollars in distributable revenue away from the Sebastians and back to themselves, including by pouring Classic Dealership money into needless capital improvements at the Classic Dealership locations that only inure to the benefit of the property owners, which happen to be the Real Estate Defendants, which in turn are majority-owned by the Durant Defendants. In Classic Elite GMC, for example, cash was reduced by more than $10 million in the month of November alone. It is a blatant and shameless kickback and self- dealing scheme. [32]. These illegal and self-interested measures constitute an effort to cause a short-term devaluation of the Classic Dealerships and to diminish the Sebastians’ contractually anticipated financial liquidity in order to leverage their cooperation. On numerous occasions, Jeff Sebastian asked to speak directly with Tom Durant, but was told by Bently Durant, that “in no way, shape, or form” would he be allowed to do so. Jeff also pleaded for access to his emails, communication App.A 0121 threads, and basic financial information on multiple occasions. On each occasion, the Durant Defendants denied his pleas and told him to stay away from the business and the dealerships. [33]. Now, the Durant Defendants have demanded that the Sebastians relinquish 100% of their Membership/Shareholder Interests in Cadet, 8100 Partners, all three Classic Dealerships for a pitiable fraction of their true value in violation of a myriad of contractual and fiduciary obligations, including the Classic Dealerships’ Management Agreements, and a Buy-Sell Agreement the parties executed dated effective May 1, 2023. Therefore, the Sebastians and the Classic Dealerships seek relief therefrom, including the issuance of a declaratory judgment and the critical appointment of a Receiver for specific assets of the Classic Dealerships or their rehabilitation.
VI. CAUSES OF ACTION Count 1 - Breach of Fiduciary Duty 34. All of the preceding paragraphs are incorporated herein as though fully set forth below. [35]. Each of the Durant Defendants currently are, and have at all relevant times been, Officers, Members, and/or Shareholders of Cadet and the Classic Dealerships. Specifically, Defendant Tom Durant is a Member and Manager of Cadet, a Member and Director of Classic Chevrolet Sugar Land, LLC, a Member and Manager of Classic Chevrolet West Houston, LLC, and a Shareholder and President of Classic Buick GMC of Houston, Inc. Similarly, Defendant Bently Durant is a Member/Shareholder of the Classic Dealerships, General Counsel to the Classic Dealerships and Cadet, and Secretary of Classic Buick GMC of Houston, Inc. Likewise, Defendant Dynasty Trust is a Member/Shareholder and Director of the Classic Dealerships and Cadet through its Trustee, Mark Escamilla. [36]. Consequently, the Durant Defendants each owe the following fiduciary duties to the Sebastians, Cadet, and the Classic Dealerships: App.A 0122 a. Duty of loyalty and utmost good faith; b. Duty of candor; c. Duty to refrain from self-dealing; d. Duty to act with integrity of the strictest kind;
e. Duty of fair, honest dealing; and f. Duty of full disclosure. 37. Nevertheless, the Durant Defendants materially breached their fiduciary duties by, without limitation, (i) conspiring to obstruct the Sebastians’ ability to successfully operate Cadet and the Classic Dealerships, (ii) disparaging the Sebastians to one another and the public, both personally and professionally, (iii) conspiring to and illegally and unjustly purporting to fire the Sebastians from their employment with Cadet and the Classic Dealerships, (iv) conspiring to and illegally cutting the Sebastians’ access to the corporate and financial information of Cadet and the Classic Dealerships, (v) conspiring to and breaching the Membership and Management Agreements of Cadet and the Classic Dealerships, (vi) conspiring to and illegally refusing to make Cadet and Classic Dealership Member distributions, and (vii) illegally diverting Member/Shareholder profit from Cadet and the Classic Dealerships to unapproved and wasteful projects that directly benefit the Durant Defendants and their separate interests at the expense of the Sebastians, Cadet, and the Classic Dealerships. 38. “It is settled as the law of this State that where a third party knowingly participates in the breach of duty of a fiduciary, such third party becomes a joint tortfeasor with the fiduciary and is liable as such.” Kinzbach Tool Co. v. Corbett-Wallace Corp., 138 Tex. 565, 574, 160 S.W.2d 509, 514 (1942). Mike Ward and the Real Estate Defendants knew the Durant Defendants were fiduciaries and knowingly participated in the Durant Defendants’ breach of their fiduciary duties.
App.A 0123 Thus, Mike Ward and the Real Estate Defendants are joint tortfeasors with the Durant Defendants and are liable as such. 39. The Durant Defendants’, Ward’s, and the Real Estate Defendants’ breaches have caused, and continue to cause, in excess of $10,000,000 in damages to the Sebastians (including the Sebastian Estate), Cadet, and the Classic Dealerships. The Sebastians are therefore entitled to recover actual damages, the equitable remedy of disgorgement, and exemplary damages from Count 2 - Breach of Contract 40. All of the preceding paragraphs are incorporated herein as though fully set forth below.
a. The Management Agreements 41. The Durant Defendants and the Sebastians entered into a number of valid and enforceable contracts that govern the management and operation of the Classic Dealerships. Those agreements include the Limited Liability Company Agreement for Classic Chevrolet Sugar Land, LLC (“Sugar Land Agreement”), the Company Agreement of Classic Chevrolet West Houston, LLC (“West Houston Agreement”), the Bylaws of Classic Buick GMC of Houston, Inc. (“GMC Bylaws”), and the Limited Liability Company Agreement for 16835 Cadet Partners, LLC (“Cadet Agreement”) (collectively, the “Management Agreements”). However, the Durant Defendants proceeded to materially breach terms of those Management Agreements at great cost to the Sebastians, Cadet, and the Classic Dealerships. 42. Particularly, and without limitation, the Durant Defendants caused the Sebastians to be removed from their employment/management positions at Cadet and the Classic Dealerships without complying with the voting and approval requirements set forth in the Management Agreements. The Durant Defendants have also caused Cadet and the Classic Dealerships to engage in acts and expenditures that are directly adverse to the necessary and/or advisable interests of the App.A 0124 Sebastians, Cadet, and the Classic Dealerships, and in breach of the Management Agreements, including (i) causing the Classic Dealerships to spend millions of dollars on wasteful capital improvements to properties that the Classic Dealerships do not own (and which are instead majority-owned by the Durant Defendants), (ii) preventing Cadet and the Classic Dealerships from paying dividends/distributions to their owners, (iii) decreasing the Classic Dealerships’ revenue and profitability, and (iv) damaging the Classic Dealerships’ valuable relationships and ability to transact business within the industry. 43. The Durant Defendants’ material breaches of the Management Agreements have caused, and continue to cause, in excess of $10,000,000 in damages to the Sebastians (including the Sebastian Estate), Cadet, and the Classic Dealerships.
b. The Buy-Sell Agreement 44. Defendant Tom Durant, Defendant Dynasty Trust, and the Sebastians are also parties to a Buy-Sell Agreement for Interests in Classic Chevrolet Sugar Land, LLC, Classic Chevrolet West Houston, LLC, Classic Elite Buick GMC, Inc., and 16835 Cadet Partners, LLC (the “Buy-Sell Agreement”). The Buy-Sell Agreement governs certain rights and restrictions pertaining to the sale or transfer of the parties’ ownership interests in Cadet and the Classic Dealerships, including a rendition of the purchase options and the means/methods of determining share price if such options are validly exercised. In particular, the Buy-Sell Agreement stipulates that an option to purchase the Sebastians’ interest in Cadet and the Classic Dealerships shall arise upon the occurrence of certain events, including “the cessation of the performance of the Dealership Business Duties of the Sebastians (including termination of either of the Sebastians as an officer or Manager of the LLC)”. Purportedly, Jeff Sebastian was terminated on July 22, 2024, which, by App.A 0125 contract, would have expressly triggered the applicable Buy-Sell Agreement and established the Valuation Date. 45. In October, 2024, incident to the Sebastians’ unlawful firing/exclusion, Defendant Dynasty Trust, by and through its Trustee, Mark Escamilla, issued an “Exercise of Option to Purchase” letter (“Exercise Notice”) to the Sebastians stating that it was electing to repurchase all of the Sebastians’ interest in Cadet and the Classic Dealerships. However, no valid triggering event had occurred that would render that kind of involuntary repurchase demand an available option for Defendant Dynasty Trust. Furthermore, the repurchase price demanded was and is directly opposed to the valuation method dictated by the Buy-Sell Agreement. 46. As such, the repurchase demand made by Defendant Dynasty Trust is in direct breach and violation of the Buy-Sell Agreement and has caused, and continues to cause, direct financial damage to the Sebastians in excess of $10,000,000 for which they seek recovery by this lawsuit. Count 3 - Suit for Declaratory Judgment 47. All of the preceding paragraphs are incorporated herein as though fully set forth below. 48. Pursuant to the Exercise Notice, Defendant Dynasty Trust demands that the Sebastians relinquish 100% of their Shareholder/Membership interests in Cadet and the Classic Dealerships. Moreover, Defendant Dynasty Trust demands that the Sebastians’ Cadet and Classic Dealership shares be valued at a small fraction of what the applicable Buy-Sell Agreement requires. 49. Therefore, in accordance with Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code sections 37.003 and 37.004, the Sebastians seek an affirmative judgment from the court declaring their right under the Buy-Sell Agreement to receive fair market value for their Cadet and Classic Dealership shares in the event of a buyout by any of the Durant Defendants, including Defendant Dynasty Trust. A App.A 0126 justiciable controversy related to the pricing of the Sebastians’ Classic Dealership shares exists and will be resolved by the declaration sought.
App.A 0127 and/or separate entities that they own and control. The Durant Defendants have additionally demanded that the Sebastians transfer their ownership interests in Cadet and the Classic Dealerships over to them in exchange for a fraction of their contractual and marketable value. 55. Accordingly, the Sebastians are entitled to recover such monies from the Durant Defendants, as well as their actual and consequential damages caused thereby which exceed $10,000,000. Count 6 - Tortious Interference with a Contract 56. All of the preceding paragraphs are incorporated herein as though fully set forth below. 57. Defendant Mike Ward willfully, intentionally, and tortiously interfered with the performance of the Management Agreements and the Buy-Sell Agreement. Particularly, he lied to and conspired with the Durant Defendants in an aggressive yet calculated campaign to cause a breach of the Agreements for his own personal gain. 58. Prior to the summer of 2024, Defendant Mike Ward was the General Manager of another automotive dealership that the Durant family owns in Grapevine, Texas. As such, Defendant Ward knew from experience the Grapevine dealership does not present the same level of professional/financial opportunity and partnership potential that Cadet and the Classic Dealerships do – particularly if their owners and managers (i.e., the Sebastians) were forcibly expelled. 59. Therefore, Defendant Ward engaged in an effort to ensure that the Sebastians’ unjust expulsion from Cadet and the Classic Dealerships in violation of the Agreements actually occurred. Particularly, and without limitation, Defendant Ward proceeded to re-locate to Houston and relayed materially false information about the Sebastians’ and their professional capabilities to the Durant Defendants, the Cadet and Classic Dealership employees, and other key figures in the automotive industry. He also made derogatory and sexist comments about Tiffany Sebastian, App.A 0128 peddled deceit, and was an avid force in the decision to systematically fire the Sebastians. Meanwhile, Defendant Ward inserted himself into a de facto management position at the Classic Dealerships. 60. Defendant Ward’s targeted acts of contractual interference unfortunately paid off in the summer of 2024 in that they were a proximate cause of the Sebastians’ professional and financial eviction from Cadet and the Classic Dealerships in direct violation of the Agreements. Defendant Ward’s intentional malfeasance has caused the Sebastians to suffer in excess of $10,000,000 in financial and non-financial damage. Count 7 –Fraud by Misrepresentation 61. All of the preceding paragraphs are incorporated herein as though fully set forth below. 62. The Sebastians and the Durant Defendants were parties to multiple transactions involving stock. 63. During the transactions, the Durant Defendants made a false promise to the Sebastians with the intent not to fulfill it, and the promise was material to the transaction. The promise concerned the valuation of the Sebastians’ stock ownership and the attendant rights of access and control, which was material to the Sebastians’ acquiring the stock. It is clear by the conduct of the Durant Defendants that they had no intention of fulfilling their promises to the Sebastians. 64. The Durant Defendants made the false promise for the purpose of inducing the Sebastians to enter into the contracts. 65. The Sebastians justifiably relied on the Durant Defendants’ false promise by entering into the contract. Had the Sebastians known that the Durant Defendants would unjustifiably and illegally terminate their access and control associated with their ownership of stock and would engage in self-dealing conduct to devalue the Sebastians’ stock, the Sebastians would not have App.A 0129 entered into the agreement. The Sebastians justifiably relied on the guiding principle of law- abiding citizens—do not engage in unlawful and tortious conduct. 66. The Durant Defendants’ false promise proximately caused injury to the Sebastians resulting in damages in excess of $10,000,000.00. 67. The Durant Defendants violated Texas Business & Commerce Code section 27.01, which is the basis of this suit, with actual awareness of the falsity of their representation or promise, which entitled the Sebastians to exemplary damages under section 27.01(c). 68. The Sebastians are entitled to recover reasonable and necessary attorney fees, expert- witness fees, court costs, and costs for copies of depositions under Texas Business & Commerce Code section 27.01(e). Count 8 –Fraudulent Transfer 69. The Durant Defendants made transfers and incurred obligations with the actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud the Sebastians concerning value of their stock. The Durant Defendants made transfers to and incurred obligations from entities that are owned and controlled by the Durant Defendants, such as the Real Estate Defendants. Thus, the Real Estate Defendants are insiders under the definition of the Texas Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (“TUFTA”), Tex. Bus. & Com. Code section 24.001, et seq. See Tex. Bus. & Com. Code § 24.002(7). Therefore, these transfers of assets from the Classic Dealerships to the Real Estate Defendants by the Durant Defendants are fraudulent as to the Sebastians. 70. The transfers were done with actual intent because (1) the transfers were to insiders; (2) the Durant Defendants ostensibly retained possession or control of the property transferred after the transfer; (3) the transfer was concealed from Plaintiff; (4) the Durant Defendants have absconded and concealed the assets; (5) upon information and belief, the Classic Dealerships App.A 0130 received no consideration for the assets transferred; and (6) the transfer occurred proximate to the incursion of a substantial payout to the Sebastians as a result of the divorce proceedings. See Tex. Bus. & Com. Code § 24.005(b). 71. Therefore, the Sebastians seek (1) avoidance of the transfer(s) or obligation(s) to the extent necessary to satisfy their claims; (2) an attachment or other provisional remedy against the asset(s) transferred or other property of the transferee in accordance with the applicable Texas Rules of Civil Procedure and the Civil Practice & Remedies Code relating to ancillary proceedings; and/or (3) subject applicable principles of equity and in accordance with applicable rules of civil procedure: (A) an injunction against further disposition by the debtor or a transferee, or both, of the asset(s) transferred or of other property; (B) appointment of a receiver to take charge of the asset transferred or other property of the transferee; or (C) any other relief the circumstances may requires. See Tex. Bus. & Com. Code § 24.008(a). 72. The Sebastians also request that the court award them the costs and reasonable attorney fees as are equitable and just incurred by the Sebastians in the prosecution of their rights. See Tex. Bus. & Com. Code § 24.013.
VII. APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT OF RECEIVER FOR SPECIFIC ASSETS AND/OR TO REHABILITATE 73. All of the preceding paragraphs are incorporated herein as though fully set forth below. 74. The Sebastians, Cadet, and the Classic Dealerships are entitled to the appointment of a receiver to preserve the financial assets of Cadet and the Classic Dealerships, as well as the Sebastians’ owner-interests therein and/or to rehabilitate Cadet and the Classic Dealerships, pursuant to Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code section 64.001(3) et. seq.; Texas Business Organizations Code section 11.401, et seq.; Texas Business & Commerce Code section 24.008; App.A 0131 and the laws of equity. Indeed, the Sebastians, and the Sebastian Estate, own a right to a substantial percentage of the equity and profits of Cadet and the Classic Dealerships as core Members/Shareholders. In fact, Jeff Sebastian presently owns a majority of the Class A voting shares of Classic Buick GMC of Houston, Inc. and Classic Chevrolet of West Houston, LLC. Furthermore, the Durant Defendants, in their capacity as de facto “governing persons” of Cadet and the Classic Dealerships, since the unlawful and unjustifiable exclusion of the Sebastians, have taken actions that are illegal, oppressive, and fraudulent and have misapplied or wasted the property of Cadet and the Classic Dealerships. See Tex. Bus. Org. Code § 11.404(A)(1)(C) and (D). 75. Similarly, Cadet and the Classic Dealerships have a right and interest in/to the property they own, as well as in preventing waste, loss, and injury associated with their businesses and equity. 76. As described above, and supported by the affidavits attached hereto, the Durant Defendants have, are, and will continue to (i) deny Member/Shareholder access to the Cadet and Classic Dealerships’ books and records, (ii) deny Member/Shareholder access to the Cadet and Classic Dealerships’ budgets and accounting records, (iii) prevent Cadet and the Classic Dealerships from distributing contractual payments and distributions owed to their Members/Shareholders, (iv) transfer all profits, and additional revenues, generated by Cadet and the Classic Dealerships to themselves and the various entities they own and control, (v) implement inventory pricing and sales policies that significantly depress Cadet and the Classic Dealerships’ revenues and profits, (vi) implement contracting, spending, pricing, and sales protocols for that depress the equitable value of Cadet and the Classic Dealerships, and (vii) initiate transactions that negatively impact Cadet and the Classic Dealerships’ ability to conduct business in the local automotive industry.
[*20][*21]App.A 0132 77. Further, the Sebastians, as major or majority Members/Shareholders of Cadet and the Classic Dealerships, maintain a right and obligation to enforce the Cadet and Classic Dealerships’ Management Agreements for purposes of preventing waste, loss, and corporate abuse. They are also entitled to the preservation and distribution of their ownership interests in the Cadet and Classic Dealerships’ valuable property. Such property is currently either already removed, or in severe danger of being lost, removed, or damaged, in such a way that is materially adverse to the purpose of Cadet and the Classic Dealerships. 78. Therefore, the Sebastians, Cadet, and Classic Dealerships petition the Court to appoint a receiver to protect and conserve the purpose and interests of Cadet and the Classic Dealerships during the pendency of this lawsuit between its Members/Shareholder. Injunctive relief will not protect such interests as the Durant Defendants have forcefully taken (and maintain in) full possession and control of Cadet and the Classic Dealerships and have demonstrated that they will continue to act in violation of any restraints placed on them. They have already breached their fiduciary duties, disregarded multiple key agreements (the Management Agreements and the Buy- Sell Agreement), fraudulently transferred assets, and have illegally converted in excess of $3,000,000 in the past several months alone. 79. The Sebastians, Cadet, and Classic Dealerships specifically request that the Court order the appointment of a receiver with all power and authority to take possession and control of the following property and business: a. All Member Units/Shares of Cadet and the Classic Dealerships, including distributions, payments, transfers, conveyances, sales, acquisitions, and options; b. All expenditures made from the revenues of Cadet and the Classic Dealerships to the extent such expenditures are out of the ordinary course of daily business, App.A 0133 including expenditures in excess of $10,000 and expenditures associated with any renovations or capital improvements to Cadet and/or the Classic Dealership properties; c. All actions/inactions that may cause Cadet and/or the Classic Dealerships to accrue any financial obligations or debts that are outside of the ordinary course of daily business, including any financial obligations or debts associated with any renovations or capital improvements to Cadet and/or the Classic Dealerships;
[*22]d. Modifications or amendments to any existing contracts/agreements to which Cadet, the Classic Dealerships, or their affiliates are a party, including any real property lease agreements, credit agreements, and marketing agreements;
e. All Management/C-Suite decisions pertaining to the hiring, firing, removal, promotion, or demotion of Cadet and/or Classic Dealership department leadership; f. All actions that serve to transfer Cadet and/or Classic Dealership revenues to any
Member or Shareholder of Cadet or the Classic Dealerships either directly or indirectly.
VIII.
ACTION FOR AUDIT UNDER RULE 172, 80. All of the preceding paragraphs are incorporated herein as though fully set forth below.
81. Third-Party Plaintiffs are owners of each of the Classic Entities. 82. Under the applicable Company Agreements, Third-Party Plaintiffs are entitled to certain monetary benefits arising from the operations of Cadet and each of the Classic Dealerships. 83. Third-Party Plaintiffs are without knowledge of the amount of profit realized or to be realized by, or the distributions required to be made by each of the Classic Dealerships (other than App.A 0134 distribution that would have resulted in $3.5 million paid to Third-Party Plaintiffs and the Community, which the Durant Defendants, advised had been reallocated for unnecessary capital expenditures, including self-dealing transactions), or other amounts due to Third-Party Plaintiffs under the applicable Company Agreements. Further, despite repeated requests, Third-Party Plaintiffs have been unable to obtain from Cadet and the Classic Dealerships documentation for these aspects of Cadet and each of the Classic Dealerships’ financial affairs. Third-Party Plaintiffs cannot obtain such knowledge, ascertain those amounts, or receive relevant documentation without an accounting from Cadet and each of the Classic Dealerships. To the extent such audit reveals monies transferred from Cadet or any of the Classic Dealerships to any other dealership or entity owned by the Durant Defendants, Third-Party Petitioners contend an audit of each such dealership or entity should be ordered. 84. Third-Party Plaintiffs seek to have an auditor appointed under Rule 172 to audit the books and records of Cadet and each of the Classic Dealerships. Third-Party Plaintiffs anticipate the Auditor will discover further breaches of fiduciary duty by the Durant Defendants. The Durant Defendants should be ordered to pay all costs associated with such audits.
[*23]IX. ENTITLEMENT TO EXEMPLARY DAMAGES AND ATTORNEY FEES 85. All of the preceding paragraphs are incorporated herein as though fully set forth below. 86. The Durant Defendants and Defendant Mike Ward have engaged in the acts described herein intentionally, in bad faith, with malice, and with willful disregard for the critical interests of the Sebastians, Cadet, and the Classic Dealerships. Accordingly, the Sebastians, Cadet, and the Classic Dealerships are entitled to exemplary damages against the Durant Defendants and Defendant Mike Ward, jointly and severally, pursuant to Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code section 41.003.
[*24]App.A 0135 87. The actions of the Durant Defendants and Defendant Mike Ward have also required the retention of the undersigned counsel to prosecute, defend, and enforce the Sebastians’, Cadet’s, and the Classic Dealerships’ legal and equitable interests. Therefore, the Sebastians, Cadet, and the Classic Dealerships are additionally entitled to an award of their reasonable and necessary attorney fees against the Durant Defendants and Defendant Mike Ward, jointly and severally, pursuant to Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code section 38.001.
X. CONDITIONS PRECEDENT 88. All conditions precedent to the Sebastians’, Cadet’s, and the Classic Dealerships’ claims for relief have been performed or occurred.
XI. RULE 193.7 NOTICE 89. Pursuant to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 193.7, the Sebastians, Cadet, and the Classic Dealerships hereby give notice to all parties that any documents produced may be used against the party producing the documents at any pretrial proceeding and/or trial of this matter without necessity of authenticating the documents.
PRAYER
For these reasons, the Sebastians, Cadet, and the Classic Dealerships pray that the Court, after notice and hearing or trial, render judgment, jointly and severally, against the Durant Defendants and Defendant Mike Ward for the following: a. Actual damages; b. Consequential damages; c. Disgorgement; d. Exemplary damages; App.A 0136 e. Attorney fees; f. Litigation costs and costs of court; g. Appointment of a receiver; h. Pre-judgment and post-judgment interest; and i. All other relief to which Third Party Plaintiffs may be justly entitled, as law or in equity.
[*25]Respectfully submitted, GORDON REES SCULLY MANSUKHANI LLP
By: /s/ Joseph W. DiCecco Joseph W. DiCecco State Bar No. 05812520 [email protected] John A. Coselli State Bar No. 24100163 [email protected] Nicholas A. Ocampo State Bar No. 24126423 [email protected] 1900 West Loop South, Suite 1000 Houston, Texas 77027 (713) 490-4879 - Telephone (713) 961-3938 – Facisimile
ATTORNEYS FOR THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFF, TIFFANY LYNN SEBASTIAN, INDIVIDUALLY, ON BEHALF OF THE SEBASTIAN COMMUNITY ESTATE, AND DERIVATIVELY ON BEHALF OF CADET AND THE CLASSIC DEALERSHIPS App.A 0137
[*26]SCHEEF & STONE, L.L.P. By: /s/ J. Mitchell Little J. Mitchell Little State Bar No. 24043788 [email protected] Steven Ovando State Bar No. 24128862 [email protected] 2600 Network Blvd., Suite 400 Frisco, Texas 75034 (214) 472-2100 Telephone (214) 472-2150 Telecopier ATTORNEYS FOR THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFF, TIFFANY LYNN SEBASTIAN, INDIVIDUALLY, ON BEHALF OF THE SEBASTIAN COMMUNITY ESTATE, AND DERIVATIVELY ON BEHALF OF THE CLASSIC DEALERSHIPS
-And-
BOHREER LAW FIRM PLLC By: /s/ E. Michelle Bohreer E. Michelle Bohreer State Bar No. 06717100 Pritesh Soni State Bar No. 24063926 777 Post Oak Blvd., Ste 950 Houston, Texas 77056 Telephone: (832) 856-3006 Facsimile: (832) 856-2891 Emails: [email protected] [email protected] E-service: [email protected] ATTORNEYS FOR THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFF, MICHAEL JEFFREY SEBASTIAN, INDIVIDUALLY, ON BEHALF OF THE SEBASTIAN COMMUNITY ESTATE, AND DERIVATIVELY ON BEHALF OF CADET AND THE CLASSIC DEALERSHIPS
27 App.A 0138
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. Lisa Lim on behalf of Joseph DiCecco Bar No. 5812520 [email protected] Envelope ID: 95574422 Filing Code Description: Amended Filing Filing Description: First Amended Third-Party Petition Status as of 12/23/2024 8:40 AM CST Associated Case Party: TiffanyLynnSebastian Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status Haley K.Burnside [email protected] 12/20/2024 5:37:03 PM SENT Nicole Ross [email protected] 12/20/2024 5:37:03 PM SENT Eliza Cabrera [email protected] 12/20/2024 5:37:03 PM SENT Bobby Newman [email protected] 12/20/2024 5:37:03 PM SENT John Coselli III [email protected] 12/20/2024 5:37:03 PM SENT Joseph DiCecco [email protected] 12/20/2024 5:37:03 PM SENT Lisa Lim [email protected] 12/20/2024 5:37:03 PM SENT Nicholas Ocampo [email protected] 12/20/2024 5:37:03 PM SENT J. MitchellLittle [email protected] 12/20/2024 5:37:03 PM SENT Steven Ovando [email protected] 12/20/2024 5:37:03 PM SENT SIGNED this l¾ay of ~ , 2025 at J: 07 f-.m.
_;fl/ tJ~5y(lgnment JUDGE PRESIDING App.B 0001
Transcript of: Corporate Meeting Taken February 22, 2025
Cause No.: Corporate Meeting class 3:5 4:6,15 5:1,9 fill 7:6 6:14 filling 4:8 5 7:18 Classic 3:5,22 4:20 5:2,3, fills 4:17 51 3:4 4:5,15 5:1,9 6:13 10,11,15 6:14,16 7:5,9,11 5th 6:11 finally 7:11 company 3:8,24 4:10,16, 22 5:22,25 follow 7:20 A compensation 5:24 6:5, Fourth 7:9 15,19 7:13 a.m. [3]:2 consideration 3:21 G accordance 3:7 considered 4:7 5:23 action 7:3 gross 6:4,9,12,18,21 consuming 6:2 7:15,17,19 addressed 4:19 7:2 copy 3:15,16 adjourned 7:22 counsel 3:11,12 SIGNED this l¾ay of ~ , 2025 at J: 07 f-.m.
_;fl/ tJ~5y(lgnment JUDGE PRESIDING App.G 0002
Derek D. Rollins 9201 N. Central Expressway A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP Fourth Floor ATTORNEYS & COUNSELORS Dallas, Texas 75231 (214) 780-1400 (Main) (214) 780-1401(Fax) [email protected]
March 12, 2025
VIA E-mail to [email protected] Jeff Sebastian c/o Michelle Bohreer Bohreer Law Firm 777 Post Oak Blvd., Suite 950 Houston, Texas 77056
Re: Chevrolet West Houston
Dear Michelle:
Michelle, I understand your client, Jeff Sebastian, went to the Chevrolet West store today, ostensibly to go to work or manage the store. He is not an employee and any voting / managerial rights previously enjoyed by him were lost last month pursuant to the Company Agreement due to his request for receivership.
I have attached relevant portions of the Company Agreement for your reference.
To confirm, Jeff is not welcome at the store and he is not authorized to work for, or manage, the activities at that dealership. He will be treated as a trespasser, to the extent he is unwilling to voluntarily leave. The dealership reserves all rights associated with this disruption and with Jeff falsely holding himself out as having a right to manage or otherwise operate Chevrolet West.
Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact our office.
Sincerely,