Thursday, August 18, 2011


A poster posted to the BV last night that Rendon won big in federal court yesterday. Let’s look to the opinions of the court.

 A NOTE TO CARLITO - YES CARLITO Strasburger and Price are paying me 1 billion dollars an hour to advise them in this case, because one of the most prominent law firms in Texas cannot win without my advice - and yes, BISD is doing as I tell them because we all know the majority of Presas-Garcia, Longoria, Escobedo, and Saavedra are dependent on my brilliant advice. 

It blows my mind that one human being can be this much of a pathological liar and still have the ear of elected officials.  Why? - because without a pathological liar willing to put out their lies, Presas-Garcia, Longoria, Escobedo, and Saavedra have no one to speak for them. 

Carlito actually believes that when the city managers of Harlingen, McAllen, or Edinburg read his garbage they are going to say - hey this guys is trustworthy - lets give him $2.5 million  for a start up airline.  He truly has no idea.  And Carlito while every lie you tell about me may not be defamation it is still evidence of malice.  You just keep on building those punitive damages for me.

BISD sought summary judgment on 4 issues. They won on three. This according to Rendon’s supporter is evidence of winning big. Still no money - he now faces another motion for summary judgment on whether or not there is any evidence to support his claims of trustee misconduct, fraud, and barratry.

The court granted summary judgment against Rendon on his defamation claim, and violation of the Texas Constitution.

The court granted summary judgment against Rendon on his whistle blower claim - Ben Neece, Frank E. Perez, and Star Jones being the brilliant lawyers they are filed it in the wrong court.  It is highly unlikely that he can file this in state court and win.  Rendon has already been to state court.  Under the doctrine of Collateral Estoppel you cannot go back to state court and file a claim you could have filed the first time.  You do not get to lose in state court and then refile a new claim you could have filed the first time.  Rendon's lawyers can try, but the appellate courts will certainly throw it out on the claim of Collateral Estoppel.

The court granted summary judgment on Rendon’s First Amendment claims based on all alleged wrongful acts which were related to his job. The court found that the First Amendment cannot be used as a defense to employee discipline. If the employee theoretically has a duty to report wrongdoing, then it is not covered by the First Amendment.

Notwithstanding its denial of the First Amendment claims as to Rendon’s alleged complaints of wronging by BISD as it related to his job description, the trial court denied the summary judgment on his First Amendment claims as a matter of law on questions of whether or not Rendon’s rights were violated when he filed claims of trustee misconduct, alleged conspiracy to commit fraud, and barratry. This issue is interesting because the same court granted summary judgment claiming that the First Amendment does not cover the reporting of incidents which are related to his job. On appeal the Fifth Circuit will have a hay day with this distinction.

See pp 16-17 of opinion


Yesterday the court also dismissed all remaining claims against Aguilar, Colunga, Zayas, Cortez, and Brett Springston in their official capacities. In a previous post on December 3, 2010, the BV noted that Rendon on his own motion to avoid being nailed by the court dismissed his claims against each of these defendants in their individual capacity. Rendon has cost the taxpayers a fortune with his kitchen sink approach to his pleadings - plead everything and hope something sticks.

See opinion


See the opinion it is short and speaks to their incompetence and game playing.


BISD has brought in a top notch law firm - Strasburger Price. They have done an excellent job. Their next move is to move for summary judgment on the facts alleged by Rendon concerning barratry, trustee misconduct, and conspiracy to commit fraud. The court has yet to address if there is any evidence to support these claims. The only issue was, if the allegations are presumed true then as a matter of law Rendon still cannot prevail. The court ruled that if it presumes the allegations to be true, Rendon is entitled to a jury trial.  The court has yet to rule if there is any evidence to support the allegations.  This is the next issue for the court.

The next opinion by the court will address if there are any fact questions on these issues - or restated - has Rendon actually alleged any facts which are supported by evidence, or did he simply do a kitchen sink approach in his claims in hopes something comes out true.

Now given the opinion by the court nailing Rendon’s attorneys, it should be interesting to see if they can produce any evidence to support the remaining claims. If they do not nothing short of sanctions to cover all of BISD’s attorneys fees should issue.

BISD's problem is, there may not be enough time before trial to get a ruling on no evidence to support the remaining claim.  The trial court may delay the trial to get to the issue.  I do not know.  But during trial on each issue the trial court can dismiss the claims as Rendon fails to put on evidence.


These people are sociopaths - they  cannot see how obvious their lies really are.  Joe Colunga and Cavasos cannot call the insurance company and demand a new lawyer in the Rendon case.  The Board can vote on the issue, and then Dr. Montoya can make the request.  The insurance company can ignore the request.  Given BISD's big win yesterday - why change lawyers?


BISD's deductible is $50,000.00 not, $250,000.00 as the pathological liar claims.  Let him produce the DEC sheet - this is a summary page about the coverage.  I have the DEC sheet, and when I find it in the boxes I will post it.  (My surgery kind of interrupted my unpacking and organizing.) The $250,000.00 number comes from the renewal of the policies by the insurance company which is covering the Rendon case.  BISD could not afford the new deductible so they switched to a company which offered to continue the $50,000.00 deductible.  But to be clear, Rendon's and Presas-Garcia's lawsuits are covered by the old deductible of $50,000.00.  The insurance company cannot change the deductible after the fact.  It can change the deductible at the time of renewal for lawsuits which are filed after the new policy takes effect.  Rendon's and Presas-Garcia's lawsuits were filed under the old policies.


Anonymous said...

Great Post!

Anonymous said...

Thank you for clearing up the deductible amount for your readers.

Anonymous said...

I guess that's why the lawsuit was on the last agenda. They wanted to settle before Rendon would lose.

Anonymous said...

Sure sounds Cata Presas-Garcia is rushing to get this case settled before it is thrown out in court. Can anyone answer the following questions: Is she looking to share the settlement loot? How many times a week does she communicates with the plaintiffs in the cases she wants to settle? Does anyone know who is paying for her car? If anyone can produce answers with concete evidence, please speak up because your time is running out.

Anonymous said...

She is settling for a fancy vehicle in another family member's name..

BobbyWC said...

guys no posts which speculates about a person's credit rating - sorry

Bobby WC