Discovery

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION # #

HEATHER JOHNSON

# #

Plaintiff,

#

v.

# #

TRAVIS COUNTY AND SUSAN SPATARO IN HER INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL CAPACITIES, Defendants

# # #

A-08-CA-643-SS

OFFER OF SETTLEMENT

~i.sIcR~&

&~~~4ttVAND

TO DEFENDANTS THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: .. Pursuant to Rule 167 of the Texas rule of Civil proc~~ant to Rule 68 of the Federal rule of Civil Procedure, the Plainti . ..~ ~~ ("Plaintiff') hereby offers to allow settlement to be entered against it in this action or: 1) Future and current lost wages based on leaving salary 2) Attorney's Fees and Court Costs 3) Loss of past and future employment benefits 4) Damages for emotional distress, humiliation, and embarrassment 5) Damages for loss of opportunities for career advancement, and damage to reputation 6) Exemplary damages in the amount of$I,OOO,OOO.OO.Please see table below. The Plaintiff feels this is a fare and balanced offer due to the malice allegations filed against the defendants. With the malice treatment and termination of the Plaintiff came the squandering and lost ability of the Plaintiff to file with the State Incentive and Productivity Commission "brilliant" ideas resulting in an insurmountable savings for taxpayers, bond and vendor owners, and grantors and grantees of Travis County creating a boundless fountain of percentage earrings for the Plaintiff and other Travis County employees. Susan Spataro without a doubt is already guilty of having employed five plus auditors without CPA's, violated numerous other statuary, federal, and global equity laws, and created a social distorted closed circle environment with the equation "1-1 = 1." Thus, I believe it is in the "best" interest of Travis County to settle the case quickly and promptly without an abundance of media exposure, time, and tax dollars spent. The only defense it seems the defendants are swaying heavily on is their ability to claim sovereign immunity? This action seems

)

Potential Lawsuit for Termination

I

on 614108

Assets backed Security

Eauitv based on Trust Settlement Outlook

due to market

39 7.00%

Retirement

or decrease conditions of the

vears of potential service match of income

Cobra Medical Insurance Cobra Dental Insurance Unforeseen

Medical Cost

Connection

loss due to termination

Emotional

Settlement Outlook

variable increase

damaaes

Attornev fees

$'s worth

1065000 74550 280800 70200 100000 500000 250000 25000

39 7.00%

Retirement

years of potential service

35500

match of income

Cobra Medical Insurance Cobra Dental Insurance Unforeseen

Medical Cost

Connection

loss due to termination

Emotional damaaes Attorney fees

2365550

1065000 74550 280800 70200 100000 500000 250000 25000 2365550

circular and turned within itself because all the evidence so far presented by the defendants has been based on word testimony, hence; this action only supports the closed circular environment created by Susan Spataro. Therefore, if this goes to trial with the evidence fmally gathered, all the testimony collected, and the cases resting with in the hands of the public then the confidence of a guilty conviction will surely rest on the Plaintiff's shoulders in a "perfect" outcome giving rise to other possible future lawsuits against Travis County from the people of Texas, United States of America, and the rest of the Global World. This offer of settlement is intended to resolve all of Plaintiffs' claims in this action. This offer shall not be filed with the court. To accept this offer, Plaintiff must serve written notice of acceptance by March 25,2009. Dated: March 9, 2009 Respectfully submitted, BY:~~~

Heather M. Johnson SELF REPRESENTIVE OF AMERICA CIVIL LIBERTIES 601 Blessing Ranch Rd. Liberty Hill, TX 78642 (512) 778-6099 Voice (512)778-6628 Facsimile Email: [email protected]

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on the 9th day of March, 2009, I faxed, emailed, and mailed the settlement offer via certified parcel # 7oYr£/ JCJo ()cofdS-21 :2t;/jto the following: Anthony J. Nelson ASSISTANT TRAVIS COUNTY ATTORNEY Travis CounZ Attorney's Office 314 West 11 Street Room 420 Austin, TX 78701 (512) 854·4801 Fax: 512/854-4808 Email: [email protected] Leslie W. Dippel ASSISTANT TRAVIS COUNTY ATTORNEY Travis County Attorney's Office P.O. Box 1748 Austin, TX 78767 (512) 854-9513 Fax: 512/854·4808 Email: [email protected]

BY~

Heather . Johnson SELF REPRESENTIVE OF AMERICA CIVIL LIBERTIES

hp

officejet

5500

series

5510

Personal

Printer/Fax/CopierlScanner

Log for HEATHER JOHNSON (512)-778-6628 3/9/20094:13PM

Last Date 03109

Transaction Time 04:11p

T~pe Fax Sent

Identification 15128544808

Duration 1:52

Pages

Result

4

OK

DAVID

LITIGATION

A. ESCAMILLA

COUNTY

ATTORNEY

DIVISION

SHERINE E. THO MASt DIRECTOR

STEPHEN H. CAPELLE FIRST ASSISTANT

ELAINE

JAMES W. COLLINS EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT

A. CASAS

FELIX

TARANGO

ANTHONY

314 W. 11TH, STREET GRANGER BLDG., SUITE 420 AUSTIN, TEXAS 78701

LESLIE

J. NELSON W. DIPPEL

JENNIFER

P. O. BOX 1748 AUSTIN, TEXAS 78767 (512) 854-9513 FAX: (512) 854-4808

tMEMBER

01'

OF THE

KRABER

THE

COLLEGE

STATE

BAR

March 24, 2009

Via Certified Mail RRR # 7004289000022964471 Heather Johnson 601 Blessing Ranch Road Liberty Hill, Texas 76842 Re

Cause No. A-08-CA-643-SS; Heather Johnson v. Travis County and Susan Spataro, In her Individual and Official Capacities; In the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, Austin Division

Dear Ms. Johnson: Enclosed please find a copy of Defendants' Alternative Dispute Resolution Report filed today with regard to the above mentioned matter. Should you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to call our office. Sincerely, ~~

Leslie W_Dippel _~. Assistant County Attorney

LWD/mc Enc_

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION

.HEATHER JOHNSON

§ §

~

§

TRAVIS COUNTY AND SUSAN SPATARO IN HER INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL CAPACITIES

§ § § §

A-08-CA-643-SS

DEFENDANTS' ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION REPORT TO THE HONORABLE SAM SPARKS: Defendants Travis County and Susan Spataro file this Alternate Dispute Resolution Report in accordance with Local Rule CV-88, and state the following in support: I.

The status of settlement negotiations is that Plaintiff and Defendants have informally

discussed settlement opportunities and are actively pursing all available options. Pursuant to the Court's Scheduling Order, Plaintiffhas provided an initial settlement offer to which Defendants will timely respond. The Court's Scheduling Order orders the parties to complete discovery by July 31, 2009, and the parties fully intend to use the discovery process to further explore the possibility of ...

=

settlement during the course of th~.s~.~~oceedings. 2.

Plaintiff pro se is the party responsible for settlement negotiations on her behalf.

Anthony Nelson, Leslie Dippel, and Susan Spataro are the parties responsible for settlement negotiations on behalf of Defendants. All formal settlement agreements are further subject tothe approval of the Travis County Commissioner's Court.

200846-1 245.882

200846-1 245.882

CERTIFICATE

OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on the 23rd day of March, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing Defendants'

Alternative Dispute Resolution with the Clerk of Court using the CM'ECF system,

and I have mailed a copy of this document by certified U.S. Mail to the following non-CMlECF participant:

CMRR 700428900002 29674741 Heather Johnson 601 Blessing Ranch Road Liberty Hill, TX 78642

ony J. Nelson Leslie W. Dippel

200846-1 245.882

DAVID

LITIGATION

A. ESCAMILLA

COUNTY

ATTORNEY

STEPHEN H. CAPELLE FIRST ASSISTANT

ELAINE

JAMES W. COLLINS EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT

FELIX

LESLIE JENtHFER

P. O. BOX 1748 AUSTIN, TEXAS 78767 (512)

854·9513

(512)

A. CASAS TARANGO

ANTHONY

314 W. II'H, STREET GRANGER BLDG., SUITE 420 AUSTIN, TEXAS 78701

FAX:

DIVISION

SHERINE E. THO MASt DIRECTOR

J. NELSON W. DIPPEL KRABER

t ••EMBER Of THE' OF THE STATE

854·4808

COl.LEGE BAR

March 25,2009 Confidential Settlement Communication Gertified Mail R/R/R #2005 2570 0000 5005 3133 Heather Johnson 601 Blessing Ranch Road Liberty Hill, Texas 78642 Re: Settlement Offer Dear Ms. Johnson: We have received your settlement demand dated March 9, 2009. We are not aware of any facts that would support a claim of discrimination. However, in exchange for a full release of claims, Travis County submits the following counter-offer: 1. Travis County will agree to characterize your separation of employment as a voluntary resignation. Please advise of your decision on the above counter-offer. questions, comments, or concerns.

LWD/rnpc

Please contact me with any

April 22, 2009

Via Hand Delivery William G. Pulunicki Clerk of Court, United States District Court Western District of Texas 200 West 8th Street Austin, Texas 78701 Re:

Civil Action # A: 08-CA-643-SS; Heather Johnson v. Travis County Texas and Susan ~fataro, in her Individual and Official Capacity; In the 200t Judicial District Court; Travis County, Texas

Dear Mr. Putnicki: Enclosed please find for filing in the above-referenced matter the original and one copy of the Amended Pleading. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding this matter

Sincerely,

Heather M. Johnson prose cc: Leslie W. Dippel, with enclosures (viafacsimile

512-778-6628)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION HEATHER JOHNSON Plaintiff

§ §

V.

§

TRAVIS COUNTY AND SUSAN SPATAOR IN HER INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICAIAL CAPACITIES Defendants

§ § § §

CIVIL ACTION NO. A: 08-CA-643-SS

PLANTIFF'S MOTION TO AMEND PLEADING Heather M. Johnson, Plaintiff in this action, pursuant to Federal Rule 15 in the above civil action, moves the court for permission to file an amended pleading, consisting of factual background surrounding circumstances occurring from 5/12/2008-7/3/2008, the date of the final decision in the grievance process. Per Fed. R. 15(a)(I), following is the factual background the Plaintiff proposes to be added to the initial pleading section V. Factual Background. Most of the documentation validating the 12 events is located within the property of Travis County belonging to the people of United States of America, thus the plaintiff is in the current process of requesting the evidence with discovery: 1. After Tracy LeBlanc, who worked for the Defendant five plus years without a CPA degree as an Associate Auditor II, was unable to explain how to make the necessary journal entries balancing a $60.48 difference between the encumbrance (PO's) of the GM (payables system) and the PI (purchasing system), the Plaintiff .became aware of how Ms. LeBlanc is unaware of accounting procedures, practices, language, and the functionality of accounting software. The H.T.E. software seemed to magically drop the amount from the system and Ms.

Motion To Amend

I

LeBlanc's only explanation was the amount somehow would magically reappear back into the department's unencumbered department fund balance. Ms. LeBlanc was responsible for approving and updating new encumbrances and/or changes entered against existing encumbrances by the Defendants' Purchasing Department. The daily automated updates crossed future payable entries (PO's) against revenue accounts from the PI system creating encumbrances in the GM system of the H.T.E. software. Ms. LeBlanc explanation, "The PI system reports do not matter. The encumbrance report in the PI syste~ is only for the departments' reference. The GM encumbrance reports are the only reports to reconcile bringing into balance by forcing entries with the social distorted idea the encumbrance(capital,

assets) must equal the liquidation(conversion,

flow)

creating the formula "1-1 = 1." Date occurred: 5112/08 or 5/13/08, numerous emails to Ms. Leblanc explaining the error 5/12-5/16/08 2. Due to Ms. LeBlanc's inability to explain the accuracy of her thought process or move on her position and understand the Plaintiff's concerns through various examples sent via email.Ms. Johnson was instructed to converse with Sean O'Neil, a Financial Analyst V working for the Defendant fifteen plus years. During the conversation Mr. O'Neil expressed, "The Disbusmements Division of the Travis County Auditor's Office does not account or audit for revenue." Their prime focus is expenditures.

He confirmed Ms. LeBlanc's comments in regards

to the functions and the application of the H.T.E. software. Only the GM batches were used in reporting finances to the public. However, from the time of

Motion To Amend

2

employment to the time of termination the Plaintiff entered daily transactions due for payment into the PI system against the encumbrances.

The entries were

updated daily. The updates crossed the transactions from the PI system into GM system creating a batch. The batches were audited for errors and processed for payments weekly. Ms. Johnson also received numerous emails and phone conversations while working for the Defendants from other departments in reference to transactions necessary to enter for the balancing and closing of the encumbrances.

Final approval was given by Ms. LeBlanc through email. Thus,

since Mr. O'Neil was the prime financial analyst in charge of bonds, due to the above points, the defendants are in violation of statues by not understanding the basic principals of GAAP accounting practices and the inability to recognize and realize the functationility of their accrual based software linking GM and PI reports. The expenditures are part of a continual rolling revenue process of future payables and receivables in the form of bonded projects paid out through the encumbrance process. Date occurred: 5119108-numerous emails to follow regarding my theories into errors with the PO process and the necessary need for the PI reports to balance with the GM encumbrance reports up to my termination on 6/4/08. 3. In the meantime on 5115108, after the Plaintiff was turning in her weekly GM batch reports into Sandy Hendrix, a Financial Analyst V working for the Defendants ten plus years who was in charge of auditing the Plaintiff's batches proceeded to slam her fist on her desk displaying acts of brutality with threatening

Motion To Amend

3

facial expressions asking, "Where are your groups for the week?" Ms. Johnson tried to calmly explain to her this does not consistently happen, but there was an encumbrancelPO issue she was addressing with an employee. When discussing her hostility, the situation became clear Mrs. Hendrix was having issues with other individuals she was auditing, so Ms. Johnson proceeded to ask if Mrs. Hendrix could address and focus on the problems she was having with her to warrant the outbreak. Mrs. Hendrix went on to accuse Ms. Johnson of consistently not turning in her batch reports on time. Therefore, Ms. Johnson asked her to provide the reports that validated her accusations. Ms. Johnson walked back to her office and later sent a couple of emails to Mrs. Hendrix regarding otherconcems

on 5/16-5/19/08.

4. Due to the above events, on Tuesday, 5/20/08, Ms. Johnson had a meeting with Mike Crawford, a Financial Analyst V and Jose Palacios, Chief Assistant County Auditor. The main focus of the meeting was for Mr. Crawford and Mr. Palacios to address my inability to turn in my reports on time, my accuracy, and my communication skills. Once again, Ms. Johnson asked Mr. Palacios to show the reports validating Mrs. Hendrix's claim. Mr. Palacios said he would have to give me the reports on a later date. It was in this meeting, the Plaintiff after trying to express to Mr. Palacios her concerns of the lost $60.48 he informed her how the Travis County Auditor's Office does not keep track of Income nor does it have the responsibility of handling the finances of the departments.

Finances of each

individual county department are handled by the departments, themselves.

This

statement is completely false and can be proven through phone conversations,

Motion To Amend

4

emails, and financial transactions produced by the Defendant from the start of my employment on 11/7/08 until 6/4/08. Due to the fact Mr. Palacios is a manager in charge of the Disbursement Division of the Travis County Auditor's Office, the meeting on 5/20/08 only proved how he is unable to appropriately train employees to accurately account/audit/practice

financial procedures necessary for

governing county finance. Thus, according to Tex. Gov Code Sec. 554.002 and , by the Defendant's own manual, a manager at any level is an appropriate person to report a violation of finance. The auditor has auditing and reporting responsibilities for the entire county government dealing with county finances. Mr. Palacios would go on to confirm why the employees on the above and below points are unaware of accounting procedures and practices violating numerous Texas Statues. 5. After a discussion with Yolanda Jones, a financial analyst for the Defendant, regarding a cash receipt from an employee in relation to a personal car rental and where to credit the payment, Mrs. Jones claimed the receivable accounts and cash receipts were processed through the Treasure's Department and are only audited by the Auditor's Department. After further investigation, this turned out not to be the case. Date occurred: 5/27-5/29/08 emails to back up proof and phone conversations with Rhonda Ambrose of the Treasure's Dept.-week of 6/2/08 6. Due to the Plaintiffs findings from points one, two, five, and six. During the last week of May of2008 through 6/3/08, Ms. Johnson sent emails and had phone

Motion To Amend

5

conversations with Nancy Barchus ofthe Defendant's Purchasing Department an encumbrance.

The communication explained to her a new way of processing PI

transactions.

The process explained Ms. LeBlanc's errors and how to correctly un

liquidate and unencumber on both sides, plus correct other issues such as line requisition errors. This would eliminate the unnecessary need of the rolling process of asking for the money back from various soucrces in charge of the major general funds. False to what Mrs. LeBlanc and Mr. O'Neil claimed foregoing the money does not return back to the unencumbered balance of the project/departmental/grant

fund source. Ms. Johnson was scheduled to have a

meeting with Mrs. Barchus in the second week of June. 7. On 6/3/08, the Plaintiff had a meeting with Mr. Palacios, Mr. Crawford, and April Bacon, Chief Assistant County Auditor, regarding the meeting on 5/20/08 and my professional performance since the meeting. Ms. Johnson was handed a PIP memo. Below listed are highlights from the meeting and the PIP memo: a)

At the beginning, Mr. Palacios claimed to provide proof of the GM batch reports

Ms. Johnson had been asking for on 5/20/08.

Again this is another false statement. Mr.

Palacios had to ask Mr. Crawford in the meeting to retrieve the reports from his office. When Mr. Crawford returned with the reports she had been asking for a month, Ms. Johnson had to explain to Mr. Palacios the reported time on the printouts were blacked out do to the copy machine. Therefore, the issue surrounding the Plaintiff's inabilities to turn her groups in on time still went unaddressed. b)

Mr. Palacios and Mr. Crawford also claimed the meeting to be on 5/19/08 and not

5/20/08. Mr. Palacios listed within the PIP memo the date three times, incorrectly.

Motion To Amend

6

When trying to explain to Mr. Palacios and Mr. Crawford the date was incorrect, both got very defensive. Mr. Palacios questioned, "Whether I noticed if his television was turned on because if his television was tuned on then the meeting did not happen on Tuesday because his television was on Tuesday all day due to Commissioner Court."

Ms. Johnson sent two emails to Ms. Bacon verifying proof the meeting did not happen on 5/19/08-one late on 6/3108 after the meeting and one earlier in the morning on

6/4/08. One fact is there was a check run on Monday, therefore; Ms. Johnson can verify she was working on auditing upload batches into OM. Her upload did not need the approval of Ms. Hendrix's.

She also received an email from Mr. Crawford on

Monday morning when the meeting was supposedly occurring. c)

From the meeting on 6/3/08, Mr. Palacios and Mr. Crawford expressed one of the

main focal points of the meeting on 5/20/08 was contract issues. This is a false statement. However, contract issues were addressed on 6/3108. Mr. Crawford and Mrs. Bacon undermined Ms. Johnson's ability to question and respond on emails sent to the departments concerning contract problem/issues on invoices due for payment. Their concerns contradict Mr. Palacios comments in the meeting on 5/20/08 giving Ms. Johnson credit and a compliment for generally having an inquisitive mind. The three contracts mentioned on 6/3108 were Honda Motorcycle's, Envision, and Covert Chevrolet. Problems with the three invoices bringing up concerns talked about on

6/3/08: A
Motion To Amend

7

April fmally admitted the Honda Motorcycle contract should have been written in better terms. Thus, April's statement circles in on itself contradicting Mike's points and her points at the beginning of the meeting invalidating most of the meeting: emails sent between 5/21108-6/4/08. B<Envision>transaction

occurring inside a small secular

group structure of individuals isolating and not benefiting the whole general public: emails sent between 5/21/086/4/08, phone conversations, laserfische images. CMs. Johnson finally received OEM price list manuals on 6/3/08 from the dealer. She did not have a chance to check and see if Covert for over a year had been under invoicing according to the bid markup cost of 16% on OEM material. In the business world this is just one way you do business and form relationships long term. The vendor will invoice at a discounted rate instead of the agreed upon bid price if you agree to keep renewing their bid. emails sent between 5/21/08, OEM manuals, laserfische images, and phone conversation The PIP memo contradicts Mr. Crawford's approach in the past who continually gave me the ok to directly email the Purchasing Department with contract questions. Ms. Johnson was instructed since the beginning of her employment in weekly meetings to pull and know a contract a week as one of her responsibilities.

Motion To Amend

She also helped develop

8

a flow chart for dealing with vendor changes on contracts awarded to vendors through a bid process, due to their legality issues with CoCom. The flowchart would help the Defendant avoid future lawsuits. e) From the meeting on 6/3/08, the plaintiff feels Ms. Bacon to have been an abusive person in nature not warranting any of the claims and allegations she addressed. The Defendant expressed how Ms. Johnson was to be a perfect employee and always stand above every other employees of Travis County in her work performance and personal approaches. By signing the PIP memo, Ms. Bacon claims to have gathered evidence from a variety of sources to my performance as an employee. When asked, "Ms. Bacon, have you done this to any other employees working in Ms. Johnson's position for the duration in which she has worked, and how did they compare?" Ms. Bacon responded, "That is none of your business." Ms. Johnson went on to explain to Ms. Bacon this would be the case if she was individually employed, however; since the plaintiff worked with six other plus Associate Auditors I and II there should be relative reports to compare performance levels without addressing who is the individual. Furthermore, what was Mr. Crawford doing in both meetings ifhe was not a manager or a supervisor addressing Ms. Johnson's work performance, according to the Defendants policy he should not be aware or addressing concerns of Ms. Johnson's performance because in Ms. Bacon's words, "it was none of his business." Privacy? 8. After returning to work the next morning the plaintiff sent an email to the Defendant, Mrs. Bacon. Due to the inaccuracy of the memo, the email sent on the morning of 6/4/08 explained to Mrs. Bacon how Ms. Johnson was reluctant to sign the PIP memo until it was redrafted because the memo was asking to

Motion To Amend

9

improve on her accuracy immediately.

It was ten minutes later after overhearing

a conversation right outside the Plaintiffs office, an employee of the Travis County Auditor's office was asking Ms. LeBlanc, "How do you account for Cash Receipts?" Ms. LeBlanc responded, "They have been accounting the cash receipts incorrectly, but now they are going to start crediting the receivables account." Since the conversation was right outside Ms. Johnson's office she proceeded to interject in the conversation by asking a simply question of Ms. LeBlanc, "Who informed you they were incorrectly accounting for revenue?" Sean O'Neil walked by the hall at this time and responded with, "Now is not a very good time." Ms. Johnson then responded with asking, "Why he was not letting them know she was the one who pointed out the problem in the first place?" Displaying yet another contradiction and proves the PIP memo to be slandidourus statement regarding my accounting/auditing/contractual

abilities.

9. A few seconds later Ms. Johnson was given a termination letter in Mr. Palacios's office with Mrs. Bacon, and a questionable Mr. Crawford present. Afterwards, Ms. Johnson was escorted back to her office to pick up her personal belongings. When she was trying to pull personal emailsfromheraccount,

Mr. Flanagan, an

employee of the Defendants, ran into the office creating a commotion by unplugging the computer. Therefore, Ms. Johnson would not be able to take any emails from the Defendants. During this time Mr. Palacios and Mrs. Bacon were present standing in the office in a state of extreme paranoia with over excessive authoritarianism stating the police would be called if Ms. Johnson did not leave immediately.

Motion To Amend

Why were those actions necessary? What are in those emails

10

.(

making the above scene necessary? From the point of conversation with Ms. LeBlanc on 5/12/08 to the termination on 6/4/2008, the plaintiff stands by her claims the Defendants abused their power of authority creating false truths and forcing Ms. Johnson to sit back as a submissive employee, violating her First Amendment rights of freedom of speech to ask basic questions in her job as an auditor such as '"Who's, Who's", "What's, What's", and "Where's, Where's" 1O. Also, within the time frame stated above, the plaintiff found numerous other errors with equity transactions.

The defendant seems to credit and debit equity instead

of cash. According to all basic rules of accounting, crediting equity pooled in cash at time of receipt or debiting it at the time of payment is invalid and a dysfunctional equation. The transaction should never return to equity until after it has been deposited in cash, not equity pooled in cash. By Global Finance Laws of Governance "Equity=Assets-Liabilities",

therefore; the equity can not be within

the assets/cash itself this would produce an equity circulating within itself. 11. Ms. Johnson also found examples of federal grants that have been in debt for numerous years. Due to point one, two, four, five, and six from above, the transactions do not seem to return back to the funds correctly. Therefore, the debt of the federal grants can be reduced significacently with JE reconciliations. 12. On the day ofthe grievance proceedings 6/24/08, Ms. Spataro made the Plaintiff and her attorney of charge, Steven J. Moss, aware Ms. Johnson was hired as an "auditor and not an accountant."

However, it was the understanding of Ms.

Johnson an auditor was a type of an accountant usually with higher capabilities and experience than regular accountants, so an auditor should posses the

Motion To Amend

11

necessary background in accounting to recognize procedural errors when it comes to the process of accounting. Later, she became aware Mrs. Spataro could was in violation by hiring the plaintiff and six plus other employees without CPA's to practice public accountancy Texas State Board of Public Accountancy v. Fulcher, 515 S.W.2d (1974). Mrs. Johnson at the time of employment had six plus years in job cost accrual based accounting, therefore; obtained the knowledge through work experience and her own studies to address the issues outlined. It was not only her job to audit expenditures, but as it is any accountant's job to know your software and how the transactions are crediting and debiting each and every account. As a result of Mrs. Spataro's decision in the grievance process, the above fmance violations to points 1-12 were reconfirmed and finalized from the Federal Financial Management Circulars of the Office of Management and Budget and the following Texas Statues: TEX TEX TEX TEX TEX TEX TEX TEX TEX TEX TEX TEX TEX TEX TEX TEX TEX TEX TEX TEX

LOC LOC LaC LOC LaC LOC LOC LOC LOC LOC LOC LaC LOC LaC LOC LOC LaC LOC LOC LOC

GOV'T GOV'T GOV'T GOV'T GOV'T GOV'T GOV'T GOV'T GOV'T GOV'T GOV'T GOV'T GOV'T GOV'T GOV'T GOV'T GOV'T GOV'T GOV'T GOV'T

Motion To Amend

CODE CODE CODE CODE CODE CODE CODE CODE CODE CODE CODE CODE CODE CODE CODE CODE CODE CODE CODE CODE

§ 111.003, TEX LOC GOV'T CODE § 111.004 § 111.005, TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 111.007 § 111.008, TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 111.010 § 111.033, TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 111.034, § 111.036, TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 111.037 § 111.038, TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 111.039 § 111.040, TEX LOC GOV'T CODE § 111.041 § 111.041, TEX LOC GOV'T CODE § 111.042 § 111.043, TEX LOC GOV'T CODE § 111.044 § 111.0705, TEX LOC GOV'T CODE § 111.0706 § 111.0708, TEX LOC GOV'T CODE § 111.091 § 111.092, TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 111.093 § 111.094, TEX LOC GOV'T CODE § 112.002 § 112.005, TEXLOC GOV'T CODE § 112.006 § 112.007, TEX LOC GOV'T CODE § 112.008 § 112.051, TEX LOC GOV'T CODE § 112.052 § 112.053, TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 112.054 § 113.047, TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 114.001 § 114.001, TEX LOC GOV'T CODE § 114.002 § 114.022, TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 114.023 12

.

TEX LOC GOV'T CODE § 114.024, TEX LOC GOV'T CODE § 114.025 TEX LOC GOV'T CODE § 115.002, TEX LOC GOV'T CODE § 115.003 TEX LOC GOV'T CODE § 115.004, TEX LOC GOV'T CODE § 115.021 TEX LOC GOV'T CODE § 115.091, TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 116.058 TEX LOC GOV'T CODE § 116.112, TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 117.083 TEX. GOV'T CODE § 783.006; TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1301.003 TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1301.004; TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1432.010 TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1432.011; TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1432.012 TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1432.013; TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1432.014 TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1434.052; TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1471.011 TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1471.012; TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1471.014 TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1471.015; TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1471.016 TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1471.017; TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1471.023 TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1471.026; TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1471.028 TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1471.051; TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1471.056 TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1471.081; TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1471.082 TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1471.083; TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1471.084 TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1471.085; TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1471.086 TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1471.087; TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1472.002 TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1472.005; TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1472.006 TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1472.007; TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1472.008 TEX. GOV'T CODE § TITLE 9 PUBLIC SECURITIES CHAPTER 1471-1472, 1474-1477 CHAPTER 1473 SUBTITLE I TEX. GOV'T CODE § CHAPTER 314 315 TEX. GOV'T CODE § CHAPTER 2256 PUBLIC FUNDS INVESTMENT SUBCHAPTER A B

Motion To Amend

13

Respectfully submitted,

HEATHER M. JOHNSON Self Representative for American Civil Liberties and Global Human Rights 601 Blessing Ranch Rd. Liberty Hill, TX 78642 (512) 497-2114: PHONE (512) 778-6628: FAX

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Plaintiff's Amended Pleading Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedures 15 was served on the Defendants' counsel via facsimile (512) 854-4808 before 5 /

Defendants' Attorneys: ANTHONY J. NELSON/LESLIE W. DIPPEL Travis County Assistant Attorneys 314 W. 11th Street, Suite 420 Austin, TX 78701 Phone Number: (512) 854-9513

Motion To Amend

14

Case 1:08-cv-00643

Filed 04/29/2009

Document 17

Page 1 of 2

HEATHER JOHNSON,

Plaintiff, -vs-

Case No. A-08-CA-643-SS

TRAVIS COUNTY aiid SUSAN SPATARO, in her individual and official capacities, Defendants.

•

ORDER

BE IT REMEMBERED on this day the Court reviewed the file in the above-styled cause, and specifically the plaintiff Heather Johnson's Motion to Amend Pleading [#16] filed April 22, 2009, and thereafter, enters the following: IT IS ORDERED that the --Motion to Amend Pleading is GRANTED as Heather Johnson had . that right under the scheduling order existing in this case. Ho~ever, plaintiff's Motion to Amend I

Pleading is in itself a pleading that does not comply with Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil· Procedure. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Heathe:.- Johnson file an amended pleading within eleven days of the date of this orderin .il'·

compliance with Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil .

Procedure. Rule 8(a) requires "A pleading that states a claiin for relief must contain: ... (2) a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief; and (3) a demand for the relief sought .... "

Case 1:08-cv-00643

Document 17

Filed 04/29/2009

Page 2 of 2

The Rule further requires "Each allegation must be simple, concise, and direct. No technical form is required." In the amended complaint, Heather Johnson is ORDERED to state a short and plain

statement, concisely, of each claim against each defendant she sues in this lawsuit and further state what relief she seeks from each defendant. -- --- - - -- - --. The Motion to Amend Pleadings is a rambling statement that does not comply with the -,

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and simply alleges extraneous opinions and conclusions about facts and legal citations. Heather Johnson is also advised she is proceeding pro se in this lawsuit and any references in the pleadings to "self-representative for American civil liberties and global human rights" are not only unnecessary but are improper and shall be stricken from the pleadings. -a: SIGNED this the ~ day of April 2009.

,

';'j""~

~J.. "

~

UNITEDSTA~T:nj])(m

-_.

I L r ,

1

-2-

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION HEATHER JOHNSON Plaintiff V. TRAVIS COUNTY AND SUSAN SPATAOR IN HER INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICAIAL CAPACITIES Defendants

§ § § §

CIVIL ACTION NO. A: 08-CA-643-SS

§ § §

PLANTIFF'S SECOND MOTION TO AMEND PLEADING Heather M. Johnson, Plaintiff in this action, pursuant to Federal Rille 15 in the above civil action, moves the court for permission to file a second amended pleading. In compliance with Federal Rule 8, the Plaintiff reiterates her allegations from the original petition. The Plaintiff repeatedly through the good will and within good faith of her profession reported to the Defendants serious financial and contractual errors along with accounting irregu1arities affecting the fmancial conditions of the people of Travis County, the United States, and the World. Per Fed. R.15(a)(I), below are the following details relating to the allegations the Plaintiff reserved the right to amend in the original petition section V. Factual Background (8). 8(a). After Tracy LeBlanc, working for the Defendants five plus years as an Associate Auditor II, was unable to explain how to make the necessary journal entries balancing a $60.48 difference between the encumbrancelPO of the GM payables system and the PI purchasing system, the Plaintiff became aware of how the Defendants might possibly be forcing entries and misappropriating funds with the social distorted idea the encumbrance( capital, assets) must equal the liquidation(conversion,

Motion To Amend

flow) creating the formula "1-1 =1."

1

Date occurred: 5/12/08 or 5/13/08, numerous emailsto Ms. LeBlanc explaining the error 5/12-5/16/08. 8(b). As a result, Ms. Johnson was instructed to converse with Sean O'Neil, a Financial Analyst V working for the Defendants fifteen plus years regarding her concern. Mr. O'Neil seemed to claim the Disbursements Division ofthe Travis County Auditor's Office only audits for expenditures and not revenue. However, the expenditures are part of a continual rolling revenue process of future payables and receivables in various forms paid out through the encumbrance process, thus again; the Plaintiff realized how employees of the Defendants could be unaware of certain GAAP accounting practices, language, and the function of their accrual based H.T.E. accounting software linking GM and PI report. Date occurred: 5/19/08-numerous emails to follow regarding my concerns and theories into errors with the PO process and the necessary need for the PI reports to balance with the GM encumbrance reports up to my termination on 6/4/08. 8(c). Due to the above events, on Tuesday, 5/20/08, Ms. Johnson had a meeting with Mike Crawford, a Financial Analyst V and Jose Palacios, a Chief Assistant County Auditor for the Defendants. It was in this meeting, the Plaintiff made a good faith complaint of the Defendants alleged inappropriate fmancial practices by expressing her concerns of the lost $60.48. The Plaintiff seemed to be instructed the matters were only the concern of other Departments and not to concern herself with the matters and theories reported anymore during working hours.

Motion To Amend

2

8(d). After receiving email/phone communication from an employee of Travis County in regards to a cash receipt and discussing with Yolanda Jones, a Financial Analyst V for the Defendants and Rhonda Ambrose of the Travis County Treasury Department, it seemed unclear on who accounts/audits for receivables.

After further

investigation, it appeared there were other possible accounting procedural errors with cash receipts causing inappropriate accounts to be credited. Date occurred: 5/27-5/29/08 emails to back up proof and phone conversations with Rhonda Ambrose of the Treasure's Dept.-week of 6/2/08 8(e). During the last week of May of 2008 through 6/3/08, Ms. Nancy Barchus of the Travis County Purchasing Department emailed and phoned the Plaintiff with questions concerning alleged errors with numerous other financial transactions of the Defendants. The communication sent from the Plaintiff explained to Mrs. Barchus a new way of processing PI transactions to eliminate future errors. Ms. Johnson was scheduled to have a meeting with Mrs. Barchus in the second week of June concerning the possible accounting irregularities of the encumbrance process affecting bond, contract, grant, and other payable entries. 8(f). Also, within the timeframe stated above, the Plaintiff found numerous concerns with questionable equity transactions creating accounting irreguralties with possibly serious financial significant. The Defendants seems to be crediting and debiting equity instead of cash. According to all basic rules of accounting, crediting equity pooled in cash at time of receipt or debiting it at the time of payment is invalid and a dysfunctional equation. The equity can not be within the assets/cash itself this Motion To Amend

3

would produce an equity circulating within itself. The correct universal equation by Global Finance Laws of Governance is "Equity=Assets-Liabilities," 8(g). Due to a transaction Ms. Johnson was processing for payment, the Plaintiff also found examples of grants/projects that have been in debt for numerous years. Due to allegations ,S(a)-8(f), the transactions do not seem to return back to the funds correctly. Therefore, the debt of the grants/projects could have a chance to be reduced significantly with the proper JE reconciliations. 8(h). On 6/3/08, the Plaintiff had a meeting with Mr. Palacios, Mr. Crawford, and April Bacon, a Chief Assistant County Auditor. Ms. Johnson was handed a PIP memo in retaliation for doing her job as an Associate Auditor I III and reporting in good faith possible contract violations. Three examples of supposed contract violations discussed in the meeting were Honda Motorcycle, Envision, and Covert Chevrolet. From 5/21/08-6/4/08, on all three, there were emails, phone conversations, and payable documents verifying conversations between Travis County employees, the vendors, and the Plaintiff. Ms. Johnson sent an email to Mrs. Bacon after the meeting on 6/3/08 and one earlier the next morning on 6/4/08 in reference to the inaccuracy and slanderous allegations of the PIP memo. The Plaintiff was terminated on 6/4/08 before receiving a response. 8(i). As a result of Mrs. Spataro's decision in the grievance proceeding process from 6/24/08-7/3/08, possible serious and significant finance violations to allegations 8(a)-8(h) of certain sections of the Federal Financial Management Circulars ofthe Office of Management and Budget A-I 02, A-I33 and the below Texas Statues were reported in good faith to an appropriate law enforcement authority who in turn denied Motion To Amend

4

factual evidence to be turned over and further investigation of the allegations, thus; the County Auditor's actions were a willful and blatant violation ofthe Texas Whistleblower Act, Section 554.002. Therefore, the Plaintiff will also show as stated in the original petition Mrs. Spataro actions deprived Ms. Johnson of her First and Fourteenth Amendment rights made actionable by 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983. TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 111.003, TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 111.004 TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 111.005, TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 111.007 TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 111.008, TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 111.010 TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 111.033, TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 111.034 TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 111.036, TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 111.037 TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 111.038, TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 111.039 TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 111.040, TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 111.041 TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 111.041, TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 111.042 TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 111.043, TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 111.044 TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 111.0705, TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 111.0706 TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 111.0708, TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 111.091 TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 111.092, TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 111.093 TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 111.094, TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 112.002 TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 112.005, TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 112.006 TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 112.007, TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 112.008 TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 112.051, TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 112.052 TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 112.053, TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 112.054 TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 113.047, TEX LOCGOV'T CODE § 114.001 TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 114.001, TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 114.002 TEX LOC GOV'T CODE § 114.022, TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 114.023 TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 114.024, TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 114.025 TEX LOC GPV'T CODE § 115.002, TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 115.003 TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 115.004, TEX LOC GOV'T CODE § 115.021 TEX LOC GOV'T CODE § 115.091, TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 116.058 TEX LaC GPV'T CODE § 116.112, TEX LaC GOV'T CODE § 117.083 TEX. oov-r CODE § 783.006; TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1301.003 TEX. GOV'T CODE § l301.004; TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1432.010 TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1432.011; TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1432.012 TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1432.013; TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1432.014 TEX. GOV'l' CODE § 1434.052; TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1471.011 TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1471.012; TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1471.014 TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1471.015; TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1471.016 TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1471.017; TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1471.023 TEX. GOV'lf CODE § 1471.026; TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1471.028 TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1471.051; TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1471.056 Motion To Amend

5

TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1471.081; TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1471.082 TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1471.083; TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1471.084 TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1471.085; TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1471.086 TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1471.087; TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1472.002 TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1472.005; TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1472.006 TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1472.007; TEX. GOV'T CODE § 1472.008 TEX. GOV'T CODE § TITLE 9 PUBLIC SECURITIES CHAPTER 1471-1472, 1474-1477 CHAPTER 1473 SUBTITLE I TEX. GOV'T CODE § CHAPTER 314,315 TEX. GOV'T CODE § CHAPTER 2256 PUBLIC FUNDS INVESTMENT SUBCHAPTER A, B According to the original petition section XI. Relief Sought (23) & (24) and in compliance with the Federal Rule 8, the plaintiff seeks monetary relief for the allegations against the Defendant Spataro in her individual capacity under 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 and seeks monetary relief for the allegations against the Defendant Travis County under the Texas Whistleblower Act for the damages set forth in the original petition.

Respectfully submitted,

HEATHER M. JOHNSON 601 Blessing Ranch Rd. Liberty Hill, TX 78642 (512) 497-2114: PHONE (512) 778-6628: FAX

Motion To Amend

6

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Plaintiff's Second Amended Pleading Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedures 15 and 8 was served on the Defendants' counsel via facsimile (512) 854-4808

efore Sp.m. on the 6th of May 2009.

ffl;l Defendants' Attorneys:

ANTHONY J. NELSON/LESLIE W. DIPPEL Travis County Assistant Attorneys 314 W. 11th Street, Suite 420 Austin, TX 78701 Phone Number: (512) 854-9513

Motion To Amend

7

./

Fax To:

Travis County Attomey's Office:

From:

Heather M. Johnson

Pages:

1-7

Date:

5/612009

Leslie W. Dipple/Anthony J. Nelson Fax:

(512)-854-4808

Phone: Re:

Second lVIotionto Amend

It] Urgent

o For Review

cc:

o Please Comment

,

~

,. -.

i2JPlease Reply

o Please Recycle

. Fax Log for

HP Officejet J4500 AU-in-One series

May 06 2009 10:35AM

Last Transaction Date , May 6

to

Time

Type

Station

10:29AM

Fax Sent

15128544808

Duration

Pages

Result

2:45

7

OK

,

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION

HEATHER JOHNSON V. TRAVIS COUNTY AND SUSAN SPATARO IN HER INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL CAPACITIES

§ § § § § §

A-08-CA-643-SS

§

DEFENDANTS' FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO:

TO PLAINTIFF

Plaintiff, pro se, .Heather Johnson, 601 Blessing Ranch Road, Liberty Hill, Texas 78642 Pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 26 and 33, you are required to respond to the following

Defendants Travis County and Susan Spataro's First Set of Interrogatories to Plaintiff pursuant to the included instructions and definitions within thirty (30) days after service. This discovery

shall be deemed continuing so as to require supplemental

answers

pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(e).

".. J,.. >- .

.

Defendants'

First Set of lnterrogatoncs

189656-1 094.269

to Plaintiff

.

Respectfully submitted, DAVID ESCAMILLA County Attorney, Travis County P.O. Box 1748 Austin, Texas 78767 Telephone: (512) 854-9513 Facsimile: (512) 854-4808

By:

CERTIFICATE

~~~ Anthony J. Nelson State Bar No. 14885800 Leslie W. Dippel State Bar No. 00796472 ATTORNEYS FORDFENDANTS TRAVIS COUNTY AND SUSAN SPATARO

OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Defendants' First Set of Interrogatories

to Plainti ff has been served in accordance with the Federal Rules of th

Civil Procedure, via Facsimile and certified mail, return receipt requested, on this the 15 day of April 2009, as follows:

Via Certified MaiL RlR/R # 70052570000050053164 Heather Johnson Plaintiff. pro se 601 Blessing Ranch Road Liberty Hill, Texas 78642

Anthony J. Nelson Leslie W. Dippel

Defendants' ril'St Set of lntcrrogatoeics t 89656-1 094.269

to Plaintiff

2

DEFINITIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS A. Instructions L Answer each interrogatory separately and fully in writing under oath, unless it is properly objected to, in which event state the reasons for the objection in lieu of an answer. If you respond with an objection, answer any portion of the interrogatory to which you do not object. 2.

An evasive or incomplete answer may be deemed to be a failure to answer.

3. You are under a continuing duty to promptly supplement your response as soon as practicable after you discover that a previous answer is either inaccurate, no longer accurate, or incomplete. 4. If there are any documents, which answer in whole or in part, any of these interrogatories, they may be attached to your answers and incorporated in the answers by specific reference. 5. Ifa document required to be identitied by these interrogatories was, but is no longer, in your possession or subject to your control, state what disposition was made of the document as well as the date(s), or approximate date(s), on which such disposition was made and state the nature of and the circumstances surrounding the disposition. 6. In the event tbat a privilege is claimed as the ground for not answering any interrogatory, either in whole or in part, you are instructed to identify such information by its subject matter and state with particularity the facts and grounds constituting the nature and basis for any such privilege or other ground for non-disclosure. Only such parts of your answer which are privileged from disclosure, according to your claim, may be withheld. Any part of your answer to which you did not claim privilege or work product should be given in full. 7. Although subsequent discovery and/or investigation may yield additional information in the future and make it necessary for you to supplement your responses, Defendants Travis County and Susan Spataro request that you answer these interrogatories as fully and completely as possible by providing all such responsive information as is known to you at the time your original answers to these interrogatories are due. This necessarily includes the facts known to you at the time Plaintiffs Original Petition was filed and which formed the basis for the allegations contained therein with regard to Defendants. 8. For any requested information about a document that no longer exists or cannot be located, identify the document, state how and when ceased to existence, or when it could no longer be located, and the reasons for the disappearance. Also, identify each person having knowledge about the disposition or loss, and identify each document evidencing the existence or nonexistence of each document that cannot be located.

Defendants' First Set of Interrogatories to Plaintiff 189656.1094.269

3

B. Definitions The following definitions shall have the following meanings, unless the context requires otherwise: 1. "Plaintiff' or "Heather Johnson," as well as a party's full or abbreviated name or a pronoun referring to a party, means the party, and where applicable, her agents, representatives, officers, directors, employees, partners, corporate agents, subsidiaries, affiliates, or any other person acting in concert with her or under her control, whether directly or indirectly, including any attorney. 2. "Travis County" means Travis County, Texas and as the context requires, including its agents, representatives, affiliates, predecessors, successors, and persons acting or purporting to act on its behalf or under its control. 3. "Defendants" means Travis County, Texas and/or Susan Spataro as the context requires, includes their agents, representatives, affiliates, predecessors, successors, and persons acting or purporting to act on their behalf or under their control. 4. "You" or "your" means Plaintiff, Heather Johnson, her successors, predecessors, divisions, subsidiaries, present and former officers, agents, employees, and all other persons acting on behalf of Plaintiff or her successors, predecessors, divisions, and subsidiaries. 5. "Document" is defined to be synonymous in meaning and equal in scope to the usage of this term in Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 34(a). A draft ofa non-identical copy is a separate document within the meaning of this term. 6. "Possession, custody, or control" of an item means that the person either has physical possession of the item or has a right to possession that is equal or superior to the person who has physical possession of the item. 7. "File" means any collection or group of documents maintained, held, stored, or used together, including, without limitation, all collections of documents maintained, held, or stored in folders, notebooks, or other devices for separating or organizing documents. 8. "Person" means any natural person, corporation, firm association, partnership, joint venture, proprietorship, governmental body, or any other organization, business, or legal entity, and all predecessors or successors in interest. 9. "Relating to"· and "relates to" mean, without limitation, embodying, mentioning, or concerning, directly or indirectly, the subject matter identified in the interrogatory. 10. "Concerning" means, in whole or in part, directly or indirectly, referring to, relating to, connected with, conunenting 01], responding to, showing, describing, analyzing, reflecting, or constituting.

Defendants'

First Set of Interrogatories

189656-1094.269

to Plaintiff

4

11. "Date" means the exact date, month, and year, if ascertainable, or, if not, the best available approximation. 12. "Mobile device" means cellular telephone, satellite telephone, pager, personal digital assistant, palm top computer, hand-held computer, electronic rolodex, or walkietalkie. 13. "Identify" or "describe" when referring to a person, means you must state the following:

14.

a.

The full name.

b.

The present or last known residential address and residential phone number.

c.

TIle present or last known office address and office telephone number.

d.

The present occupation, job title, employer, and employers address at the time ofthe event or period referred to in each particular interrogatory.

e.

In the case of any entity, identify the officer, employee, or agent most closely connected with the subject matter of the interrogatory, and the officer who is responsible for supervising that officer or employee.

"Identify" or "describe" when referring to a document, means you must state the following: a.

The nature (e.g., letter, handwritten note) of the document.

b.

The title or heading that appears on the document.

c.

The date of the document and the date of each addendum, supplement, or other addition or change.

d.

The identity of the author and of the signer of the document, and of the person on whose behalf or at whose request or direction the document was prepared or delivered.

e.

The present location of the docwnent, and the name, address, position or title, and telephone number of the person or persons having custody of the document.

15. "Communication" means any contact between two or more persons, companies, corporations, joint ventures or partnerships and shall include, without limitation, electronic communication, letters, memoranda, telegrams, or telecopies, ,and any oral contract such as face-to-face meetings and telephone conversations.

Defendants' First Set 189656-1 004.269

or lruerrogaiorics

to Plaintiff

5

16. "Lawsuit" shall mean the lawsuit styled Heather Johnson v. Travis County and Susan Spataro, in her Individual and Official Capacities, In the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, Austin Division, Cause No. A-08-CA-643-SS. 17. "EEOC Charge" shall mean the EEOC complaint filed with the U.S. Equal Opportunity Employment Commission, Charge Number 36A-2008-00319. 18. "Health Care Provider" means any practitioner of the healing arts, and may include medical doctors, dentists, hospitals, clinics, radiologists, psychologists, psychiatrists, counselors, chiropractors, osteopaths, emergency room services, ambulances, pharmacists, pathologists, and therapists. 19. "Describe in detail " means to give a complete and full description concerning the matter about which inquiry is made, including the full name, address, and telephone number (both office and home) of persons involved, if appropriate, along with the dates, times, places, amounts, and other particulars which make the answers to the interrogatory fair and meaningful. 20. "Income" means any source of revenue you receive on a weekly, biweekly, monthly, semi-annual, or annual basis which is derived from any form of employment, gifts, royalties, government assistance, etc. 21.

As used in these Interrogatories, the singular encompasses the plural and the plural encompasses the singular.

22.

Whenever the masculine gender is used herein, it should- be taken to include feminine gender where appropriate.

23.

The word "and" means "and/or."

24.

The word "or" means "or/and."

Defendants'

First Set of Interrogatories to Plaintiff

189656-1094.269

6

Personal financial information comes within the zone of privacy protected by California Constitution, Article I, § 1 (Va/ley Bank of Nevada IJ. Superior Court (1975) 15 Cal.3d 652, 656). The Insurance Information Act and Privacy Protection Act, Ins. Code §§ 793, et seq., limits the disclosure of information in connection with insurance transactions (Griffith v. State Farm Mutua/Auto Ins. Co. (1991) 230 Cal.App.3d 59, 65-71). "Privileged information" means any individually identifiable information that both: (1) relates to a claim for insurance benefits ... (2) is collected in connection with or in reasonable anticipation of a claim for insurance benefits .... " Ins. Code, § 791.02, subd. (v)(1), (2).)

DEFENDANTS'

INTERROGATORY

FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES

TO PLAINTIFF

NO. I:

Please state the full name, including your middle name or names, all nicknames by which you are known, and any name by which you were ever known. ANSWER:

INTERROGATORY

NO.2:

Identify each person answering these interrogatories, supplying information, or assisting in any way with the preparation of the answers to these interrogatories. ANSWER:

INTERROGATORY

NO.3:

Please state the complete address of your residence for the last 10 years.

ANSWER:

INTERROGATORY

NO.4:

State whether you have been convicted of or pled guilty or nolo contendere to any misdemeanors or felonies within the past ten (10) years, except for minor traffic violations. If so, describe for each the nature of the charge, the date, location and circumstances of the conviction, the ultimate disposition of the case, and if you are presently on probation in connection with any such conviction

ANSWER:

Defendants' First Set 189656-1 094.269

or 11llf;~ITOg:ttorics 10 Plaintiff

7

INTERROGATORY

NO.5:

Identify any and all psychiatrists, psychologists, counselors, physicians, or any other health care providers whose services you have ever retained for counseling, treatment, or analysis of any physical, emotional, mental, or psychological condition or complaint for the past ten years. ANSWER:

INTERROGATORY

NO.6:

Have you ever complained to a previous employer or any governmental agency of any form or kind of discrimination, retaliation, or constitutional violation? If so, please identify the employer and provide the date and nature of your complaint. Please also include what resolution was reached, if any. ANSWER:

INTERROGATORY

NO.7:

Identify any cause of action or administrative claim you have brought against any person or entity by providing the cause number and the court in which it was filed; state the nature of the litigation; and, state the resolution, if any. ANSWER:

INTERROGATORY

NO.8:

Please state the basis of your allegation that your rights under the Texas Whistleblower Act were violated. ANSWER:

INTERROGATORY

NO.9:

Please state the basis for your allegation that Defendants' conduct constitutes a willful and blatant violation of the Texas Whistleblower Act.

Defendants' First Set of Interrogatories 10 Plaintiff 189656~1 094.269

8

ANSWER:

INTERROGATORY

NO. 10:

Please state when, how, and to whom you expressed your concerns relating to the alleged accounting irregularities that violated laws and regulations of the State of Texas to your supervisors and managers employed by the Defendants, including Susan Spataro. ANSWER:

INTERROGATORY

NO. 11:

Please state of the basis of your allegation that Defendants deprived you of your First Amendment to the United States Constitution. ANSWER:

INTERROGATORY

NO. 12:

Please state of the basis of your allegation that Defendants deprived you of your Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. I

ANSWER:

INTERROGATORY

NO. 13:

Please state the name, address and qualifications of each person you expect to call as an expert witness at the trial of this cause, the subject matter upon which the expert is expected to testify, the documents and/or tangible things reviewed or prepared by the expert, the mental impressions and opinions held by each such witness, and the facts known to the expert which relate to or form the basis ofthe mental impressions and opinions held by each such witness. ANSWER:

Defendants' First Set of huerrogatories 189656-1 094.269

to Plaintiff

9

INTERROGATORY

NO. 14:

Please state the name, address and qualifications of each expert used for consultation who is not expected to be called as a witness at the trial of this cause but whose worlc product forms the basis, either in whole or in part, of the opinions of any testifying expert who is to be called as witness at trial, and state the mental impressions and opinions held by the expert, the facts known to the expert, and the documents reviewed or prepared by the expert. ANSWER:

INTERROGATORY

NO. 15:

Please identify and describe, in detail, each element of damages claimed by Plaintiff in connection with the incidents made the basis of this suit, the factual basis for each element of damages, the amount in dollars and cents of reimbursement or compensation claimed due to the Plaintiff in connection with each element of damages, the factual basis for the computation of the damage amount specified. ANSWER:

INTERROGATORY

NO. 16:

Describe all attempts you have made to secure employment since your separation from Travis County. If currently employed, please identify you current employer and current position. ANSWER:

INTERROGATORY

NO. 17:

Identify each and every employer you have had for the IO-year period prior to your employment with the Travis County Auditor's Office, stating the name and address of such employer(s), your job title, the dates of employment for each, and the reason for leaving. ANSWEd:

INTERROGATORY

Defendants'

NO. 18:

First Set of Interrogatories

189656·1 094.269

10 Plaintiff

10

Please identify any source of income you have received since your separation from Travis County including but not limited to unemployment, social security, disability, wages, and/or other sources. Include the dates the income was received, the amount, and the source of each such income. ANSWER:

Defendants' First Set 18%56~1094.269

or Interrogatories

to Plaintiff

11

PLAINTIFF'S FIRST SET OF RESPONSES TO THE DEFENDANTS' INTERROGATORIES

I: My full name is Heather Marie Johnson. 2: The Plaintiff, Heather Marie Johnson is the only person answering these interrogatories. 3: The Plaintiff's complete address of residence for the last 10 years is5/2005-currentl601 Blessing Ranch Rd Liberty Hill, TX 78642 7/2001-71200517800 San Felipe Blvd. No. 702 Austin, TX 78729 7/2000-7/2001lApartment 5/1999-612000/Apartments

Complex on Riverside Dr. Austin, TX in San Marcos, IX

4: The Plaintiff has not been convicted of, pled guilty, or nolo contendere to any misdemeanors or felonies within the past ten (10) years. 5: Objection: The subject interrogatory NO.5 seeks information that is irrelevant and not calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence at the time of trial because the information is protected from disclosure by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 and invasive to the Plaintiff's privacy. 6: No, the Plaintiff has never complained to a previous employer or any governmental agency of any for or kind of discrimination, retaliation, or constitutional violation. 7: The Plaintiff has not brought any cause of action or administrative claim against any person or entity.

Plaintiff's First Set of Responses to the Defendants' Interrogatories

8: Objection to the subject of the interrogatory NO.8 on the grounds it is overbroad, vague, and somewhat repetitive to NO.9. 9: The Plaintiff objects to Interrogatory NO. 9 on the ground it is overboard and unduly burdensome.

The interrogatory is also irrelevant and invasive to her privacy,

since the case is to be presented, argued, and decided before a jury.

In addition, the

Plaintiff is in the process of requesting factual evidence through discovery. 10: The Plaintiff objects to Interrogatory NO. 10 on the ground it is overboard and unduly burdensome.

The interrogatory is also irrelevant and invasive to her privacy,

since the case is to be presented, argued, and decided before a jury. In addition, the Plaintiff is in the process of requesting factual evidence through discovery. II:

The Plaiptiff objects to Interrogatory NO. lion

unduly burdensome.

the ground it is overboard and

The interrogatory is also irrelevant and invasive to her privacy,

since the case is to be presented, argued, and decided before a jury. In addition, the Plaintiff is in the process of requesting factual evidence through discovery. 12: The Plaintiff objects to Interrogatory NO. 12 on the ground it is overboard and unduly burdensome .. The interrogatory is also irrelevant and invasive to her privacy, since the case is to be presented, argued, and decided before a jury. In addition, the Plaintiff is in the process of requesting factual evidence through discovery. 13&14:

Ms. Johnson does not expect to call an expert witness at the trial, but the

Plaintiff reserve the right to answer the interrogatory in the future if she feels an expert witness is needed to be called upon. 15: The Plaintiff objects to Interrogatory NO. 15 on the ground it is overboard and unduly burdensome.

The interrogatory is also irrelevant and invasive to her privacy,

Plaintiff's First Set of Responses to the Defendants' Interrogatories

2

since the trial is to be presented, argued, and decided before a jury.

In addition the

Plaintiff is in the process of requesting factual evidence through discovery. 16: The Plaintiff has applied for over fifty different positions since her separation from Travis County. Ms. Johnson has not heard back from anyone position. 17: Please see attached resume. 18: The Plaintiff has received no income since her separation from Travis County.

Plaintiff'S First Set of Responses to the Defendants' Interrogatories

J

HNSON PROSE 601 Blessing Ranch Rd. Liberty Hill, TX 78642 Telephone: (512) 778·6099 Facsimile: (512) 778·6628 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Plaintiff's Fist Set of Responses to the Defendants' Interrogatories has been served in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, via certified mail, return receipt requested, on this the 14thday of May 2009, as follows:

Via Certified Mail RIRIR # 70072560000083909125 Anthony J. Nelson Lelie W. Dippel Assistant County Attorneys P.O. Box 1748 Austin, Texas 78767

•

Plaintiff's First Set of Responses to the Defendants' Interrogatories

4

HEATHER M. JOHNSON 601 Blessing Ranch Rd • Liberty Hill, TX 78642 Cell; (512) 497-2114· Home; (512) 778-6099· Fa:x (512) 778-6628· Email;[email protected]

ACCOUNTANT AccouDts Payable· Purchase Orders. Iovcatosy » Fixed Assets »Job Coer» ORice Supply Manager • Timberline & Great .PlainsSoftware· MS ORice Suite. Crystal Rcpons » Basic Web Design· QuickBooks PROFILE

Self motivated, ambitious, meticulous, accountant with a solid administrative background. Competent and ready to perform in a fast paced environment for a diverse group of individuals. Excellent organizational and networking skills vital for efficiently completing multi-task projects on a daily basis. Advanced knowledge of current computer applications and the readiness to learn and master new programs.

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE --------------------Travis County Auditor's Office-1ustin, T.X 11/07"()6/2008 Disbursements division of governmental accounting focusing on the auditing! enforcement procedures of tax payers dollars. Magnolia Pictures, LLC - Austin, T.X distribuli()IJ branch of Todd IJ:7agller & Mark Cuban s 2929 Entertainmmt,

Tbeatricai & H()lIIe E"tmmn/hen/

Enviroquip, Inc. - Austin, TX

04/2006-05/2007 f()C1IJing on a distinctiw and diverse group ()ffiuns.

08/2000-10/2005

An intemationai supplier oflVIembranc, Aeration, Bar S trem, Symbio, & Belt Filter Press material to govcmmmtol alld c()lJlIJJcrdalwas/CWOlff aJld water plan/s.

Accomplishments -- 1 of 2 accountants performing financial tasks for a 40+ employee based company. - Designed a computerized e>..-pensereport using excel. ---Recreated a manual time sheet in excel for Enviroquip's hourly employees. - Balanced two general ledger accounts unreconciled for 1.5 veers. Accounts Payable • Entered and generated daily invoices using either a general ledger and/or job cost

accounting format. • Processed 4 different weekly check runs.

• Audited and processed travel expense reports. • Recorded, generated, and disposed of fixed assets into a DOS database. • Reconciled and reported journal entries to comptroller. • Maintained and cleaned up hundreds of vendor files for 3 different companies • Allocated over $30,000 worth of monthly credit card charges. Purchasing • Exported buyout files and imported them into a job cost purchase order format for the receiving department and vendors. • Registered inventory into an excel spreadsheet and documented monthly totals into a DOS database. • Purchased office supplies and furniture for the company. • Filed and sorted purchase orders. Billing • Invoiced customers for large contract amounts and small travel and parts expenses. • Researched, reconciled, and recorded expenses owed by employees. • Organized and filed contact documents.

Employment Histo!;y --------------------------------Temporary Personnel Services- Accountants on Call, Austin, TX (7/00-8/00,1/06-4/06) Water Safety Instructor-Austin Parks and Recreation, Austin, TX (6/00-8/00) Career Associate-Career Services at TSU, San Marcos, TX (8/99-5/00)

Education &TrNning------------------------------liA,~atJdAtt-TSU, Cum Laude with a GPA of 3.44, San Marcos, T.X (8/94-5/00) New HorizoD""-"'foorottOffice 2000 Suite, Levels 1-3, Austin, TX (2001-2002) TSCS-Beginning & Advanced Crystal Reports, Houston, TX (2004)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION

HEATHER

JOHNSON

V. TRAVIS COUNTY AND SUSAN SPATARO IN HER INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL CAPACITIES

§ § § § § § § §

A-08-CA-643-SS

DEFENDANTS' FIRST REOUEST FOR PRODUCTION TO PLAINTIFF

TO:

Plaintiff, pro se, Heather Johnson, 601 Blessing Ranch Road, Liberty Hill, Texas 78642 Pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 26 and 34, you are required to respond to the following

Defendants Travis County and Susan Spataro's First Request for Production of Docwnents to Plaintiff pursuant to the included instructions and definitions within thirty (30) days after service. This discovery shall be deemed continuing so as to require supplemental answers pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(e).

Defendants' First Request for Production to Plaintiff 190032-1 94.269

Respectfully submitted, DA VID ESCAMILLA County Attorney, Travis County P.O. Box 1748 Austin, Texas 78767 Telephone: (512) 854-9513 Facsimile: (512) 854-4808

By:

CERTIFICATE

~~ Anthony J. Nelson State Bar No. 14885800 Leslie W. Dippel State Bar No. 00796472 ATTORNEYS FOR DFENDANTS TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS AND SUSAN SPATARO

OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Defendants' First Set of Request for Production to Plaintiff has been served in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, certified mail, return receipt requested, on this the 15th day of April 2009, as follows: Via Certified Mail RRR#7005 2570000050053164 Heather Johnson, Plaintiff, pro se, 601 Blessing Ranch Road Liberty Hill, Texas 78642

Anthony J. Nelson Leslie W. Dippel

Defendants' First Request for Production to Plaintiff 190032-1 94.269

2

DEFINITIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS Please use the following definitions in responding to the following Requests for Production: I.

"Plaintiff," "you" or "your" means Heather Johnson Plaintiff herein, and as the context requires includes her agents, representatives, affiliates, predecessors, successors, and persons acting or purporting to act on Plaintiff's behalf or under Plaintiffs control.

2.

"Travis County" means Travis County, Texas and as the context requires includes its agents, representatives, affiliates, predecessors, successors, and persons acting or purporting to act on its behalf or under its control.

3.

"Defendants" means Travis County, Texas and/or Susan Spataro and as the context requires includes their agents, representatives, affiliates, predecessors, successors, and persons acting or purporting to act on its behalf or under their control.•.'~· ' . .,

4.

"Persons" as used herein includes natural persons, general partnerships, limited partnerships, joint ventures, associations, corporations, governmental agencies, departmental units or subdivisions thereof, and any other form of business entity or association, as the case may be.

5.

"Documents" means "documents and tangible things" within the broad sense of the R. Crv. P. 34(a), and includes, with out limitation, all written, recorded or graphic matter, however produced or reproduced, now or at any time in your possession, custody or control, or subject to your control, including, without limitation, all letters, correspondence, statements, reports, papers, memoranda, books, accounts, invoices, drawings, drafts, charts, photographs, negatives, electronic or videotape recordings, any other data compilations from which information may be obtained, and includes drafts and non-identical copies of documents. Documents are deemed subject to your control if you have the right to secure the item or copy thereof from another person or a public or private entity having actual physical possession thereof. If any document requested herein was, but is no longer subject to your control, please state what disposition was made of it, and the date or dates or the approximate date or dates of such disposition. FED.

6.

"Concerning" includes referring to, alluding to, pertaining to, responding to, relating to, in connection with, commencing on, in respect of, about, regarding, discussing, showing, describing, mentioning, reflecting, analyzing, constituting, or evidencing.

7.

"Communication" means any contact between two or more persons, companies, corporations, joint ventures or partnerships and shall include, without limitation, written contact by means such as letters, memoranda, telegrams, telecopies or

Defendants' First Request for Production to Plaintiff \90032-1 94.269

3

telexes, or by any document, and any oral contract such as face-to-face meetings and telephone conversations. 8.

"Lawsuit" shall mean the lawsuit styled Heather Johnson v. Travis County, Texas and Susan Spataro, in her Individual and Official Capacities, In the United States District Court Western District of Texas, Austin Division, Cause Number A-08-CA643-SS.

9.

"Health Care Provider" means any practitioner of the healing arts, and includes medical doctors, dentists, hospitals, clinics, radiologists, psychologists, psychiatrists, counselors, chiropractors, osteopaths, emergency room services, ambulances, pharmacists, pathologists, and therapists.

10.

"Income" means any source of revenue you receive on a weekly, biweekly, monthly, semi-annual, or annual basis which is derived from any form of employment, gifts, royalties, government assistance, etc.

II.

As used in these Requests for Production of Documents, the singular encompasses the plural and the plural encompasses the singular.

12.

Whenever the masculine gender is used herein, it should be taken to include feminine gender where appropriate.

13.

The word "and" is defined to mean "and/or".

14.

The word "or" is defined to mean "or/and".

Defendants'

190032-1

First Request for Production to Plaintiff

94.269

4

REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION

REQUEST NO. t: Any and all documents reflecting or describing any investigation of the incident forming the basis ofthis lawsuit. RESPONSE:

REQUEST NO.2: All documents, photographs, moving pictures, films, videotapes, recordings that are connected with or related, in any way, to this lawsuit.

and audio

RESPONSE:

REOUEST NO.3: Discoverable documents and tangible things evidencing or relating in any way to any allegation contained in Plaintiff's original complaint and subsequent pleadings, if any. RESPONSE:

REQUEST NO.4: Documents and tangible things consisting of any written statements or transcriptions of oral statements purporting to have been made by Plaintiff or Plaintiff's agents in connection with the allegations in Plaintiff's suit against these Defendants. RESPONSE:

REQUEST NO.5: Documents and tangible things consisting of any writing originating with Plaintiff and/or signed by Plaintiff which are in the custody or control of Plaintiff or herlhis agents which concern the alleged incident.

Defendants' 190032-1

First Request for Production to Plaintiff 94.269

RESPONSE:

REOUEST NO.6: Any written, verbal, recorded, or other statements of Defendants that are connected with or related, in any way, to this lawsuit. RESPONSE:

REOUEST NO.7: Any written, verbal, recorded, or other statements of Plaintiff that are connected with or related, in any way, to this lawsuit.

REQUEST NO.8: Any and all documents or records of regularly conducted business activities which Plaintiff may introduce into evidence at the time of trial of this case or which may be used in the examination of any witness at trial or by deposition in this case. RESPONSE:

REQUEST NO.9: All documents and tangible things that have been made or prepared for or reviewed by any expert who may be called to testify as a witness in this case. In the event that there is an expert witness about whom you or your attorney have knowledge, whom you or your attorney cannot positively aver will not testify, then you are hereby requested that the factual observations, test, supporting data, calculations, photographs, and opinions of each such expert be recorded and reduced to a tangible form and produced in response to this request. RESPONSE:

REOUEST NO. 10: All documents and tangible things that have been made or prepared for any expert in anticipation of the expert's trial and/or deposition testimony.

Defendants' First Request for Production to Plaintiff 190032-1 94.269 •

6

RESPONSE:

REOUEST NO. 11: All documents and tangible things that have been made or prepared Qy an expert used for consultation purposes that forms the basis, either in whole or in part, of the opinions of an expert who may be called as a witness. RESPONSE:

REOUEST NO. 12: Any and all documents reflecting the current curriculum vitae, resume, biography, and bibliography of published works for each expert witness Plaintiff expects to call as a witness in this case. RESPONSE:

REOUEST NO. 13: Any and all published treatises, periodicals, or pamphlets on a subject of history, medicine, or other science or art upon which Plaintiff or Plaintiff's expert witnesses claim to be reliable authority which may be introduced into evidence at the trial of this case or which may be used in the examination of any witness at trial or by deposition in this case. RESPONSE:

REOUEST NO. 14: The contract itself and every document which evidences or relates to the contract of employment between you and any of your testifying or non-privileged consulting experts. RESPONSE:

Defendants' First Request for Production to Plaintiff 190032-1 94.269

7

REOUEST NO. 15: All documents evidencing or referring to any correspondence between you (including your attorneys} and any of your testifying or non-privileged consulting experts relating to this lawsuit. RESPONSE:

REOUEST NO. 16: All documents or tangible things concerning this litigation, which were given by you to any person who you intend to call and/or may call at trial as an expert witness. RESPONSE:

REOUEST NO. 17: All written instructions or any instructions or directions recorded in any form from you, or your attorneys, to any of your experts or non-privileged consulting experts concerning the formation of their opinions in this litigation. RESPONSE:

REOUEST NO. 18: All check stubs, federal income tax returns receipts or other documents that refer to evidence or relate to any wages lost by Plaintiff as a result of the incident made the basis of this suit. RESPONSE:

REOUEST NO. 19: Complete the attached authorization permitting the full disclosure of all employment records which are reasonably related to the loss or damages asserted by the Plaintiff. An authorization for release of employment records is attached to this request for production for signing.

Defendants' First Request for Production to Plaintiff \90032-\ 94.269

8

RESPONSE:

REQUEST NO. 20: Any and all documents which describe, support, reflect, or bear upon, either directly or indirectly, the past or future loss of wages or earning capacity of Plaintiff, and which Plaintiff claims as damages in this lawsuit.

RESPONSE:

REQUEST NO. 21: Any and all documents which are in possession of the Plaintiff, her attorney, or any of his agents that are related to this incident made by any witness or purported witness, including witness statements. RESPONSE:

REQUEST NO. 22: Any and all documents that were mentioned in your responses to Defendants' First Set of Interrogatories to Plaintiff, but not included in this request for production. RESPONSE:

REQUEST NO. 23: Any and all documents not prepared specifically by or for Plaintiffs attorney containing any description or account of how the incident[s] made the basis of this suit occurred, including any documents created by any law enforcement officials. RESPONSE:

Defendants' 190032-1

First Request for Production to Plaintiff 94.269

9

REQUEST NO. 24: Every statement of the Defendants, recorded in any form whatsoever, concerning any of the fact issues involved in this lawsuit. RESPONSE:

REQUEST NO. 25: Any and all documents reflecting a settlement or any agreement regarding any of your claims in this lawsuit with any person. RESPONSE:

REQUEST NO. 26: All documents relating to any prior lawsuits or claims for damages made by Plaintiff, including copies of deposition transcripts.

RESPONSE:

REOUEST NO. 27: Copies of Plaintiffs resume and/or curriculum vitae for 1995 to the present. RESPONSE:

REQUEST NO. 28: Copies of any and all job applications made by Plaintiff and copies of any job postings or job bulletins collected by Plaintiff RESPONSE:

Defendants'

First Request for Production to Plaintiff

190032-1 94.269

\0

REQUEST NO. 29: All Calendars, appointment books, logs, notes and diaries belonging to you, kept by you or kept on your behalf from January 2004 through the present.

RESPONSE:

REQUEST NO. 30: All documents in your possession, custody or control that you intend to rely upon or introduce at the trial in this matter. RESPONSE:

REOUEST NO. 31: All documents evidencing, referring or relating to any arrest, indictment or conviction of you for any crime, other than minor traffic violations, for the last ten years. RESPONSE:

REQUEST NO. 32: All charges, complaints or other documents filed and/or received at any time by or on behalf of you with any governmental entity, including, but not limited to, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Texas Commission on Human Rights, the Texas Workforce Commission, the Social Security Administration, NASD, and the Texas Department of Insurance, evidencing, referring or relating to your employment with Travis County.

RESPONSE:

Defendants' First.Request for Production to Plaintiff 190032-1 94.269

11

REQUEST NQ. 33:

All Documents that evidence, refer or relate to any claims for attorneys' fees against Travis County and Susan Spataro in this action, including, but not limited to~ all documents reflecting a fee agreement between you and your attorneys and any invoices or statements pursuant thereto. RESPONSE:

REQUEST NO. 34:

Complete the attached authorization permitting the full disclosure of all medical records. An authorization for release of medical records is attached to this request for production for signing. RESPONSE:

REQUEST NO. 35:

All documents in your possession, custody, or control evidencing, referring or relating to any source of income, benefits, insurance payments or compensation, including commissions, earned or received by you since June 4, 2008 including, but not limited to, all W -2 forms and state and federal income tax returns, payroll check stubs, workers' compensation documents, unemployment compensation documents and disability documents, including Social Security documents, and any documents related to income earned or received by any employment, sole proprietorship, consulting relationship or business you have participated in during such period.

RESPONSE:

REQUEST

NO. 36:

All documents evidencing, relating or referring in any way to your attempts to engage in self-employment or to obtain employment with another employer since June 4, 2008, including, but not limited to, job applications, classified ads for jobs sought by you, telephone logs, resumes, tests, correspondence with prospective employers or job placement agencies, offer and rejection letters, job search files, expense records and reimbursement records.

Defendants' First Request 190032-1 94.269

fOT

Production to Plaintiff

12

RESPONSE:

Defendants' First Request for Production to Plaintiff 190032-1 94.269

13

AUTHORIZATION FOR THE USE OR DISCLOSURE OF HEALTH INFORMATION By signing below, I hereby authorize to disclose certain individually identifiable health information (the "information") as provided in the Authorization. Printed Name: -'_ Date of Birth: Social Security Number: _ Information to be released ("the entire medical record: or "billing records" or identify more specifically the records requested: the entire medical records, including but not limited to: face sheet, discharge summary, history and physical, consultation reports, operative reports..radiology reports, lab reports, pathology reports, any diagnostic reports, emergency room records, nurses notes, and doctors notes. Purpose of Request: The request is being made fore the purpose of

-'

Who and Where to SendlRelease the Information:

_

Expiration and Revocation of this Authorization: I understand that I may revoke this Authorization at any time prior to the expiration date or event, but that my revocation will not have any affect on actions taken by the Health Care Provider, its employees or agents before they receive niy revocation. Should I desire to revoke this Authorization, I must send written notice to (Health Care Provider and address): __________________________ authorization will expire on the following date or event ___________ , or 180 days from the date of signature.

- Unless revoked, this

Signature of Patient or Personal Representative Who May Request Disclosure: I understand that I do not have to sign this authorization, I can inspect or copy the protected health information to be used or disclosed. I authorize this healthcare provider to releasethe protected health information specified above. A copy of this authorization shall have the same force as the originaL I understand that if the recipient authorized to receive the information is not a covered entity (i.e.: insurance company or health care provider), the released information may no longer be protected by federal or state privacy regulations, I further understand that my health care and the payment of my health care will not be affected if I do not sign this form. Signature (patient):

_

Signature (witness):

_ ,

202268-1 094269

Date: Date:

_ _

.. '

!

EMPLOYEE'S RELEASE AND AUTHORIZATION THE STATE OF TEXAS

3 3

COUNTY OF TRAVIS

3

BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared Heather Johnson who, after being first duly sworn, did depose and say: That she does hereby authorize all of her prior employers in all jobs she has had to give the Travis County Attorney, or any of his representatives, any and all information relative to any employment she may have had with any persons, individual, corporation, partnership, association and any other business entity whatsoever. Information revealed may include, but is not limited to, federal income tax wage and earning statements, 1099 forms, employment files, time sheets, employment applications, interoffice memoranda and any other written or verbal communication pertaining to her employment and compensation. That she does also hereby authorize all employers to provide oral or written statements, copies of all records and any and all other documents concerning or in any way connected with the employment provided her. That she does hereby further authorize all employers who have employed her to submit to the Travis County Attorney or his representatives any reports setting forth the history, hiring, firing, compensation or any information whatsoever concerning her employment. That her identifying information is as follows: Date of Birth: Social Security Number: Driver's License Number: Any photostatic copy of this authorization shall serve as an original.

Heather Johnson SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO on this _

day of

, 2009.

Notary Public In and For The State of Texas

/ 202266-1 094.269

/

PLAINTIFF'S FIRST RESPONSES TO THE DEFENDANTS'

REOUEST FOR

PRODUCTION:

I: The basis of this lawsuit resulted because a proper law enforcement official did not investigate, therefore; there would be no documents reflecting or describing an investigation. 2: All documents, photographs, moving pictures, films, videotapes, and audio recordings that are connected with or related, in any way, to the lawsuit are in the possession of Travis County and at this time are being requested through the discovery process by the Plaintiff. 3: Again, Ms. Spataro and Travis County already has in their possession a packet of discoverable documents, audio recordings, and tangible evidencing relating in any way to any allegation contained in Plaintiff's original complaint and subsequent pleadings. The Plaintiff is in the

process of requesting

discoverable documents from

discoverable documents granted by the Defendants she plans to use as evidence. 4: Again, please refer to response 3. 5: The request is denied because additional support is in the process of being requested through the discovery process. The request is broad and unduly

burdensome, and intrudes on her and the public's privacy as the allegations are set to be argued and determined before a jury. 6&7: The Plaintiff reserve the right to turn in any written, verbal, recorded, or other published statements of the Defendants and Plaintiff that are connected with or

Plaintiff's First Responses To The Defendants' Request for Production

call an expert witness. 18: The Plaintiff was terminated from Travis County, therefore; lost her annually salary of$35,500.

Attached are pay stubs. (1<.).'((

2W\C(

!(jJ~r.\itUJe ,h fV-daI~\

19: The Plaintiff denies the request because there are no employment records which are reasonably related to the loss or damages asserted by the Plaintiff, expect those within Travis County. Travis County was her only place of employment when she was terminated, and she has not been employed since her termination, hence; the request is irrelevant and invasive to her privacy. 20: The request is denied because additional support is in the process of being requested through the discovery process. The request is also overbroad and unduly

Plaintiffs First Responses To The Defendants' Request for Production

, t,,' .

"

I

'I

2

.

I

I

I,"!'

I

I

'I

I

I I

, I ,.

...

.\'

'I'

II "-"'--~"""""WfI

•• I•1•• .

'

,

II

t"ltl

related, in any way to this lawsuit before discovery closes, but at this time does not have anything new to turn over that is not already in the possession of the Defendants. 8: Any documents or records of regularly conducted business activities which the Plaintiff may introduce into evidence at the time of trial of this case or which may be used in the examination of any witness at trial or by deposition in this case is in the process of being requested in the discovery process and will be turned on a later date if there are any. 9-17: The Plaintiff does not foresee herself using an expert witness, therefore; Ms. Johnson reserves the right in the future to respond to requests 9-17 if she decides to call an expert witness. 18: The Plaintiff was terminated from Travis County, therefore; lost her annually salary of $35,500. Attached are pay stubs. (, \0.'(

b~ .. v~( luJ~r-\ilUk

);

r~.c0JM-.\ .

)

19: The Plaintiff denies the request because there are no employment records which are reasonably related to the loss or damages asserted by the Plaintiff, expect those within Travis County. Travis County was her only place of employment when she was terminated, and she has not been employed since her termination, hence; the request is irrelevant and invasive to her privacy. 20: The request is denied because additional support is in the process of being requested through the discovery process. The request is also overbroad and unduly burdensome, and intrudes on her and the public's privacy as the case is set to be argued and determi?ed before ajury. 21: Currently, the only documents in possession of the Plaintiff that are related to this incident made by any witness or purported witness is the attached TWC

Plaintiffs First Responses To The Defendants' Request for Production

2

statements. The Plaintiff is in the current process of requesting email documentation and phone conversations through the discovery process. 22: There are no documents. 23: The suit is based on the actions of Travis County and Susan Spataro who clearly terminated and did not investigate allegations which were reported in good faith to the appropriate law enforcement official. Also, again Ms. Johnson is currently in the process of requesting documentation through the discovery process. 24: Again, the Plaintiff is in the current process of requesting phone conversations and email documentation through the discovery process, thus; she currently has no new statements for the Defendants. 25: There has been no settlement or any agreements regarding any of the claims in this lawsuit with any person. 26: There have been no prior lawsuits or claims for damages made by the Plaintiff. 27: see attached 28 & 36: see attached 29: Ms. Johnson does not keep calendars, appointment books, logs, notes and diaries. It is also an irrelevant an invasive question concerning her privacy that does not lead to calculated discovery of admissable evidence. 30: Ms. Johnson is currently not in possession, custody, or control of all documents she intends to rely upon or introduce at the trial because she is currently in the process of requesting documentation in the discovery process. Again, the Defendants have within their custody all evidence within the possession of the Plaintiff.

Plaintiff's First Responses To The Defendants' Request for Production

3

31: The Plaintiff has never been arrested, indictment, or convicted of any crime for the last ten years. 32:seeattached

(w ,I,

~vd

33: see attached

C VJ ,/1

{}QnJ Ial-er

(O-~

34: Denied because the Defendants

/1(J(e 1-0

J

Vi{«(fhfle.

?1()e

seek information

6 CG{(CWl

tV

that is irrelevant

and not

calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence at the time of trial because the information is protected from disclosure by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 and invasive t~ the Plaintiffs privacy 35: see attached

Plaintiff's

First Responses

C V'J '

To The Defendants'

l( ~

nvf lCc\t

Request for Production

c-

.

fl \

(0

rIlo It fo ~~"0~L

4

HEATHER M. OHNSON PROSE 601 Blessing Ranch Rd. Liberty Hill, TX 78642 Telephone: (512) 778-6099 Facsimile: (512) 778-6628 CERTIFICATE

OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Plaintiff's Fist Responses to the Defendants' Request for Production has been served in accordance with the Federal Rilles of Civil Procedure, via certified mail, return receipt requested, on this the 14thday of May 2009, as follows:

Via Certified Mail

RIR/R # 70072560000083909125 Anthony J. Nelson Lelie W. Dippel Assistant County Attorneys P.O. Box 1748 Austin, Texas 78767

f7~ II

Plaintiff's First Responses To The Defendants'

Request for Production

Heather M. Johnson

5

.oJ

o cr .oJ

t==2~~~=-~ s """'d

<;6 't,$

1\ 'i I ~9H!le,

SENDER: COMPLETE • • •

• • •

THIS SECTION

Complete items I, 2, and 3. Also complete ltem 4 Restricted Delivery is·desired. Print your name and address on the reverse so that we can return the card to you. Attach this card 10 the back of the rnallpiece, or on the front space permits.

n

A.SignaIlae

X

o Agent

o Addressee C. Dale of DeIive
n

DYes ONo

PE TO TH!=l1fGHT TDOTTEOWNI';

------------'AIL

.1111111111111

4. Restrlcted Delivery? (Extra Fee)

' •.•

,_ 'Y 2004

0 Yes

7007 2560 DDOD 839D 9125 Domestic Return Raceipt

- llJ2595
WUUW~~-----------------------

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION

HEATHER JOHNSON V. TRAVIS COUNTY AND SUSAN SPATARO IN HER INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL CAPACITIES

§ § § § § § § §

A-08-CA-643-SS

PLAINTIFFS' FIRST SET OF INTERRROGA TORIES TO DEFENDANTS TO:

Anthony J. Nelson and Leslie W. Dippel, Attorneys for the Defendants, Susan Spataro and Travis County, P.O. Box 1748 Austin, Texas 78767

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 and 33, Susan Spataro and the following employees of Travis County: Tracy LeBlanc, Mike Crawford, Sandy Hendrix, Sean O'Neil, Jose Palacios, Yolanda Jones, April Bacon, and Blain Keith are required to respond to the subsequent Plaintiff s First Set of Interrogatories to Defendants pursuant to the included instructions and definitions within thirty (30) days after service. This discovery shall be deemed continuing so as to require supplemental answers pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(e).

Plaintiff's First Set of Interrogatories

to Dc:fendaolS

1

Respectfully submitted,

tl~Jj(;,~ I HEATHER M. JOHNSON PROSE

601 Blessing Ranch Rd. Liberty Hill, TX 78642 Telephone: (512) 778-6099 Facsimile: (512) 778-6628

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Plaintiff's Fist Set of Interrogatories to Defendants has been served in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, via certified mail, return receipt requested, on this the 16th day of May 2009, as follows:

Via Certified Mail RIRIR # 70072560000083909132 Anthony J. Nelson Lelie W. Dippel Assistant County Attorneys P.O. Box 1748 Austin, Texas 78767

Plainllff's

Ftrst Set of Interrogatories

to Defendants

2

DEFINITIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS

A. Instructions 1. Answer each interrogatory separately and fully in writing under oath, unless it is properly objected to, in which event state the reasons for the objection in lieu of an answer. If you respond with an objection, answer any portion of the interrogatory to which you do not object. 2. An evasive or incomplete answer may be deemed to be a failure to answer. 3. An answer does not have to be either yes or no, therefore; please think about your answers thoroughly before responding and explain in detail your response. 4. You are under a continuing duty to promptly supplement your response as soon as practicable after you discover that a previous answer is inaccurate, no longer accurate, or incomplete. 5. If there are any documents, which answer in whole or in part, any of these interrogatories, they may be attached to your answers and incorporated in the answers by specific reference. 6. If a document required to be identified by these interrogatories was, but is no longer, in your possession or subject to your control, state what disposition was made of the document as well as the date(s), or approximate date(s), on which such disposition was made and state the nature of and the circumstances surrounding the disposition. 7. In the event that a privilege is claimed as the ground for not answering any interrogatory, either that a privilege is claimed as the ground for not answering any interrogatory, either in whole or in part, you are instructed to identify such information by its subject matter and state with particularity the facts and grounds constituting the nature and basis for any such privilege or other ground for non-disclosure. Only such parts of your answer which are privileged from disclosure, according to your claim, may be withheld: Any part of your answer to which you did not claim privilege or work product should be given in full. 8. Although subsequent discovery and/or investigation may yield additional information in the future and make it necessary for you to supplement your responses, Plaintiff, Heather Johnson request that you answer these interrogatories as fully and completely as possible by providing all such responsive information as is known to you at the time your original answers to these interrogatories are due. 9. For any requested information about a document that no longer exists or cannot be located, identify the document, state how and when it ceased to existence, or when it could no longer be located, and the reasons for the disappearance. Also, identify each Plaintiff's Fint Set of Interrogatories to Defendants

3

person having knowledge about the disposition or loss, and identify each document evidencing the existence or nonexistence of each document that cannot be located.

B. Definitions The following definitions shall have the following meanings, unless the context requires otherwise: 1. "Defendants" means Travis County, Texas and/or Susan Spataro as the context requires, includes their agents, representatives, affiliates, predecessors, successors, and persons acting or purporting to act on their behalf or under their control. 2. "Travis County" means Travis County, Texas and as the context requires, including its agents, representatives, affiliates and persons acting or purporting to act on its behalf or under is control. 3. "Plaintiff" or "Heather Johnson," as well as a party's full or abbreviated name or a pronoun referring to a party, means the party, and where applicable, her agents, representatives, officers, directors, employees, partners, corporate agents, subsidiaries, affiliates, or any other person acting in concert with her or under her control, whether directly or indirectly, including any attorney. 4. "You" or "your" means the following employees of the Defendant Travis County, Texas: April Bacon, Jose Palacios, Mike Crawford, Sandy Hendrix, Sean O'Neil, Tracy LeBlanc, Yolanda Jones, and Blain Keith, and the Defendant Susan Spataro, their successors, predecessors, divisions. subsidiaries, present and former officers, agents, employees, and all other persons acting on their behalf or their successors, predecessors, divisions, and subsidiaries. 5. "Document" is defined to be synonymous in meaning and equal in scope to the usage of this term in Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 34(a). A draft of a non-identical copy is a separate document within the meaning of this term. 6. "Possession", custody, or control" of an item means that the person either has physical possession of the item or has a right to possession that is equal or superior to the person who has physical possession of the item. 7. "File" means any collection or group of documents maintained, held, stored, or used together, including, without limitation, all collections of documents maintained, held, or stored in folders, notebooks, or other devices for separating or organizing documents. 8. "Person" means any natural person, corporation, firm association, partnership, joint venture, proprietorship, governmental body, or any other organization, business, or legal entity, and all predecessors or successors in interest.

Plaintifrs

First Set of Interrogatories

to Defendants

4

9. "Relating to" and "relates to" mean, without limitation, embodying, mentioning, or concerning, directly or indirectly, the subject matter identified in the interrogatory. 10. "Concerning" means, in whole or in part, directly or indirectly, referring to, relating to, connected with, commenting on, responding to, showing, describing, analyzing, reflecting, or constituting. II. "Date" means the exact date, month, and year, if ascertainable, or, if not, the best available approximation. 12. "Mobile device" means cellular telephone, satellite telephone, pager, personal digital assistant, palm top computer, hand-held computer, electronic rolodex, or walkietalkie. J3. "Identify" following:

or "describe"

when referring to a person, means you must state the

a. The full name. b. The present or last known residential address and residential phone number. c. The present or last known office address and office telephone number d. The present occupation, job title, employer, and employer's address at the time of the event or period referred to in each particular interrogatory . e. In the case of any entity, identify the officer, employee, or agent most closely connected with the subject matter of the interrogatory, and the officer who is responsible for supervising that officer or employee. 14. "Identify" following:

or "describe"

when referring to a document, means you must state the

a. The nature (e.g. letter, handwritten note) of the document. b. The title or heading that appears on the document. c. The date of the document and the date of each addendum, supplement, or other addition or change. d. The identity or the author and of the signer ofthe document, and of the person on whose behalf or at whose request or direction the document was prepared or delivered. e. The present location of the document, and the name, address, position or title, and telephone number of the person or persons having custody of the document. 15. "Communication" means any contact between tow or more persons, companies, corporations, joint ventures or partnerships and shall include, without limitation, electronic communication, letters, memoranda, telegrams, or telecopies, and any oral contract such as a face-to-face meetings and telephone conversations. Plaintitrs

First Set of lnterrogatortes to Defendants

5

16. "Lawsuit" shall mean the lawsuit styled Heather Johnson V. Travis County and Susan Spataro, in her Individual and Official Capacities, In the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, Austin Division, and Cause No. A-08-CA-643ss. 17. "Health Care Provider" means any practitioner of the healing arts, and may include medical doctors, radiologists, psychologists, psychiatrists, counselors, chiropractors, osteopaths, emergency room services, ambulances, pharmacists, pathologists, and therapists. 18. "Describe in detail" means to give a complete and full description concerning the matter about which inquiry is made, including the full name, address, and telephone number (both office and home) of person involved, if appropriate, along with the dates, times, places, amounts, and other particulars which make the answers to the interrogatory fair and meaningful. 19. "Income" means any source of revenue you receive on a weekly, biweekly, monthly, semi-annual, or annul basis which is derived from any form of employment, gifts, royalties, government assistance. 20. As used in these Interrogatories, the singular encompasses the plural and the plural encompasses the singular. 21. Whenever the masculine gender is used herein, it should be taken to include feminine gender where appropriate. 22. The word "and" means "and/or." 23. The word "or" means "or/and."

Plaintiff's First Set of Interrogatories to Defendants

6

PLAINTIFFS' FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES

INTERROGATORY

TO DEFENDANTS

NO.1:

Please state the full name, including your middle name or names, all nicknames by which you are known, and any name by which you were ever known. ANSWER:

INTERROGATORY

NO.2:

Identify each person answering these interrogatories, supplying information, or assisting in any way with the preparation of the answers to these interrogatories ANSWER:

INTERROGATORY

NO.3:

Please state the complete address of your residence for the last 10 years. ANSWER:

INTERROGATORY

NO.4:

State whether you have been convicted of or pled guilty or nolo contendere to any misdemeanors or felonies within the past ten (10) years, except for minor traffic violations. If so, describe for each the nature of the charge, the date, location. and circumstances of the conviction, the ultimate disposition of the case, and if you are presently on probation in connection with any such conviction. ANSWER:

Plaintiff's First Set of Interrogatories

to Defendants

7

INTERROGATORY NO.5: Identify any and all psychiatrists, psychologist, counselors, physicians, or any other health care providers whose services you have ever retained for counseling, treatment, or analysis or any physical, emotional, mental, or psychological condition or complaint for the past ten years.

ANSWER:

INTERROGATORY NO.6: Identify each and every employer you have had for the past I O-year period, stating the name and address of such employer(s), your job title, the dates of employment for each, and the reason for leaving.

ANSWER:

INTERROGATORY NO.7: Did you posse a C.P.A. at the time of the Plaintiff's employment?

ANSWER:

INTERROGATORY NO.8: Identify any personal financial debt you have had in the last IO-year period and how you personally manage your debt?

ANSWER:

Plaintiff's First Set of Interrogatories to Defendants

8

INTERROGATORY

NO.9:

In your accounting software, H.T.E., it has a GMBA encumbrance section. In this section what is the proper equation for balancing of cJosinthe PO( encumbrance), and should the encumbrance equal the liquidation before closing the PO (encumbrance)? Please provide printouts from all screen levels of the GMBA encumbrance inquiry and printouts from the Accounts Payable Transaction detailed inquiry screen of the H.T.E. software explaining and validating your answer. ANSWER:

INTERROGATORY

NO. to:

In the same GMBA encumbrance section, what is the process of correcting a PO if an encumbrance is issued to a wrong vendor in the following situations: before an invoice has been entered against the PO, after an invoice has been entered against the PO creating a partial entry, and after an invoice has been entered completing the PO. Please provide printouts from the H.T.E. software explaining and validating your answers. ANSWER:

INTERROGATORY

NO. 11:

Within the same GMBA encumbrance section, what happens to an amount if it is un liquidated from the PO vs. unencumbered, and why would someone choose to un liquidate vs. unencumber? Please provide printouts from the H.T.E. software explaining and validating your answers. ANSWER:

Plalntitrs

First Set of lnterrogatories

to Defendants

9

INTERROGATORY

NO. 12:

Please explain why for the fiscal year 2008 and prior years, the following project DDDC08 is out of balance, close to $25,000 in debt. Please provide printouts from the H.T.E. software explaining and validating your answers. ANSWER:

INTERROGATORY

NO. 13:

Is an expenditure part of the revenue process, thus; becoming revenue? Is a budget considered income, and is income considered revenue? ANSWER:

INTERROGATORY

NO. 14:

If someone called asking what account should be referenced on a cash receipt in order for it to be properly credited then who would be the person to ask? ANSWER:

INTERROGATORY

NO. 15:

When a cash receipt is credited to an account, what was the process in April of 2008 vs. April of 2009? Was or is more then one account credited or debited simultaneously when entering the transactions? Does the money return to the proper account without a JE? Please provide printouts from H. T.E. validating and explaining your answers. ANSWER:

Plaintiff's First Set of Interrogatories to Defendants

10

INTERROGATORY

NO. 16:

What is the correct universal equation for equity? ANSWER:

INTERROGATORY NO. 17: Can you please explain what words Travis County uses to name and describe #29 oftheir fund activity basic within the account balance inquiry screen and # 10I of their fund activity basic and sub activity within the account activity listing screen from the account balance inquiry transactions screen? What would be the correct equation for credits and debits applied to #29 and # I a I from the words used to describe and name their account activity? Please provide printouts from the H. T.E. software explaining and validating your answer. ANSWER:

INTERROGATORY

NO. IS:

Does Travis County view their general fund sources as parenting accounts from which all fiscal activity is derived? What does this say about bonded projects which the County has agreed to furnish? ANSWER:

INTERROGATORY

NO. 19:

What is the correct equation for bonded activity and who stands to benefit? ANSWER:

Plaiutifrs

First Set of Interrogatories

to Defendants

II

INTERROGATORY

NO. 20:

What is the definition of remainder? ANSWER:

INTERROGATORY

NO. 21:

If Travis County awarded to purchase from a vendor through a bid process two specific items on a particular contract, but the contract allows for Travis County to purchase the remainder of the two specific items if there is money left in their budget for the fiscal year, however; the two specific items have already been purchased and paid, should you then pay the invoice? ANSWER:

INTERROGATORY

NO. 22:

If Travis County agrees to pay a vendor through a contract for consulting work regarding information on the geographically and marketable layout of land and the vendor is in a partnership with a fiscal entity who is a stakeholder in land, therefore; the fiscal entity benefits from the sale of the land, should you then pay the invoice? ANSWER:

INTERROGATORY

NO. 23:

If Travis County agrees to pay a vendor a contract price of 15 percent makeup on all OEM material listed awarded through a bid process, but the invoice shows a reduction in the counter sale price of the item then what is the correct process of double checking making sure the vendor is invoicing at the correct contract price?

Plaintiff's First Set of tuterrogarortes to Defendants

12

ANSWER:

INTERROGATORY

NO. 24:

Was Mike Crawford a manager at the time of the Plaintiff's employment, and did Mr. Crawford preach in meetings. 'The number one responsibility of an associate auditor is to pull and know a couple of contracts a week?" ANSWER:

INTERROGATORY NO. 25: Who has auditing and reporting responsibilities for the entire county government and is responsible for the, "strict enforcement of the laws governing county finances?" ANSWER:

Plaintiff's First Set of Interrogatories

to Derendanrs

13

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION

HEATHER JOHNSON V. TRAVIS COUNTY AND SUSAN SPATARO IN HER INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL CAPACITIES

§ § § § § § § §

A-08-CA-643-SS

PLAINTIFFS' FIRST REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION TO PLAINTIFF

TO:

Anthony J. Nelson and Leslie W. Dippel, Attorneys for the Defendants, Susan Spataro and Travis County, P.O. Box 1748 Austin, Texas 78767

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 and 34, Susan Spataro and/or Travis County are required to respond to the subsequent Plaintiffs First Request for Production to Defendants pursuant to the included instructions and definitions within thirty (30) days after service. This discovery shall be deemed continuing so as to require supplemental answers pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(e).

Plaintitrs

First Request For Production to Defendants

Respectfully submitted,

~~

HEATHER M. JO

SON

PROSE 601 Blessing Ranch Rd. Liberty Hill, TX 78642 Telephone: (512) 778-6099 Facsimile: (512) 778-6628

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Ihereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Plaintiffs

Fist

Request for Production to Defendants has been served in accordance with the Federal th

Rules of Civil Procedure, via certified mail, return receipt requested, on this the 16 day of May 2009, as follows:

Via Certified Mail R/R/R # 70072560000083909132 Anthony J. Nelson Lelie W. Dippel Assistant County Attorneys P.O. Box 1748 Austin, Texas 78767

Heather M. Johnson

Phlintitrs

First Request For Production to Defendants

2

DEFINITIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS Please use the following definitions in responding to the following Requests for Production: I. "Defendants," "you" or "your" means Travis County, Texas and/or Susan Spataro and as the context requires, includes their agents, representatives, affiliates, predecessors, successors, and persons acting or purporting to act on their behalf or under their control. 2. "Travis County" means Travis County, Texas and as the context requires, including its agents, representatives, affiliates and persons acting or purporting to act on its behalf or under is control. 3. "Plaintiff", "her", or "she" means Heather Johnson and as the context requires, includes their agents, representatives, affiliates, predecessors, successors, and persons acting or purporting to act on their behalf or under their control. 4. "Persons" as used herein includes natural persons, general partnerships, limited partnerships, joint ventures, associations, corporations, governmental agencies, departmental units or subdivisions thereof, and any other form of business entity or association, as the case may be. S. "Documents" means "documents and tangible things" within the broad sense of the FED. R. CIV. P. 34(a) and includes, with out limitation, all written, recorded or graphic matter, however produced or reproduced, now or at any time in you possession, custody or control, or subject to your control, including, without limitation, all letters, correspondence, statements, reports, papers, memoranda, books, accounts, invoices, drawings, drafts, charts, photographs, negatives, electronic or videotape recordings, any other data compilations from which information may be obtained, and includes drafts and non-identical copies of documents. Documents are deemed subject to your control if you have the right to secure the item or copy thereof from another person or a public or private entity having actual physical possession thereof. If any document requested herein was, but is no longer subject to your control, please state what disposition was made of it, and the date or dates or the approximate date or dates of such disposition. 6. "Concerning" includes referring to, alluding to, pertaining to, responding to, relating to, in connection with, commencing on, in respect of, about, regarding, discussing, showing, describing, mentioning, reflecting, analyzing, constituting, or evidencing. 7. "Communication" means any contact between two or more persons, companies, corporations, joint ventures or partnerships and shall include, without limitation, written contact by means such as letters, memoranda, telegrams, telecopies or telexes, or by any document, and any oral contract such as face-to-face meetings and telephone conversations. PlaintilT's First Request Fer- f>rod.uction to Defendants

3

8. "Lawsuit" shall mean the lawsuit styled Heather Johnson V. Travis County and Susan Spataro, in her Individual and Official Capacities, In the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, Austin Division, and Cause No. A-08-CA-643ss. 9. "Income" means any source of revenue you receive on a weekly, biweekly, monthly, semi-annual, or annul basis which is derived from any form of employment, gifts, royalties, government assistance. 10. As used in these Interrogatories, the singular encompasses the plural and the plural encompasses the singular. II. Whenever the masculine gender is used herein, it should be taken to include feminine gender where appropriate. 12. The word "and" means "and/or." 13. The word "or" means "orland."

Plaintiff's First Request For Production to Defendants

4

REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION

REQUEST NO.1: Please provide documentation which states it is against the policy and procedures of Travis County and/or other privacy laws within the United States to allow employees access to analyst reports, documentation, and/or be present in closed door meetings regarding the performance goals and behavior of other individuals who are working for Travis County.

RESPONSE:

REQUEST NO.2: Please supply the necessary documentation that warranted Mike Crawford, a Financial Analyst V, working for Travis County, to be in all three closed door meetings with the Plaintiff's managers on a debatable 5/19/08, a certain 6/3/08, and 6/4/08 concerning her performance, behavior, and termination.

RESPONSE:

REQUEST NO.3: Since the printout of the time is included on the GMBA batch groups, provide examples ofGMBA batch groups from 4/01108-5/0\/08 turned in by the Plaintiff validating Ms. Hendrix's, a Financial Analyst, verbal accusation on 5/15/08. Mrs. Hendrix's accusation of the Plaintiff's work not being turned in on a timely manner was the major reason for the closed door meeting on a questionable 5/19/08, and is the leading accusation listed in bullet style only to repeat itself on point four( 4.) within the PIP memo handed to Ms. Johnson on 6/3/08.

RESPONSE:

rlalntUT's First Request For Producttua to Defendants

5

REQUEST NO.4: Please present documentation stating why the Plaintiff was never granted Request NO.3 when Ms. Johnsonasked Mr. Palacios, a Chief Assistant County Auditor, to provide the GMBA batch groups basing your allegations in the first meeting on a debatable 5/19/08, and when she asked on 6/3/08 to provide the evidence not yet granted you proceeded in providing GMBA batch groups with the time blackened out from the copy machine in the first meeting. RESPONSE:

REQUEST NO.5: Please provide documentation and an adequate explanation as to why Request NO.4 is not an example of your inability to understand the key points before leaving or engaging in a discussion. RESPONSE:

REQUEST NO.6: On the GMBA batch groups provided, from REQUEST NO.3 explain in detail Ms. Hendrix's comments. In reference to Ms. Johnson's inaccuracy, supply the necessary documentation validating the notations (claims) on the groups. Please do not provide examples of groups past the date 5/09/08, as again the Plaintiff repeatedly asked for examples of groups dated prior to Mrs. Hendrix's outburst on 5/15/08, and the meeting with Mr. Palacios and Mr. Crawford on a questionable 5/19/08, thus; leading to the meeting on 6/3/08. When presented the groups in the meeting on 6/3/08, the majority of the remarks on the group had to do with Laserfrische images being citied wrong. Laserfische is an electronic filing system for invoices and has nothing to do with the accuracy of the batch groups used in all financial reporting for Travis County including your weekly payables. RESPONSE:

PlaintilTs First Request For Production to Defendants

6

REQUEST NO.7: The following request is for your documentation referring to the factual background Travis County gathered explaining their allegations and conclusions about the Plaintiffs work performance, behavior, and the accuracy ofthe factual circumstance stated within the PIP memo, itself: • Please provide the evidence that validates the meeting was held on 5/19/08 and not 5/20/08, such as email activity and activity within H.T.E. on 5/19 vs. 5/20 from the three individuals involved in the meeting. As the Plaintiff already requested this information in emails on 6/3/08 and 6/4/08 to April Bacon, a Chief Assistant County Auditor who was present in the meeting on 6/3/08 and never fulfilled her request. • Please give ample examples of non effective communication skills by the Plaintiff prior to 5115/08 and include all email exchange between her and Amy Draper and her and Mrs. Hendrix. • Please supply the necessary evidence that validates bullet two was talked about and addressed in the meeting on a debatable 5119/08. • Please explain in detail the daily tasks of an associate auditor up to 6/3/08 and present publications of how an auditor's position is not an accounting position. • Please provide the evidence validating your accusations on point (3.) Ms. Johnson received her BA in Art and Anthropology, therefore; she feels the comment is a highly slanderous and false allegation to the Plaintiffs expression, thoughts, behaviors, and beliefs, and hopes the evidence is not based on one occurrence. • Please explain why she is considered an Associate Auditor I on the signature line because according to the attached document, the Plaintiff received a promotion to an Associate Auditor II and was told by Mr. Palacios the day she was handed the article, "You received a promotion due to a universal promotion within Travis County." RESPONSE:

PlaintiJrs

First Request For Production to Defendants

7

REQUEST NO.8: Please provide all other evidence referring to the factual/opinion background Travis County gathered from other employees explaining the Defendant's allegations and conclusions about the Plaintiff s work performance and behavior and supply the documentation explaining all your attempts at consultation. RESPONSE:

REQUEST NO.9: Relating to the Defendant's alleged financial violations by the Plaintiff, please supply all emails sent, forwarded, received, and replied from the Plaintiff's domain [email protected] to and from Ms. LeBlanc for the work week of 5112/08 expressing her concerns after Ms. LeBlanc asked the Plaintiff how to process a transaction on PO#380801 and instead offollowing Ms. Johnson's advice Ms. LeBlanc decided to do it a different way. This resulted in the H.T.E. software to drop $60.48 from the system alluding to the need to make the necessary JE somewhere out there to which the Plaintiff sent a variety of different examples expressing her trepidation to Mrs. LeBlanc. RESPONSE:

REOUEST NO. 10: Please provide the reports validating how $60.48 from PO#380801 returned to the correct unencumbered balance of the account. Also, provide documentation explaining why Mr. Palacios did not and could not provide the reports to the Plaintiff in the first place when she addressed her concerns in the meeting on an arguable 5/19/08, but instead along with Mr. Crawford instructed Ms. Johnson not to concern herself with this matter and the difference between a modified accrual system and a corporate accrual system during working hours. RESPONSE:

I'laintitrs

first Request For

r-rocueaon

to Defendants

REQUEST NO. 11: Please provide reports from 3/1/08-4/1/08 showing how encumbrances from GMBA that are un liquidated or unencumbered return to the unencumbrance balance of the necessary accounts. Please do not give reports with transactions dated after the Plaintiff's termination. RESPONSE:

REQUEST NO. 12: Please grant the necessary phone conversations and emails that were sent, received, forwarded, and replied from the Plaintiff's domain [email protected] for the timeframe 5/12/08-6/4/08 to and from Sean O'Neil for the following three reasons: • She was instructed by Mrs. LeBlanc to talk to Mr. O'Neil who is in charge of sending monthly open PO (encumbrance) reports to the departments regarding her concerns with PO#380801 before the meeting on a questionable 5/l9/08. • Ms. Johnson also went to Mr. O'Neil with another PO concern, #379421 when she received phone calls and emails from Mrs. Barchus, Purchasing Agent II. The Plaintiff became aware again of how there were possible financial violations and accounting irregularities with the encumbrance process of Travis County and your H.T.E. software. She sent an email within the above timeframe requesting from Mr. O'Neil certain reports. Yet again, Mr. Palacios was overheard by the Plaintiff outside her office denying the request to Mr. O'Neil. • Lastly the Plaintiff went to Mr. O'Neil with a question regarding cash receipts after Yolanda Jones, a Financial Analyst, was unable to answer. The exchange of words lead the Plaintiff to believe there were other accounting irregularities with the revenue process of cash receipts and sent various emails explaining her theories into your errors and how to correct the problem. RESPONSE:

Plaintil'rs First Request For Production to Defendants

9

REQUEST NO.13: Please provide phone conversations and emails that were sent, received, forwarded, and replied from the Plaintiff's domain [email protected] during 5/12-6/4/08 to and from Mrs. Barchus regarding PO#379421 and alternate solutions to the problem/error in question. RESPONSE:

REQUEST NO. 14 The Plaintiff reserves the right to request email and phone conversations exchanged between Mr. O'Neil and Mr. Palacios on a given day, but that day is yet to be determined as it pertains to an email requested in production sent to Mr. O'Neil. In the TWC hearings, Mr. O'Neil denied communicating to anyone concerning Ms. Johnson's verbal claims, questions, correspondence, and email allegations communicated to Mr. O'Neil by the Plaintiff, however; please Refer back to Request No. 16. RESPONSE:

REQUEST NO. 15 On same note, but different tune, the Plaintiff reserves the right to request email and phone conversations exchanged between Mr. O'Neil and Mrs. Hendrix on a given day, but that day is yet to be determined as it pertains to an email requested in production sent to Mr. O'Neil by the Plaintiff in reference to possible financial violations. Mrs. Hendrix was seen walking to Mr. O'Neil's office and then overheard initiating a conversation regarding the email sent. Refer to Request No.i6. and No.I S RESPONSE:

REQUEST NO. 16 Please provide phone conversations and emails that were sent, received, forwarded, and replied from the Plaintiff's domain [email protected] Plaintifrs

First Request For Production to Defendants

to 10

and from Rhonda Ambrose, a Treasury employee and Yolanda Jones in reference to a phone call from a Travis County employee questioning how to apply a cash receipt for a personal car rental. The email records and phone calls precede and are relevant evidence to the details of the disruptive conversation outside her office the morning of 6/4/08 prior to her termination. RESPONSE:

REQUEST NO. 17 Please provide phone conversations and email exchanges between Mr. O'Neil, Ms. LeBlanc, and Mr. Keith on 6/4/08 as it is questionable as to why having a conversation right outside the Plaintiffs office concerning a new way of handling cash receipts (Ms. Johnson's ideas and theories expressed to Mr. 0 'Neil after questioning alleged financial activity which she later reported to Mrs. Spataro as potential financial violations in the grievance proceedings and the real reason behind the termination) was an appropriate place to meet up and have a conversation, since the night before the Plaintiff was put on a PIP memo for her work performance and behavior. RESPONSE:

REQUEST NO.18: Please provide reports, documentation, and explanations as to the procedures of handling cash receipts from 111108-5/01/08 vs. from 7/1I08-present. RESPONSE:

REQUEST NO. 19: Please provide a photo ID of Mr. Keith verifying the ID of the employee as the Plaintiff only knows Mr. Keith by sight and was not aware of the associated name with the individual employee while working for Travis County. RESPONSE: Plaintiff's First Request For Production to

nerencams

11

REQUEST NO. 20: Please provide phone conversations and emails that were sent, received, forwarded, and replied from the Plaintiff's domain [email protected] from 5/12/08-6/4/08 to and from the following employees of Travis County regarding contract issues and possible violations discussed in the meeting on 6/3/08: Christine Rodriguez, Bonnie Floyd, Lorean Breland, Lori Clyde, Mike Crawford, Donald Rollack, and Nancy Barchus,

RESPONSE:

REQUEST NO. 21: Please provide phone conversations and emails that were sent, received, forwarded, and replied from the Plaintiff's domain [email protected] during 5/12/08-6/4/08 to and from the following vendors regarding contract issues and violations discussed in the meeting on 6/3/08: Envision, Honda Motorcycle, and Covert Chevrolet.

RESPONSE:

REQUEST NO. 22: Please provide a copy of Envision, Honda Motorcycle, and Covert Chevrolet's contract and a copy of all invoices and correspondence regarding the invoices due for payment pertaining to the foregoing potential contract violations at the time of the Plaintiff's employment.

RESPONSE:

Plaintltrs

First Request For Production to

nereneams

12

REQUEST NO. 23: Please provide a copy of the Covert Chevrolet's OEM manuals received by the Plaintiff the day before she was terminated in relation to a probable contract violation.

RESPONSE:

REQUEST NO.24: The Plaintiff would like to ask permission to schedule a day when she can visit the premise to look through her email domain, listen to phone conversations, view images scanned into laserfische, and look at word documents she created while working for Travis County relevant to proving her allegations for the lawsuit, therefore; no unnecessary and confidential information will be leaked and granted, and no factual, truthful, helpful documentation will be denied from the Plaintiff, thus; eliminating the potential for here say on both sides.

RESPONSE:

REQUEST NO.25: If the Defendants claim there is no record of the requested emails and phone conversations then Ms. Johnson would like evidence pertaining to the activity from the archives of your information system mainframe servers to make sure there have been no deletions as this would be a violation of the law punishable up to 5-7 years iffound guilty.

RESPONSE:

Plaintiff's first Request For Production to Defendants

13

Plaintilrs first Request for Productlcn to Defendants

14

PAF Number:

PERSONNEL ~l'ION FINAL

0125979

Employee Id Number. Employee.

926461 JOHNSON,

HEATHER

FORM

11/15/07 16:11:29 Hire Date: Eligible to work:

M

.. Appointment & Re-Appoint Effective .. Regular, CC approval not required.

PAF Action Type .

Comment

Date of Action:

11/05/2007

:

CURRENT

STATUS

NEW STATUS

Authorized Posn. Code . Authorized Posn. Title. Actual Position Code. Actual Position Title Grade/Step. Dep/Div/Act . .

15634 AUD ASSOCIATE 13634 AUD ASSOCIATE 0l3/01 06-10-516

Authorization

00035

(Slot) Nbr:

Employee Status . . . Full Time/Part Time . Exempt from Overtime. No. Hours/Week. . . .

REGULAR Full Time No 40

Hourly Annual

$

Expense

00/00/0000 y

Rate Rate

$

Distribution.

i>.PPROVALS: Requisitioner Department

.

Approval

Approval

fmMD Review ~uditor Approval

- No Chg

AUDITOR

II

AUDITOR

I

17.0673 35,500.00

001-0610-516-0701

CASIASJ WARNERD PAFAUTO OWENSP

CASIAS, JACKIE - County A WARNER, DIANA L - County PAF Automatic Upload/Appr OWENS, PREVIA - Co~ty Au

100.000%

11/05/2007

Approved

11/05/2007

Approved

11/08/2007 11/15/2007

Reviewed Approved

( PAF Number,

PERSONNEL

0130860

ACTION

3/31/08 9,33,30

PORM

PINAL Employee Id Number. Employee. . ...

Hire Date, Eligible to work:

926461

JOHNSON,

HEATHER

M

Effective

PAF Action Type .

.. Mobility .. Reclassification

Comment.

.. Implementation of new pay grades Auditor1s positions.

CURRENT Authorized Authorized

Posn. Poso.

Actual Position Actual Position Grade/Step. Dep/Div/Act .

Authorization

Employee

Code . Title.

Code. Title

013/01 06-10-516

(Slot)

Status

Nbr:

_ .

Full Time/Part Time Exempt from Overtime. No.

HourS/Week.

Hourly Annual

Expense

Approval

Auditor

Approval

- No Chg

NEW STATUS 17635

AUDITOR

II

AUD ASSOCIATE

AUDITOR

II

AUDITOR

I

15635

AUDITOR

I

AUD ASSOCIATE 015/01

40

$ $

Department Approval HRMD Review

for County

REGULAR Full Time No

17.0673 35,500.00

Distribution.

APPROVALS, Requisitioner

03/16/2008

00035

. .

Rate Rate

and titles

STATUS

13634

AUD ASSOCIATE

of Action,

(non-POPS)

15634

AUD ASSOCIATE

Date

11/05/2007

Y

001-0610-516-0701

CASIASJ WARNERD PAFAUTO OWENSP

CASIAS, JACKIE - County A WARNER, DIANA L - County PAF Automatic Up1oad/Appr OWENS, PREVIA - Co~t~ Au

03/25/2008 03/25/2008 03/28/2008 03/31/2008

'

.

100.000%

Approved Approved Reviewed Approved

•

TRAVIS

TRAVIS COUr.;TY AD:\U:-;ISTRATJO:-: BmLDTNG

COl;:"'TY

AUDITOR'S OFFICE

P.O BOX 1748 LIBERTY HILL, TX. 78767

scsex A. SPATARO, CPA, ClL-\ COU:\TY

(512) 854-9125

Au"'UITOR

FA.X: (512)

854-9164

June 5, 1008

Heather Johnson 601 Blessing Ranch Road Liberty Hill, TX 78642

Dear Ms. Johnson: Please find enclosed your final check. This check covers your compensation the period May 16, 2008 through noon June 4, 2008. This, also, includes the compensation for your accrued Sick and Vacation Leave under current Travis County Policy. A detail of the hours paid has been included. There will be no other direct deposits or checks for you. If you have any questions related to your insurance County Human Resources @512 ..854-04Q-l..

coverage,

please contact Travis

For information related to YOUT retirement account at the Texas County and District Retirement System. please caJl 512-328-8889 or through their website: www.tcdrs.org.

Sincerely,

I

~~gh~J~.~ Chief Assistant County Auditor Payroll and Benefits Auditing

·

'.

TRAVIS Hours

PRrOOUBl

JOH....~SON, ~EJl..THER SE.1'11-MQKl':!LY 11

Employee

pay period position . . . Ov~rtime status ie information,

l

Type

Hours (2)

COUNTY Entry

AUD

ASSOC:ATE

6/05/08 10:20:17

r·t

926461

h~~ITOR

II

press

Auditor

Enter.

Dollars

Date

(2)

rnrndd

g~ ~~gg ~g:

2f-

- County

SAL~RIED ~ON-EXEMPT OVERTIME Account Override Fnd DpDvAct BlOb

Rate(4) 170673 ~7D673

~

2792-

I" ~ 1"92.00 F3=Exit F4_prompt F9_Alt data

More •.. F5_Year override Fll~Accrual inquiry

27.92F7=Copy field F12=Cancel

Fa-Paste F24=More

field keys

TR.-\VIS CO(':\TY AliDITOR'S OFFICE

TRAVIS COUNTY

KED A. GR.~"GER BUILDING P.O. BOX 1748 AUSTf.\I, TX 78767 (512) 854-9125 FA-X: (512) 854-9164

S(,SA.'\' A. SPATARO. CPA. DU COl'l\'TY Al'DITOR

Memorandum To:

Heather Johnson

From:

Jose Palacios

Dale:

June 3, 2008

Re:

Personal Improvement

Plan

.>• .---~

"' ' ...

iOn May j.9, you, Mike and I discussed your performance, which had raised concerns aooblt-:jpur understanding of our expectations for your position. During that discussion we focused on three areas: prioritizing your workload to meet deadlines, following the protocols for your position, and developing effective communication skills. In the meeting you were instructed to: • focus on your job duties, making sure your work was complete, asecurate and on time; • work more closely with the appropriate contract staff, making sure you ask them about contract issues before asking questions of county staff outside of our office; worry less about accounting principals. since your position is not an accounting position • •

enhance your communications by toking notes during the discussion summarizing the important points before leaving the discussion; and ~

receRJi~o

~Ian<:tions

proyided bll ~nior

\f\\~1"''-='lV_~L' LCVY\mi~11(tlte>

:--

1\

?~.

LQLU~' ~

rO-

tJ \

,fuC~.·

"t~SIJ-:,',

Cqr C\.A (t\0.-'\\.. .

The following wee~ it appeared as if you either did not understand or chose to ignore those instructions.! Yo did not et closed within the timelines provided by your Fin=..cial Analyst. our work was not accurate ac In ~o. Ice Invoic proeedures. When refe en Ing inS ru Ions . May 19 'cussion to ask your (" ntract questions of our contract staff, you re ponded' n unrelated comment ~j@tes.!rom an April staff i1leeting ~3Ile sllTiasKrngconi'rac{ , ~ ~chasln Sfafflatt1e-r1f1an auditor staff.

..

c,

personnel.

and/O}~,... \.

quesHo~~?t~

I

Co fidenfia/

Page 2

~

I

61312008

Additionally. your communications have been unprofessional on several recent occasions. You engaged in a heated and loud discussion with Sandy Hendrix which was easily overheard by co-workers. You responded in an insubordinate manner to Mike Crawford in an email exchange regarding a motorcycle purchase. You interrupted a conversation among co-workers in the file room with an angry and unrelated remark. making them uncomfortable and confused. This behavior will not be tolerated. Your position requires professionalism. effective communication. good judgment in executing your assigned tasks, and the ability te understand and follow instructions. These skills are necessary to performing as a team member in this office. When you are given an explanation or instruction, you must listen carefully and communicate any additional questions or concerns clearly without anger or sarcasm. Staff want to help you understand the work of the office. but they also depend on you in meeting their own performance goals. Coworkers must be able to rely on a professional response in their interaction with you. You must correct your actions immediately.

You are expected to:

1. Treat co-workers with courtesy, despite any personal feelings you may have regarding a particular set of circumstances. 2. Make sure you have attentively listened and understood a discussion by summarizing your understanding of the conversation, and allowing the other participants to correct any miscommunication immediately. 3. If you ask a question that is not answered adequately for your understanding, ask the question a different way rather than repeating the same question several times. If you listen to or read the communication carefully, you should be able to determine the point of confusion or misunderstanding and resolve it. 4. Turri in your work on time according to the schedules you are given. that all work is accurate and complete before turning it in.

Make sure

5. Attend to your invoice workload rather than attempting contract or accounting analysis assigned to other positions. When you are told by a manager or contract/accounting analyst position that an invoice should be paid, or that there are no contract issues to hold up payment, or that the system properly accounts for accruals. or that our office does not have authority over the process you are questioning. accept that determination. Follow their instructions. 6. Ask either Mike Crawford or Sean O'Neal any questions you have regarding a contract, but only after you have first read the comments section in the contract database and did not find the information you needed to audit the invoice according to the procedures for your position.

2

61312fJOB

Page 3

Confidential

7. Copy me on any contract correspondence issues that are not quickly resolved. For purposes of this plan, quickly resolved means within one conversation or an exchange of two (the original and the response) emails.

,,-

Additionally, i ur May 19 ;;Jeeting, Mike formed the opinion that you were surreptitiousl t' nversation. If so, you will stop taping co-workers without their permission. It creates an atmosphere of suspicion and mistrust, and is counterproductive to the operations of this office. Because attitude and approach are personal commitments, you may identify other steps that will bring your performance to office standards. If you cannot meet these expectations for any reason, please take this opportunity to express your .concerns. Failure to implement the requirements of this Personal Improvement Plan and meet the performance standards of this office will result in disciplinary action up to and including termination. It is not enough to show some progress, you must show and maintain immediate improvement. ...

/

--~

----'--~.' \\d~f:~J9se Palacios, Chief Asst. County Auditor .,'Disbursements Auditing Division

I I

I have read and discussed this memorandum with my manager. I understand its contents and the consequences of not improving. I understand that I can provide a written response for· inclusion in my personnel file.

Date:

_

Heather Johnson, Associate AUditor I

C: Susan Spataro, County Auditor Diana Warner, First Assistant County Auditor Employee File

3

500 E WHITESTONE CEDAR PARK, TX 78613-9998

j

04:14:11

PM

OSt16J2QOS

Sales Receipt

---Product

Sale

Description

--------_

Fi na l

Unit

Price Pr-i ce .._---- ---_.-----_.---- --Qty

$2.07

AUSTIN,

fX

78767 zonev t First-Class

t1aiH!)

Large Envelope

o

lb. 7.40 oz. Certified Hai Jl" Returr. Receipt (U.S.

$2.80 $2.30

tlail)

========= $7,17

Issue postage: ::;;::::::========

Total:

$7.H

Paid by:

$7,17

DebitCard Account #: A.pproval #:

XXXXXXXXXXXX9028

on #:

151951 387

23_902480623-99 Receipt #:

040591

Transact;

Transaction USPS® #

80 481565-9550

Humbsr:

To check on the delivery

status of

your Certified Mail'" article, our Track & Confi rm webs" te

visit at

www.usps.com or use this Automated postal Center~ (or any Automated Postal CentBr~

at other

postal

locations). Please retain all receipts from affixed forms. For inquiries, both the salas-receipt and the customer copy from the affixed form shall be required. Thanks.

It's

a pleasure

to serve you.

ALL SALES FINAL ON STAMPS AND POSTAGE, REFUNDS FOR GUARANTEEO SERVICES ONLY.

Page I of2 Heather M. Johnson From: To: Sent: Attach: Subject:

"Heather M. Johnson" ; Monday, May 18, 2009 9: 18 AM . SONint.doc; TLBint.doc; YJint.doc; BKint.doc; JPint.doc; MCint.doc; SHint.doc; SSint.doc; p int.doc Plaintiffs Interrogatories

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION HEATHER JOHNSON

V. TRAVIS COUNTY AND SUSAN SPATARO IN HER INDIVIDUAL 'AND OFFICIAL CAPACITIES

-~---'-l

J l______

§ § § § § § § §

A-08-CA-643-SS

r~-______J

~.. --.-. - --_--==-======-=--::::--- ....-.=:==-============:::==--

:====--:':::""::==--==:J

Good Morning District Attorney's Office: Attached please find the Plaintiff's First Set of Interrogatories. A certified copy was mailed out late on 5/16/09, however; I forgot to included copies for all individuals needing to respond individually. Again, once cooperation is granted then I will be more then obliged to better answer your first set and request to the best of my abilities. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me regarding this matter via phone or email. My fax is still having problems communicating, so if there is error then please leave me a message. Sorry for the Delay.

6/17/2009

Page 2 of2 Sincerely, ~IJI'

o!( cJdlmsmt

:)(: Heather M. Johnson Pro Se 60 I Blessing Ranch Rd Liberty Hill, TX 78642 (512)-497-2114 Fax: (512)-778-6628 [email protected]

6/17/2009

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION

HEATHER JOHNSON V. TRAVIS COUNTY AND SUSAN SPATARO IN HER INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL CAPACITIES

§ § § § § § § §

A-08-CA-643-SS

Pursuant to the Scheduling Order issued on November 7, 2008 per Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 16, the Plaintiff respectfully submits the following exhibit and witness list.

PLAINTlfF"S

EXHIBIT AND WITNESS LIST

Page 1 of 6 pages

OAO

J

87 (Rev. 7/87) Exhibit and Witness List

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS, AUSTIN DIVISION HEATHER JOHNSON, Plaintiff, V.

PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT AND WITNESS LIST

TRAVIS COUNTY AND SUSAN SPATARO IN HER INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL CAPACITIES, Defendants.

PRESIDING JUDGE:

PLAINTIFF'S ATTORNEY:

Sam Sparks ProSe

PLF. NO.

TRIAL OATE (S) October 2009 DEF. DATE NO. OFFERED

COURT REPORTER MARKED

ADMITTED

Case Number: A-08-CA-643-SS

DEFENDANT'S ATTORNEY: Assistant County Attorneys Anthony J. Nelson, Leslie W. Dippel COURTROOM DEPUTY DESCRIPTION OF EXHIBITS'

AND WITNESS

Witness: Susan Spataro, Travis County Auditor, 314 W. IIID Street, Suite 200 Austin, Texas 78701. If called, Mrs. Spataro is expected to have personal knowledge of the policies and procedures of the Travis County Auditor's Office. She is also expected to have personal knowledge of her position, its function. and the routine tasks of a County Auditor. Finally, Susan Spataro is expected to have personal knowledge of Ms. Johnson's employment with Travis County, her disciplinary actions, her termination, subsequent appeal. and reports made by the Plaintiff' of possible contract and financial violations of the Defendants. (may call)

PLAINTIFF S EXHIBIT AND WITNESS LIST

Witness: April Bacon, Chief Assistant County Auditor, 314 W. 111Il Street, Suite 200 Austin, TX 78701. If called, Mrs. Bacon is expected to have personal knowledge of the policies and procedures of the Travis County Auditor's Office. She is also expected to have personal knowledge of her position, its function, and the routine tasks of a Chief Assistant County Auditor. Finally, April Bacon is expected to have personal knowledge of Ms. Johnson's employment with Travis County, her disciplinary actions, reports made by the Plaintiff of possible contract and financial violations of the Defendants, and ultimarelv her termination. (mav call) Witness: Jose Palacios, Chief Assistant County Auditor, 314 W. 11'" Street. Suite 200 Austin, TX 78701. If called, Mr. Palacios is expected to have personal knowledge of the policies and procedures of the Travis County Auditor's Office. He is also expected to have personal knowledge of his position, its function, and the routine tasks of a Chief Assistant County Auditor. Jose Palacios is also expected to have personal knowledge of Ms. Johnson's employment with Travis County, her disciplinary actions, reports made by the Plaintiff of possible contract and financial violations of the Defendants, and ultimatelv her termination. Imav call) Page 2 of 6 pages

Witness: Sean O'Neil, Financial Analyst V, 314 W. lit Street, Suite 200 Austin, Texas 78701. If called, Mr. O'Neil is expected to have personal knowledge of the policies and procedures of the Travis County Auditor's Office. He is also expected to have personal knowledge of his position, its function, and the routine tasks ofa Financial Analyst V. Sean O'Neil is also expected to have personal knowledge of his working relationship with Ms. Johnson, her termination, and possible information regarding numerous exchanges of communication between the Plaintiff and himself relating to potential financial violations of the Defendants, and ideas and theories necessarv for corrections. (mav tam Witness: Diana Warner. First Assistant County Auditor, 314 w. 1111IStreet, Suite 200 Austin, Texas 78701. If called. Mrs. Warner is expected to have personal knowledge of the policies and procedures of the Travis County Auditor's Office. She is also expected to have personal knowledge of her position, its function, and the routine tasks ofa First Chief Assistant County Auditor. Finally, Diana Warner is also expected to have personal knowledge of her working relationship with Ms. Johnson. her disciplinary actions, and ultimately her termination. (may call) Witness: Mike Crawford. Financial Analyst Y, 314 W. 11 Street, Suite 200 Austin, Texas 78701. If called, Mr. Crawford is expected to have personal knowledge of the policies and procedures ofthc Travis County Auditor's Office. He is also expected to have personal knowledge of his position, its function, and the routine tasks of a Financial Analyst V. Finally, Mike Crawford is also expected to have personal knowledge of his working relationship with Ms. Johnson, her disciplinary actions, and ultimately her termination along with possible information regarding numerous exchanges of communicatioo between the Plaintiff and himself relating to potential contract violations of the Defendants, and ideas and theories necessary for corrections.

(mar call) Witness; Blain Keith, Chief Assistant Auditor, 314 W. II Street, Suite 200 Austin, Texas 78701. If called, Mr. Keith is expected to have personal knowledge of the policies and procedures of the Travis County Auditor's Office. He is also expected to have personal knowledge of his position, its function, and the routine tasks of a Chief Assistant Auditor. Finally, Blain Keith is also expected to have personal knowledge of his working relationship with Ms. Johnson, her termination, and possible information regarding numerous exchanges of communication between Mr. O'Neil and himself relating to potential financial violations of the Defendants, and ideas and theories for corrections.Imav cain Witness: Tracy LeBlanc, 314 W. 1111 Street, Suite 200 Austin, Texas 78701. If called, Mrs. LeBlanc is expected to have personal knowledge of the policies and procedures of the Travis County Auditor's Office. She is also expected to have personal knowledge of her position, its function, and the routine tasks of an Associate Auditor JI. Finally, Tracy LeBlanc is also expected to have personal knowledge of her working relationship with Ms. Johnson, her termination, and possible information regarding numerous exchanges of communication between the Plaintiff and herself relating to potential financial violations of the Defendants, and ideas and theories necessary for corrections.

(mev cam Witness: Yolanda Jones, Financial Analyst, 314 W. II Street, Suite 200 Austin, Texas 78701. If called, Mrs. Jones is expected to have personal knowledge of the policies and procedures of the Travis County Auditor's Office. She is also expected to have personal k-nowledge of her position, its function, and the routine tasks of a Financial Analyst. Finally, Mrs. Jones is also expected to have personal knowledge of her working relationship with Ms. Johnson, her termination, and possible information regarding a few exchanges of communication between the Plaintiff and herself relating to potential financial violations of the Defendants, and ideas and theories necessary for corrections. (may call) Witness: Rhonda Ambrose, Treasury Employee of Travis County, 314 W. J 111I Street, Suite 160 Austin, Texas 78701. If called, Mrs. Ambrose is expected to have pe.~~nal knowledge of the role and function of her position within Travis

County. may call) Witness: Nancy Barchus, Purchasing Agent II, 314 W. 11m Street, Suite 400 Austin, Texas 7870 I. If called. Mrs. Barchus is expected to have personal knowledge of her position, its function, and the routine tasks of a Purchasing Agent Il. She is also expected to have personal knowledge of her working relationship with Ms. Johnson., and possible information reeerdlna numerous PLAINTIFF'S

EXHIBIT AND WITNESS LIST

Page 3 of 6 pages

exchanges of communication between the Plaintiff and herself relating to potential financial violations, and ideas and theories of corrections necessary for Travis Countv.-(~av cail)' Witness: Lori Clyde, Bonnie Floyd, Lorean Breland, and/or Donald Rollack, Purchasing Agents for Travis County, 314 W. I J tIIo Street, Suite 400 Austin, Texas 78701. If one is called, they are expected to have personal knowledge of their working relationship with Ms. Johnson, and possible information regarding numerous exchanges of communication between the Plaintiff and themselves relating to potential contract violations of the Defendants. {may

calli Witness: Christine Rodriguez, an employee for Travis County. If called, Mrs. Rodriguez is expected to have personal knowledge her working relationship with Ms. Johnson, and possible information regarding numerous exchanges of communication between the Plaintiff and herself relating to potential financial and contract violations of the Defendants, and ideas and theories of necessary for corrections. (may calllWitness: Sandy Hendrix, Financial Analyst, 314 W. II tIIo Street, Suite 200 Austin, Texas 7870 I. If called, Mrs. Hendrix is expected to have personal knowledge of the policies and procedures of the Travis County Auditor's Office. She is also expected to have personal knowledge of her position, its function, and the routine tasks ofa Financial Analyst. Finally, Sandy Hendrix: is also expected to have personal knowledge of her working relationship with Ms. Johnson, reported allegations by Mrs. Hendrix regarding the Plaintiff's work performance and behavior, and possible information regarding a few exchanges of communication between Mr. O'Neil and herself relating to potential financial violations of the Defendants, and ideas and theories of necessary for corrections. rmav cal1\ Witness: Dominic Audino, Arboretum Plaza One, 9442 N. Capital of Texas Highway, Suite 500 Austin, Texas 78759, If called Mr. AUdi~~J1iSexpel~~ed to have knowledge on the issue of the Plaintiffs anornev's fees. mav call Witness: Steven J. Moss, 13809 Research Blvd. Suite 701 Austin, Texas 78750. If called, Mr. Moss is expected to have knowledge of the issue of the Plaintiff's attorney's fees. He also has personal knowledge concerning the appeal on

6125/08. (may calli Witness: Anthony J. Nelson, 3J4 W. I Jilt Street Suite 420 Austin, Texas 78701. If called, Mr. Nelson is expected to have knowledge on the issue of the Defendant'S attorney's fees. He also has personal knowledge concerning the grievance process of the Plaintiff up to and was present at the appeal on

6125108. (mav call) Witness: Leslie W. Dippel, 314 W. lido Street, Suite 420 Austin, Texas 78701. If called, Mrs. Dippel is expected to have knowledge on the issue of the Defendant's attorney's fees. (may caiil· Exhibit: Policy and Procedure Manual of the Travis County Auditor's Office.

1 2.12.2 3

Exhibits: Travis County Code Manuals for the Policies, Procedures, and Regulations for a1l Travis County Employees Exhibit: Personnel Aclion Form Final of Johnson, Heather M. dated 3/31108 & Travis County Hours Entry backup regarding the Plaintiff's last paycheck from Travis CountY relatinz to Ms. Johnson's position title uoon termination. Exhibit: Wiley !FRS 2009: Interpretation and Application ofInternational Accountine and Financial Reeortina Exhibit: Wiley GAAP 2009: Interpretation and Application ofOenerally Accepted Accoununa Practices Exhibits: Comprehensive Annul Financial Reports 2007, 2008, & 2009 for Travis County

4 5 6.16.3 7

Exhibit: A booklet of charts and diagrams created by the Plaintiff questioning the auditing and accounting policy and procedures of Travis County regarding eorential financial, contract. and auditine violations ofthe Defendants. Exhibits: Defendants' responses, documentation, and communication provided to the Plaintiffs Request for Production

8.18.25 9.19.9 10 PLAINTlFF'S

Exhibits; Defendants' answers, documentation, to the Plaintiffs Set of interrogatories

and communication

Exhibit: OEM manuals of Covert Chevrolet

EXHIBIT AND WITNESS LIST

Page 4 of 6 pages

provided

Exhibit

11 12

www.ci.austm.tx.us/wallercreek

Exhibit to be presented in booklet format, emails and attachments sene from the Plaintiffs home domain hmj7476ral:hughes.net to Travis County employees and her own domain at Travis County heather [email protected] regarding financial theories and questions to potential violation and errors of the Defendant while working for Travis County: Sent to the Plaintiffs own domain on 5/13/08 subject po#liquadation, attach: 380803J.xls

Sent 10 Tracy leBlanc on 5/16108 subject: 380801 attach: 380801 ~ freightliner.doc Sent to Sandy Hendrix on 5/19/08 subject: income statement Sent to Mike Crawford on 5/19/08 subject accrual accounting. attach: accrual.doc; modified accrual. doc; explantetion.doc; Attempted to send to Sean O'Neil 5120108 subject: so's-Accruers-rrccess attach: accruaL doc; modified.accrual.doc; encumbrance example. doc; encumbrance explanatation.doc The rest were sent to her domain where she later would make minuet changes and forward to Sean O'Neil during non working hours 5122108 subject: mas. attach mas.doc 5/30/08 subject: answer to the riddle, attach \\'WW phoneplusmag comanicJes471 featOl.mdi.; w\vw ftc.goY.soecches-
13 14 15 16

Any witness necessary for authentication, impeachment or rebuttal.

Plaintiff reserves the right to add additional witnesses depending on Defendant's witness and exhibit designations. Plaintiff reserves the right to submit a revised exhibit list after the closing of discovery on July 31, 2009

Respectfully submitted,

prose

HEATHER M. JOHNSON 601 Blessing Ranch Rd. Liberty Hill, TX 78642 (512)497-2114: PHONE

PLAIN1lfF·S

EXHIBIT AND WITNESS LIST

Page 5 of 6 pages

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Plaintiff s Exhibit and Witness List pursuant to the Scheduling Order issued on November 7, 2008 per Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 16 was served on the Defendants' counsel via facsimile (512)

Defendants' Attorneys: ANTHONY J. NELSONILESLIE W. DIPPEL Travis County Assistant Attorneys 314 W. 11th Street, Suite 420 Austin, TX 78701 Phone Number: (512) 854-9513

PLAINTIFF·S EXHIBIT AND WITNESS LIST

Page 6 of 6 pages

HP Ofllcejet

J4500 AII-In-One

series

Fax Log for Jun

NOTE: Blocked calls are not displayed on this report. For more information, see Junk Fax Report and the Caller

17 2009

ID Report.

8:22PM

fleiA~ ~C)Qd-.

Last 30 Transactions Date

Duration

Pages

Result

Received

0:26

1

OK

Apr 24 2:49PM

Received

0:41

0

No fax

Apr 27 1:33PM

Received

0:35

1

OK

Apr 30 11:03AM

Received

0:41

0

No fax

May 5

6:18PM

Received

0:40

0

No fax

May 6 May 6

10:29AM 11:06AM

Fax Sent Received

15128544808

2:45 0:40

7 0

OK No fax

May 6 May 9

11:57AM 10:39AM

Fax Sent Received

15128544808

3:08 0:41

8 0

OK No fax

Apr

Time

24 10:36AM

Type

Station ID Caller ID

May

11 10:54AM

Received

0:40

0

No fax

May

14 11:03AM

Received

0:41

0

No fax

May 14 11:23AM

Received

0:41

0

No fax

May

Received

0:41

0

No fax

May 141:23PM

Received

0:41

0

No fax

May

Received

0:40

0

No fax

May 15 10:31AM

Received

0:40

0

No fax

May

152:15PM

Received

0:40

0

No fax

May 152:36PM

Received

0:41

0

No fax

May

Received

0:40

0

No fax

May 162:15PM

Received

0:41

0

No fax

May

Received

0:41

0

No fax

1412:32PM

143:51PM

1611 :59AM

189:26AM

May

18 11:13AM

21 3:34PM 213:38PM 21 9:38PM 219:46PM 21 9:47 226un 5 12:12PM Jun 6 6:45PM May May May May May

Received Fax Fax Fax Fax ax

Sent Sent Sent Sent Sent

Fax Sent Fax Sent

15128544808 15128544808 15123200975 15123200975 123200975 1 14787573144 15123201413

0:40

0

No fax

0:00 0:42 0:00 0:51 0:4 2:2 1:46 1:08

0 0 0 0

No answer Cancel

6 4 2

No answer Cancel K OK OK

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION

§ HEATHER

JOHNSON, Plaintiff,

§ §

§

V.

§ §

TRAVIS COUNTY AND SUSAN SPATARO IN HER INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL CAPACITIES, Defendants.

§ § §

A-08-CA-643-SS

§

DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S SECOND MOTION TO AMEND PLEADING COME NOW Defendants Travis County and Susan Spataro ("Defendants"), and through their attorney of record and file this Responseto

by

Plaintiff's Second Motion

to Amend Pleading. Defendants offer the following in support: I. INTRODUCTION Following her termination from Travis County, Plaintiff sued Defendants alleging violations of the Texas Whistleblower Act and the First and Fourteenth Amendments to .,

the United States Constitution under 42 U.S.C. §1983. Plaintiff filed a motion to amend her complaint on April 22, 2009.

The Court granted her leave to amend but ordered her

to file an amended complaint complying with FED. R. CN. P. 8. In response, Plaintiff filed a Second Motion to Amend Pleading.

DEFENDANTS TRAVIS COUNTY AND SUSAN SPATARO'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFf'S

204259-1

SECOND MOTION TO AMEND PLEADING PAGE J OF4

II. ARGUMENT In response to the Court's Order Plaintiff filed a Second Motion to Amend Pleading.

Defendants object to Plaintiff's motion because it does not state a basis for

leave to amend her Complaint. additional

Further, the proposed

facts or causes of action.

amendments

Rather, the proposed

do not assert

amendments

interpretations of and conclusions from facts she has already asserted.

contain

Finally, Plaintiff

does not attach a copy of the proposed amended complaint to her motion for leave. Accordingly, Defendants request the Court deny Plaintiff's Second Motion to Amend Pleading as it does not comply with FED. R. CIV. P. 8 or the Court's Order of April 29, 2009. III. PRAYER WHEREFORE,

PREMISES

CONSIDERED,

Defendants

request the Court

deny the Plaintiff's Second Motion to Amend Pleading. and grant further relief to which Defendants may be entitled. Respectfully submitted, DAVID ESCAMILLA TRAVIS COUNTY ATTORNEY P. O. Box 1748 Austin, TX 78767 (512) 854-9415 FAX: (512) 854-4808 By:~~ J. NELSON Assistant Travis County Attorney State Bar No. 14885800 ANTHONY

LESLIE W. DIPPEL

Assistant Travis County Attorney State Bar No. 00796472 Attorney for Defendants Travis County and Susan Spataro DEFENDANTS TRAVIS COUNTY AND SUSAN SPATARO'S

204259-1

RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S SECOND MOTION TO AMEND

PLEADING PAGE20F4

CERTIFICATE

OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on the 20th day of May, 2009, I electronically filed foregoing Defendants' Defendants Travis County and Susan Spataro's Response Plaintiff's Second Motion to Amend Pleading with the Clerk of the Court using CM'ECF system, and I have mailed a copy of this document by certified U.S. Mail to following non-CMlECF participant:

the to the the

CMRR 70052570 000050053195 Heather Johnson 601 Blessing Ranch Road Liberty Hill, TIC 78642

Anthony J. Nelson Leslie W. Dippel Assistant County Attorneys

DEFENDANTS TRAylS CQIINTY AND SUSAN SPATARO'S

204259-1

RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S SECOND MOTION TO AMEND PLEADING PAGE30F4

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION

HEATHER JOHNSON, Plaintiff,

§ § § §

V.

§

A-08-CA-643-SS

§ § § §

TRAVIS COUNTY AND SUSAN SPATARO IN HER INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL CAPACITIES, Defendants __

-~ ORDER

On

" 2009, this Court considered Plaintiff's Second Motion to

Amend Complaint.

Having considered the motion, the Defendant'

response, and the

applicable law, this Court denies the Plaintiffs Second Motion to Amend Pleading.

SIGNED AND ENTERED on this

day of

--', 2009.

Presiding Judge

DEfENDANTS

204259·1

TRAVIS

COUNTY

AND SUSAN SPATARO'S

RESPONSE

TO PLAINTIFF'S

SECOND

MOTION

TO AMEND

PLEADING

PAGE40F4

Case 1:08-cv-00643

Document 21

Filed 06/08/2009

F-'LED

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE wESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DMSION

Page 1 of 2

'1m JUN~8

PH 2: 06

...

. ~;!;};RS',"'w.;~:. ~Viir ~ew~rt.ql(j'1·~;f#tt.Kl*1.: . BY

HEATHER JOHNSON,

-

(H7ft1y¥

Plaintiff,

-vs-

Case No. A-08-CA-643-SS

TRAVIS COUNTY and SUSAN SPATARO, in her individual and official capacities, Defendants.

ORDER

BE IT REMEMBERED on this day the Court reviewed the file in the above-styled cause, and specifically Plaintiff Heather Johnson's Second Motion to Amend Pleading [#18] filed May 20, 2009, and Defendants' Response thereto [# 19]. After considering the motion, the response, and the t

,"

,.Il.

case file as it whole, the Court enters the following order. On April 22, 2009, the Plaintiff filed a Motion to Amend Pleading [# 16]. The Court granted said motion on April 29, 2009, ordering the Plaintiff to file an amended pleading in compliance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8 within eleven days of the order. Shortly thereafter, Plaintiff filed her second motion to amend. Defendants object to the second motion to amend, pointing out the motion lacks a basis for leave to amend and lacks an attached amended complaint. Upon reviewing the second motion to amend, the Court concludes the pleading is in fact the PlaintifPs response to the Court's order to file an amended complaint improperly titled as a motion to amend. Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and her pleadings must be liberally construed. The Court will therefore construe ...

Case 1;08-cv-00643

.' , ~,

Document 21 '

.

Filed 06/08/2009

Page 2 of 2

the Plaintiff s "Second Motion to Amend Pleading" as a supplement to her complaint, and dismiss the motion to amend as moot. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff Heather Johnson's Second Motion to Amend Pleading [#18] is construed as a supplement to the Plaintiff s complaint and the request to amend is DISMISSED AS MOOT.

SIGNED this the

g

k day

of June 2009.

'd~~

SAMSPARK~ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

t.

-2-