No syfertize treatment data for this case.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Shamar D. Bradley
v.
Texas Office of the Attorney General and Texas Department of Information Resources
v.
Texas Office of the Attorney General and Texas Department of Information Resources
Published
ACCEPTED 15-25-00138-CV FIFTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 11/17/2025 2:50 PM CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE No. 15-25-00138-cv CLERK _____________________________ FILED IN In the Court of Appeals 15th COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS for the Fifteenth Judicial District 11/17/2025 2:50:12 PM Austin, Texas CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE ______________________________ Clerk
SHAMAR D. BRADLEY, Appellant, v. TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION RESOURCES, Appellees. ______________________________
On Appeal from the 261st Judicial District Court of Travis County, Texas Honorable Sherine Thomas, Judge Presiding ______________________________ BRIEF OF APPELLEE ______________________________ KEN PAXTON Denver Burris Attorney General Texas Bar No. 24138940 Assistant Attorneys General Brent Webster General Litigation Division First Assistant Attorney General P.O. Box 12548, Capitol Station Austin, Texas 78711-2548 Austin Kinghorn Phone (512) 463-2120 Deputy Attorney General for Fax (512) 320-0667 Civil Litigation Kimberly Gdula Division Chief, General Litigation Division
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE ORAL ARGUMENT NOT REQUESTED
-i-
IDENTITY OF PARTIES AND COUNSEL
Pursuant to Rule 38.1(a) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, Appellees herein provide this Court with the following list of parties and the names and addresses of all trial and appellate counsel: Shamar D. Bradley Plaintiff-Appellant Texas Department of Information Resources Defendant-Appellee
- ii - TABLE OF CONTENTS Identity Of Parties And Counsel ..................................................................................................... ii Table Of Contents .......................................................................................................................... iii Index Of Authorities ...................................................................................................................... iv Statement Of The Case .................................................................................................................. vi Statement Regarding Oral Argument............................................................................................ vii Issues Presented ........................................................................................................................... viii Statement Of Facts .......................................................................................................................... 1 Summary Of Argument................................................................................................................... 3 Standard Of Review ........................................................................................................................ 3 Argument ........................................................................................................................................ 4 A. Appellant does not have a probable right to the relief sought. ........................................... 4 Appellant brings criminal claims for: abuse of official capacity (C.R. 74); copyright infringement (C.R. 75); abuse of official capacity (C.R. 75); official oppression (C.R. 75); tampering with physical evidence (C.R. 76); tampering with governmental record (C.R. 76); obstruction and retaliation (C.R. 76); obstruction and retaliation (C.R. 77); abuse of official capacity (C.R. 77—79). Appellant brings a single tort claim for theft against Appellee. (C.R. 77) Appellant also brings causes of action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code § 104.002(a)(2) in his Amended Petition, but those claims were not present in his Original Petition, the live petition at the time this appeal was initiated. (C.R. 882).
[*1]Appellant filed his Motion for Injunctive Relief on June 26, 2025, the denial of which being the catalyst for this appeal. Plaintiff’s Motion does not appear in the record and is attached to this Brief as an Appendix. In his Motion, Appellant argued that he is entitled to injunctive relief in the form of a temporary injunction because he is in danger of Appellee causing him to be arrested for not returning his work laptop to Appellee following the termination of his employment. (Appellant’s Motion for Injunctive Relief at p. 45—46). Appellant’s whistleblower claim against Appellee in his previous lawsuit was dismissed for want of jurisdiction at the trial court level.
[*2]Appellant did not present a whistleblower claim in his Original Petition, which was the live petition at the time of this appeal.
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT
Appellant is not entitled to a temporary injunction and the trial court’s order should be affirmed. Appellant does not have a probable right to the relief he seeks because he either does not have standing to bring his claims, or his claims are barred by Appellee’s sovereign immunity. Appellant is not in danger of suffering a probable, imminent, or irreparable injury without a temporary injunction. For those reasons, the trial court’s order should be affirmed and Appellant’s appeal dismissed.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
Appellate courts review the grant or denial of a temporary injunction by an abuse of discretion standard. Walling v. Metcalfe, 863 S.W.2d 56, 58 (Tex. 1993). "A temporary injunction's purpose is to preserve the status quo of the litigation's subject matter pending a trial on the merits." Butnaru v. Ford Motor Co., 84 S.W.3d 198, 204 (Tex. 2002). A temporary injunction is an extraordinary remedy and does not issue as a matter of right. Id. To obtain a temporary injunction, the applicant must plead and prove three specific elements: (1) a cause of action against the defendant; (2) a probable right to the relief sought; and (3) a probable, imminent, and irreparable injury in the interim. Id. “An injury is irreparable if the injured party cannot be adequately compensated in damages or if the damages cannot be measured by any certain pecuniary standard.” Id. (citing Canteen Corp. v. Republic of Tex. Props., Inc., 773 S.W.2d 398, 401 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1989, no writ).
[*3]ARGUMENT
Appellant fails to show his entitlement to such an extraordinary remedy as a temporary injunction. He is unable to show that he has a probable right to the relief sought, or that he is in danger of suffering a probable, imminent, and irreparable injury without such extraordinary relief. For that reason, his appeal should fail.
A. Appellant does not have a probable right to the relief sought. Appellant does not have a probable right to the relief sought because Appellant’s claims should be dismissed on jurisdictional grounds. Appellant does not provide a waiver of sovereign immunity that would abrogate Appellee’s sovereign immunity.
[*4]1. None of Appellant’s claims against Appellee are viable. a. Whistleblower claim
As a threshold matter, Appellant does not present a whistleblower claim in his Original Petition, and any argument he makes in support of receiving injunctive relief for such a claim is outside the scope of this appeal.
Res judicata, or claims preclusion, prevents the re-litigation of a claim or cause of action that has been finally adjudicated, as well as related matters that, with the use of diligence, should have been litigated in the prior suit. Gracia v. RC Cola-7-Up Bottling Co., 667 S.W.2d 517, 519 (Tex. 1984). When a plaintiff's claims are dismissed with prejudice, the doctrine of res judicata prohibits the plaintiff from reasserting his claims against that defendant in a later suit. see Mossler v. Shields, 818 S.W.2d 752, 754 (Tex. 1991) (holding that dismissal with prejudice functions as final determination on merits); see also Williams v. TDCJ-Inst. Div., 176 S.W.3d 590, 594 (Tex. App.—Tyler 2005, pet. denied) (holding that dismissal with prejudice has full res judicata and collateral estoppel effect).
Appellant seeks reversal of an order denying his Motion for Injunctive Relief. In his Motion, Appellant seeks injunctive relief on a whistleblower claim that was dismissed with prejudice in a previous lawsuit against Appellee. (Appellant’s Motion at p. 23). Even if Appellant had presented a whistleblower claim in his Original Petition, that claim would be barred by res judicata because the claim was fully adjudicated in a prior suit. Appellant’s request should be denied and the trial court’s order should be affirmed. b. Criminal claims
[*5]Appellant’s Motion seemingly only seeks injunctive relief on his previously dismissed whistleblower claim, which is not present in his Original Petition, the live petition for purposes of this appeal. (Appellant’s Motion). To the extent Appellant may seek injunctive relief for any criminal claims in his petition, that attempt should fail and the trial court’s order should be affirmed.
Texas does not recognize causes of action brought under the Penal Code. Aguilar v. Chastain, 923 S.W.2d 740, 745 (Tex.App.—Tyler 1996, writ denied). Because Texas does not recognize causes of action brought under the Penal Code, Appellant does not have standing with respect to any of his claims against Appellee. As such, Appellant may not receive injunctive relief with respect to any of the criminal claims he brings against Appellee. Accordingly, the trial court’s order should be affirmed.
[*6]c. Claims outside the scope of this appeal
Appellee’s Brief argues for injunctive relief under causes of action absent in his Original Petition, which was the live petition when this appeal was initiated. Appellant attempts to receive injunctive relief for a claim brought under the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act (Appellant’s Brief at p. 52), a tortious interference with a contract claim (Id.), a libel claim (Id. at p. 54), a whistleblower claim (Id. at p. 58), a “free speech retaliation” claim pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Id. at p. 72), and claims for violation and deprivation of due process, due course of law, and equal protection under the Texas Constitution (Id. at p. 77). These claims were not present in Appellant’s live petition at the time of appeal, nor are they present in the Motion he is asking this Court to grant. (C.R. 3—85); (Appellant’s Motion). Appellant should not be awarded any relief based on claims that are outside the scope of this appeal. The trial court’s order should be affirmed.
2. Sovereign immunity deprives this Court of jurisdiction.
A suit against the State or its agencies is barred by sovereign immunity absent clear and unambiguous legislative consent, and sovereign immunity deprives a trial court of subject matter jurisdiction. Tex. Dept. of Parks and Wildlife v. Miranda, 133 S.W.3d 217, 224-225 (Tex. 2004); Tex. Dep’t. of Transp. v. Miller, 8 S.W.3d 636, 638 (Tex. 1999). Sovereign immunity bars a suit against the State unless the legislature expressly consents to the suit. Texas Nat. Res. Conservation Comm’n. v. IT-Davy, 74 S.W.3d 849, 853 (Tex. 2002). Unless the plaintiff pleads a viable claim, sovereign immunity is retained for government defendants. See Andrade v. NAACP of Austin, 345 S.W.3d 1, 11 (Tex. 2011).
[*7]Appellant brings a theft claim against Appellee. (C.R. 77). Theft is an intentional tort, and the Texas Tort Claims Act does not waive immunity for intentional torts. SEE TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE § 101.057 (2). Accordingly, Appellee’s sovereign immunity bars this claim. Because sovereign immunity bars this claim, Appellee is unable to show that he has a probable right to the relief sought, and his request for a temporary injunction should be denied. The trial court’s order should be affirmed.
B. Plaintiff is not in danger of suffering a probable, imminent, and irreparable injury.
For purposes of a temporary injunction, an injury is irreparable if the injured party cannot be adequately compensated in monetary damages or if the damages cannot be measured by any certain pecuniary standard. Butnaru,
84 S.W.3d at 204. The party applying for a temporary injunction has the burden of production, which is the burden of offering some evidence that establishes a probable right to recover and a probable interim injury. See Wyly v. Preservation Dallas, 165 S.W.3d 460, 465 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2005, no pet.). If an applicant does not discharge his burden, he is not entitled to such extraordinary relief. Id.
[*8]Appellant asks this Court to reverse the order by the trial court denying Appellant injunctive relief in the form of reinstatement with Appellee. (Appellant’s Brief at p. 98). Appellant claims his request is a “statutory injunction” governed by Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code § 65.011. (Id. at p. 40—41). Appellant did not argue for an injunction under this statute in his Motion and only mentions it in passing once. (Appellant’s Motion at p. 47). Importantly, section 65.011(3) provides that an applicant may be entitled to an injunction, if the applicant can show they would receive an injunction “under the principles of equity”. SEE TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE § 65.011(3). Texas Appellate Courts have held that section 65.011(3) “does not supersede the common law’s irreparable harm or injury requirement”. Devon Energy Prod. Co., L.P. v. McCarver, No. 10-15-00002-CV, 2015 Tex. App. LEXIS 8241, at *4 (Tex. App. Aug. [6], 2015). Indeed, the “default rule” is that “the rules of equity control the granting of temporary-injunctive relief unless a particular statute provides otherwise.” Cardinal Health Staffing Network v. Bowen, 106 S.W.3d 220, 235 (Tex. App.—Houston 2003). Appellant’s assertion that § 65.011(3) “does not include the equitable requirement of irreparable injury and inadequate legal remedy” is incorrect. (Appellant’s Brief at p. 41).
[*9]Appellant’s Brief does not argue he is in danger of an irreparable, imminent harm because it falsely assumes that is not a requirement for injunctive relief. Even if Appellant correctly applied the law in his Brief, he would be unable to obtain injunctive relief because he has not indicated the irreparable injury he is in danger of suffering without preservation of the status quo. Appellant is currently not employed by Appellee; the injunction Appellant seeks does nothing to preserve this status quo and would actually change the current position of the parties. Simply put, no equitable or legal justifications exist for this Court to overturn the trial court’s correct decision.
Further, Appellant’s Motion for Injunctive Relief argues that he “fears for his safety” after Appellee asked Appellant to return the work computer that was provided to him when Appellee hired Appellant. (Appellant’s Motion at p. 46). Appellant also claimed in his Motion, in a paragraph under the heading “STATEMENT OF IMMEDIATE AND IRREPARABLE HARM,” - 10 - that he has a protected interest in “his good name, honor, integrity, reputation, and employment which will be irreparably harmed” without the Court’s intervention. (Id.) (emphasis added). Appellant’s clear recitation of an element of injunctive relief, and his lackluster attempt to argue such a point, conflict with his claim in his Brief that § 65.011(3) “does not include the equitable requirement of irreparable injury”. (Appellant’s Brief at p. 41).
Appellant’s Motion for Injunctive Relief, the denial of which is the issue on appeal, and his appellate Brief, ostensibly in support of said Motion, contradict each other on whether Appellant is supposed to prove irreparable harm at all. Appellant’s Brief does not even attempt to argue that he needs protection from an irreparable harm. Accordingly, the decision of the trial court should be affirmed.
PRAYER
For the foregoing reasons, the Court should dismiss Appellant’s appeal and affirm the trial court’s order. Appellant does not attempt to argue for the granting of his Motion for Injunctive Relief and instead argues for claims outside the scope of this appeal. Appellant has not established his entitlement r d rd tion and ining • 1g w uld u]t in rforman . · ( ) ( , n. tio nal favor- i • cal p nd official a y or influ- • r ff th r ult e on. c r pri al for th tion I mploye reas n bly ny l le. 11 • n r u. wn , an abn l.llti s tUl to public h ( ) In a • • •• • r- lnfro. (1 with -.-.----., ion 2302(a (2) ( ) of this ti h uth ri y h • • includin ,he. "(2) an h hich i nots tit:v action ' . • ·s nt • • h • principl .
[*11]th h1u1 it in U1 level; ,.· an I
r n ca. or any I· - tion b 1e i- t • • 1 nso • • ·on. g Ill flll th ...\clmini trntiv ( flicp of tlw nitc•d . tat 0Y<•1111111mt rintin., m e, but d s no include- ( i) overnme • (ii the Fede ra.l 1 y i- uti 1 of ~hich . ·gn intc r th lo r pl Ot ll " .min t mplo mentr- • r 1· • • or n ti nal 71 1Right ct ( r hibit d • 12 on in •m e of 0 f
p (29 ..c. 791) • or " ( • ) on th b • a.rital r polit,i l Oiliation prohibit d on w, rul uJ ·on; 74 of 159 App. 000075 Copy from re:SearchTX
Exhibit G2 - HB3893, Proposed Revision to TWA, 06MAR2025, Page 2 (ilJ 2 of 6 H. B . No . 3893 including termination , demotion , suspension , harassment , blacklisting , pay reduction , or other forms of discrimination .
3. Protected Disclosure - A good faith communication
regarding misconduct reported to a supervisor , compliance officer , oversight body , law enforcement , or an elected official .
SECTION 4 . SCOPE OF COVERAGE .
This Act applies to :
1. Public Sector Employees - State , county , municipal , and law enforcement personnel .
2. Private Sector Employees - Emp l oyees of bus i nesses and nonprofit organizations operating in Texas .
3. Contractors and Volunteers Individuals performing services for an employer under contract or as unpaid personnel.
SECTION 5 . PROHIBITED RETALIATION .
(a) No employer , agency , or organization may engage in retaliation against a whistleb l ower . (b) Retaliation includes , but is not limited to :
1. Termination , suspension , or demotion ; 2. Pay reduction or denia l of benefits ;
3. Workplace harassment or the creation of a hostile work environment ;
4. Blacklisting or any act that harms future employme n t opportunities . (c) Employers violating this provision may be subject to
criminal liability under Texas Penal Code § 39 . 06 (Misuse of Official Information) and civil liabi l ity under Chapter 554 , Texas 75 of 159 App. 000076 Copy from re:SearchTX
Exhibit G3 - HB3893, Proposed Revision to TWA, 06MAR2025, Page 3 il.D. lSV • .J07.J IIJ 3 of 6 Government Code (Whist leblower Protect ion Act) .
SECTION 6 . WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTIONS .
(a) Confidentiality : Whistleblower identities sha l l remain confidential unless disclosure is required by law .
(b) Remedies for Reta l iation :
1. Reinstatement to the same or equivalent position ;
2. Compensation for lost wages , benefits , and emotional distress;
3. Punitive damages and reimbursement of legal fees .
SECT I ON 7 . MANDATORY REPORTING REQUIREMENTS .
(a) All employers in Texas shall establish :
1. Internal procedures for whistleblower disclosures;
2. Mandatory notification of employee rights under this Act ;
3. Supervisor and HR personnel training on handling whistleblower complaints .
SECTION 8 . TEXAS WHISTLE BLOWER OVERSIGHT COMMISSION
(TWOC) .
(a) The Texas Whistleblower Oversight Commission (TWOC) is hereby established as an independent body to :
1. Receive , investigate , and mediate whistleblower complaints;
2. Recommend penalties for retaliatory actions ;
3. Require annual reports from organizations detailing whistleblower disclosures and remedial actions taken .
SECTION 9 . TRANSPARENCY IN PUBLIC ENTITIES .
All Texas government agencies , including constables ' 76 of 159 App. 000077 Copy from re:SearchTX
Exhibit G4 - HB3893, Proposed Revision to TWA, 06MAR2025, Page 4 ID 4of 6 H. B . No . 3893 offices , shall :
(a) Submit quarterly budget reports disclosing funding allocations for specialized units ;
(b) Include whistleblower reports and resolutions for public review under the Texas Public Information Act (Chapter 552 , Texas Government Code) .
SECTION 10 . LAW ENFORCEMENT ACCOUNTABILITY .
(a) No law enforceme n t agency , including constables ' precincts , may hire an officer previously dismissed for :
1. Official misconduct under Texas Penal Code§ 39 . 02 (Abuse of Official Capacity) ;
2. Civil rights violations under Texas Penal Code § 39 . 03 (Official Oppression) .
(b) Agencies must conduct thorough background checks and periodic personnel reviews of all officers.
SECTION 11 . LEGAL RECOURSE FOR WHISTLEBLOWERS . (a) Whistleblowers may file civil l awsuits against employers within three ( 3) years of retaliatory actions .
(b) Lawsuits may include : 1. Compensation for economic and emotional damages ;
2. Recovery of lega l fees and punitive damages ;
3. Injunctive relief restoring employment or benefits .
SECTION 12 . AMENDMENTS TO TEXAS WH I STLEBLOWER ACT . (a) Expansion of Protections:
1. Extends whistleblower protections to private - sector employees ; 77 of 159 App. 000078 Copy from re:SearchTX
Exhibit G5 - HB3893, Proposed Revision to TWA, 06MAR2025, Page 5 I[] 5 of 6 H. B . No . 3893 2. I ncludes explicit safeguards for reporting constitutional and civil rights violations ; 3. Aligns Texas laws with federal whistleblower protections under the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act (WPEA) . SECTION 13 . PENALTIES FOR RETALIATION. (a) Civil Penalties : Employers guilty of retaliation may face : 1. Fines up to $500 , 000 per violation ; 2. Compensatory damages for affected whistleblowers . (b) Criminal Penalties:
3. Any employer obstructing a whistleblower disclosure may be charged under Texas Penal Code § 36 . 06 (Obstruction or Retaliation) and face imprisonment. SECTION 14 . ESTABLISHMENT OF WHISTLE BLOWER SUPPORT FUND . (a) A state - funded program shall provide : 1. Financial assistance for whistleblowers facing legal proceedings ; 2. Counseling services for whistleblowers and their families . SECTION 15 . ENFORCEMENT . (a) The Texas Attorney General ' s Office shall oversee enforcement of this Act ; (b) The Texas Whistleblower Oversight Commission (TWOC) shall monitor compliance and publish an annual report to the Texas Legislature. SECTION 16 . EFFECTIVE DATE .
78 of 159 App. 000079 Copy from re:SearchTX
Exhibit G6 - HB3893, Proposed Revision to TWA, 06MAR2025, Page 6 H. B . No . 3893 1 This Act shall take effect on January 1 , 2025 . 2 SECTION 17 . SEVERABILITY . 3 If any provision of this Act is held invalid , the remainder of 4 the Act shall not be affected and shall continue in full force and 5 effect .
79 of 159 App. 000080 Copy from re:SearchTX
Exhibit H - OAG Whistleblower Sign 121 of 159 App. 000122 Copy from re:SearchTX
Exhibit M7 - Email from Court Administrator’s Office, 03JAN2025 Gmail shamar bradley <[email protected]> 127 of 159 App. 000128 Copy from re:SearchTX
Exhibit M13 - Email to Court Administrator’s Office, 30JAN2025 - 2 From: shamar bradley <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2025 12:14 PM To: tc.civildistrictannounce <TC [email protected]> Subject: [CAUTION EXTERNAL] Re: Hearing announcement - D-1-GN-24- 009408 139 of 159 App. 000140 Copy from re:SearchTX
Exhibit N3 - Brickman V. OAG Final Order, 04APR2025, Page 3
Whistleblower Act occurred. Each of the Plaintiffs filed suit not later than the 90 1h day after the date on which the violations of the Texas Whistleblower Act occurred. Each of the Plaintiffs presented evidence establishing the damages awarded in this Judgment.
Because reinstatement, a form of mandatory relief available under the Texas
Whistleblower Act, is not feasible, Plaintiffs are entitled to an award of the value of such reinstatement, commonly referred to as "front pay." 2
OAG by and through its counsel of record elected not to dispute the Plaintiffs' lawsuit as to any issue, including any issue of fact in this case as to the claim or damages. Moreover, OAG
won the right to avoid discovery in this case by certifying to the Supreme Court of Texas that "the agency does not contest liability, damages, or reasonable attorneys' fees." On attorney's fees, OAG represented to the Supreme Court that it "agreed not to contest the figures offered by
Plaintiffs." Having achieved the relief it sought, OAG is now estopped from contesting liability, damages, or the attorney's fees figures that Plaintiffs' counsel have testified are reasonable and necessary. See Pegram v. Herdrich, 530 U.S. 211 , 227, n. 8 (2000) (Judicial estoppel protects the integrity of the judicial system and "generally prevents a party from prevailing in one phase of a case on an argument and then relying on a contradictory argument to prevail in another phase.");
Fleming v. Wilson, 694 S. W.3d 186, 192 (Tex. 2024) (quoting Pegram for application of judicial estoppel if the successful representation arose "in another phase" of the same case).
Independent of judicial estoppel, the Court finds that Plaintiffs have proved liability, damages, and reasonable and necessary attorney' s fees by a preponderance of the evidence.
Because the Office of the Attorney General violated the Texas Whistleblower Act by firing and 2 See TEX. GOVT. CODE §554.003(b)(I); see also Pollardv. £.!. DuPont Nemours & Co., 532 U.S. 843-853 (2001); City ofHouston v. Livingston, 221 S.W.3d 204, 231-233 (Tex. App. -Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, no pet.); Giles v. Gen. £lee. Co., 245 F.3d 474, 489 n. 27 (5th Cir. 200 I); and Wal mart Stores, Inc. v. Davis, 979 S.W.2d 30, 45 (Tex. App. - Austin 1998, pet. denied).
140 of 159 App. 000141 Copy from re:SearchTX
Exhibit N4 - Brickman V. OAG Final Order, 04APR2025, Page 4 otherwise retaliating against the Plaintiffs for in good faith reporting violations of law by Ken
Paxton and OAG, the Court hereby renders judgment for Plaintiffs. Accordingly, the Court
ORDERS that Plaintiffs recover the following from the Office of the Attorney General:
As to Plaintiff James Blake Brickman, Compensation for wages lost during the period of termination in the amount of $65,770.82;
Compensatory damages for emotional pain, suffering inconvenience, mental anguish, loss of enjoyment of life in the amount of $250,000.00;
Prejudgment interest on the above damages awarded at the rate of7.5% from November 12, 2020, until the date of this judgment in the amount of $102,906.69
Attorneys' fees in the amount of $842.269.00 3;
Court costs in the amount of $2,420.66; and Post-judgment interest on all of the above at the rate of 7.5%, compounded annually, from the date this judgment is rendered until all amounts are paid in full.
As to Plaintiff David Maxwell, Compensation for wages lost during the period of termination in the amount of $871,249.83 ;
Compensatory damages for emotional pain, suffering inconvenience, mental anguish, loss of enjoyment of life in the amount of $250,000.00·
Prejudgment interest on the above damages awarded at the rate of 7.5% from November 12, 2020, until the date of this judgment in the amount of $365,404.57;
In lieu of reinstatement, front pay, from the date of trial through the remainder of the Attorney General's current term in the amount of $392.916.59·
Attorneys' fees in the amount of $336,708.00; and 3 Plaintiff Brickman' s attorney ' s fees are comprised of: $465,705 from Tom Nesbitt; $345,995 from the firm of Cain & Skamulis; and $30,569 from the firm ofScanes Yelverton & Talbert.
141 of 159 App. 000142 Copy from re:SearchTX
Exhibit O1 - DIR Project Manager III Job Announcement, 28APR2025, Page 1 [[] 1 of 7 Travel:
[*40]Occasional
Work Location:
Central / Austin, Texas 78756
Web site:
1 None of Appellant’s claims against Appellee are viable. ........................................... 5 a. Whistleblower claim .................................................................................................. 5 b. Criminal claims .......................................................................................................... 6 c. Claims outside the scope of this appeal ..................................................................... 7
2 Sovereign immunity deprives this Court of jurisdiction. ............................................ 7 B. Plaintiff is not in danger of suffering a probable, imminent, and irreparable injury. ......... 8 Prayer ............................................................................................................................................ 11 Certificate Of Compliance ............................................................................................................ 13 Certificate Of Service ................................................................................................................... 13 - iii - INDEX OF AUTHORITIES Cases Aguilar v. Chastain, 923 S.W.2d 740 (Tex.App.—Tyler 1996, writ denied) ............................................................. 6 Andrade v. NAACP of Austin, 345 S.W.3d 1 (Tex. 2011) ........................................................................................................... 8 Butnaru v. Ford Motor Co., 84 S.W.3d 198 (Tex. 2002) ..................................................................................................... 3, 8 Canteen Corp. v. Republic of Tex. Props., Inc., 773 S.W.2d 398 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1989, no writ) .................................................................. 4 Cardinal Health Staffing Network v. Bowen, 106 S.W.3d 220 (Tex. App.—Houston 2003)........................................................................... 10 Devon Energy Prod. Co., L.P. v. McCarver, No. 10-15-00002-CV, 2015 Tex. App. LEXIS 8241 (Tex. App. Aug. 6, 2015) ........................ 9 Gracia v. RC Cola-7-Up Bottling Co., 667 S.W.2d 517 (Tex. 1984) ....................................................................................................... 5 Mossler v. Shields, 818 S.W.2d 752 (Tex. 1991) ....................................................................................................... 5 Tex. Dep’t. of Transp. v. Miller, 8 S.W.3d 636 (Tex. 1999) .......................................................................................................... 8 Tex. Dept. of Parks and Wildlife v. Miranda, 133 S.W.3d 217 (Tex. 2004) ....................................................................................................... 7 Texas Nat. Res. Conservation Comm’n. v. IT-Davy, 74 S.W.3d 849 (Tex. 2002) ......................................................................................................... 8 Walling v. Metcalfe, 863 S.W.2d 56 (Tex. 1993) ......................................................................................................... 3 Williams v. TDCJ-Inst. Div., 176 S.W.3d 590 (Tex. App.—Tyler 2005, pet. denied) ............................................................. 5 - iv - Wyly v. Preservation Dallas, 165 S.W.3d 460 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2005, no pet.) .................................................................. 9 Statutes TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE § 101.057 (2) ................................................................................. 8 TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE § 65.011(3) .................................................................................... 9 -v- STATEMENT OF THE CASE Nature of the Case: This lawsuit centers around Appellant’s belief that Appellee committed numerous criminal acts against him. Appellant brings all of his claims under criminal statutes. Trial Court: The trial court is the 261st District Court in Travis County, Texas. Trial Court Disposition: The order to be appealed is the trial court’s order denying Appellant’s Motion for Injunctive Relief. - vi - STATEMENT REGARDING ORAL ARGUMENT Appellees respectfully submit that oral argument is not necessary. The single issue at hand in this appeal is whether the trial court was correct in denying Appellant’s Motion for Injunctive Relief. Since the issue is straightforward and concerns well-settled law, Appellees do not believe oral argument will aid the Court’s decision-making process. However, if the Court determines oral argument is warranted, Appellees respectfully request the opportunity to participate. - vii - ISSUES PRESENTED 1. Did the trial court correctly deny Appellant’s Motion for Injunctive Relief when Appellant pleaded to no viable claim and did not present evidence of irreparable harm? - viii - No. 15-25-00138-cv In the Court of Appeals for the Fifteenth Judicial District Austin, Texas SHAMAR D. BRADLEY, Appellant, v. TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION RESOURCES, Appellees. On Appeal from the 261st Judicial District Court of Travis County, Texas Honorable Sherine Thomas, Judge Presiding BRIEF OF APPELLEE Texas Department of Information Resources (“Appellee”) files this Brief requesting this Court affirm the trial court’s order denying Appellant’s Motion for Injunctive Relief and would show as follows: STATEMENT OF FACTS On February 24, 2025, Appellant Shamar Bradley (“Appellant”) filed his Original Petition for Writ of Mandamus in Travis County District Court. C.R. 3. Appellant’s Petition brought 53 “counts” against various Defendants, some of whom are not parties to this lawsuit. C.R. 64—80. Against Appellee, - 11 - to such extraordinary relief as a temporary injunction, and the trial court’s order should be affirmed. KEN PAXTON Attorney General BRENT WEBSTER First Assistant Attorney General AUSTIN KINGHORN Deputy Attorney General for Civil Litigation KIMBERLY GDULA Division Chief, General Litigation Division /s/ Denver Burris DENVER BURRIS Assistant Attorney General Texas Bar No. 24138940 Office of the Attorney General General Litigation Division P.O. Box 12548, Capitol Station Austin, Texas 78711-2548 (512) 475-4105 | FAX: (512) 320-0667 [email protected] - 12 - CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE This document complies with the requirements of Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.4(i)(2)(B). This document contains 2,123 words and was prepared using Microsoft Word as part of the Microsoft Office program. This certificate complies with the requirement of Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.4(i)(3). /s/Denver Burris Attorney for Appellee CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that that on November 17, 2025, this document was filed electronically via the Court’s CM/ECF system, causing electronic service upon all counsel of record. Shamar Bradley CM/RRR#: 7020 1290 0000 7441 8641 10109 Lake Creek Pkwy #170682 Austin, Texas 78117 210-425-5464 [email protected] PLAINTIFF PRO SE /s/ Denver Burris DENVER BURRIS Assistant Attorney General - 13 - No. 15-25-00138-cv _____________________________ In the Court of Appeals for the Fifteenth Judicial District Austin, Texas ______________________________ SHAMAR D. BRADLEY, Appellant, v. TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION RESOURCES, Appellees. ______________________________ On Appeal from the 261st Judicial District Court of Travis County, Texas Honorable Sherine Thomas, Judge Presiding ______________________________ APPENDIX OF APPELLEE ______________________________ KEN PAXTON Denver Burris Attorney General Texas Bar No. 24138940 Assistant Attorneys General Brent Webster General Litigation Division First Assistant Attorney General P.O. Box 12548, Capitol Station Austin, Texas 78711-2548 Austin Kinghorn Phone (512) 463-2120 Deputy Attorney General for Fax (512) 320-0667 Civil Litigation Kimberly Gdula Division Chief, General Litigation Division ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents ……………………………………………………………………………….. ii Plaintiff’s Motion for Injunctive Relief; June 26, 2025 ……………………………………000001 ii 6/26/2025 2:59 PM Velva L. Price District Clerk Travis County D-1-GN-25-001373 Max Hernandez Cause No. D-1-GN-25-001373 SHAMAR D. BRADLEY § IN THE 261ST DISTRICT COURT Plaintiff § v. § TRAVIS COUNTY TEXAS OFFICE OF THE § ATTORNEY GENERAL, § JURY TRIAL DEMANDED TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF § INFORMATION RESOURCES, § WRIT OF MANDAMUS REQUESTED and all other Defendants § similarly situated § App. 000001 Copy from re:SearchTX IDENTITY OF PARTIES AND COUNSEL Plaintiff Shamar D. Bradley Pro Se [email protected] 10109 Lake Creek Parkway, #170682 Austin, TX 78717 Telephone: (210) 425-5464 Defendants The Texas Department of Information Resources (“DIR”) Trial and Appellate Counsel for Defendants Denver Burris Assistant Attorney General [email protected] Texas Bar No. 24138940 Office of the Attorney General General Litigation Division P.O. Box 12548, Capitol Station Austin, Texas 78711-2548 Telephone: (512) 475-4105 Facsimile: (512) 320-0667 GENERAL COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT Josh Godbey General Counsel [email protected] Texas Bar No. 24049996 300 W. 15th Street, Suite 1300 Austin, TX 78701 Telephone: (512) 475-4550 1 of 159 App. 000002 Copy from re:SearchTX TABLE OF CONTENTS IDENTITY OF PARTIES AND COUNSEL .................................................................................. 1 INDEX OF AUTHORITIES ........................................................................................................... 3 STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION ............................................................................................... 9 ISSUES PRESENTED.................................................................................................................... 9 STATEMENT OF FACTS ............................................................................................................ 10 ARGUMENT ................................................................................................................................ 13 I. Standard of Review ..........................................................................................................13 II. The Texas Whistleblower Act ..........................................................................................15 III. DIR’s missing and misleading instructions are due process violations ...........................15 a. DIR refused or failed to inform the plaintiff of his whistleblower rights ................... 17 b. DIR claimed there was no appeal procedure and ignored its invocation .................... 18 c. The prescribed content of the Whistleblower Poster is deficient................................ 18 IV. Doctrines of Stare Decisis, Res Judicata, and Collateral Estoppel do not apply .............19 a. DIR failed to give notice on their Amended Plea to the Jurisdiction.......................... 22 b. The plaintiff filed this case prior to the dismissal of the other case............................ 22 c. The trial court ignored the plaintiff's motion to dismiss for want of prosecution....... 23 d. The trial court erred in dismissing the other case with prejudice ............................... 23 V. Plaintiff is likely to prevail on the merits of whistleblower retaliation ...........................23 a. The plaintiff’s report of a violation of law was a protected disclosure....................... 23 i. DIR’s acts and omissions are official acts ............................................................ 23 ii. Plaintiff reported a violation of a law by another public employee ...................... 24 iii. The violation had occurred and was not speculative ............................................ 25 b. DIR is not entitled to sovereign immunity for whistleblower retaliation ................... 25 c. The Whistleblower Act is a remedial statute and thus should be construed liberally . 26 d. Sovereign immunity does not bar suits against a State official’s unlawful acts ......... 26 e. A constitutional challenge to a state official’s action is not a suit against the State ... 28 f. No Permission required to sue the State for a state official’s violations of state law . 29 g. The trial court wrongly pursued a narrow construction of the Act ............................. 30 h. Okoli is flawed and cannot be applied to the facts of this case .................................. 31 i. The trial court disregarded the unlawful employment practice claim ........................ 36 j. “Regulate Under the Law” Is Unconstitutionally Vague ............................................ 37 VI. DIR has investigative, regulatory, and enforcement powers ...........................................38 a. DIR is a regulatory agency that makes rules governing other Agencies .................... 38 b. DIR has investigatory authority .................................................................................. 39 c. DIR has enforcement authority ................................................................................... 40 d. DIR otherwise regulates conduct outside the Agency ................................................ 40 STATEMENT OF IMMEDIATE AND IRREPARABLE HARM................................................ 45 CONCLUSION AND PRAYER ................................................................................................... 47 AFFIDAVIT .................................................................................................................................. 48 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE ...................................................................................................... 48 APPENDIX ................................................................................................................................... 49 2 of 159 App. 000003 Copy from re:SearchTX INDEX OF AUTHORITIES CASES: Page(s) Alamo Heights Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Clark, 544 S.W.3d 755, 770-71 (Tex. 2018) .................................................................................13 Barr v. Resolution Trust Corp., 837 S.W.2d 627, 628 (Tex.1992) .................................................................................19, 20 Bd. of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth, 408 U.S. 564, 572, 92 S.Ct. 2701, 33 L.Ed.2d 548 (1972) ................................................16 Bonniwell v. Beech Aircraft Corp., 663 S.W.2d 816, 818 (Tex.1984) .......................................................................................20 Bradley v. Department of Information Resources, D-1-GN-24-009408.................................................................................................. 102-137 Brandt v. Hickel, 427 F.2d 53, 56 (9th Cir. 1970) ..........................................................................................22 Brickman v. Office of the Attorney General, D-1-GN-20-006861.................................................................................................. 138-141 In re Bridgestone Ams. Tire Operations, LLC, 459 S.W.3d 565, 572 (Tex. 2015) .................................................................................37,38 Brody v. Vill. of Port Chester, 434 F.3d 121, 129–30 (2d Cir. 2005) .................................................................................22 Burch v. City of San Antonio, 518 S.W.2d 540, 544 (Tex. 1975) ......................................................................................26 Camacho v. Samaniego, 954 S.W.2d 811, 818 (Tex. App.—El Paso 1997, writ denied)..........................................24 City of Cockrell Hill v. Johnson, 48 S.W.3d 887, 896-97 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2001, pet. denied) .................................24 City of Dallas v. VSC, LLC, 347 S.W.3d 231, 238–39 (Tex. 2011) (same).....................................................................25 City of Fort Worth v. Pridgen, 653 S.W.3d 176, 182, 184 (Tex. 2022) ..............................................................................25 City of Mason v. West Tex. Utils. Co., 237 S.W.2d 273, 280 (Tex. 1951) ......................................................................................26 City of San Antonio v. Maspero, 640 S.W.3d 523, 528 (Tex. 2022) ......................................................................................13 City of Waco v. Lopez, 259 S.W.3d 147, 154 (Tex. 2008) ......................................................................................30 City of West Covina v. Perkins, 525 U.S. 234, 241, 119 S.Ct. 678, 142 L.Ed.2d 636 (1999) ..............................................16 Connally v. Dallas Indep. Sch. Dist., 506 S.W.3d 767, 788 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2016, no pet.) ................................................25 Engelman Irrigation Dist. v. Shields Bros., Inc., 960 S.W.2d 343 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 1997, pet. denied) .......................................22 3 of 159 App. 000004 Copy from re:SearchTX CASES: Page(s) Familias Unidas v. Briscoe, 619 F.2d 391, 403 (5th Cir. 1980) .....................................................................................24 Foster v. Wells,
4 Essential Contract Contract services Contract Agency services are are moderately services are Function not critical for essential to DIR's critical to meeting DIR's mission DIR mission mission
5 Stability & No recent No recent change, Recent change Experience of change and but not significant and not Contractor's Key significant experience; or significant Management experience recent change experience Staff but significant experience
6 Administralivc Fee (if any): One Quar1er of One Pcrcenl (or 0.25%).
7 Prompl Paymenl Di scount De1 ails (if any): Refer 10 Attachment C.
8 ATTACHME TA: NASPO ValuePoim Mas1er Agreement Tern, and Condi1ions ATTACHME TB: Scope of Work ATTACHME TC: Price Schedule ATTACHME TD: End User License Agreemenls (as appli cable) Any conflicts between Attachment a nd the other tt ac hmcnts will be resolved in fa or of Attachment A.
9 D UME TS rNCORPORATED I TO TH IS CONTRA T BY R FERE CE BUT OT ATTACHED: a. All 01her govemme111al laws, regula1ions. or ac1ion app licab le 10 1hc goods and/or serv ices au1horized by this contract b. U1ah Procurement Code, Procurement Rules, and Contraclor·s response 10 so lici1a1ion #K 12 1-47. I0. · ac h person igning 1his Agreement represents and warrants tha1 he/she is duly aulhorized and ha legal capac ity 10 execute and del iver 1hi Ai,,,-cemen1 and bind 1he panics here10. Ea h signa1ory represe111s and warran1s 10 1he 01hcr thai 1he execution and delivery of the Agreement and !he performance of each pany's obligalions hereunder have been duly aulhorized and tha1 the Agreement is a va lid and legal agrcemen1 binding on the panic and enforceable in accordance wilh it. terms. WIT ESS WHEREOF, the panies sign and cause this contract to be executed. otwithslanding verbal or 01 her rcpresen1a1ions by the parties, the "Effec1ivc Date" of this Contract sha ll be 1he date provided within Sec1ion 5 above. CONTRACTOR DI VI 10 OF P RCH G ~~H !la1111«ft 20,2 04/20/2022 //JIU~ ll'D ~\q 04/20/2022 H•nnah May ~pr •1 lOT) tllck H\igho. (Apr 10, 2022 09:48 '40TI Contractor's signalure Date Director, Di vision of Purchasing Dale Hannah May Senior Corporate Attorney Type or Print ame and Tille I111emal Con1rac1Tracking #: AR3764 olicita1ion #: KM2 l-47 Vend r #: C248808 98 of 159 App. 000099 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit K2 - Utah Cooperative Contract with Tyler Tech, 20APR2022, Page 55 ID 55 of 134 T lerTechnol ies, NIC Division • Catego 1 Pricing Cat.a l l',W T ~ N I C ~ l1tt....,_Jc-CUI- ,..,,_ l f ~ ~ - ~-0.01«1 pnOnf: ("I.OM) SlOO.OOOl,......._,,,..,.,,t<ll•17S,OOO,,,,C, T""'T«hlocto,-.HIC~ l11ttfOf.wFCMlrut,o,,lt,tfom,(J~I -"'-~pnoncl5M-1DM) SIOO,OOO~UDnfer•SISJlf:JOI,,_ , ... T~HICDMsO> £11'1-r-dmori~IJOUflCUlelml ~-Wledllf'Oll{lM•W) StOD,OOO......._,ui.-la•SSO..DOD/ffll:, ~T~MDMol.loft lm-,f-JIIIDlll'UorfDffl>j~M) oc,pljU1111t1'6ne011t1D111l~IMI St00,DOO~lm;SJ0..0Dlllma T\"lfrlKfl. . . .~ I I I C ~ (n1.,.nwf-<,l.nCU1-~tJOIMdH.,anl) •PQPwall-llli;odpna,i,:lol'-~11&~•IM) S7\000~ftt • ~ - T',Cnl.......ld.NIC°'"""°" C n t e r p m c t - a r - ~ ~ I _.,,o,,MlotdPOQ111f'11f11UMtlO,lllliesl~KIOlJ SSOOCll~•-lff•Sll,ooa(mo Twta-T~HIC"DMsoc,n lffl8-Kf-•lltu1"'rfwfflV~ _..__.,_M!diw..,.fo,~('<2Wlll ~ODO......,_,l_,_•SU.IIDQ(IM ' - " " ' " ' ~ - - 0 . . . S - b,~Jwndu... ~'-'«-r.o,,•t.lodul,rj . PoPlllltxwo.bsailP"'211~lOM) SSO.OOO~l••S~ooa(mo T.,_1fflln0ktr-h1CO.-C,,, [ M _ . . f - d a t l m l t ' b ~ ~ - ~ J - po. . .Uofl--....{5M lQl,4) SlS,OOO~lff•UQ..OOIWmo t \ ' l f f T ~ f r l k ~ ll'll-1MJCM\ct.ta,l'Wfa,"'~- Modl,,wl · ~ ~ l l M S I - ' ) SILOm~MOlllff•SJ4000(me Twtn-TKlvdocco,NK~ lt't--fDMIMUtb>"latlu!1"t~-Modulej ---DIIM'IIOfa'ICl<tMI SlOOOD~-lff•SlSmal'- T\olarlmw,glea;~MC~ [M__.,fD1111dar...Plad..,..~-~J ~ . . - . l o r ~ f ! , O O l·lMI UDOO..,.._UID!>fft•SlO.aoo/lno TVWT~Nte°""""'" (,,lc_... ,.....,~lQPl,..rfann~-~ · ~ - - - ~ , o r ~ I-~ S§,0 0 0 f f i ~ I N • S1,5,IIO/fff0 1'-"'l~HIC~ (,..~fov'lllt!JOl'l'!Mf-~-~l • IOOll'IIIM~IW-.fat,...,...~R'll~I ss.ooo.,.~i- - suoa,"'° l.,tnl~in,HICDtwl\lof'I ll'!.-""'foi;m:l""'°" ..., . _ , , ~ , . 6 i c r l l l l ~ w c l ' " ° " " SO.W11elCllffllrf l\41,rT~e,HIC~ Cnt_,_r_o•uonfllltfo,,o,jGowZGo•MiduM) ~ - P < " ° " ' l ! P .I DMJ "S7'11..11110,',, ,sas,000 ~ l ' I I D I I - _.u1nw ly!a"T_,...._NICo,,,,t..., lnt.....-h,u,.ci• lO'lfllltf..,..jGaw?Go• ModU.) -----bn«IDrCffl&t!,M l.OM) •sss.aoo1ma,sn.ooo~uan-.....,kfti,w fylro"t~;e.MC~ (M~J-Qfa,,t,UOl'Wl~K,a• ~ , . _..,.,,...._~l1"'"5MI •~•SlS.C00~~---.1111f;,... 1¥\ttTffl'odoltlft.lft(~ fll(~~lboll~f(iOvlGo•Moct....) ~Pl'IDrofl<IMI 'SlS.OOtll- · SJS.000~~,1a11--•"°"" lyltrT~-NICl>Mww> lm...._F.....,d-Pi.tfomtjGo,,Koo•Moduwj ~ i , . . . , _ l u , _ _ _ . _ ~ 1M) "SlO.~•SlU)OO~IOll--llb. f,Wf-....-NICo..n.. lnt--hlunlll....,91.d"""f(;avlGa• MDd. .l _,_lalftl.....,,..lnr..........,. (25Dlt,50lllJ •s11.soo/nta•SJS..000.....,_1mn _ _ 11aw 1,-,-......... wo.-- £M...,,-f-11d•,_,.__1G<w1t.a•ua-1 ~-......,....,_...........,4!41 "'$1.S,O!XV-•Sl\OOO_,.,...,_,u1mn_,,,.nftao ,....,___,.-,MC_ flllff.,,_.FGlfld,IIOfl~(T~""MOOl.-t•IOC.M_-,IOICIII St0,000,,,,_,.frNl!N,~•SOllt--l SlM..,._.lk-.lwllM--..:_QCMr_afld ~C-~Dll~.,.--fftQ.....,Clata C-.,..alldbaW011~-n,1a)AHD/[Nl;uptaSlO s 1 , o o o o ~ -- ,"'• - SXIOOOWGc11o1Go-on"- -- - SlOD,aoo/mu-1,0.25,ptr~l"'ffll SlZO,DOO~toofn•Slil,ODOp,,,-GcwZGo-Ulo.o• sua.00Cli'... •S0.2!i_..., _ _ $100,00ll""pil,IIMUIIDIIIN•SlO_DOOperGar.'>Go~• t~f~.._NIC""""- t,n~~IOOll~l,tJIMGd""8•kNnll.ll-/•IIOfl'IIM--11, _...,lll\0'4.(1M·W) Sl1000Gf,no,SO.:ZS _ _. _ PS.OOO~ff't • SXUIOOHl'GowlGo~'"- · S'j,l),OXl/ma • so.n- ._.u.,n,1 S70,oll0....,.._,..,bOllkoe•SlQ,OIIOp«Go,,lG<i--• SO,ooclr/,,,a•SO.u,..~1 $16.GlO~~ll!l'•SXl,IIOO_,GovlUO~• SJ0.001)1,,io•5025Nt~!Mflt ~~i,onJtt•S20.000-GiwZC-.O_..,_,_• ,.,..,.,.._,.._HIC.,,..._, lfflonraehluRlll•i-ftaUDnlllAIModula•F....a•uana;l•_,.lllt-.bawdi,na,,lar-fbal~J Sll,(IXlf,na•SO,.ll,-_.,._.1 lylB"l~-.HC~ em...,,-fG.ml•hml ...ffllnlltAl,,__.•,.._nmm•IIIDl1Rfll) u...-__,.-..,.... u.,mSl~ --~·-- IMT~'" ~I(~ l l l l f ! f - ~ - , t ) f ' - ( M l i f t . . . . •FCIWfWl•-l•troll_.ll)fl<Q~l'f'dlil 1.1o1auoo-- 11'1!,'T~ er...Mr...-1~P1Mr- ...._.._,\_Dll.4~ .. 1,-,j ... ~ - · - · ~ ~ - ~ ~ - -• - l - - WOlbw--.,.-0.,..__.,.NJDl'IOl,........~t.,.._I SC--911CL-..I_.._I !.adC:...._,..._~.,._,.,.,."-19-C-,·JO~U-.i-<DIIJ -c..-.....,.~,."---~19wNC-I :zs~~t-caal S ,.,., 47,IZH9 •.Uc..16 !oMSC..........-~---f-(SI\IIM'-J M'.IC-ta.l~..a) ~ c - . . . . . , _ ~ , . . _ , _ ~ l " " " - 1 l't,C--.j-c.CI "'''"' ,.,....,, 116,M.OO " ' ' r - - - - ~ - - , - 1 - - ~ JDDc-n-i-.i---1 ,.,__,, - ~ , . . . . . . _ ~ f l l a f , w . , - - - 1 9 ' a r N ~ - USC.......-I.INQ ........ lasll ! o M S C . . . . . . . . . . , . _ _ ~ ~ , _ 1 9 w t i d C - l Ullc-fl'Wll.,._lt--'-i ,,....... s..6C.-........,_~,._-,_ISI\M,ll-/ llSC--~i-Ulll'I 110.411.ll ~c....,....,,,..._~......,_.,...........,,._l_l JOOC-..,-U-1l..,_.rc,,d S lll,4S,SI ,,..._~,a.-.. .. -.......---°""'~' ..._,_ i.-a-~--- caw, ........... ~ - - - - - - M - ~C..~~..,_.,._,.,,.,.,_,..,..lot-.(lfwNlliM-I ,r-.-~~-. S ,7,&U.M l , o , d C - . . . . . _ _ ~ ....-,-..,..io,, ..."'Ac(,-,,.,.,,,.llN!-1·\0C--.1.-1...-.,1-U w.,,.., !oadc:a..........,._.,~,...,._f_wllll~ ~ C - ) J5C---..-i--c> li!,,UO.Sl !&dC- .......- ~ , . _ _ _ , . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . _ ~ 1 -1 Mic-..-.._,....... ~ n1.02uo """6~ ............. .,.,,____"---.__•··,._.~1.a,,1-, .7!,c-..._,_.. ....., 106,U,Y I . M 5 C - _ . , _ ~ , . . _ - , _ _ , . . . , ~ 1 9 w o . , . ~ 1- 11111~'-->I-..I-II k.5,!n'-1 ~o,.,......-~,..,.,,._,_ _•-~ ~c........_,_~....,_,..,f........__.....,._ ~ r - , usc-...-'--1_.....t-.Q f ! l w N ~ I uoc--u...t,.__.r-i S _,,.., ~],.4Sl.14 S - t . . - - - ~ f l a , . _ , , _ • • 1 t - - - - ! S N , H t . . - j IISC-W...U-..(.....,._l lll_llOU1 ~ ) ~ ~ O . .......... Plll_,___11""""" CV-M~l·IClll'--~1-.."'6U !167.....111 ~o,,n.1~- ,....,._.._o..~c--1 -- _,,..,.,.-e,,-..,_...,.,_. 99 of 159 App. 000100 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit L1 - DIR-CPO-5274 Tyler Tech, Pricing Index, Page 1 Case Management Complete Tyler Technolog ies Platforms and Porfolio Suites 19.50% Per User (Saas or Software License) Justice Analytics Suite, CJIS Population Based Tyler Technologies 5.00% Enterprise Data Platform Pricing Managed Services - Silver, Gold, Tyler Technologies 19.50% Annualy Platimum and Platimum Plus Tyler Technolog ies Set Up Fee (Onetime cost) 19.50% One Time Fee Per Configure Tyler Technologies Custom Reporting Services 19.50% Report Tyler Technologies Data Migration 19.50% Per Hour Tyler Technologies Implementation 19.50% Per Hour Tyler Technologies Training And Certification 19.50% Per User Tyler Technolog ies Certified Administrator Training 19.50% Per Class Tyler Technologies Certified Developer Training 19.50% Per Class Certified implementation Tyler Technologies 19.50% Per Class Consultant Training Tyler Technologies Certified Report Engineer Training 19.50% Per Class Tyler Technolog ies Configu ration Services by Role 19.50% Per Hour Maintenance and Support Gold, Tyler Technologies 19.50% Annualy Platimum and Platimum Plus 100 of 159 App. 000101 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit L2 - DIR-CPO-5274 Tyler Tech, Pricing Index, Page 2 Based on Tyler Technologies Versa Maintenance Packages 19.50% Customer Requirements Based on Data Storage and Hosting Tyler Techno logies 19.50% Customer Packages Requirements Base annual Maintenance (20% of 20% Calculated Tyler Technologies Base and Named User License 0.00% from Total Purchase Price) Discounted Price Online Portal Module Base Year 20% Calculated Maintenance (20% of Module Base Tyler Technologies 0.0.0% from Total and Named User License Purchase Discounted Price Price) Analytics Module Base Year 20% Calculated Maintenance (20% of Module Base Tyler Technologies 0.00% from Total and Named User License Purchase Discounted Price Price) Turnkey solutions packages to be configure based on cu stomers requirements and it will include but not limited to (Software and 19.50% Overall Package Services as listed above) 101 of 159 App. 000102 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit M - Bradley v DIR, D-1-GN-24-009408 Exhibit M1 - Bradley v DIR, D-1-GN-24-009408 Case Summary Exhibit M1A - Bradley v DIR, D-1-GN-24-009408 Case Summary, Page 1 https://research.txcourts,gov/CourtRecordsSearchNiewCasePrinl/92023cd9c3d549c487193c47935771 Of Case Information SHAMAR BRADLEY vs. TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION RESOURCES D-1 -GN-24-009408 Locatiort Case C.ategory Case Type CAse Filed D1:11e Judgo Cas~ St~,u~ Travis County - Civil - Employment Other Employment 11 /2012024 419TH, DISTRICT Open (Open) District Clerk COURT Parties0 Type Name Nl(Ji.name/AIIElS Allotne'r'S Plaintiff SHAMAR D BRADLEY Pro Se Defendant TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION DENVER BURRIS RESOURCES Hearings[!] oa1emmt! Ju.IQ• Loo1ol\1U11 12/18/2024 02:00 PM Setting Date 1/22/2025 02:00 PM Setting Date 217/2025 09:00 AM Setting Date 2/1 812025 02:00 PM Setting Date Events[!i] Dale Evco1 Type Comme11ts Oocu1nems 11120/2024 Filing 5050DC WHISTLEBLOWER ORIGINAL PETITION/APPLICATION (OCA),pdl RETALIATION COMPLAINT 11 /20/2024 Filing 5402DC STATEMENT OF INABILITY STATEMENT OF INABILITY TO AFFORD COSTS.pd! TO AFFORD PAYMFNT OF COURT COSTS 11/20/2024 FIiing 5050DC WH ISTLEBLOWER ORIGINAL PETITION/APPLICATION (OCA).pdl RETALIATION COMPLAINT 11/22/2024 Filing 5265DC MOTION FOR INJUNCTIVE MOTION FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF.pd! RELIEF 11/22/2024 Filing 5415DC CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE .pd! 11/27/2024 Filing 5415DC EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF EV IDENCE IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR MOTION FOR INJUNCTIVE INJUNCTIVE RELIEF.pdf RELIEF 12/2/2024 Filing 5415DC WITNESS LIST WITNESS LIST.pd! 12/412024 FIiing 5415DC LETTER- SUBPOENA LETTER- SUBPOENA REQUESTS VIA PCT 5.pdf REQUESTS VIA PCT 6 12/11 12024 FIiing 5150DC DIR S ORIGINAL ANSWER DIR S ORIGINAL ANSWER AND DE FENSES.pdf AND DEFENSES 12/13/2024 Filing 5150DC DIR S PLEA TO THE DIR S PLEA TO THE JURISDICTION.pd! JURISDICTION 12/17/2024 Filing 5153DC DIR S OPPOSITION TO DIR S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR PLA INTIFFS MOTION FOR INJUNCTIVE RELI EF AND REQUEST FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND TEMPORARY INJUNCTION.pd! 102 of 159 App. 000103 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit M1B - Bradley v DIR, D-1-GN-24-009408 Case Summary, Page 2 I[] 2 of 6 REQUEST FOR TEMPORARY INJUNCTION 12/18/2024 Hearing Setting Date 12/23/2024 FIiing 5054DC AMENDED AMENDED WHISTLEBLOWER RETALIATION WHISTLEBLOWER COMPLAINT.pdf RET/\LI/\TION COMPLAINT 1/9/2025 Filing 5153DC DIR S AMENDED PLEA TO DIR S AMENDED PLEA TO THE JURISDICTION.pd! THE JURISDICTION 1/9/2025 Filing 4B0BDC SIGN AND SEAL SUBPOENA SIGN AND SEAL SUBPOENA.pdf 1/9/2025 Filing 4808DC SIGN AND SEAL SUBPOENA SIGN AND SEAL SUBPOENA.pd! 1/9/2025 FIiing 5415DC NOTICE OF HEARING ON NOTICE OF HEARING ON TEXAS DEPARTMENT 0 TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION RESOURCES PLEA TO THE INFORMATION RESOURCES JURISDICTION.pdf PLEA TO THE JURISDICTION 1/9/2025 Filing 480BDC SIGN AND SEAL SUBPOENA SIGN AND SEAL SUBPOENA- JOHN DECHENE.pdl - JOHN DE CHENE 1/9/2025 Filing 4808DC SIGN AND SEAL SUBPOENA: SIGN AND SEAL SUBPOENA: MICHELLE DANG .pd! MICHELLE DANG 1/9/2025 Filing 4808DC SIGN AND SEAL SUBPOENA: SIGN AND SEAL SUBPOENA : WILLIAM FANG .pdf WILLIAM FANG 1/9/2025 Filing 4808DC SIGN AND SEAL SUBPOENA: SIGN AND SEAL SUBPOENA: WILLIAM WILLIAM FARAONE FARAONE.pdf 1/9/2025 Filing 4808DC SIGN AND SEAL SUBPOENA: SIGN AND SEAL SUBPOENA: TAWANNA HARRIS.p TAWANNA HARRIS 1/9/2025 Filing 4B0BDC SIGN AND SEAL SUBPOENA: SIGN AND SEAL SUBPOENA: LISA JAMMER.pd! LISA JAMMER 1/9/2025 Filing 4808DC SIGN AND SEAL SUBPOENA: SIGN AND SEAL SUBPOENA : PATRICK LARSON .pc PATRICK LARSON 1/9/2025 Filing 4808DC SIGN AND SEAL SUBPOENA: SIGN AND SEAL SUBPOENA: EDUARDO EDUARDO MARQUIS MARQUIS.pd! 1/9/2025 Filing 4808DC SIGN AND SEAL SUBPOENA: SIGN AND SEAL SUBPOENA : AMANDA AMANDA MONTGOMERY MONTGOMERY.pd! 1/9/2025 Filing 480BDC SIGN AND SEAL SUBPOENA: SIGN AND SEAL SUBPOENA: SARAH PAYLOR.pd! SARAH PAYLOR 1/9/2025 Filing 4808DC SIGN AND SEAL SUBPOENA: SIGN AND SEAL SUBPOENA: BETH PERRY.pd! BETH PERRY 1/9/2025 FIiing 4808DC SIGN AND SEAL SUBPOENA: SIGN AND SEAL SUBPOENA: BRIAN PURDY.pd! BRIAN PURDY 1/9/2025 Filing 4B0BDC SIGN AND SEAL SUBPOENA: SIGN AND SEAL SUBPOENA: RISHI SEEDAN .pdf RISHI SEEDAN 1/9/2025 Filing 4808DC SIGN AND SEAL SUBPOENA: SIGN AND SEAL SUBPOENA: GINA SMITH.pd! GINA SMITH 1/9/2025 FIiing 4808DC SIGN AND SEAL SUBPOENA: SIGN AND SEAL SUBPOENA: ANN TEXTER.pdf ANN TEXTER 1/9/2025 Filing 480BDC SIGN AND SEAL SUBPOENA: SIGN AND SEAL SUBPOENA: TONY TRAN .pd! TONY TRAN 1/9/2025 Filing 4B0BDC SIGN AND SEAL SUBPOENA: SIGN AND SEAL SUBPOENA: GUY VACHON.pd! GUY VACHON 103 of 159 App. 000104 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit M1C - Bradley v DIR, D-1-GN-24-009408 Case Summary, Page 3 ([] 3 of 6 1/912025 Filing 4808DC SIGN AND SEAL SUBPOENA: SIGN AND SEAL SUBPOENA: ISSAC WILCHER.pd! ISSAC WILCHER 1/9/2025 Filing 5415DC EXECUTED SUBPOENA GUY EXECUTED SUBPOENA GUY VACHON.pd! VACHON 1/912025 Filing 5415DC EXECUTED SUBPOENA EXECUTED SUBPOENA EDUARDO MARQUIS.pd! EDUARDO MARQUIS 1/912025 FIiing 5415DC EXECUTED SUBPOENA EXECUTED SUBPOENA ISAAC WILCHER.pdf ISAAC WILCHER 1/912025 Filing 5415DC EXECUTED SUBPOENA EXECUTED SUBPOENA TONY TRAN .pd! TONY TRAN 1/912025 Filing 54 15DC EXECUTED SUBPOENA ANN EXECUTED SUBPOENA ANN TEXTER .pd! TEXTER 1/13/2025 Filing 5265DC MOTION TO COMPEL MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY.pd/ DISCOVERY 1/13/2025 Filing 4893DC EXECUTED SUBPOENA · EXECUTED SUBPOENA · MICHELLE DANG.pdf MICHELLE DANG 1/13/2025 FIiing 4893DC EXECUTED SUBPOENA - EXECUTED SUBPOENA · DEREK BLACKMAN.pd! DEREK BLACKMAN 1/13/2025 FIiing 4893DC EXECUTED SUBPOENA· EXECUTED SUBPOENA · TAWANA HARRIS.pdf TAWANA HARRIS 1/13/2025 Filing 4893DC EXECUTED SUBPOENA· EXECUTED SUBPOENA · JOHN DECHENE .pdf JOHN DECHENE 1/13/2025 Filing 4893DC EXECUTED SUBPOENA· EXECUTED SUBPOENA· SHARON BLUE.pd / SHARON BLUE 1/13/2025 Filing 4893DC EXECUTED SUBPOENA· EXECUTED SUBPOENA· RISHI SEEDAN .pdf RISHI SEEDAN 1/13/2025 Filing 4893DC EXECUTED RETURN EXECUTED RETURN SERVICE OF CITATION • SERVICE OF CITATION · TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF RESOURCES .pd! INFORMATION RESOURCES 1/ 14/2025 Filing 5265DC DIR S MOTION FOR DIR S MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE.pd! CONTINUANCE 1/14/2025 FIiing 5265DC MOTION TO DISMISS MOTION TO DISMISS DEFENDANTS PLEA TO THE DEFENDANTS PLEA TO THE JURISDICTION AND MOTION FOR JURISDICTION AND MOTION CONTINUANCE.pdf FOR CONTINUANCE 1/1 5/2025 FIiing 4893DC EXECUTED RETURN EXECUTED RETURN SERVICE OF CITATION • SERVICE OF CITATION • PERRY BETH .pd! PERRY BETH 1/15/2025 Filing 5265DC MOTION FOR CONTEMPT MOTION FOR CONTEMPT.pd! 1122/2025 FIiing MOTION TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION INFORMATION RESOURCES RESOURCES MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER MOTION FORA STAYING DISCOVERY.pdf PROTECTIVE ORDER STAYING DISCOVERY 1122/2025 Filing MOTION MOTION TO DISMISS MOTION TO DISMISS DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER.pd/ A PROTECTIVE ORDER 104 of 159 App. 000105 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit M1D - Bradley v DIR, D-1-GN-24-009408 Case Summary, Page 4 liIJ 4 of 6 1/22/2025 Filing MOTION TO MOTION FOR MOTION FOR REINSTATEMENT.pdf RETAIN/REINSTATE REINSTATEMENT 1/22/2025 Hearing Setting Date 1/23/2025 Filing OTHER· NOTICE NOTICE OF HEARING NOTICE OF HEARING.pd! 1/23/2025 Filing MOTION AMENDED MOTION FOR AMENDED MOTION FOR CONTEMPT.pd! CONTEMPT 1/23/2025 Filing OTHER • NOTICE DIR S AMENDED NOTICE OF DIR S AMENDED NOTICE OF HEARING.pd! HEARING 1/23/2025 Filing EXECUTED SERVICE EXECUTED RETURN EXECUTED RETURN SERVICE OF SUBPOENA· SERVICE OF SUBPOENA • SMITH , GINA.pdf SMITH, GINA 1/23/2025 Filing EXECUTED SERVICE EXECUTED RETURN EXECUTED RETURN SERVICE OF SUBPOENA · SERVICE OF SUBPOENA - PURDY. BRIAN .pdf PURDY, BR IAN 1/23/2025 Filing EXECUTED SERVICE EXECUTED RETURN EXECUTED RETURN SERVICE OF SUBPOENA - SERVICE OF SUBPOENA - FANG WILLIAMS.pd! FANG WILLIAMS 1/23/2025 Filing EXECUTED SERVICE EXECUTED RETURN EXECUTED RETURN SERVICE OF SUBPOENA - SERVICE OF SUBPOENA - PAYLOR SARAH.pdf PAYLOR SARAH 1/23/2025 Filing EXECUTED SERVICE EXECUTED RETURN EXECUTED RETURN SERVICE OF SUBPOENA - SERVICE OF SUBPOENA - FARAONE JIM.pd! FARAONE JIM 1/23/2025 Filing EXECUTED SERVICE EXECUTED RETURN EXECUTED RETURN SERVICE OF SUBPOENA - SERVICE OF SUBPOENA - JAMMER LISA.pd! JAMMER LISA 1/24/2025 Filing ORDER ORDER DENYING ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF.pd! INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 1/27/2025 Filing OTHER - NOTICE SUBPOENA-BRENT SUBPOENA - BRENT EDWARD WEBSTER, FIRST EDWARD WEBSTER, FIRST ATTORNEY GENERAL.pd/ ATTORNEY GENERAL 1/27/2025 Filing OTHER - NOTICE SUBPOENA- HOLLY EILEEN SUBPOENA- HOLLY EILEEN TAYLOR .pdf TAYLOR 1/27/2025 Filing OTHER - NOTICE SUBPOENA SIGNED & SU BPOENA SIGNED & SEALED - GERTRUDE SEALED - GERTRUDE "TRUDY" HUNTER STRASSBURGER.pdf "TRUDY" HUNTER STRASSBURG ER 1/27/2025 Filing OTHER - NOTICE SUBPOENA SIGNED & SUBPOENA SIGNED & SEALED - JOSHUA TRAVIS SEALED - JOSHUA TRAVIS "JOSH" RENO.pd! "JOSH'' RENO 1/27/2025 Filing OTHER - NOTICE SUBPOENA SIGNED & SUBPOENA SIGNED & SEALED - WARREN SEALED • WARREN KENNETH "KEN" PAXTON JR .. pdf KENNETH "KEN" PAXTON JR. 1/27/2025 Filing OTHER - NOTICE SUBPOENA SIGNED & SUBPOENA SIGNED & SEALED - RALPH MICHAEL SEALED · RALPH MICHAEL MOLINA.pdf MOLINA 1/27/2025 Filing OTHER - NOTICE SUBPOENA SIGNED & SUBPOENA SIGNED & SEALED • RICKEY DURANTE SEALED · RICKEY DURANTE JONES.pd! 105 of 159 App. 000106 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit M1E - Bradley v DIR, D-1-GN-24-009408 Case Summary, Page 5 llD sot 6 JONES 1/27/2025 Filing OTHER - NOTICE SUBPOENA SIGNED & SUBPOENA SIGNED & SEALED - JASON SEALED - JASON HUDSON HUDSON.pdf 1/27/2025 Filing OTHER - NOTICE SUBPOENA SIGNED & SUBPOENA SIGNED & SEALED - DEXTER EARL SEALED - DEXTER EARL GILFORD.pd! GILFORD 1/27/2025 Filing OTHER - NOTICE SUBPOENA SIGNED & SUBPOENA SIGNED & SEALED - KIMBERLEY ANN SEALED - KIMBERLEY ANN GDULA.pd! GDULA 1/27/2025 Filing OTHER - NOTICE SUBPOENA SIGNED & SUBPOENA SIGNED & SEALED - DELIA AILEEN SEALED - DELIA AILEEN GARZA.pd! GARZA 1/27/2025 Filing OTHER - NOTICE SUBPOENA SIGNED & SUBPOENA SIGNED & SEALED - MICHELLE E. SEALED - MICHELLE E. FERNALD.pd! FERNALD 1/27/2025 Filing OTHER - NOTICE SUBPOENA SIGNED & SUBPOENA SIGNED & SEALED - LESLIE WOOD SEALED - LESLIE WOOD DIPPELpdf DIPPEL 1/27/2025 Filing OTHER - NOTICE SUBPOENA SIGNED & SUBPOENA SIGNED & SEALED - LUCIO ALONZO SEALED - LUCIO ALONZO DEL TORO.pd! DELTORO 1/29/2025 Filing SUBPOENA SIGNED & SUBPOENA SIGNED & SUBPOENA SIGNED & SEALED - JASON SEALED SEALED - JASON ANDERSON.pdf ANDERSON 1/29/2025 Filing SUBPOENA SIGNED & SUBPOENA SIGNED & SUBPOENA SIGNED & SEAL - MICHAEL SHANE SEALED SEALED - MICHAEL SHANE ATTAWAY.pd! ATTAWAY 1/29/2025 Filing SUBPOENA SIGNED & SUBPOENA SIGNED & SEAL SUBPOENA SIGNED & SEAL - BRENT DUPRE.pdf SEALED - BRENT DUPRE 1/30/2025 Filing EXECUTED SERVICE EXECUTED RETURN EXECUTED RETURN SERVICE - LARSON SERVICE - LARSON PATRICK PATRICK.pdf 1/30/2025 Filing OTHER - NOTICE NOTICE OF HEARING NOTICE OF HEARING.pd! 1/30/2025 Filing MOTION MOTION FOR MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE.pd! CONTINUANCE 2/5/2025 FIiing MOTION MOTION TO DISMISS FOR MOTION TO DISMISS FOR WANT OF WANT OF PROSECUTION PROSECUTION.pd! 2/5/2025 Filing RESPONSE DIR S RESPONSE IN DIR S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE.pd! S MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE 2/6/2025 Filing MOTION TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION INFORMATION RESOURCES RESOURCES MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER MOTION FORA STAYING DISCOVERY.pdf PROTECTIVE ORDER STAYING DISCOVERY 2/7/2025 Hearing Setting Date 2/18/2025 Hearing Setting Date 106 of 159 App. 000107 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit M2 - Original Petition, D-1-GN-24-009408, 20NOV2024 Exhibit M2A - Original Petition, Page 1 ([] 1 of 49 Flied In Th Dfltrlct Court ofTravll County, Texa D-1-GN -24-009408 NOV 2 0 2024 JG 419TH DISTRICT COURT At H·8o PM. Velva L Price, DI ttlct Clerk ARD. BRADLEY TIIE DI TRI T RT Plaintiff 1: TEXAS DER RTME T OF I 'FORMAT/0 RESO RCES D ifenda111 ) I B DI F R lATIO hamar D. Bradley. M . MB . EIT r hamar·) has been retaliated again t in hi employment a a Databa e Aclmmi trator II with the Te as Department of Information Resour e • al 300 W. I th lreel, uile I 00 Au ·tin, T 7 70 I. a a re uh of having report d criminal a tivit . The ·tale go emmental entity and person · that ha, e r taliated against me are: Te a· Department of Information Res urce . Bnan Hurdle, IT perations Manager. and L1 a Jammer, Dire tor of P ople and Culture m e. II T TE 1 T OF F T I. Between ovemb r I th , 2 2 and Augu t 21 t, 2024. hamar wa employed a a Database dmini trator II with the Te as Department of Information Re ource in u tin, Te a . Hi dutie in that capacity require him to, am ng other thing . co rdinate the planning, de elopment, maintcnanc . and mon11onng r integrated databa e y tern ; evaluating nd re, iewing databa e architecture: and maintaining data integrity. hamar had ne er recei ed a wrillen reprimand r notice r adver"e ac11on b an upervi or or manager 107 of 159 App. 000108 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit M2B - Motion for Injunctive Relief, Page 1 ([) 1 of 19 11 /27/2024 9:07 AM Velva L. Price District Clerk Travis County SHAMAR D. BRADLEY ) IN THE 419' h DlSTRlCT cc§tjltJN-24-009408 Eva Fairchild Plaintiff ) V. ) TRAVIS COUNTY ) TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF ) INFORMATION RESOURCES ) Defendant ) Cause NO. D- I -GN-24-009408 EVlDENCE IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR INJUNCTIVE RELlEF LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit A I - Offer Letter 3 IOCT2023 , Page I ............................ .................... ....... ... .... ............. 5 Exhibit A2 - Offer Letter 3 IOCT2023 , Page 2 .. .... ..... .. ... ....... ..... .. ..... ..... .... .... .... ... .... .. .. .... ....... 6 Exhibit BI - DIR Database Administrator Job Description I 3OCT2023, Page I ..... ................. 7 Exhibit B2 - DlR Database Administrator Job Description l3OCT2023 , Page 2 ... ...... .. .... .. ..... 8 Exhibit B3 - DIR Database Administrator Job Description I 3OCT2023, Page 3 ... .... ............... 9 Exhibit B4 - DlR Database Administrator Job Description 13OCT2023, Page 4 .................... 10 Exhibit BS - DlR Database Administrator Job Description 13OCT2023, Page 5 .... .. .... ....... .... 11 Exhibit B6 - DIR Database Administrator Job Description 13OCT2023, Page 6 ... ................. 12 Exhibit B7 - DlR Database Administrator Job Description 13OCT2023, Page 7 .................... 13 Exhibit C - Shamar Bradley Termination Letter 21 AUG2024 .................................................. 14 Exhibit D - Protected Whistleblower Disclosure I 6AUG2024 ..... .................. .... ...... ...... ......... 15 Exhibit E - Business Objects Status Teams Meeting 07AUG2024 ............................ ...... ......... 16 Exhibit FI - Recent User Login Email from Guy Vachon - I 5AUG2024, Page I ................... 17 Exhibit F2 - Recent User Login Email from Guy Vachon - I 5AUG2024, Page 2 ...... .. ...... ..... 18 Page I of 18 Copy from re :SearchTX 108 of 159 App. 000109 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit M2C - Motion for Injunctive Relief, Page 2 I[] 2 of 19 II JURISDICTlON AND SUMMARY OF EVCDE CE The Texas Department of Information Resources ("DIR") is a state of Texas governmental entity. See Texas Governm ent Code§ 554.00/(5)(AJi. Shamar D. Bradley began employment at DIR on November 13th, 2023. ii Bradley was employed as a Database Administrator. iii Bradley was wrongfully terminated on August 2 1st, 2024. iv The total time of Bradley's employment at DIR was 9 months and 8 days. Therefore, he successfully completed the mandatory 9-month probationary period and is a "public employee." See Texas Governm ent Code § 554.001(4!'. Bradley hereby timely invoked action under the DIR grievance/appeal procedure relating to the cause for tennination of public employment at DIR. See Texas Government Code § 554.006(b)(J t;. Bradley was wrongfully terminated in illegal retaliation vii for refusing to engage in illicit activity and for the good faith report of a violation of a law viii by public employees at DIR. Bradley refused to be compl icit in and reported criminal violations of software copyright infringementi• by another public employee of D[R; shortly thereafter, he was terminated thus satisfying the knowledge-timing test. See 17 U11ited States Code § 506(a)(l)(B). (e); see also / 8 United States Code §23J9(b)(f)_ DIR fa il ed to display notice of whistleblower rights in the recently acqui red Adult Day Care (ADC) facility.• See Texas Government Code § 554.009(a). Notwithstanding aforementioned lack of notice, Bradley's burden of proof has been met with clear and convincing evidence•i and the allegation of retaliatory termination is presumed to be true. See Texas Government Code § 554.004(a). xii DIR sovereign irnmunity•iii is to be waived and abolished and relief'iv is being sought in the appropriate jurisdiction.Xv See Texas Government Code§ 554.0035 . See also Texas Governm ent Code§ 554.00J(a)-(c). See also Texas Governm ent Code§ 554.007(a). Page 2 of 18 Copy from re:SearchTX 109 of 159 App. 000110 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit M2D - Motion for Injunctive Relief, Page 3 ID 3 ot 19 Ill CITATIONS AN D ENDNOTES i See Texas Government Code§ 554.001(5/(A/ - State governmenta l entity" means: a board, commission, department, office, or other agency in the executive branch of state government, created under the constitution or a statute of the state, including an institution of higher education, as defined by Section 61.003, Education Code ii See Exh ibit A 1-A2 - Offer Letter 31 OCT2023, Pages 1-2 iii See Exh ibit B 1-B7 - DIR Database Adm inistrator Job Description 13OCT2023. Pages 1-7 iv See Exhibit C - Shamar Bradley Terminati on Letter 21 AUG2024 vSee Texas Government Code 1~ 554.001(4) - "Public employee" means an employee or appoi nted officer other than an independent contractor who is paid to perform services for a state governmenta l enti ty. vi See Texas Go vemment Code § 554.006(b)(I) - (use of grievance or appeal procedures) "A public employee must initiate action under the grievance or appea l procedures of the employing state governmental entity relating to suspension or termination of employment or adverse personnel action before su ing under this chapter. The employee must invoke the applicable grievance or appeal procedures not later than the 90th day after the date on wh ich the alleged violation of thi s chapter occu rred. vii See Texas Government Code § 554.002(a) 01)(1) - (reta liation prohibited for reporting vio lation of law) A state governmental entity may not terminate the emp loyment ofa public employee who in good faith reports a violation of law by the employing governmenta l entity or another public emp loyee to an appropriate law enforcement authority. In this section, a report is made to an appropriate law enforcement authority if the authority is a part of a state governmenta l entity that the employee in good fa ith believe is authorized to regulate under or enforce the law alleged to be violated in the report. viii See Texas Government Code§ 554.00/(J)(A) - In this chapter "Law" means a state or federal statute. ix See / 7 United States Code § 506(al(I )(Bl (el - (Crimina l offense ) Crimina l Infringement mean any person who wi ll fully infringes a copyright shall be punished as provided under section 23 19 of tit le 18, if the in fringemen t was committed by th e reproduction or di tribution, including by electron ic mean , during any 180- day period, of I or more copyrighted works, wh ich have a total retail value of more than $ 1,000. (e) Fa lse Representation - any person who knowingly makes a false representation of a material fact in th e application for copyri ght registrntion provided for by section 409, or in any written statement filed in connection with the application, shall be fined not more than $2,500. See also 18 United States Code§ 23J9(bl(I I - (Crim inal infringement of a copyright) Any person who commi ts an offense under section 506(a)( l )(A) of title 17 shall be imprisoned not more than 5 years, or fined in the amount set fo rth in th is title, or both, if the offense consists of the reproduction or distribution, includ in g by electronic mean , during any 180-day period of I or more copyrigh ted works whi ch have a tota l retai l value of more than $2,500. x See Texas Government Code§ 554.009(0/ - (notice to emp loyees) A state governmental entity shall inform its emp loyees of their rights under thi s chapter by posting a sign in a prominent location in the workpl ace. xi See Exhibi t D - Protected Whistleblower Disclosure I 6AUG2024 xi i See Texas Govemment Code§ 554.004(a) - (burden of proof; presumption) A public employee who sues under this chapter ha the burden of proof, except that if the termination ofa public emp loyee occurs not later than the 90th day after the date on which the employee reports a violation of law, the termination is presumed to be because the employee made the report. xiii See Texas Government Code S 554.0035 - (waiver of immunity) A public employee who all eges a vio lation of this chapter may sue the employing state governmenta l enti ty for the relief provided by this chapter. Sovereign immunity is waived and abo lished to the extent ofliability for the relief allowed under this chapter for a vio lation of this chapter. Page 3 of 18 Copy from re :SearchTX 110 of 159 App. 000111 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit M2E - Motion for Injunctive Relief, Page 4 ([] 4 of 19 ,iv See Texas Government Code 6 554.00J{a)-(c/ - (relief availab le to public employee) (a) A public employee whose emp loyment is suspended or terminated or who is subjected to an adverse personnel action in vio lation of Section 554.002 is entitl ed to sue fo r: injunctive relief; actua l damages; court costs; and reasonable attorney fees. In addition to relief under Subsection (a), a public employee whose employment is terminated in violation of this chapter is en titled to: reinstatement to the employee's former position or an equi valent position; compensation for wages lost during the period of termination; and reinstatement of fringe benefits and seniority rights lost because of the terminat ion. In a suit under this chapter agai nst an employing state governmenta l entity, a public employee may not recover compensatory damages for future pecuniary losses, emotional pain, suffe ring, inconvenience, mental anguish, loss of enjoyment of life, and other nonpecuniary losses in an amount that exceeds $200,000, if the emp loying state governmenta l ent ity has more than 200 and fewer than 501 employee in each of20 or more calendar week in the calendar year in which the suit is fi led or in the preceding year. " See Texas Government Code~ 554.00 l (a) - A public emp loyee of a state governmental entity may sue under this chapter in a di trict court of the county in which the cau e of action arises or in a district co urt of Travis County. Page 4 of 18 Copy from re:SearchTX 111 of 159 App. 000112 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit M3 - Evidence in Support of Motion for Injunctive Relief, Page 14 Exhibit - hamar Bradley Tennination Lette r 2 IAUG2024 IR Agency Memorandum To: Shamar Bradley From: Brian Hurd le Date: August 21, 2024 Subject: Termination of Employm nt This memorandum is to inform you that your employm nt is terminated effective today, August 21 , 2024, for misconduct. I Texas Department of Information Resources I dir,texas.gov I #DIRislT @TexasDIR I Page 1 Page 14 of 18 112 of 159 App. 000113 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit M4 - Order Denying Motion for Injunctive Relief ([]1of1 01/24/202512:31:42 PM Velva L. Price District Clerk Travis County D-1-GN -24-009408 CAUSE NO. O-1--GN-24-009408 SHAMAR 0. BRADLEY § IN THE DISTRICT COURT Plaintiff, § § V. § TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS § TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION § RESOURCES § Defendant. § 419TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF ON THIS DAY came to be heard the Motion for Injunctive Relief filed by Plaintiff Shamar Bradley. After due consideration of the law and the filings of the parties, the Court DENIES said motion. SIGNED this2$ day of ck,,"'1,...,. , 2025. M HON. ~ YA GUERRA GAMBLE 459TH DISTRICT JUDGE 113 of 159 App. 000114 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit M4A - Order Denying Motion for Injunctive Relief Email, 27JAN2025 Gmail Shamar 0. Bradley <[email protected]> This is a Signed Order notification from the Travis County District Clerk's Office for Case Number D-1-GN-24-009408 [email protected] <[email protected]> Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 8:55 AM To: [email protected] This is a notification that a signed Order has been accepted by the Travis County District Clerk's Office. CauseNumber: D-1-GN-24-009408 Date Accepted : 1/27/2025 8:55 :20 AM Document Information : ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF Please do not reply to this email. This message was automatically generated by The Travis County District Clerk's office If you need technical assistance, please call: 512-854-9457 This email may have been generated by a computer program or a copy machine on behalf of another Travis County user. Please verify the validity of the message or the identity of the sender before taking any action if this email is unexpected or appears suspicious. This electronic mail message , including any attachments , may be confidential or privileged under applicable law. This email is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed . If you are not the intended recipient of this email , you are notified that any use, dissemination , distribution , copying , disclosure or any other action taken in relation to the content of this email including any attachments is strictly prohibited . If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this email, including secure destruction of any printouts. 627368.pdf 82K 114 of 159 App. 000115 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit M5 - DIR’s Amended Plea to the Jurisdiction, 09JAN2025 Exhibit M5A - DIR’s Amended Plea to the Jurisdiction, Page 2 Plaintiffs claims should be dismissed because he does not present a viable whistleblower claim and does not plead facts to show the waiver of sovereign immunity for whistleblower claims applies in this instance. II. STANDARD OF REVIEW A plea to the jurisdiction challenges the court's subject matter jurisdiction to decide a case. See Bland Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Blue, 34 S.W.3d 54 7. 553-54 (Tex. 2000). A plaintiff has the burden to establish subject matter jurisdiction. Id. at 446. The existence of subject matter jurisdiction is a question of law for the court. See City of Dallas u. Carbajal, 324 S.W.3d 537, 538 (Tex. 2010). Where the pleadings and evidence before the court fail to show subject matter jurisdiction, the court must grant a plea to the jurisdiction and dismiss the case. See Tex. Dep 't of Parks & Wildlife v. Miranda, 133 S.W.3d 217. 226-28 (Tex. 2004). The purpose of a plea to the jurisdiction "is to defeat a cause of action without regard to whether the claims asserted have merit." Blue at 554. Ill ARGUMENTS AND AUTHORITIES In this case, the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction because Plaintiff cannot overcome the sovereign immunity of DIR. As a result, Plaintiffs claims should be dismissed. A. Sovereign Immunity Deprives this Court of Jurisdiction. In a plea to the jurisdiction, sovereign immunity may be properly raised because it "deprives a trial court of jurisdiction over lawsuits in which the state ... or governmental units have been sued, unless the state consents to suit." Mission Consol. Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Garcia, 372 S.W.3d 629, 635-36 (Tex. 2012); see also 115 of 159 App. 000116 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit M5B - DIR’s Amended Plea to the Jurisdiction, Page 3 Miranda, 133 S.W.3d at 224; Dallas Cnty. Mental Health v. Bossley, 968 S.W.2d 339, 341 (Tex. 1998). A suit against the State or its agencies is barred by sovereign immunity absent clear and unambiguous legislative consent, and sovereign immunity deprives a trial court of subject matter jurisdiction. Tex. Dept. of Parks and Wildlife v. Miranda, 133 S.W.3d 217, 224-225 (Tex. 2004); Tex. Dep't. of Transp. v. Miller, 8 S.W.3d 636, 638 (Tex. 1999). Sovereign immunity bars a suit against the State unless the legislature expressly consents to the suit. Texas Nat. Res. Conservation Comm'n. v. IT-Davy, 74 S.W.3d 849, 853 (Tex. 2002). B. DIR is entitled to sovereign immunity. DIR "is an agency of the state" by statute. TEX. Gov. CODE §2054.004. As such, it is entitled to sovereign immunity. C. Plaintiffs claims are barred by sovereign immunity. "A plaintiff has the burden to affirmatively demonstrate the trial court's jurisdiction ...That burden encompasses the burden of establishing a waiver of sovereign immunity in suits against the government". Town of Shady Shores v. Swanson, 590 S.W.3d 544, 550 (Tex. 2019). Unless the plaintiff pleads a viable claim, sovereign immunity is retained for government defendants. See Andrade v. NAACP of Austin, 345 S.W.3d I, 11 (Tex. 2011). Here, Plaintiff may not avail himself of any waiver of sovereign immunity because his whistleblower claim is not viable. 116 of 159 App. 000117 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit M5C - DIR’s Amended Plea to the Jurisdiction, Page 4 The Supreme Court of Texas has made it clear that "the statutory elements in Section 554.002(a) are 'jurisdictional when necessary to ascertain whether plaintiff has adequately alleged a violation of the [Whistleblower Act].' " Mission Consol. Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Garcia, 372 S.W.3d 629, 636 (Tex. 2012), citing State v. Lueck, 290 S.W.3d 876, 880 (Tex.2009). By statute, a plaintiff wishing to bring a whistleblower claim must have reported the alleged violation of law to "an appropriate law enforcement authority." See TEX. Gov. CODE §554.002(a). The statute defines "an appropriate law enforcement authority" as one that the employee in good faith believes is authorized to: (1) regulate under or enforce the law alleged to be violated in the report, or (2) investigate or prosecute a violation of law. See TEX. Gov. CODE §554.002(b)(l) and (2). The Texas Supreme Court has held that "[t]o satisfy the Act's requirements, a report must be made to (1) an individual person who possesses the law-enforcement powers specified under the Act, or (2) someone who , like a police-intake clerk, works for a governmental arm specifically charged with exercising such powers." Texas Dep't of Hum. Servs. u. Okoli, 440 S.W.3d 611 , 617 (Tex. 2014). The Supreme Court of Texas established that internal agency reports to a supervisor were not whistleblower reports to an appropriate law enforcement authority if the agency itself generally lacked authority to investigate or prosecute criminal conduct or otherwise regulate conduct outside the agency involved. Id. , at 618. Here, Plaintiff observed what he described a s a "mistake" related to use of copyrighted software. He specifically stated on two occasions 'We are mistakenly 117 of 159 App. 000118 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit M5D - DIR’s Amended Plea to the Jurisdiction, Page 5 using one license key for two machines." Pl.'s Amd. Petition at 11. Plaintiff made these statements in a group chat on Microsoft Teams to various coworkers in DIR, none of whom are law enforcement authorities. Pl.'s Amd. Petition at 12. In his Amended Petition, Plaintiff judicially admits that he reported the alleged violation only to his coworkers at DIR. Pl.'s Amd. Pet. at 11-12. Plaintiff provides no evidence that he reported his concern to any actual law enforcement authority, opting instead to merely report the alleged violation to his supervisors and coworkers. DIR, as an agency, has no law enforcement duties or powers. SEE TEX. Gov. CODE §2054.051. Moreover, a report to his DIR manager is insufficient, because a governmental entity is obligated to comply with laws does not mean they are a law enforcement authority, and Plaintiffs manager is (at most) "a law-compliance authority, but he was not a law-enforcement authority'' sufficient to meet the requirements of the Whistleblower Act, and dismissal based on sovereign immunity is appropriate. See Univ. of Texas Sw. Med. Ctr. at Dallas v. Gentilello, 398 S.W.3d 680, 685 (Tex. 2013). As a result, "[r]eporting to [the manager] was not protected by the Act." Id., at 687. Plaintiff did not report the alleged violation of law to anyone with "authority to investigate or prosecute criminal conduct or otherwise regulate conduct outside the agency involved." Okoli, 440 S.W.3d at 618. As a former employee of DIR, Plaintiff would know, based on his training and experience with the agency, that DIR is not a law enforcement authority and does not have prosecutorial powers in any sense. As a result, Plaintiff did not trigger the protections of the Whistleblower Act. 118 of 159 App. 000119 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit M5E - DIR’s Amended Plea to the Jurisdiction, Page 6 Under Andrade, DIR retains its sovereign immunity because Plaintiffs claim is not viable. As a result, Plaintiffs claims remain barred by sovereign immunity and should be dismissed accordingly. IV. CONCLUSION AND PRAYER For the foregoing reasons, DIR respectfully requests this Court to grant this Plea to the Jurisdiction, to dismiss Plaintiffs claims in their entirety, and to grant DIR such other relief to which it may be entitled. DATE: January 9, 2025 Respectfully submitted. KEN PAXTON Attorney General of Texas BRENT WEBSTER First Assistant Attorney General RALPH MOLINA Deputy First Assistant Attorney General JAMES LLOYD Deputy Attorney General for Civil Litigation KIMBERLY GDULA Chief for General Litigation Division /s/ Denver Burris DENVER BURRIS Assistant Attorney General Texas Bar No. 24138940 Office of the Attorney General General Litigation Division P.O. Box 12548, Capitol Station Austin, Texas 78711-2548 (512) 475-4105 I FAX: (512) 320-0667 119 of 159 App. 000120 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit M6A - Email to Court Administrator’s Office, 03JAN2025, Page 1 From: shamar bradley <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, January 3, 2025 4 :01 PM To: tc.civildistrictannounce <TC .CivilAnnouncements@traviscountytx .gov> Subject: [CAUTION EXTERNAL] hearing announcement D-1 -GN -24-009408 AUTION , This email Is from OUTSIDE Travis County. Links or attachments may be dangerous. Chck the Phish A lert button bove 11 you think this email is malicious . hearing announcement on the Motion for Injunctive Relief for cause D-1-GN-24-009408 (Sha mar D. Bradley vs . Texas Department of Information Resources , Whistleblower Retaliation Complaint). Regards, _ _Isl _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Shamar D. Bradley, MS, MBA, EIT 10109 Lake Creek Parkway, #1 70682 Austin, TX 78717 This electronic mail message, including any attachments, may be confidential or privileged under applicable law. This email is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you are notified that any use, dissemination, distribution , copying , disclosure or any other action taken in relation to the content of this email including any attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the orig inal and any copy of this email, including secure destruction of any printouts. 120 of 159 App. 000121 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit M6B - Email to Court Administrator’s Office, 03JAN2025, Page 2 CIVIL DISTRICT COURT A OUNCEMENTFORM THIS FORM MUST BE FILLED OUT I FULL AND RECEIVED NO LATER THAN 5:00 P.M. 0 WED ESDA Y OF THE WEEK PRIOR IN ORDER FOR THE ANNOUNCEME T TO BE PROC ESSED. ANNOUNCEMENT MUST BE E-MAILED TO: TC.CivilDistrictAnnounce traviscountytx.gov Date and Time of Setting: January 22nd, 2025 at 2pm Cause Number: D-1-GN-24-009408 Case Style: Shamar D. Bradley vs. Texas Department of Information Resources Hearing(s )/Trial(s) that are set: _ _M_o_t_io_n_ fo_ r_ ln_ju_ n_c_t_iv_e_ R_e_li_e_f _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Name/Contact Information for any interpreter appearing on this setting: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ ****All parties have conferred and we: D AGREE that thi s hearing/trial can proceed REMOTELY FILL OUT lN FULL THE AGREEMENT TO REMOTE PROCEED! GS WHICH IS LOCATED AT THE E D OF THIS ANNOUNCEME T FORM . IO ATURES OF ALL SELF-REPRESENTED PARTIES AND ATTORNEYS OF RECORD MUST BE INCLUDED . ATTA H TH IS FORM WHEN ANNOU CING WITH THE COURT ADM I ISTRATOR' S OFFICE. fNCOMPLETE FORMS WILL OT BE CONSIDERED . (PLEASE OTE TBA T TlfE CO RT WILL ADVISE O ROW THE REARING WILL PROCEED PRIOR TO THE HEARING. LESS OTHERWISE ORDERED OR I STRUCTED BY THE CO RT I N WHI CH THE CASE IS ASSIG ED, PROCEED! G WILL OCC RI '-PER~O ) Time Estimate (TOT AL TIME FOR ENTIRE HE ARI G OR TRIAL): _ 1_ h_o _u _r _ _ __ For Jiuy docket cases and Family and Civil Monday Long docket cases only: Has Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) been comp leted or waived by the Court?: Yes:D_; No:D_(Jf ot, Reason?_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _~ FOR FAMILY LAW CASES ONLY: ls/Are Hearing(s) Still Necessary?: Yes:D_; o:0_ (Ifno, provide reason: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __, District Judge being requested?: Yes: D_; No: O Has an Agreement been filed waiving right to De ovo?: Yes:O ; No:_-~-- Request for Record to be made of Proceeding?: Yes: O • No:._O _ _,____ RE : [CAUTION EXTERNAL] hearing announcement D-1-GN-24-009408 1 message tc.civildistrictannounce <[email protected]> Fri, Jan 3, 2025 at 4:09 PM To: shamar bradley <[email protected]>, "tc.civildistrictannounce" <[email protected]> Mr. Bradley The announcement cannot be accepted as it is too early because your hearing is set for January 22, 2025 . The ready announcement period is ONE week prior Monday, Tuesday or Wednesday by 5:00 p.m. Please send your announcement at that time. Thank you , Court Administrator's office Travis County Civil & Family Courts 122 of 159 App. 000123 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit M8 - Lack of Notice of Whistleblower Rights Sign at WPC Gmail Shamar D. Bradley <[email protected]> [Records Center] Public Information Request:: R004019-010925 1 message Texas DIR Public Records Center <[email protected]> Fri , Jan 24, 2025 at 4 :55 PM To : "shamar.d.bradley@gmail .com" <shamar.d.bradley@gmail .com> --- Please respond above this line -- Powered by Gov 01 /24/202- RE: PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST of January 09, 2025, Reference # R0040I 9-0 I0925 Dear Shamar Bradley: DlR received a public information request from you on January 09, 2025 . You requested : " Date of posti ng and location of Notice of Whistleblower ri ghts in WPC (300 W 15th St. Suite 1300, Austin, TX 78701 )" Thank you for your req ue t. The Texas Department of ln forma tion Resources does not have any document responsive to your request. Regards, Gloria C. Rivera Legal Assistant To monitor the progress or update this request please log into the Public Records Center Po rl!d b} Gov 123 of 159 App. 000124 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit M9 - Lack of Notice of Whistleblower Rights Sign at ADC Gmail Shamar D. Bradley <[email protected]> [Records Center] Public Information Request:: R004020-010925 1 message Texas DIR Public Records Center <[email protected]:> Fri , Jan 24, 2025 at 4 :58 PM To: "shamar.d [email protected]" <shamar.d .bradley@gmail .com> --- Please respond above this line --- r«I by Gov 01 /24/2025 RE: PUBLIC RECORD REQUEST of January 09, 2025, Reference # R004020-0 I 0925 Dear Shamar Bradley: DIR received a public information request from you on January 09, 2025. You requested : "Date ofposti.ng and location of otice ofWhistleblower rights in ADC (9500 metric boulevard , Austin , TX 78758)'" Thank you for yourrequest. The Texas Department of Information Re ow·ces does not have anydocument responsive to your request. Regard , Gloria C. Rivera Legal Assistant To monitor the progress or update this request please log into the Public Records Center Pu eredby Gov 124 of 159 App. 000125 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit M10 - Lack Training of Whistleblower Rights Gmail Shamar D. Bradley <shamar.d.bradley@gmai l.com> (Records Center) Public Information Request :: R004021-010925 1 message Texas DIR Pu blic Records Center <[email protected]> Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 5:31 PM To: "[email protected]" <shamar.d.bradley@gmail .com> --- Please respond above this line -- 01 /24/2025 RE: PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST of January 09 2025, Reference # R00402 I-O I 0925 Dear Shamar Bradley: DIR received a public information reque t from you on January 09, 2025. You req uested: " Date of training, completi on certificate and training materia ls for whistl eblower rights for Li a Jammer, Brian Hurdle, and Shamar Bradley" DIR does not have a training specificall y designated as the whistleblower ri ght tra ining as specified by yo ur request. As such, DLR has no responsive documents and your request is now closed . Regards, Christi Koenig Brisky Assistant General Counsel To monitor the progress or update this request please log into the Public Records Center Po I by Gov 125 of 159 App. 000126 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit M11A - Email to Court Administrator’s Office, 30JAN2025 - 1, Page 1 Gmail shamar bradley <[email protected]> Hearing announcement - D-1-GN-24-009408 1 message shamar bradley <[email protected]> Thu , Jan 30, 2025 at 12:11 PM To: TC [email protected] Hi, Just sending this hearing announcement in case the defense, who originally scheduled the hearing for 07feb2025 didn't already send it:) . Shamar Hearing announcement 07feb2025.pdf 157K 126 of 159 App. 000127 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit M11B - Email to Court Administrator’s Office, 30JAN2025 - 1, Page 2 CNIL DISTRICT COURT ANNOUNCEMENT FORM THI S FORM MUST BE FILLED OUT IN FULL AND RECEIVED NO LATER THA 5:00 P.M. ON WED ESDA Y OF THE WEEK PRIOR rN ORD ER FOR THE ANNOUNCEMENT TO BE PROCESSED. ANNOUNCEMENT MUST BE E-MAIL ED TO : [email protected] Date and Time of Setting: February 7th, 2025 at 9am Cause Number: D-I-GN-24-009408 Case Style: Shamar D. Bradley vs. Texas Department of Information Resources Hearing(s)/TriaJ(s) that are set:_M _ o_ti_o_n_f_o_r _C_o_n_t_e_m~p_t_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Name/Contact Information fo r any interpreter appearing on this setting: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ **** All parties have co nferred and we: 0 AGREE that this hearing/trial can proceed REMOTELY FILL OUT 1N FULL THE AGREEMENT TO REMOTE PROCEEDING WHICH I LOCATED AT THE EN D OF THIS ANNOUNCEMENT FORM. SIGNATURES OF ALL SELF-REPRESE TED PARTIES AND ATTORNEYS OF RECORD MUST BE INCLUDED. ATTACH TH IS FORM WHEN ANNOUNCING WITH TJJ E COURT ADMINlSTRATOR'S OFF ICE. INCOMPLETE FORM WILL NOT BE CON ID ERED. (PLEAS E OT E THAT THE COURT WILL ADVIS E O HOW THE HEARING WILL PROCE ED PRIOR TO THE HEARING . U, LESS OTHERWISE ORDERED OR I STR CTE D BY THE COURT I WHICH THE CASE IS ASSIG:'IE D PROCEE DING WI LL OCCU R I -PERSON) Time Estimate (TOT AL TIME FOR ENTIRE HEARING OR TRIAL): _ 1_ h_o _u _r _ _ __ For Jury docket cases and Family and Civil Monday Long docket cases only: Has Alternative Dispute Reso luti on (A DR) been compl eted or wa ived by th e Court?: Yes:0 _; No:D_(IfNot, Reason?_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _~ FOR FAMILY LAW CASES ONLY: Is/Are Hearing(s) Still Necessary?: Yes:0 _· No:0__ (lfno, provide reason:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __, District Judge being requ ested?: Yes: 0_; No:O Has an Agreement been fil ed waiving right to De Novo?: Yes: O ; No:_._O_..____ Request for Record to be made of Proceeding?: Yes:O ; No:.... O_..._____ CAUTION : This email is from OUTSIDE Travis County. Links or attachments may be dangerous. Click the Phish Alert button above if you think this email is malicious . It's supposed to be 2 hours , sorry 128 of 159 App. 000129 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit M14 - Email from Court Administrator’s Office, 30JAN2025 - 1 Gmai shamar bradley <[email protected]> RE: [CAUTION EXTERNAL] Re: Hearing announcement - D-1-GN-24-009408 tc.civildistrictannounce Thu , Jan 30, 2025 at 1:58 <[email protected]> PM To: shamar bradley <shamarb [email protected]> Good afternoon Shamar, The max amount of time you can set for this docket is 15 minutes. Therefore, majority of the settings on this date will not be heard by the judge. Please call our office for further information and to advise of which ones you would like to remove at (512) 854-2484 option zero. Best, Court Admini Lrator s Office Travis County Civil District Courts PO. Box 1748 Austin, TX 78767 This electronic mail me sage, including any attachments, may be confidential or privileged under 129 of 159 App. 000130 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit M15 - Email to Court Administrator’s Office, 30JAN2025 - 3 shamar bradley <[email protected]> Re: [CAUTION EXTERNAL] Re: Hearing announcement - D-1-GN-24-009408 shamar bradley <[email protected]> Thu , Jan 30, 2025 at 3:23 PM To: "tc.civildistrictannounce" <[email protected]> Hi, The court administrator agreed to a 2 hour hearing on February 7th. 130 of 159 App. 000131 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit M16 - Email from Court Administrator’s Office, 30JAN2025 - 2 shamar bradley <[email protected]> RE: [CAUTION EXTERNAL] Re: Hearing announcement - D-1-GN-24-009408 1 message tc.civildistrictannounce Thu , Jan 30 , 2025 at 3:27 <TC. CivilAnnouncements@traviscou ntytx.gov> PM To: shamar bradley <shamarb [email protected]> This was set in error and therefore, will not be able to proceed . The max amount of time allowed is 15 minutes. Best, Court Admini. trator :~· Office Travis County Civil District Courts PO. Box 1748 Au tin, TX 78767 This electronic mail mes age, including any attachments, may be confidential or privileged under applicable law. This email is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you are notified that any use, dissemination distribution, copying, disclosure or any other action taken in relation to the content of this email including any attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received thi 131 of 159 App. 000132 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit M17 - Email from Court Administrator’s Office, 30JAN2025 - 3 On Thu , Jan 30, 2025 at 3:24 PM tc.civildistrictannounce <TC .CivilAnnouncements@ traviscountytx.gov> wrote: That docket only allows for a max of 15 minutes. Best, Court Administrator :~ Office Travi County Civil District Courts P.O. Box 1748 Austin, TX 78767 Thi s electroni c mail message, includ ing any attachme nts, may be confi dentia l or pri vi leged under applicable law. This email is intended solely fo r the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipien t of this email, you are notified that any use, dis emination, di tribution copying, di sclosure or any other action taken in re lati on to the content of thi s email including any attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have rece ived thi email in en-or, please noti fy the send er immediately an d permanently delete the ori ginal and any copy of thi email , inc luding secure de tructioo of any pri ntouts. 132 of 159 App. 000133 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit M18 - Email to Court Administrator’s Office, 30JAN2025 - 4 From: shamar bradley <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2025 3:26 PM To: tc.civildistrictannounce <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [CAUTION EXTERNAL] Re: Hearing announcement - D-1-GN-24-009408 CAUTION: This email is from OUTSIDE Travis County. Links or attachments may be dangerous. Click the Phish Alert button above if you think this email is malicious. I can send you the audio recording of the court administrator agreeing to the 2 hour hearing. Exhibit M19 - Email to Court Administrator’s Office, 30JAN2025 - 5 From: shamar bradley <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2025 3:39 PM To: tc.civi ldistrictannounce < [email protected]> Subject: Re: [CAUTION EXTERNAL] Re: Hearing announcement - D-1-GN-24-009408 G~Yi t9!-'J l~J.~~ ~g ~IJltt~J~~9 ~ /J.~ 19..tl.'?l'-!i~)f O u.~ty!..,~~n~~:p t-~!t.~w~.n:.~~t~.:~ ~x,pj ., dangerous. Click the Phish Alert button above Wy6u\think ,this!email 1is', malici6us':•.:a,....& - Please provide the name , address, and phone number of the supervisor for the announcements division. 133 of 159 App. 000134 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit M20 - Email from Court Administrator’s Office, 30JAN2025 - 4 Gmail shamar bradley <[email protected]> RE: [CAUTION EXTERNAL] Re: Hearing announcement - D-1-GN-24-009408 tc.civildistrictannounce Thu, Jan 30, 2025 at 3:41 <TC. [email protected]> PM To: shamar bradley <[email protected]> Good afternoon Shamar, We attempted to contact you earlier regarding this to further explain and left a detailed voicemail. Please contact us at (5 12) 854-2484 option zero for further information . Best, Court Administrator's Office Travis County Civil District Courts PO. Box 1748 Austin, TX 78767 This electronic mail message, including any attachments may be confidential or privileged under applicable law. This email is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you are notified that any use 134 of 159 App. 000135 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit M21 - Email from Court Administrator’s Office, 30JAN2025 - 5 From: shamar bradley <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2025 3:26 PM To: tc.civildistrictannounce <TC [email protected]> Subject: Re: [CAUTION EXTERNAL] Re : Hearing announcement - D-1-GN-24- 009408 CAUTION : This email is from OUTSIDE Travis County. Links or attachments may be angerous. Click the Phish Alert button above if you think this email is malicious. I can send you the audio recording of the court administrator agreeing to the 2 hour hearing . 135 of 159 App. 000136 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit M22 - Order Granting Defendant’s Plea to the Jurisdiction I[] l of I 02/28/2025 05 :17:27 PM Velva L. Price District Clerk Travis County D-1-GN-24-009408 CAUSE NO. D-1-GN-24-009408 SHAMAR D. BRADLEY § IN THE DISTRICT COURT Plaintiff, § § V. § TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS § TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION § RESOURCES § Defendant. § 419TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT ORDER GRANTING DIR'S AMENDED PLEA TO THE JURISDICTION ON THIS DAY came to be heard the Am nded Plea to the Jurisdiction filed by Defendant Texa Department of Information Resources (''DIR"). After due consideration of the law and th filings of the parties, the Court finds said plea meritorious. It is therefore , ORDERED that Dill's Plea to th Juri diction is GRANTED. It i further ORDERED that Plaintiffs claims against DIR are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE in their entirety. SIGNED this 28th day of F ebruary, 2025. r N. JESSICA MAN RUM 200THDISTRICT JUDGE 136 of 159 App. 000137 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit M23 - Order Granting DIR’s Plea to the Jurisdiction Email, 03MAR2025 Gmail Shamar D. Bradley <[email protected]> This is a Signed Order notification from the Travis County District Clerk's Office for Case Number D-1-GN-24-009408 [email protected] <TC [email protected]> Mon , Mar 3, 2025 at 12:06 PM To: SHAMAR.D [email protected] This is a notification that a signed Order has been accepted by the Travis County District Clerk's Office. CauseNumber: D-1-GN-24-009408 Date Accepted : 3/3/2025 12:06 :21 PM Document Information : ORDER GRANTING DIR'S AMENDED PLEA TO THE JURISDICTION Please do not reply to this email. This message was automatically generated by The Travis County District Clerk's office If you need technical assistance, please call : 512-854-9457 This email may have been generated by a computer program or a copy machine on behalf of another Travis County user. Please verify the validity of the message or the identity of the sender before taking any action if this email is unexpected or appears suspicious. This electronic mail message , includ ing any attachments , may be confidential or privileged under applicable law. This email is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed . If you are not the intended recipient of this email , you are notified that any use, dissemination , distribution , copying , disclosure or any other action taken in relation to the content of this email including any attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this email , including secure destruction of any printouts. tJ 639523.pdf 217K 137 of 159 App. 000138 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit N1 - Brickman V. OAG Final Order, 04APR2025, Page 1 7 04/04/2025 04 :32 :12 PM Velva L. Price District Clerk Travis County D-1 -GN-20-006861 CAUSE NO. D-1-GN-20-006861 JAMES BLAKE BRICKMAN, § IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF DAVID MAXWELL, § J. MARK PENLEY, and § RYANM. VASSAR § Plaintiffs, § § ~ § TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS § OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL § OF THE STA TE OF TEXAS § § § Defendant. § 250 th JUDICIAL DISTRICT FINAL JUDGMENT The trial of this case took place on February 20 and March 26, 2025. All matters, legal and factual, were submitted to the Court for its determination. The Court heard evidence from Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs moved for judgment based on the sworn pleadings and evidence, and the Court announced its decision for Plaintiffs. In support of its decision, the Court makes the following findings: On September 30, 2020, Plaintiffs were all public employees employed by the Defendant, the Office of the Attorney General of the State of Texas ("Defendant" or "OAG") in OAG' s office in Austin, Travis County, Texas. OAG had more than 500 employees in each of 20 or more calendar weeks in 2019 and 2020. On September 30, 2020, Plaintiffs in good.faith reported to appropriate law enforcement authorities violations of law by Attorney General Ken Paxton, other employees of the Office of the Attorney General, and the Office of the Attorney General. Plaintiffs reported to law enforcement that, over the course of 2019 and 2020, Ken Paxton abused his office, obstructed 138 of 159 App. 000139 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit N2 - Brickman V. OAG Final Order, 04APR2025, Page 2 justice, and accepted bribes from ate Paul. Plaintiffs reported that Paxton and OAG deployed the power of OAG and directed employees and resources of OAG spanning multiple functions and departments, to improperly interfere in the civil disputes and criminal matters of Nate Paul. Plaintiffs also reported that Paxton and OAG engaged in these acts not only to benefit Paul, but to benefit Paxton personally because of the financial, reputational and personal relationships between Paul and Paxton, relationships Paul and Paxton sought to conceal. These reports were made in good faith. On October 1, 2020, Plaintiffs notified Paxton and the Office of the Attorney General of the reports to law enforcement. The Office of the Attorney General then retaliated against Plaintiffs by first attempting to harass and intimidate them, placing some of the Plaintiffs on investigative leave, and then by terminating their employment. OAG terminated Plaintiff James Blake Brick.man's employment on October 20, 2020, Ryan Vassar's employment on November 17, 2020, David Maxwell's employment on November 2, 2020, and Mark Penley's employment on November 2, 2020. Plaintiffs made their reports to law enforcement in good faith, and OAG terminated each of the Plaintiffs because of their reports to law enforcement in violation of the Texas Whistleblower Act. In addition to evidence establishing that OAG terminated Plaintiffs because of their reports to law enforcement, it is presumed that OAG took the adverse employment actions because OAG terminated each Plaintiff within 90 days of their reports. 1 Each of the Plaintiffs initiated action under the grievance or appeal procedures of the OAG before filing suit and not later than the 90th day after the date on which the violations of the Texas 1 See TEX. GOVT. CODE §554.004(a). ~apps CENTRALIZED ACCOUNTING 6 PAYROLL/PERSONNEL SYSTEM G LEN HEGA R • T EXA COMPTROLL ER OF PU BL IC ACCO U NTS Welcome. You are- not signed In. I My Account Options )!r My Job Cart I Sign In ;. Job Search My Jobpage Basic Search Jobs Matching My Profile App ly Online Add to My Job Cart Job Description Project Mgr Ill (00049052) Organization: DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION RESOURCES Primary Location: Texas-Austin Work Locations: Network Security Operation CTR 1001 W NORTH LOOP Austin 78756 Job: Business and Financial Operations Employee Status: Regular Schedule: Full-time Standard Hours Per Week: 40.00 State Job Code: 1560 Salary Admin Plan: B Grade: 24 Salary (Pay Basis): 7,500.00 - 7,916.67 (Monthly) 142 of 159 App. 000143 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit O2 - DIR Project Manager III Job Announcement, 28APR2025, Page 2 Number of Openings: 1 Overtime Status: Exem pt Job Posting: Apr 28, 2025, 4:08:28 PM Closing Date: Ongoing Description Position Title: Project Manager Ill Class/Group: 1560/ 824 Military Occupation Specialty Code: Navy 641X Fair Labor Standards Act Status: Exempt Number of Vacancies: Division/Section: Chief Operations Office/ Program Operations/Strategic Client Services Salary Range: $7500.00 - $7916.67 I monthly Duration: Regular Hours Worked Weekly: 143 of 159 App. 000144 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit O3 - DIR Project Manager III Job Announcement, 28APR2025, Page 3 httQs://dlr.texas.QQ\lL Refer Inquiries to: People and Culture Office Telephone: (512) 463-5920 or (512) 475-4957 How To Apply: • Select the link below to search for this position: b.ll~J;ms.taleo.net/careersection/ex/Jobsearch.ftl?laog =en • Enter the job posting number 00049052 in the keyword search. • You must create a CAPPS Career Section cand fdate profUe or be logged in to apply. • Update your profile and apply for the job by navigating through the pages and steps . • Once ready, select "Submit" on the "Review and Submit" page. • 11.you have problems accessing the CAPPS Career Section please follow the instructions in the Resetting CAPPS Password for Job Candidate desk aid. Special Instructions: • Applfcants must provfde Tn-depth Information in the EXPERIENCE: & CREDENTIALS section to demonstrate how they meet the position qualifications. Incomplete applications may result in disqualification. • Resumes may be uploaded as an attachment but are n21 ~pted to Heu of the information required in the EXPEAIE:NCE & CREDENTIALS section of the application. Interview Place/Time: Candidates will be notified for appointments as determined by the selection committee. Selective Service Registration: Section 65 t .005 of the Government Code requires males. ages 18 through 25 years. to provide proof of their Selective Service registration or proof of their exemption from the requirement as a condition of state employment. H-1B Visa Sponsorship: We are unable to sponsor or take over sponsorship of an employment Visa at this tirne. Equal Opportunity Employer 144 of 159 App. 000145 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit O4 - DIR Project Manager III Job Announcement, 28APR2025, Page 4 I[] 4 of 7 The Department of Information Resources does not exclude anyone from consideration for recruitment, selection , appointment, training , promotion, retention, or any other personnel action, or deny any benefits or participation in programs or activities, which it sponsors on the grounds of race, color, national origin , sex, religion , age, or disability. Please call 512-475-4922 to request reasonable accommodation. What We Do We are a technology agency powered by people. DIR offers secure, modern, and cost-effective technology to help government entities in Texas serve their constituents. DIR is a fast-paced and collaborative environment with highly motivated, innovative, and engaged employees dedicated to achieving the best value for the state. We have over 250 professionals working at DIR who are honored to serve as the cornerstone of public sector technology in Texas. By joining DIR, you will be an integral part of transforming how technology serves Texans. Position Summary When your publicly funded organization requires telecommunications services, DIR makes procuring these services easy and cost effec ti ve. Since pricing is negotiated with the full vo lume buying power of the State of Texas we 're ab le to provide highly competi ti ve rates and services leve ls for vo ice, data, wireless, video, internet and managed services including network optimization and management of voice and/or data networks. This position performs complex (journey-level) project management services in support of client procurements for vo ice and data communications products and services, for the client's enterprise and agency networks in conj unction with the Communic ations Technology ervice ( T ) Operations and T etwork Engineeri ng group . Responsible for the development of business and technical requirements documentation for procurements. Works with the contract manager in all phases of the procurement li fe cycle to assure the objective for the procurement are met and the project adheres lo the schedule. Conduct facil itated e ion with ubject matter expert and en ure the documents are completed to meet procurement and business goals. Coordinates and articulate variou project and technological concepts, a well as meeting coordination, with all necessary employee/man agemen t levels within DIR and client agencies. In itiates and maintains partnerships and re lationships by collaborating with internal business and technical representati ves as required. Manages the execution of delivery by outside telecom and other project ent ities. Works under the supervision of the Manager of Strategic lien I olution with input and guidance from other division leads, and the leadership and guidance of the Division Director. Works under general superv ision, with moderate latitude for the use of initiative and independent judgement. 145 of 159 App. 000146 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit O5 - DIR Project Manager III Job Announcement, 28APR2025, Page 5 l[) 5 of 7 • Provides direction for telecommunications procurement projects; ensuring the project supports and aligns with the stated vision, goals and objectives • Creates a project structure that provides the appropriate level of controls on processes and changes to project objectives; develops the plan that brings together the project, resources, timclines, monitoring and controls • Assesse , develop , and recommends sound solutions that apply technology to solve client's business goals and objectives. Manages vendor relationships, internal team members, and client agency stake holders to ensure prompt sound, and feasible solution tracking • En. ures regular reviews and reporting are conducted for stakeholders, management and executives • Develops a methodology to ensure the component parts of the procurement, business and technical, integrate properly to accomplish the whole • Analyze the need f. r re ource by tracking allocated re ource again t the project pecification , make re ource recommendation · and help determine Operational ri k tolerance of a igncd Entcrpri c and Agency project . arry out ongoing program management re pon ibiliti e of named environment or initiative · a deemed nece ary • Performs other work-related duties as assigned. Qualifications Education • Graduation from a four-year college or university with major coursework in computer science, computer information systems, management infon11a1ion systems, engineeri ng, or bu iness; or re lated field . • Additional work-related experience may be substituted for education on a year-for-year basis (High-school diploma required. Experience and Training Required • Minimum of three (3) year of multi-di ciplined project management experience • Minimum of three (3) year of telecommunication. indu try experience • Minimum of two (2) year of procurement experience for telephony infra ·tructure Experience and Training Preferred • Open y ·tem Interconnection (0 I) model Layer I technologie to include fiber plant layout, copper-ha ed cabling infra trucn1re, and points of entry concepts. • Possess working knowledge of Ethernet, Internet Protocol (JP), Voice 146 of 159 App. 000147 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit O6 - DIR Project Manager III Job Announcement, 28APR2025, Page 6 0 er IP, and/or Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) network management and/or network design. Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities • o lid understanding of project-based work • Good understanding of project managemen t theory and practice • Good understanding of procurement processes • Sufficient understanding of cabling concepts, Ethernet, IP, Vo IP, MPLS technologies and general vo ice and data network ing principle of design and operations to assess and design workable, feasible solutions with clients • Excellent analytica l kill ; trong kill in attention to detail • trong interpersona l skills, including leadership and mentorship skills • Good writing skills for reports, requiremen ts definition and other docu men tation • Demonstrated ability to plan, prioritize, and complete multiple ass ignments on time with minimal supervision • Demon tratcd ability and thoro ugh knowledge of the management and de li very oftclecom services • Demonstrated ability to work with technical le.ams to design and deliver tclecom solutions • Ability to articulate technological solutions with all levels of client executi ve • Abi lity to evaluate multiple streams of work for consistency and integrat ion in meeti ng speci fi c objectives • Abi lity to follow standard processes, and communicate effectively and cordially with program staff and management regardi ng progrcs es and critical issues • Abil ity to effectively communicate both abstract and detai led information to varied audiences • Abi lity to quickly master new subjects; ability to be creative, flex ible and resourcefu l • Abi lity to seek ass istance, advice, or direction when appropriate • Abi lity to cxerci c courtc y, tact and diplomacy in all communication • Ability to establish and maintain effective and cordial working relationships at all organizational levels, including agency management, direct supervisors, co-workers, internal and external customers. • Ability to understand, follow and convey brief oral and/or written instructions. • Ability to communicate both verbally and in writing , in a clear and concise manner. • Ability to work independently and as part of a team , and to support and contribute to a cohesive team environment. • Ability to work under pressure and exacting schedules to complete assigned tasks. • Abi lity to work a flexible schedule to meet required deadlines. • Ability to comply with all agency policy and applicable laws. • Ability to comply with all applicable safety rul es, regulations, and 147 of 159 App. 000148 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit O7 - DIR Project Manager III Job Announcement, 28APR2025, Page 7 standards. Computer Skills • Proficiency in the use of a computer and applicable software necessary to perform work assignments e.g., Microsoft Office for word processing, spreadsheets, and Teams meeting software. Other Requirements • Regular and punctual attendance at the workplace. • Criminal background check. Working Conditions • Work is no1111ally perfonued 111 a typical interior/office wo rk cuvironme nt • Frequent use of computers, copiers, printers, and telephones. • Frequent standing , walking , sitting, listening, and talking. • Frequent work under stress, as a team member, and in direct contact with others. • Occasional out ·ide work including construction site visit • Occasional bending, stooping , lifting, and climbing . Apply Online Add to My Job Cart Toa .eo, J tat >\id e ear b from lhc Tc 11s l11te Librur~ I State Lillk Poli~~ I Te1:1s llorueluod e uril Glen n Hegar, Texas urupt roller • 0111plroller.Tcx11~. ov • ontact s Pri vucy anti . ccuril}' f>oliC)' I cccssihillt y Policy I Link Policy I Public lnformu Hun Act I Co11111nct wilh Tcxu ns 148 of 159 App. 000149 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit 1 - “State-Owned Property” Email from Lisa Jammer, 27AUG2024 Gmail Shamar O. Briidley <shamar,d,brndley@gmoll com:. State-Owned Property Lisa Jammer <[email protected]> Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 5:22 PM To: "[email protected]" <Sharnar. [email protected]> Shamar; Your employment with DIR was terminated on Wednesday, August 21, 2024. As part of the offboarding process, you JllllS.1 return all state•owned property that was Issued to you by DIR. This includes, but is no t limited to, the following DIR assets : • Latitude 7410 • MiFI 8000 • iPhone 13 If you have any DIR assets not included in the list above, you must retu rn them as we ll. Please return all DIR assets In your possession by 5:00 PM on Friday, August 30, 2024, at the WIiiiam P. Clements Building located at 300 w. 15th Street, Austin, Texas 78701 . If you fail to return this property by the stated date and time, then DIR will issue an invoice to you requi ring your fu ll repayment of all items still In your possession. Lisa Jammer j Chief People and Cu lture Officer, PHR, SHRM-CP, CDP Human Resources Department Texas Department of Information Resources Lisa Jammer@dlr te)l'as gov 0 : (512) 475-46 12 M: (512) 426·3259 300 W. 15th Street, Suite 1300, Austin. TX 78701 IR Ot!'O Transforming How Texas Government Serves Texans #DIRislT I @TexasDIR I About DIR TOP WORK 1\1151m Amtrican StattsmJn PLACES ~tate:i rna".tom 2021· 2022 149 of 159 App. 000150 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit 2 - “DIR Equipment” Email from Randa Maldonado, 12SEP2024 Gmail Shamar D Bradley <i;hamar,[email protected]> DIR Equipment Randa Maldonado <[email protected]> Thu , Sep 12, 2024 at 9:49 AM To: "[email protected]• <[email protected]> Cc: Lisa Jammer <[email protected]> Good Morning Shamar, Please return all state-owned property that was issued to you by DIR. This includes. but is not limiled to. Iha following DIR assets: • Latitude 7410 • MiFi 8000 • !Phone 13 If you have any DIR assels nol Included in the list above, you must return them as well . Please follow the Jnstructjons listed below to ship and return an DIB assets in your possession by..5ali)pm on Monday...S.eotember 16, .20.li. If you !all to return this property by the stated date and time , then DIR will issue an invoice to you requiring your full repayment of all items still in your possession. Shipping Instructions Go to the nearest FedEx location. • Have FedEx package the laptop/equlpment. utilize the DIR FedEx Account No. 1108-8402 -8 and create a shipping label to the following address: Department of lnformatkln Resources (DIR) Attn ITS Issac Wilcher 300 W 15th Streel, Suite 1300 Austin Texas 78701 • Send email to me with the FedEx tracking number. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Randa Maldonado I People & Cultu re Director, PHR People & Culture Office Texas Department of Information Resources (512) 483-5920 I [email protected] 300 W. 15th Street. Suite 1300. Austin. TX 78701 IROGO Transforming How Texas Government Serves Texans #DIRis lT I @TexasDIR I About DIR 150 of 159 App. 000151 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit 3 - Request for Invoice Email to Lisa Jammer, 20SEP2024 Gma1I Shamar D. 81".adley < ham [email protected]> Re: DIR Equipment Shamar D. Bradley <[email protected]> Fri, Sep 20 , 2024 at 11 :46 AM To: Randa Maldonado <randa [email protected]> Cc: Lisa Jamme-r <lisa [email protected] .gov>, "[email protected]" <[email protected] .gov> Invoice me. Who's handling my appeal? Exhibit 4A - DIR Whistleblower Appeal Email, 23SEP2024, Page 1 Gmail Shamar D. Bradley< [email protected]> DIR Whistleblower Appeal Shamar D. Bradley <[email protected]> Mon , Sep 23 , 2024 at 10:30 AM To: Randa Maldonado <randa [email protected] .gov> Cc: Lisa Jammer <lisa [email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Hello, I am formally invoking action under the DIR grievance/appear procedure relating lo the cause for termination of public employment at DIR as set forth in Texas Government Code§ 554 .006(b)(1 ). The PDF attachment has add itional 1nfo. Please advise as to the DIR employee responsible for handling the intern-al DIR whistleblower grievance. Regards, S a ar ~ appeal • Copy.pdf ,3335K 151 of 159 App. 000152 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit 4B - DIR Whistleblower Appeal Email, 23SEP2024, Page 2 Petition for Redress The Texas Department of Information Resources ("DIR") is a state of Texas governmental entity. See Texas Government Code § 554.001(5)(A)i _ Shamar D. Bradley began employment at DIR on November 13th, 2023 .ii Bradley was employed as a Database Administrator.iii Bradley was wrongfully terminated on August 21st, 2024.iv The total time of Bradley's employment at DIR was 9 months and 8 days. Therefore, he successfully completed the mandatory 9-month probationary period and is a "public employee." See Texas Government Code§ 554.001(4JV. Bradley hereby timely invokes action under the DIR grievance/appeal procedure relating to the cause for termination of public employment at DIR. See Texas Government Code § 554.006(b)(J) vi_ Bradley was wrongfully terminated in illegal retaliation vii for refusing to engage in illicit activity and for the good faith report of a violation of a lawviii by public employees at DIR. Bradley refused to be complicit in and reported criminal violations of software copyright infringementix by another public employee of DIR; shortly thereafter, he was terminated thus satisfying the knowledge-timing test. See 17 United States Code§ 506(0)(1)(8), (e): see also 18 United States Code§ 2319(b)(1). DIR failed to display notice of whistleblower rights in the recently acquired Adult Day Care (ADC) facility.x See Texas Government Code § 554.009(0) . Notwithstanding aforementioned lack of notice, Bradley's burden of proof has been met with clear and convincing evidencexi and the allegation of retaliatory termination is presumed to be true. See Texas Government Code§ 554.004(a) _xii In the event that the DIR grievance procedure fails to reinstate Bradley with backpay and extra benefits, DIR sovereign immunityxiii will be waived and abolished and reliefXiv will be sought in the appropriate jurisdiction.xv See Texas Government Code § 554.0035. See also Texas Government Code§ 554.003(0)-(c). See also Texas Government Code § 554.007(0). This will also result in additional civil penaltiesxvi for the public employees responsible for the violation and an auditxvii of DIR. See Texas Government Code§ 554.008. See also Texas Government Code§ 554.070. 152 of 159 App. 000153 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit 5 - Information Request for Invoice for DIR Property, 08NOV2024 Gmail Sha mar 0. Bradley <shamar.d.bradley@gmail cam> [Records Center] Public Information Request:: R003958-102724 Texas DIR Public Records Center <[email protected]> Fri, Nov 8, 2024 at 5:43 PM To: "shamar.d.bradley@gmail .com" <[email protected];:, - Please respond above this line - 11 /08/2024 RE: PUBLI RE ORD REQUEST of October 27. 2024. Reference ti R00 958-102724 Dea· l1amar Bradley: DlR received a public information request from you on October 27, 2024. You requested: " Inv i e ,f; r -tate property formerly a signed to hamar bradley who wa • fired for reporting hi c w rker for criminal copyright infringement'' Thank you for your req ue t. DIR doe not have any re ponsi e docume nt to your reque t. Regard . Gloria C. Rivera Legal Ass istant To monitor the progress or update this request please log into the Public Records Center 153 of 159 App. 000154 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit 6 - Police Presence at DIR Board Meeting, 29MAY2025 154 of 159 App. 000155 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit 7 - Report of Criminal False Report to Peace Officer, 30MAY2025 Amanda Crawford Executive Director and State Chief Information Officer 300 We t 15 th Street Suite 1300 Austin, TX 7870 I Delivered via email to [email protected] May 301h, 2025 Dear Director Crawford, As you may or may not be aware, I have been falsely arrested numerous times; therefore. I exercise an abundance of caution to safeguard my personal and professional reputation for my personal afety and wellbeing, which i why I am appealing my termination to the Supreme ou1t. After I was falsely accused of and tenninated for "unacceptable conduct" the day after reporting my coworker for repeatedly sleeping at work and engaging in criminal copyright infringement, l received an email from Lisa Jammer on August 27 th 2024 at 5:22 PM, ·ta.ting: " D[R will issue an invoice to you requiring your full repayment of all items still in your possession." See Exhibit 1 - "Slate-Owned Property" Email from Lisa Jammer. 27 AUG2024. Then I received an email from Randa Maldonado on September 12 1\ 2024 at 9:49 AM , tating: "DTR will issue an invoice to you requiring your full repayment of all items still in your possession.'' See Exh1b1I 2 - "DIR Egu1pmenL" Email from Randa Maldonado, 12SEP2024. On September 20111, 2024 at 11 :46 AM , I ent Li a and Randa an email, tating: "Invoice me. Who's handling my appeal ?" See xhibit 3 - Request for Invoice Email to Lisa Jammer. 20 EP2024. I did not receive a response or an invoice for DIR equipment so I filed a Public Records Request for the invoice. On November 81", 2024 at 5:43 PM, I received the following response from Gloria C. Rivera : ''You requested: " Invoice for state property formerly assigned to Shamar bradley who was fired for reporting his coworker for criminal copyright infringement" Thank you for your request. DIR does not have any respon ive document to your reque t. " See Exhibit 4 - Public Information Request for Inv ice for DIR Prope11y, 01{ OV2024. Yesterday, May 29 1\ 2025 I made an appearance at the DIR Quarterly Board Meeting to retrieve my personaJ property that was seized after I was retaliated against for blowing the whistle on my coworker 's criminal activity. Shortly after I arrived at the Board meeting. a police presence was requested. After the meeting concluded, I confirmed with the officer that my presence was the cause of his appearance. I reque ted that tbe officer contact DIR to retrieve my personal property and the invoice for the DIR equipment: fortunately. l was able to retrieve my personal property, but unfortunately l was advised by the State Police Officer that it is DIR's contention that the DIR prope1ty as igned to me is designated as stolen, whicb is false, as evidenced above and below. Please be advised that it is a criminal offense to knowingly make a false statement to a peace officer with intent to deceive by claiming a crime occurred when in reality, it did not, as set forth in Tex. Pen. Code§ 37.08. Thank you for you attention to this matter, and it wa nice seeing you. ------ ISi- - - - Shamar D. Bradley, MS, MBA EIT IO I09 Lake Creek Parkway, # 170682 Austin, TX 78717 shamar.d.bradleyfa. ginail.com 210-425-5464 155 of 159 App. 000156 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit 8 - Email from Lisa Jammer, 30MAY2025 Gmail Shamar D. Bradley <[email protected]> Invoice for State Equipment Lisa Jammer <[email protected]> Fri , May 30, 2025 at 5:56 PM To: "Shamar D. Bradley" <[email protected]> Cc: Josh Godbey <josh [email protected] .gov> Dear Shamar, Please see the attached document. Regards , Lisa Jammer Lisa Jammer I Chief People and Culture Officer, PHR, SHRM-CP, CDP Human Resources Department Texas Department of Information Resources Lisa [email protected] 0 : (512) 475-4612 M: (512) 426-3259 300 W. 15th Street, Suite 1300, Austin , TX 78701 IROOO Transforming How Texas Government Serves Texans #DIRislT I @TexasDIR I About DIR TOP WORK Auslm ;\mrm,111·5tatrsman PLACES states man com 2021·2022 t:J Invoice for State Equipment.pdf 152K 156 of 159 App. 000157 Copy from re:SearchTX Exhibit 9 - Defendants’ Threat of Any Legal Action, 30MAY2025 ([) ·, oi 1 IR Texas Department of Information Resources Transforming How Texas Government Serves Texans May 30, 2025 Shamar D. Bradley Mr. Bradley, Upon your termination on August 21 , 2024, DIR requested the return of state equipment in your possession. Our records reflect that, as of May 30, 2025, you have not returned the following agency assets. PROPERTY TAG ' ASSET DESCRIPTION I ACQUISITION COST 313-8338 LATITUDE 7410 1,379.01 313 -8815 IPHONE 13, MIDNIGHT, 128GB 629.99 NA MIFI DEVICE 99 .00 TOTAL ASSETS VALUE $ 2,108.00 Within ten calendar days of May 30, 2025, please resolve this situation by either: • Returning all of the above equipment to the Department of Information Resources by shipping it at agency expense by the method outlined below; or • Remitting a money order or cashier's check, payable to the "Department of Information Resources " in the amount of $2,108.00, the details of which are broken out in the above table. On Thursday, May 29, 2025, you indicated that the equipment in your possession was in San Antonio. The letter you submitted to Amanda Crawford indicated an Austin address. As DIR does not have a return address for a pre-paid label, please follow the below instructions to return the equipment: • Go to the nearest FedEx location. • Have FedEx package the laptop/equipment and, use the DIR FedEx Account No. 1108-8402-8, to create a shipping label to the following address: Department of Information Resource s (DIR) Attn: ITS Issac Wilcher 300 W. 15th Street, Suite 1300 Austin Texas 78701 Absent resolution of this matter within ten calendar days of May 30, 2025, by either returning the equipment or remitting payment as described above, DIR will consider any appropriate legal action available to the agency for your failure to return the state's property. P.O. Box 13564, Austin, TX 78711 - 3564 I (512) 475-4700 I dir.texas.gov I @TexasDIR 157 of 159 App. 000158 Copy from re:SearchTX Cause No. D-1-GN-25-001373 SHAMAR D. BRADLEY § IN THE DISTRICT COURT Plaintiff § v. § TEXAS OFFICE OF THE § TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS ATTORNEY GENERAL, § TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF § INFORMATION RESOURCES, § and all other Defendants § 261ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT similarly situated § ORDER GRANTING THE PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR RULE 2.6 ASSIGNMENT ON THIS DAY came to be heard the Motion for Local Rule 2.6 Assignment filed by Plaintiff Shamar D. Bradley. After due consideration of the law and the filings of the parties, the Court finds said plea meritorious. It is therefore. ORDERED that the Plaintiff’s Motion for Local Rule 2.6 Assignment is GRANTED. SIGNED this ____ day of ______ 2025 ________________________ Judge Presiding 158 of 159 App. 000159 Copy from re:SearchTX Cause No. D-1-GN-25-001373 SHAMAR D. BRADLEY § IN THE DISTRICT COURT Plaintiff § v. § TEXAS OFFICE OF THE § TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS ATTORNEY GENERAL, § TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF § INFORMATION RESOURCES, § and all other Defendants § 261ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT similarly situated § ORDER GRANTING THE PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF ON THIS DAY came to be heard the Motion for Injunctive Relief filed by Plaintiff Shamar D. Bradley. After due consideration of the law and the filings of the parties, the Court finds said plea meritorious. It is therefore. ORDERED that the Plaintiff’s Motion Injunctive Relief is GRANTED. It is further ORDERED that the defendant reinstate the plaintiff to the equivalent position of Project Manager III, effective immediately, at the Texas Department of Information Resources. SIGNED this ____ day of ______ 2025 ________________________ Judge Presiding 159 of 159 App. 000160 Copy from re:SearchTX 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. Envelope ID: 102484817 Filing Code Description: Motion (No Fee) Filing Description: Motion for injunctive relief Status as of 7/7/2025 8:29 AM CST Case Contacts Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status Shamar Bradley [email protected] 6/26/2025 2:59:42 PM SENT Denver Burris [email protected] 6/26/2025 2:59:42 PM I I SENT App. 000161 Copy from re:SearchTX 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. Michelle Elliott on behalf of Denver Burris Bar No. 24138940 [email protected] Envelope ID: 108131279 Filing Code Description: Brief Not Requesting Oral Argument Filing Description: 20251117_Brief_final Status as of 11/17/2025 2:55 PM CST Case Contacts Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status Jennifer Foster [email protected] 11/17/2025 2:50:12 PM SENT Rosalind Hunt [email protected] 11/17/2025 2:50:12 PM SENT Denver Burris [email protected] 11/17/2025 2:50:12 PM SENT Josh Godbey [email protected] 11/17/2025 2:50:12 PM ERROR Associated Case Party: TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION RESOURCES Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status Denver Burris [email protected] 11/17/2025 2:50:12 PM SENT Michelle Elliott [email protected] 11/17/2025 2:50:12 PM SENT Associated Case Party: SHAMARD.BRADLEY Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status Shamar D.Bradley [email protected] 11/17/2025 2:50:12 PM SENT