2/28/2019 11:13 PM

Velva L. Price
District Clerk
Travis County
CAUSE NO. D-1-GN-17-004456 D-1-GN-17-004456
Irene Silva

CHRISTI J. BOWMER, § IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF

Plaintiff, §
§
vs. § TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS
§
GTT PARKING, LP, SHELDON DAVID §
KAHN, PREMIER PARKING OF §
TENNESSEE, LLC, and WEITZMAN §
MANAGEMENT CORPORATION §
Defendants. § 353rd JUDICIAL DISTRICT

PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT GTT PARKING, L.P.’S

MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGEMENT ON
TRADITIONAL AND NO EVIDENCE GROUNDS

Plaintiff Christi Bowmer (“Plaintiff”) files this response to defendant GTT Parking L.P.’s

(“GTT”) motion for partial summary judgment on traditional and no evidence grounds, and

respectfully shows the following:

I. INTRODUCTION

In this case, Plaintiff Christi Bowmer is asserting claims against defendants based on their

negligent and grossly negligent operation and management of the Littlefield Garage—a parking

garage in downtown Austin—which posed an active hazard to the public, both inside the garage

and outside the garage. Defendants’ negligence and gross negligence nearly cost Ms. Bowmer her

life on July 13, 2017, when the negligent and gross negligent operation of the garage caused her

vehicle to plunge off of the seventh floor of the garage onto the public alleyway below due to acts

and omissions of defendants that included failure to comply the City of Austin’s building code,

the applicable standard of care, and their engineers’ own advice and warnings.

Defendants GTT and Premier Parking ran the Littlefield Garage in a textbook example of

a joint enterprise that put profits over safety. From the time GTT purchased the Littlefield Garage

-1-
in 2015, and well before the incident giving rise to this lawsuit, GTT and Premier knew—and/or

should have known—that the way they operated the garage and the cable vehicle barrier system in

the garage was woefully inadequate to restrain vehicles from falling off of the garage in the event

of an accident. GTT also knew or should have known that the operation was actively violating the

City of Austin building code, and negligently engaging in acts and omissions that were

endangering its patrons and other members of the public.

GTT claims it knows nothing about operating a garage safely, and hired co-defendant and

joint-tortfeasor Premier Parking (“Premier”) as the managing agent of the garage because Premier

was the expert who said it would run the garage safely and had served as managing agent for the

previous owners as well. In fact, Premier represents that it is an expert in running parking garages.

Plus, since Premier had run this very garage for more than two years before GTT bought it, Premier

had actual knowledge that the vehicle restraint system violated the building code and the standard

of care and had been illegally and improperly “repaired.” Under Texas law, Premier’s knowledge

is imputed to GTT as Premier was the property manager and agent for GTT.

But Ms. Bowmer has not just presented that imputed knowledge—GTT had its own actual

knowledge of the dangerous operation and conditions yet it did nothing to stop them or make them

safe.

In fact, in 2016—only 10 months before Ms. Bowmer’s incident—GTT’s garage made

national headlines when the cable barrier system failed, resulting in a patron dangling perilously

nine-stories above the same alleyway where Ms. Bowmer would later fall and suffer serious

injuries. After that near-catastrophe, the evidence shows that an engineer hired by GTT

recommended that GTT have the cable barrier system on all levels of the garage reviewed closely

by a qualified cable barrier installer. GTT ignored this advice and did not have the cables

-2-
inspected. GTT also failed to get proper city permits to repair the garage and made illegal and

unpermitted repairs. Following that incident, GTT was also put on notice of continuing cable

dangers and issues, including missing or damaged cables on the very floor where the restraint

system failed in the Bowmer incident, the 7th floor. GTT ignored those warnings as well and did

nothing to make the operation safe.

Defendants’ negligence and gross negligence was a proximate cause of Ms. Bowmer’s

injuries when the restraint system failed and her vehicle plunged from the 7th floor of the garage

onto the alleyway below. Miraculously, Ms. Bowmer survived, but was seriously and permanently

injured. She filed her original petition in this case on August 23, 2017 and the Second Amended

Petition is her current and live pleading. 1

On January 28, 2019, GTT moved for partial summary judgment on “traditional” and no-

evidence grounds, pursuant to Texas Rules of Civil Procedure 166a(b) and 166a(i). By its

“traditional” motion for summary judgment, and in somewhat of a self-conflicting, shotgun

approach, GTT argues that all of Ms. Bowmer’s claims (except for premises liability, negligence

per se, and gross negligence) should be dismissed as a matter of law on the following four grounds:

A. Ms. Bowmer’s negligence, negligence per se, gross negligence, joint enterprise,
assisting and encouraging, assisting and participating, concert of action, and
conspiracy claims should fail because GTT asserts Plaintiff’s only remedy in this
case is for premises liability; 2

B. Ms. Bowmer cannot establish her negligence per se claim, because she has not
identified applicable statutes violated by GTT, and tort liability may not be imposed
based on applicable City of Austin building codes; 3

C. Ms. Bowmer’s theory of joint enterprise liability as to GTT and Premier (which
GTT improperly and confusedly refers to as “single business enterprise theory”) is

1
Exh. B, Plaintiff’s 2d Amended Petition.
2
GTT’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgement (the “Motion”), at 4–8.
3
Id. at 8–9.

-3-
 invalid, because GTT and Premier are two separate companies with separate
responsibilities under a services agreement; 4 and

D. Ms. Bowmer’s conspiracy to commit negligence claim is not a recognized cause of

action in Texas. 5

But as set forth fully below, these grounds for “traditional” summary judgment fail for the

following reasons:

• Ms. Bowmer has properly pleaded alternative theories of recovery for negligence,
negligence per se and premises liability as allowed by Texas law; 6

• Ms. Bowmer adequately pleaded and presented evidence that GTT committed
negligence per se by violating the City of Austin ordinances which led directly to
Ms. Bowmer’s near-fatal accident. 7 And as GTT admits in its motion, Texas courts
have recognized that plaintiffs may seek a recovery under a negligence per se
theory, in addition to their premises liability claims; 8

• Ms. Bowmer has properly pleaded claims that GTT committed active negligence
that led to Ms. Bowmer’s injuries, such as making improper, substandard, and
illegal repairs in the garage, negligently representing that the garage was safe, and
negligently hiring, training, and retaining employees and/or agents as well as other
causes based in negligence; 9 and

• Texas law recognizes that co-tortfeasors, such as GTT and Premier, may be held
jointly and severally liable under theories of joint enterprise, conspiracy, and others
for jointly operating the Littlefield Garage in violation of codes, standards, and in
a grossly negligent manner. 10

In addition to these “traditional” grounds for summary judgment, GTT claims that there is

no evidence to support Ms. Bowmer’s claims for gross negligence, negligence per se, and joint

4
Id. at 9–12 (In this section, GTT also appears to assert two no-evidence grounds for summary judgment. Those are
addressed below with the other no-evidence grounds.).
5
Id. at 13–14.
6
See infra Part III.B.1.
7
See infra Part III.B.2.
8
See Motion at 4 n.4 (citing Osti v. Saylors, 991 S.W.2d 322 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1999, pet. denied)).
9
See infra Part III.B.1.
10
See infra Part III.B.3–4.

-4-
enterprise. As set forth below, Ms. Bowmer has uncovered far more than a scintilla of evidence

for each element of these claims, and they should all proceed to a jury. 11

For these reasons and all those set out below, Ms. Bowmer respectfully requests the Court

deny GTT’s motion for partial summary judgment.

II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

A. History of the Littlefield Garage and the dangerous operation of the garage and
dangerous cable vehicle barrier system.

Construction on the Littlefield Garage began in 1979, with a certificate of occupancy issued

in 1981. 12 It is a multi-level garage with parking up to the 9th level.13 It is without dispute that

the garage was required to have a vehicle restraint system to keep vehicles from falling off the

garage by accident. 14 This garage was built with a system that was supposed to be 5 cables.

By the year 2014, the cable vehicle barrier system in the garage was so dilapidated it was

essentially non-existent. 15 The cable barrier system was rotted, missing cables, had rusty cables,

and provided no safety for vehicles or even pedestrians: 16

11
See infra Part III.C.
12
Exh. C, Littlefield Garage Certificate of Occupancy.
13
See Exh. D, Affidavit of Carl J. Larosche, P.E. (“Larosche Aff.”)., Exh. B, at 1.
14
See Exh. D, Larosche Aff., ¶¶ 5-7, Exh. B, pp. 3-5.
15
See, Exh. E, Deposition of Curtis Brown (“Brown Dep.”), at 44:4-16; 67:21–68:8; Exh. F, 04/25/2014 e-mail from
J. Wright to W. Smith et al.
16
See id.

-5-
At that time, a company called Stream and its affiliates owned the Littlefield Garage, and

-6-
Premier acted as managing agent on behalf of the ownership group that operated the garage. 17 The

failing condition of the cable vehicle barrier system in 2014 was noted and observed by Stream,

Premier, two engineers, and others. 18

In or around 2014, Stream decided that it wanted to sell the garage and used Premier to

help in the process. 19 As Stream and Premier were sprucing up the garage to prepare it for sale,

they deliberately decided (against the advice of engineers) that they would not bring the vehicle

barrier system into compliance with the building code and the standard of care. 20 Because

bringing the barrier system up to the standard of care would be “onerous,” i.e., expensive, 21 Stream

and Premier opted to implement a cheap, superficial fix, that would “only replace the loose and

missing cables” 22 and “not to bring [the] garage up to current code.” 23

The problem was, Stream and Premier could not find a competent engineering firm or sub-

contractor willing to perform the dangerous, unsafe “fix” they desired. 24 VSL, a cable barrier firm

with engineers and offices in Fort Worth, evaluated the garage during this time period with and at

the request of Premier, and advised Stream and Premier that it could not and would not be involved

with the requested “repairs” unless the entire vehicle barrier system was brought up to code. 25

17
Exh. G, Service Contract between Premier and 6th & Congress, LLC.
18
Exh. E, Brown Dep., at 44:4-16; 67:21–68:8; Exh. H 06/18/2014 E-mail chain among E. Herron, M. Donoghue,
P.E., et al.; Exh. F, 04/25/2014 e-mail from J. Wright to W. Smith et al.; Exh. I, 05/08/2014 e-mail from W. Smith to
J. Wright et al.
19
Exh. J, Deposition of Bob Chapman (“Chapman Dep.”) at 32:21–33:14.
Exh. K, 05/08/2014 e-mail from J. Wright to W. Smith; Exh. H 06/18/2014 E-mail chain among E. Herron, M.
20

Donoghue, P.E., et al.

21
Exh. H, 06/18/2014 e-mail chain among E. Herron, M. Donoghue, P.E., et al.
22
Exh. K, 05/08/2014 e-mail from J. Wright to W. Smith.
23
Exh. H, 06/18/2014 e-mail chain among E. Herron, M. Donoghue, P.E., et al.
24
Exh. L, 07/03/2014 e-mail from E. Herron to S. Pfeiffer et al; Exh. M, 07/14/2014 e-mails from E. Herron to L
Sallis, et al.
25
Exh. I, 05/08/2014 e-mail from W. Smith to J. Wright et al.

-7-
That firm wrote, “Knowing the severity of the garages [sic] condition VSL will not be able to

perform your requested modifications. Should you and your team reconsider bringing the

barrier cable system up to code, in turn making your garage safe, please let us know.” 26

Similarly, after a 10-minute inspection, another engineer advised Stream and Premier that

there were “definitely numerous basic safety issues to be addressed regarding the vehicle

barriers.” 27 That engineer went on to note: 28

Like the engineer from VSL, the Maritech engineer made it crystal clear it could not be

involved in substandard repairs that did not bring the system up to code or the standard of care.

Instead of heeding their engineers’ advice and making the system safe, Stream and Premier

decided to use the cheapest, and apparently only, contractor they could find who would agree do

the superficial repairs they desired without bringing the system up to code or the standard of care. 29

They ultimately decided to hire Curtis Brown, a contractor who did “mostly stuff around the

lake” 30 and who had never installed or repaired a cable vehicle barrier system. 31 However, Mr.

Brown was cheap, could do the repairs quickly, and was willing to replace the cables without

bringing the system up to code, which would have cost significantly more. 32 In a July 14, 2014 e-

26
Id. (emphasis added).
27
Exh. N, 06/16/2014 e-mail from M. Donoghue to E. Herron et al; Exh. E, Brown Dep. at pp. 59:4–60:10.
28
Exh. O, 06/23/2014 letter from M. Donoghue to E. Herron.
29
Exh. M, 07/14/2014 e-mails from E. Herron to L Sallis, et al.
30
Exh. P, 06/30/2014 e-mail from N. Branson to E. Herron.
31
Exh. E, Brown Dep. at 15:9-12; 15:17-22.
32
Exh. M, 07/14/2014 e-mails from E. Herron to L Sallis, et al.

-8-
mail, one Stream vice president pointed out that using VSL, the “Ft Worth big-boys” that Premier

had met with would require bringing the garage up to current code. 33 This, according to Stream,

would “double the price” versus using Curtis Brown, and “will likely cost at least $125K.” 34

Indeed, the evidence shows that Curtis Brown was instructed by Stream and Premier to

simply replace the loose and missing cables—not bring the system up to code or the standard of

care. 35 This was done even though Brown noted that ownership had indicated to him there had

been incidents with vehicles going through the cables on the interior of the garage. 36 Premier—as

managing agent for the garage’s owners—actively participated in supervising and inspecting

Curtis Brown’s sub-par repairs throughout the entire process. 37

Brown finished the “repairs” in the Fall of 2014 and Premier and Stream inspected and

accepted the repairs. 38 There is no doubt whatsoever that Premier knew the repairs were done

without a permit, without an engineer, against the advice of other engineers and that the repairs

did not meet the standard of care or the code. Yet Premier left the garage open for operation both

before and after the repairs despite all this knowledge.

B. GTT purchases the Littlefield Garage in 2015, waives or does not perform any
inspection, assumes full responsibility for the dangerous condition that it is in, and
continues the dangerous operation, failing to make it safe for the public.

Approximately six months after Curtis Brown completed his repairs, GTT entered a

purchase agreement to buy the Littlefield Garage from Stream. 39 Per the Purchase Agreement

33
Id.
34
Id.
35
Exh. E. Brown Dep., at 23:14–24:18.
36
Id. at 32:16-23.
37
Id. at 17:22–18:9; 18:22-25; 22:8-15; 23:4-13.
38
Id.
39
Exh. Q, Purchase Agreement between GTT and 6th and Congress Properties, LLC (“Purchase Agreement”).

-9-
between GTT and the Stream Entities, prior to the closing of GTT’s purchase of the garage, GTT

represented that it had successfully completed a full engineering investigation of the property: 40

GTT further acknowledged in the Purchase Agreement that it had a “full, complete, and adequate”

opportunity to make all of the physical inspections it needed in order to purchase and assume

responsibility for the garage. 41 In reality, however, GTT never did hire an engineer to do any type

of inspection of the garage in conjunction with the purchase, and claims it did not inspect or notice

the condition of the barrier. 42

GTT agreed to accept the garage “AS IS, WHERE IS, [and] WITH ALL FAULTS.”43

Notably, GTT agreed to assume all risks arising from the operation of the parking garage going

forward, including construction defects, regardless of whether such defects were discovered by its

own investigation: 44

40
Id., ¶ 5.1.
41
Id. at ¶ 5.4.
42
Exh. R, Deposition of Sean O’Brien (“O’Brien Dep.”), at 193:10–195:5.
43
Exh. Q, Purchase Agreement at ¶ 9.1.
44
Id.

- 10 -
 In the purchase agreement, GTT went on to provide a full release to the Stream Entities

and their agents, agreeing to fully release and discharge them from any and all responsibility or

liabilities arising from the garage going forward. In particular, GTT agreed: 45

This broadly-worded release was perpetual in nature and “survive[d] Closing and/or termination

of this [Purchase] Agreement.” 46

45
Id. at ¶ 9.2.
46
Id.

- 11 -
 GTT closed on the garage sale in September of 2015. In that time, Premier hustled GTT

to stay on as property manager for the garage operation. Premier represented it was the expert,

that it would operate the garage safely for GTT and that it would be the eyes and ears, including

responsibility for safety. 47 Upon purchasing the Littlefield Garage, GTT retained Premier as its

managing agent pursuant to all the representations, oral agreements, and a services contract dated

September 8, 2015. 48 Under the representations, oral agreement and services agreement, Premier

was going to share profits from the operation of the garage with GTT and was entitled to a

percentage of the garage’s monthly gross revenue. 49 Mr. Kahn from GTT has described all of the

representations made by Premier and Premier has denied none of them. Of course, hiring a

property manager does not relieve the owner of the non-delegable duty for safety—it simply makes

it a joint responsibility of both of them.

Despite assuming full ownership and the non-delegable responsibility for the safe operation

and condition of the garage, GTT took no steps to ensure that the operation was safe or the garage

met applicable codes or did not pose a danger to patrons or other members of the public. GTT’s

corporate representative testified that GTT did not perform regular inspections of the garage

itself. 50 Instead, GTT relied solely on its managing agent, Premier, to make sure the cable barrier

system was not dangerous: 51

47
Exh. S, Deposition of Sheldon David Kahn, Volume 2 (“Kahn Dep. 2”) at 209:23–211:7.
48
Id.; Exh. T, Service Agreement between GTT and Premier (“Service Agreement”).
49
Exh. T, Service Agreement, at GTT 012; Exh. U, Deposition of Ryan Hunt (“Hunt Dep.”) at 24:18–25:22.
50
Exh R, O’Brien Dep. at 50:16–51:3.
51
Id. at 53:16-19.

- 12 -
Another GTT corporate representative further testified that it relied on Premier to “safely operate,

install, design, [and] make sure there was a vehicle restraint system on the floors of the parking

garage[,]” 52 and that it was relying on Premier to exercise day-to-day management and control

over the venture: 53

But in 2016, neither GTT nor Premier was operating the garage safely. The entire operation

was rife with negligence and gross negligence from who they employed to what they did and didn’t

do to where they did and didn’t do it. The operation was a ticking time bomb and a tragic accident

waiting to happen because it was a multi-level garage with no vehicle restraint system to keep cars

52
Exh. V, Deposition of Sheldon David Kahn, Volume 1 (“Kahn Dep. 1”) at 15:19–16:6.
53
Id. at 15:9-18.

- 13 -
from falling off. 54 The Defendants were operating the garage jointly in violation of the law and

the standard of care.

C. The cable barrier system fails on September 9, 2016, nearly killing garage patron
William O’Connor.

On September 9, 2016, approximately 10 months before Ms. Bowmer’s accident, a nearly

identical accident occurred at the Littlefield Garage when another patron, William O’Connor,

nearly plunged to his death when his vehicle rolled through GTT’s cable barrier on the 9th floor

of the garage: 55

Miraculously, one of the cables from the failed vehicle barrier system accidentally wrapped around

the vehicle’s wheel, saving Mr. O’Connor from certain death or massive injuries. 56 When

questioned about this incident at his deposition, GTT’s corporate representative acknowledged that

54
Exh. R, O’Brien Dep. at 162:23–163:2.
55
Exh. W, Ben Wear, 35-year-old cables played key role in Austin’s ‘dangling car’ mishap, AUSTIN AMERICAN-
STATESMAN, Sept. 13, 2016.
56
Id.

- 14 -
GTT was aware of that incident when it occurred. 57 Reasonable owners and property managers

would have learned from this event and taken action. It is perhaps the most blatant and obvious

form of notice of danger that could have been served. But not these Defendants. Rather than take

appropriate steps to fix the obvious danger, they instead made a claim against Mr. O’Connor,

recovering funds for lost profits that they then shared with each other.

Importantly, to get the 9th level fixed where Mr. O’Connor went off, GTT hired an engineer

to provide an opinion in the aftermath of Mr. O’Connor’s near-fatal encounter with GTT’s

inadequate cable barrier system. The engineer provided GTT with a report in which he

recommended that the barrier cables at all the levels below where Mr. O’Connor’s vehicle crashed

through “should be reviewed more closely by a barrier cable installer and adjusted as needed.” 58

Ryan Hunt, the president of Premier, also claims that he advised GTT to obtain a structural

assessment firm to review what went wrong with the vehicle restraint system in the wake of the

O’Connor incident: 59

57
Exh. R, O’Brien Dep. at 63:21–64:20.
58
Exh X, 09/10/2016 Letter from Richard Martin, P.E., to David Kahn of GTT, p. 2.
59
Exh. U, Hunt Dep. at 17:19–18:4.

- 15 -
 Despite the engineer’s and Premier’s recommendation, GTT admittedly ignored both and

took no action to have the garage’s cable barrier system inspected by a qualified installer.

Specifically, when asked whether GTT hired, retained, asked, or commissioned a barrier cable

installer to inspect the cables below the ninth floor after Mr. O’Connor’s incident, but before Ms.

Bowmer’s incident despite being told to do so, GTT’s corporate representative answered, “No.”60

The GTT representative further testified: 61

60
Exh. R, O’Brien Dep. at 108.
61
Id. at 114:3-24, 162:13-22.

- 16 -
- 17 -
 Shortly after GTT received a recommendation from its hired engineer to have the cable

barrier system inspected, it received a letter from the City of Austin Code Department demanding

that GTT retain a structural engineering report “for the cable system and concrete slab.” 62

Also, on September 14, a Premier employee asked GTT if it wanted him to “reach out to

Stream and get the details on the cabling work they performed in early 2015?” 63 GTT apparently

never responded to that email, and Premier never followed up. 64

Significantly, Premier apparently never shared any of the actual knowledge it had regarding

Curtis Brown and the substandard, illegal, subpar repairs. 65 Curtis Brown testified he thought he

would get a call for sure and that if anyone had called him, he would have told them about his

repairs and how they were not up to code and about what he had been asked to do. 66 The City of

Austin Code inspector has indicated that if Premier and GTT had been honest with him about the

information they had, including the letter from the engineer, he would not have cleared the garage

absent work to make it safe. 67 The city also later determined the repairs done were illegal as they

had no permit and that they did not even meet code. 68

But the Defendants didn’t just ignore the O’Connor incident. They continued after that to

ignore actual cable issues in the garage. In the months following the O’Connor incident,

Defendants continued to see evidence that the cable system was broken and dangerous. In March

and in June of 2017, just months before Ms. Bowmer’s incident, GTT and Premier continued to

62
Exh. Y, 09/15/2016 Notice of Violation, at Bowmer 001501.
63
Exh. Z, 09/15/2016 e-mail from C. Murray to R. Hunt et al.
64
See Exh. R, O’Brien Dep., at 221:16-18.
65
Exh. U, Hunt Dep., at 87:13–89:2.
66
Exh. E., Brown Dep., at 115:24–116:4.
67
Exh AA., Deposition of Troy Collins (“Collins Dep.”), at 40:16–41:6; 43:7-18.
68
Exh. BB, Deposition of John Hale (“Hale Dep.”), at 33:8–34:20.

- 18 -
received reports of broken and dilapidated cables in the Littlefield Garage. 69 These were all red

flags and clear evidence to the Defendants of the defective and dangerous condition. 70

Representatives of GTT and Premier have admitted these were dangerous and red flags, yet the

operation remained open.

It is clear that after Mr. O’Connor’s incident in 2016—yet before Ms. Bowmer’s in 2017—

GTT was aware, or should have been aware, that its cable barrier system was inadequate to prevent

vehicles from falling off its garage. Indeed, GTT received a recommendation by a registered

engineer that it should have its entire cable barrier system inspected by a qualified installer. It

ignored this advice and all the other evidence above which led directly to Ms. Bowmer’s accident

and her catastrophic injuries only 10 months later.

D. The negligence and gross negligence of the garage operation cause the cable barrier
system to fail again on July 13, 2017, seriously injuring Ms. Bowmer.

On the morning of July 13, 2017, Ms. Bowmer was invited to and lawfully drove her

vehicle into the Littlefield Garage and up to the seventh floor in order to park. GTT had previously

been warned by at least one engineer that that the visual perception of the edge of the garage was

disturbing and potentially dangerous to people parking there. 71 That visual phenomenon affected

Christi Bowmer. 72 While attempting to park, she had an accident that was foreseeable to

Defendants. 73 She suffered from anxiety and fear when pulling into a space on the open end of

the seventh level and it looked as if there was nothing to restrain her from going over the edge. In

fact, she was right – there was virtually nothing to keep her from going over the edge. In response

69
Exh. CC, 03/24/2017 e-mail from B. Bonniwell to G. Jones et al; Exh. DD, 06/09/2017 e-mail from C. Murray to
S. O’Brien et al.
70
Exh. U, Hunt Dep., at 145:16.
71
See Exh. R, O’Brien Dep., at 154:2–155:3.
72
Exh. EE, Bowmer Dep., at 71:1–72:4.
73
Exh. R, O’Brien Dep., pp. 151:22–152:17; Exh. FF, Affidavit of Cam Cope (“Cope Aff.”), Exh. B §§ 4.2, 5.10.

- 19 -
to this situation and her fear and emotions, Ms. Bowmer went to brake and she pressed down on

the accelerator by mistake. 74

Although even after hitting the accelerator Ms. Bowmer’s vehicle was only traveling 9

miles per hour at the time she impacted the cable barrier system, 75 and the shoddy, dangerous

condition of the barrier system failed to serve its purpose and Ms. Bowmer’s vehicle went through

it like a hot knife through butter. 76 Had the barrier been up to the code or standard of care it would

have held her car in the garage and she would have suffered no injury. In fact, had it met those

standards it would have held her car even if she were going twice her speed. 77

The results were nothing short of catastrophic: 78

74
Exh EE, Bowmer Dep., p. 71:1-14.
75
Exh. FF, Cope Aff., Exh. B § 5.5.
76
Exh., Cope Aff., Exh. B, §§ 4.2, 5.2, and 5.8; Exh GG, Placeholder Exhibit for Crash Video 1; Exh. HH
Placeholder for Crash Video 2.
77
See Exh. FF, Cope Aff., Exh. B; Exh. D, Larosche Aff., Exh. B.
78
Exh. FF, Cope Aff, Exh. B, § 2.1.

- 20 -
Ms. Bowmer suffered permanent, disabling life-changing injuries as a result of the incident,

including but not limited to: head lacerations, fractured ribs, a fractured right ankle, a lumbar burst

- 21 -
fracture, a sternal fracture, and thoracic vertebral fracture. 79 As a result of GTT’s gross negligence,

Ms. Bowmer suffered from excruciating pain which she still experiences to this day. 80

Had GTT behaved as a reasonably prudent operator, including doing things to remedy the

dangerous condition posed by its vehicle barrier system after Mr. O’Connor’s incident (or sooner),

and had GTT brought the cable vehicle barrier system up to code as required by the city of Austin

ordinances, Ms. Bowmer’s low-speed, non-injury accident would not have morphed into a

horrifying plunge from the 7th floor with devastating injuries. 81 Instead, GTT and Premier made

the conscious decision, time after time, to put profits ahead of safety in the operation of the garage.

Texas law provides Ms. Bowmer several causes of action to pursue justice and full and fair

compensation for the acts and omissions of Defendants, singularly and in concert with each other.

Ms. Bowmer can pursue those in the alternative and she has clearly demonstrated here that those

claims should be heard and decided by a jury, not by summary judgment.

III. ARGUMENT AND AUTHORITIES

A. Legal Standards

A traditional summary judgment is proper when there is no genuine issue of material fact

and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. 82 The court can grant a traditional

motion for summary judgment when the movant’s evidence, as a matter of law, either proves all

the elements of the movant’s claim or defense or disproves at least one element of the nonmovant’s

claim or defense. 83 A court may also grant a traditional motion for summary judgment that shows

79
Exh. II, Plaintiff’s interrogatory response # 3, 10/19/2017.
80
See, e.g., Exh. EE, Bowmer Dep., pp. 46:13-15; 83:22-25; 85:6-10; 85:11–86:13; 110:24–111:8; Exh. II,
Plaintiff’s interrogatory response # 3, 10/19/2017.
81
Exh. FF, Cope Aff, Exh. B §§ 4.2, 5.2, 5.8, 5.9, 5.10, 5.11; Exh. D, Larosche Aff, ¶¶ 4-7, Exh. B, pp. 15-19.
82
Tex. R. Civ. P. 166a(c).
83
See, e.g., Park Place Hosp. v. Estate of Milo, 909 S.W.2d 508, 511 (Tex. 1995).

- 22 -
the non-movant has no viable cause of action based on the non-movant’s pleadings. 84 In deciding

a traditional motion for summary judgment the court is required to assume all of the non-movant’s

proof and allegations are true, make all inferences in the light most favorable to the non-movant,

and resolve all doubts about the existence of a genuine issue of a material fact against the movant.85

A no-evidence summary judgment is essentially a pre-trial directed verdict. 86 Evidence

presented by a no-evidence motion or a response thereto is viewed in the light most favorable to

the party against whom summary judgment would be rendered, crediting evidence favorable to

that party if reasonable jurors could, and disregarding contrary evidence unless reasonable jurors

could not. 87 In deciding upon the motion, a court should draw all inferences in favor of the non-

movant, and must not draw and inferences against the non-movant. 88

If the non-movant presets more than a mere scintilla of evidence for each of the essential

elements of its claims, the no-evidence motion must be denied. 89 Importantly, “[t]he function of

the summary judgment [procedure] is not to deprive a litigant of his right to a trial by jury, but to

eliminate patently unmeritorious claims and untenable defenses.” 90

B. GTT’s traditional motion for summary judgment should be denied.

Under Texas law as applied to the facts of this case, Ms. Bowmer may recover under any

of the theories of liability she has pleaded, including those pleaded in the alternative. GTT’s

traditional motion for summary judgment should be denied for any and all of the following reasons.

84
See, e.g., Nat’l Un. Fire Ins. V. Merchants Fast Motor Lines, Inc., 939 S.W.2d 139, 141 (Tex. 1997).
85
See, e.g., Little v. TDCJ, 148 S.W.3d 374, 381 (Tex. 2004); Natividad v. Alexsis, Inc., 875 S.W.2d 695, 699 (Tex.
1994).
86
King Ranch, Inc. v. Chapman, 118 S.W.3d 742, 750 (Tex. 2003).
87
See Timpte Indus., Inc. v. Gish, 286 S.W.3d 306, 310 (Tex. 2009).
88
See Keller v. Wilson, 168 S.W.3d 802, 824 (Tex. 2005).
89
See Forbes Inc. v. Granada Biosciences, Inc., 124 S.W.3d 167, 172 (Tex. 2003).
90
Houston v. Clear Creek Basin Auth., 589 S.W.2d 671, 678 n.5 (Tex. 1979).

- 23 -
 1. Ms. Bowmer has properly asserted claims for negligence and negligence per se in
this case.

In its traditional motion for summary judgment, GTT claims that Ms. Bowmer’s only valid

theories of recovery in this case are for premises liability, negligence per se, and gross

negligence. 91 For the reasons set forth below, Ms. Bowmer may submit negligence questions to

the jury.

a. Ms. Bowmer has properly pleaded that GTT was actively negligent and
negligent per se.

GTT properly admits that negligence per se is a valid theory of liability that may be pleaded

alongside a premises liability claim. 92 However, GTT argues that Ms. Bowmer is precluded from

also bringing a claim for negligent activity, because her claims arise from “a condition of the cable

barrier system, not an ongoing activity.” 93 Thus, according to GTT, Ms. Bowmer’s only viable

theories of recovery in this case are for premises liability, negligence per se, and gross

negligence. 94

A finding of liability for negligent activity requires that the person have been injured by or

as a contemporaneous result of the activity itself. 95 But simply because a premises liability claim

exists does not mean a negligent-activity claim is precluded—an injury can have more than one

proximate cause. 96

91
Motion at 4 n.4, 8 (citing Osti v. Saylors, 991 S.W.2d 322 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1999, pet. denied).
92
Id. (However, GTT argues that the ordinances/codes on which Ms. Bowmer bases her negligence per se claim are
not specific enough to support a negligence per se claim. Motion at 9.)
93
Id. at 5.
94
Id. at 8.
95
Keetch v. Kroger Co., 845 S.W.2d 262, 264 (Tex. 1992).
96
Del Lago Partners, Inc. v. Smith, 307 S.W.3d 762, 774 (Tex. 2010); Lee Lewis Constr., Inc v. Harrison, 70
S.W.3d 778, 784 (Tex. 2001).

- 24 -
 In this case, Ms. Bowmer has also pleaded numerous theories of negligence arising from

GTT’s active and ongoing negligent behavior that is separate from the condition of disrepair in

which it left the cable barrier system. These theories include: (i) GTT was actively negligent in its

inspections of the garage; (ii) GTT was actively negligent in opening the garage; (iii) GTT was

actively negligent in representing that the garage was safe for its intended use; and (iv) GTT was

actively negligent in employing, training, retaining or supervising its employees and agents. 97

These claims are distinct from the premises liability claims because they arise from GTT’s

affirmative, ongoing or contemporaneous malfeasance, as opposed to a nonfeasance theory based

on the owner’s failure to take measures to make the property safe. 98 Since Ms. Bowmer has made

allegations relating to GTT’s affirmative, contemporaneous conduct to cause her injury, she has

properly pleaded a claim for negligent activity separate and apart from her premises liability

claims.

b. GTT is liable for ordinary negligence because the Littlefield Garage abuts
public property, and GTT endangered the safety of persons using the
public property.

A defendant whose premises abuts public property can be liable for ordinary negligence,

not premises liability, if the defendant endangers the safety of persons using the public

property. See Alamo Nat’l Bank v. Kraus, 616 S.W.2d 908, 910 (Tex.1981); Gonzales v. Trinity

Indus, 7 S.W.3d 303,306, (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1999, pet. denied); see also McKnight

V. Calvert, 539 S.W.3d 447, 458 (Tex.App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2017, pet. denied) (owner of

vegetation that obscures visibility of stop sign has duty of care to users of public road, even if

vegetation is not on premises that directly abut road). When a plaintiff is injured outside of the

97
See Exh B, Plaintiff’s 2d Amended Petition, ¶ 33.
98
See McCarty v. Hillstone Rest. Grp., Civ. Action No. 3:15-CV-518-L, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 109170, at *7-9
(S.D. Tex. Aug. 19, 2015) (citing Del Lago, 307 S.W.3d at 776).

- 25 -
defendant’s premise by the defendant’s conduct inside the premises, the suit should be brought as

a negligence suit, not as a premises liability suit. See, e.g., Kraus 616 S.W.2d at 910 (suit for injury

to person on public road caused by debris from demolition of building was submitted as negligence

action). Here, Plaintiff was injured and another person narrowly missed death or injury because

of Defendants’ conduct inside the premises. Thus, a pleading and cause in negligence is proper.

2. GTT is liable for negligence per se due to its violation of multiple City of Austin
ordinances which proximately caused Ms. Bowmer’s injuries.

Despite admitting that negligence per se is a valid theory of recovery available to Ms.

Bowmer in this case, 99 GTT argues that this claim fails as a matter of law because (i) Ms. Bowmer

has failed to identify the statute or ordinance on which she bases her negligence per se claim, and

(ii) violation of building codes cannot support a negligence per se claim in this case, because the

applicable building codes do not prescribe a “mandatory standard of conduct.” 100 These arguments

are meritless and addressed in turn.

First, subsequent to GTT’s filing of its motion for summary judgment, Ms. Bowmer

amended her petition to include specific reference to the city ordinances violated by GTT which

proximately caused her injuries. These ordinances are reflected in Paragraph 33(n)(iv)–(v) of Ms.

Bowmer’s Second Amended Petition. 101 Specifically, GTT violated the building codes made

applicable by City of Austin Ordinance No. 20130606-089, which adopted the 2012 International

Building Code (“IBC”) and the 2012 International Existing Building Code (“IEBC”). 102 GTT

also violated the codes made applicable by City of Austin Ordinance No. 20130926-145, which

99
Motion at 4 n.4, 8.
100
Motion at 8–9.
101
Exh. B, Plaintiff’s 2d Amended Petition, ¶33(n)(iv)–(v).
102
Exh B, Plaintiff’s 2d Amended Petition, ¶ 33(n)(iv); Exh. JJ, City of Austin Ordinance 20130606-089, pp. 1, 72.

- 26 -
adopted the 2012 International Property Maintenance Code (“IPMC”). 103 Thus, Ms. Bowmer has

plainly identified the ordinances and adopted codes upon which she bases her negligence per se

claims.

Second—without identifying the precise building codes or ordinances it is addressing—

GTT argues that tort liability cannot be imposed by the codes Ms. Bowmer relies on in this case.

In particular, GTT claims that the applicable building codes do not define a mandatory standard of

care, but rather require a defendant to “exercise judgment” in complying with the code or

ordinance. 104 As an example, GTT cites to a case in which the regulations relied on by the

plaintiffs only required the defendant to comply “so far as possible,” and upon the determination

by the defendant that certain hazards were present. 105 Because the regulations in that case left

room for discretion or the exercise of judgment by the defendant, the standard of care was no

different than the common-law standard of ordinary care, and negligence per se could not apply.106

However, when a statute, regulation, or ordinance specifically defines the conduct the

public must do or refrain from doing, it defines a mandatory standard of conduct for which

negligence per se can apply. 107 For example, in Osti v. Saylors, the First Court of Appeals found

a provision of the City of Houston building code which provided: “every floor above the first story

used for human occupancy shall have access to at least two separate exits . . . .” to be sufficiently

specific since it “clearly defined the required conduct by providing how many exits are required

and by detailing where the exits are to be located and how they are to be designed.” 108

103
Exh, B, Plaintiff’s 2d Amended Petition, ¶33(n)(v); Exh, KK, City of Austin Ordinance 20130926-145, p. 1.
104
Motion at 9.
105
Supreme Beef Packers, Inc. v. Maddox, 67 S.W.3d 453, 456 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2002, pet. denied).
106
Id.
107
See id.
108
991 S.W.2d 322, 327–28 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1999, pet denied).

- 27 -
 Similarly, the city ordinance in the seminal case, Nixon v. Mr. Property Management Co.,

was found to contain sufficiently mandatory language to expose defendants to negligence per se

liability. 109 In that case, the ordinance required landowners to “keep the doors and windows of a

vacant structure or vacant portion of a structure securely closed to prevent unauthorized entry.”110

Likewise, the ordinances and codes that apply here set forth mandatory standards of

conduct which GTT violated, and for which they can be held liable under a negligence per se

claim. Under the 2012 IEBC, which was in effect at the time of Ms. Bowmer’s accident, and

which was made applicable by City of Austin ordinance 20130606-089, the barrier cable system

in the Littlefield Garage presented a “dangerous condition” as defined by the IEBC. 111 Under that

code, dangerous conditions “shall be eliminated” and repaired or replaced in strict compliance

with the 2012 IBC. 112

As attested by a professional engineer retained by Ms. Bowmer in this case, this meant that

the cable barrier system should have been brought up to the standards set forth in the 2012 IBC,

which would have prevented her accident: 113

GTT also violated numerous sections of the 2012 IPMC, including those set forth below: 114

109
See Nixon v. Mr. Property Mgmt. Co, 690 S.W.2d 546, 548–549 (Tex. 1985).
110
Id.
111
Exh. D, Larosche Aff., ¶¶ 4–7.
112
Id.
113
Exh. D, Larosche Aff., ¶ 5.
114
See Exh. A, Plaintiff’s 2d Amended Petition, ¶ 33(n)(v); See Exh. D, Larosche Aff., Exh. B.

- 28 -
 304.1.1 Unsafe Conditions. The following conditions shall be determined as
unsafe and shall be repaired or replaced to comply with the International Building
Code or the International Existing Building Code as required for existing
buildings:

5. Structural members that have evidence of deterioration or that are not capable
of safely supporting all nominal loads and load effects...

12. Exterior stairs, decks, porches, balconies, and all similar appurtenances
attached thereto, including guards and handrails, are not structurally sound, not
properly anchored or that are anchored with connections not capable of
supporting all nominal loads and resisting all load effects…

***

304.12 Handrails and guards. Every handrail and guard shall be firmly fastened
and capable of supporting normally imposed loads and shall be maintained in
good condition.

These codes—like the ones in Osti and Nixon—set forth clear, mandatory standards of

conduct that “shall” be followed by building owners in the city of Austin. Specifically, the codes

required GTT to install a cable barrier system capable of resisting a “concentrated load of 6,000

pounds.” 115 Similarly, the codes plainly required GTT to replace guards—such as barrier cables—

that were not “capable of safely supporting all nominal loads and load effects.” These statutorily-

imposed standards were plainly violated by GTT in its operation of the Littlefield Garage. 116

GTT has presented no summary judgment evidence that it was excused from following

these building codes, as made applicable by the City of Austin ordinances. 117 Failure to comply

with these codes resulted in a ineffectual cable vehicle barrier system that failed to contain Ms.

Bowmer’s vehicle, and turned what should have been a very minor accident into a catastrophic

115
See Exh. D, Larosche Aff, ¶ 5.
116
Id. at ¶¶ 5-7, Exh. B, pp. 15-18.
117
See Exh. D, Larosche Aff, ¶ 6, Exh. B, pp. 15-18.

- 29 -
one. 118

3. GTT has improperly confused joint enterprise with single business enterprise and
and the facts of this case give rise to joint enterprise liability between GTT and
Premier, which is what is pleaded.

GTT confusingly misbrands Ms. Bowmer’s claim for joint enterprise liability as one for

“single business enterprise” liability. 119 The “single business enterprise” theory was a liability

theory whereby a court would hold two corporation liable for one another’s debts when the

corporations were not operated as separate entities, but instead integrated their resources to achieve

a common business purpose. 120 Factors courts would consider when deciding whether to impose

“single business enterprise” liability were: “common employees; common offices; centralized

accounting; payment of wages by one corporation to another corporation’s employees . . . and

unclear allocation of profits and losses between corporations.” 121

GTT correctly argues that, in 2008, the Supreme Court of Texas declared that “single

business enterprise” liability was not a valid theory under Texas law in light of the approach taken

by the legislature in Article 2.21 of the Texas Business Corporation Act. 122

However, Ms. Bowmer has not pleaded “single business enterprise” liability in this case.

She has pleaded “joint enterprise” liability, 123 which the Supreme Court of Texas declined to

declare invalid, 124 and which courts of appeals have continued to recognize as a way to impose

118
Exh. D, Larosche Aff., ¶¶ 5-7, Exh. B at pp. 15-18.
119
See Motion at 10 (“Although couched in terms of ‘joint enterprise’ Plaintiff actually seeks to assert that GTT
Parking and Premier Parking were acting as a single business enterprise in their operation and management of the
Littlefield Garage.”)
120
SSP Partners v. Gladstrong Invs. Corp., 275 S.W.3d 444, 450 (Tex. 2008).
121
Id. at 451.
122
Id. at 455-56.
123
See Exh. B, Plaintiff’s 2d Amended Petition, ¶¶ 44–45.
124
See Sloan v. Law Office of Oscar C. Gonzalez, Inc., 479 S.W.3d 833, 835 (Tex. 2016) (expressing no opinion on
the issue of whether joint enterprise liability is a valid theory of liability in light of Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code
chapter 33, and remanding the issue for consideration by the court of appeals).

- 30 -
joint and several liability. 125 Because Ms. Bowmer seeks to hold GTT and Premier jointly

accountable under a joint enterprise theory—as opposed to a single business enterprise theory—

GTT’s argument for dismissal is without merit.

GTT next argues that Ms. Bowmer’s assertion of joint enterprise liability as to GTT and

Premier is invalid, because (i) GTT and Premier “are completely unrelated businesses in terms of

ownership and operation”, and their relationship is governed by a written agreement; 126 and (ii)

Ms. Bowmer has failed to produce evidence for two elements of joint enterprise liability, namely,

community of pecuniary interest, and equal right to direct and control the enterprise. 127

The elements of joint enterprise under Texas law are (1) an express or implied agreement;

(2) a common purpose; (3) a community of pecuniary interest; and (4) an equal right to voice a

direction in the enterprise. 128 As set forth in this response, Ms. Bowmer has presented enough

evidence to raise a fact question regarding each.

GTT’s first argument is unavailing. Although GTT claims that it and Premier are

“completely unrelated businesses,” that has no legal significance. In fact, joint enterprise must

have at least two distinct actors to exist, thus the term “joint.” It is undisputed in this case that the

Defendants worked jointly together towards a common purpose: to operate the Littlefield Garage

125
See, e.g., Ramirez v. Garcia, 413 S.W.3d 134, 154-55 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2013) (recognizing the existence of
the joint enterprise theory of liability, and writing, “The Texas Supreme Court has reaffirmed its position on the
elements required to show joint enterprise”), rev’d in part on other grounds sub nom. Gonzalez v. Ramirez, 463
S.W.3d 499 (Tex. 2015); Lakes of Rosehill Homeowners Ass’n v. Jones, 552 S.W.3d 414 420 (Tex. App.—Houston
[14th Dist.] 2018, no pet.) (holding that common law rules for imposing joint and several liability survived the
enactment of chapter 33).
126
Motion at 10.
127
Id. at 12.
128
Texas DOT v. Able, 35 S.W.3d 608, 613 (Tex. 2000).

- 31 -
in an attempt to make money and share profits. 129 Further, GTT testified that it relied on Premier

completely to operate its garage in a safe manner: 130

In its motion, GTT argues that there could be no “joint enterprise” with Premier, because

the two companies “have very different roles” with respect to the garage. 131 But the mere fact that

the parties to a joint enterprise may serve different roles in the enterprise does nothing to negate

its existence. 132 The Supreme Court of Texas has rejected this argument, holding that the mere

fact that one party delegated responsibility for the component of the joint enterprise that injured

the third party does not permit the delegating party to escape joint enterprise liability. 133

And contrary to GTT’s contention, the fact that the parties had a written agreement setting

129
Exh. T, Services Agreement.
130
Exh. V, Kahn Dep. 1, at 15:9-18.
131
Motion at 12.
132
See, e.g, Texas DOT v. Able, 35 S.W.3d 608, 614-16 (Tex. 2000) (upholding a finding of a joint enterprise
despite the fact that one party managed the “day-to-day” maintenance and operations of the highway in question,
while the other party served a more supervisory role in overseeing the highway system).
133
Id. at 615.

- 32 -
forth common purpose of the enterprise—operation of a parking garage 134—only strengthens Ms.

Bowmer’s claim that GTT and Premier were engaged in a joint enterprise. 135

In the midst of its traditional motion for summary judgment, GTT also advances two no-

evidence grounds, arguing that there is no evidence that a “community of pecuniary interest”

existed between GTT and Premier, and that there is no evidence that GTT and Premier had an

equal right to direct or control the enterprise. 136 Neither of these points are persuasive or call for

summary judgment.

Parties may have business or pecuniary interests in the activities of one another, but their

interests in those activities are held “in community” when they are shared without special or

distinguishing characteristics. 137 For example, a manufacturer and a retailer of a product both have

a business or pecuniary interest in the marketing and sale of the product. However, it is not a

community of interest; the manufacturer’s pecuniary interest is in the revenue generated by the

wholesale sales, while the retailer’s interest is in the revenue generated by the retail sales. 138

In determining whether evidence of a “community of pecuniary interest” exists, the Texas

Supreme Court has focused on evidence “showing pooling of efforts and monetary resources

between entities to achieve common purposes . . . .” 139 In Texas DOT v. Able, for example, the

Supreme Court of Texas found sufficient evidence of a community of pecuniary interest between

134
Exh. T, Services Agreement.
135
See, e.g., Blackburn v. Columbia Med. Ctr., 58 S.W.3d 263, 272 (Tex. App—Fort Worth 2001, pet. denied)
(finding written diagnostic radiology agreement and deposition testimony from doctor established existence of
express agreement for joint enterprise).
136
Motion at 12. GTT also filed a no-evidence motion for summary judgment regarding the other two elements of
joint enterprise in the “no-evidence” section of its Motion. Ms. Bowmer will address those elements in the “no-
evidence” portion of this response, but will not burden this Court by repeating her arguments regarding the
“community of pecuniary interest” and “right to direct or control” elements, which are presented in this section.
137
See St. Joseph Hosp. v. Wolff, 94 S.W.3d 513, 528 (Tex. 2002).
138
See id. at 527-28.
139
Blackburn, 58 S.W.3d at 276 (citing Able, 35 S.W.3d at 614).

- 33 -
TxDOT and the Houston Metropolitan Transit Authority (“METRO”) to affirm a jury’s finding

that a joint enterprise existed between the two. 140 The supreme court held that there was more

than a scintilla of evidence that a “community of pecuniary interest” existed between TxDOT and

METRO when a document showed that the highway system at issue was a joint effort between the

two entities, that used both state and local funds. 141

Here, there is more than a scintilla of evidence that GTT and Premier share a community

of pecuniary interest in the operation of Littlefield Garage. Unlike retailers and manufacturers

which trace their pecuniary interests to two separate sets of transactions—both GTT and Premier

trace their pecuniary interests in the Littlefield Garage to the same transaction: parking sales. 142

The services contract between GTT and Premier provides that revenues from parking sales are first

pooled so that garage expenses can be paid out of them, then Premier takes its percentage of the

revenues and forwards the remainder on to GTT. 143 That contract, along with testimony from

Premier’s president, further show that operation of the garage essentially required contributions

by both parties, since GTT says it relied on Premier for the operation of the garage and the more

expenses the parties incurred in operating the garage, the less they both made. 144

Like the contract between TxDOT and METRO, the contract between GTT and Premier

“clearly contemplate an economic gain that could be realized by undertaking the activities in this

manner.” 145 David Kahn, a corporate representative of GTT, admitted as much when he testified

that GTT partnered with Premier because of their expertise in managing parking garages and their

140
35 S.W.3d at 614.
141
Id.
142
Exh. T, Services Agreement.; Exh U, Hunt Dep., at 24:18–25:22
143
Id.
144
Id.
145
Able, 35 S.W.3d at 614.

- 34 -
ability to help GTT, “stay current in all laws and regulations.” 146 And like the highway project in

Able, the Littlefield Garage joint enterprise was not “a matter of ‘friendly or family cooperation

and accommodation’ but was instead a transaction by two parties that had a community of

pecuniary interest in the purpose.” 147 Because some evidence exists that GTT and Premier share a

community of pecuniary interest in the operation of Littlefield Garage, GTT’s no-evidence motion

for summary judgment on this ground should be denied.

Likewise, more than a scintilla of evidence exists that GTT and Premier had an equal right

to a voice in the direction of the operation of Littlefield Garage. To satisfy this element, Ms.

Bowmer must show that “each [participant] must have an authoritative voice or . . . must have

some voice and right to be heard” in the enterprise. 148 In Able, the Supreme Court of Texas focused

on the contractual right of both parties to control the enterprise—namely the operation and

maintenance of a highway system. 149 In that case, the high court found that joint enterprise existed

because both parties retained the ability to control the highway, even though one party was

primarily responsible for day-to-day maintenance. 150 To allow “a member of a joint enterprise to

escape liability to a third party simply by delegating responsibility for the component of the joint

enterprise that caused the injury to the third party would defeat the theory of joint enterprise

liability.” 151 Because the agreements between the parties showed that both TxDOT and METRO

had an “interest and responsibility in the operation and maintenance” of the highway, and the

ability to control such operation and maintenance, there was more than a scintilla of evidence that

146
See, e.g., Exh. V, Kahn Dep. 1, at 47:4-10; Exh. S, Kahn Dep. 2, at 189:16–190:23; 193:23–195:3.
147
Able, 35 S.W.3d at 614.
148
Omega Contr., Inc. v. Torres, 191, S.W.3d 828, 851 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2006, no pet.).
149
Able, 35 S.W.3d at 615.
150
Id.
151
Id.

- 35 -
both parties “had a voice and right to be heard” regarding the joint enterprise. 152

Here, Ms. Bowmer has presented evidence or oral and written agreements among the

Defendants about the operation of the garage, GTT has testified that it relied on Premier to be its

managing agent and operate the garage safely (including the safety of the barrier system), and that

if Premier had mandated certain repairs, they would be done. GTT even testified that Premier

could do the repairs and then reimburse itself without advance permission of GTT. 153

Although GTT was the owner of the garage, evidence adduced in this case shows that,

under the oral and written agreement between the two companies, Premier actively managed the

day-to-day operations of the garage, made decisions regarding whether to conduct maintenance

and repairs (including repairs on the cable barrier system), when to conduct those repairs, who to

hire to conduct those repairs, and how much to pay for those repairs. 154 For example, GTT testified

that under its agreements with Premier, Premier would inspect the garage daily, and if maintenance

or repairs were needed Premier would “repair it themselves, or find a contractor to repair it” and

such repairs would not even be reported to GTT until the end of the month. 155 Although it relied

on Premier to handle most aspects of maintenance and safety, the evidence also shows that, from

time to time, GTT demonstrated its own right to control the garage as owner, by taking an active

role in directing repairs and maintenance in the building. 156

There is clearly more than a scintilla of evidence that GTT as owner, and Premier as garage

operator, both had a right to control—or at least some voice and a right to be heard—in the

152
Id. at 615-16.
153
See Exh. S, Kahn Dep. 2, at 191:3-19; 192:12–193:5; 193:19–194:22; 209:23–211:7; 233:7-19
154
See Exh. S, Kahn Dep. 2, at 191:3-19; 192:12–193:5; 193:19–194:22; 209:23–211:7; 233:7-19.
155
Id. at 209:23–211:7.
156
See Exh. R, O’Brien Dep., at 174:11-23 (directing Premier to repair broken guardrails on level 8).

- 36 -
operation of the joint enterprise, and particularly in the safety of the garage. Thus, GTT’s motion

for summary judgment on this point should be denied.

4. Ms. Bowmer’s participatory and vicarious liability claims are valid under Texas
law.

a. Ms. Bowmer has asserted a valid civil conspiracy claim in this case.

GTT argues that Texas law precludes Ms. Bowmer from advancing claims for conspiracy

to commit negligence. 157 But Ms. Bowmer’s Second Amended Petition, specifically states that

her conspiracy claim is not for a conspiracy to commit negligence. 158 Rather, Ms. Bowmer claims

that Defendants conspired to commit gross negligence, and to operate the Littlefield Garage

unlawfully, in violation of applicable ordinances, statutes, and codes. 159

Specific intent or gross negligence can be the basis of a conspiracy claim. 160 Additionally,

a conspiracy claim can stand when two defendants use unlawful means to accomplish the purpose

of their conspiracy, even if the purpose itself is lawful. 161 For example, courts have upheld claims

for conspiracy when defendants have attempted to drive their competitors out of business—a

lawful purpose in and of itself—by spreading false rumors about them—an unlawful means. 162

Although the defendants could lawfully conspire to compete with plaintiffs, they could not

conspire to use unlawful means to achieve that purpose. 163 Similarly, a claim for conspiracy could

157
Motion at 13–14.
158
Exh. B, Plaintiff’s 2d Amended Petition, ¶ 49.
159
Id.
160
See Juhl v. Airington, 936 S.W.2d 640, 644 (Tex. 1996) (implying that specific intent or the state of mind
required by a gross negligence finding could support a claim for conspiracy to commit gross negligence); Triplex
Comms. v. Riley, 900 S. W.2d 716, 719 (Tex. 1995) (holding that a claim for civil conspiracy may stand when there
is evidence of specific intent).
161
Great Nat’l Life Ins. v. Chapa, 377 S.W.2d 632, 635 (Tex. 1964).
162
Brown v. Am. Freehold Land Mortg. Co., 80 S.W.985, 987-88 (Tex. 1904).
163
Id.

- 37 -
stand against defendants when they agreed to investigate and expose wrongdoing (a lawful

purpose) by violating the Texas Wiretap Act (an unlawful means). 164

Here, Ms. Bowmer has asserted a valid claim for civil conspiracy, because she has pleaded

that Defendants conspired to intentionally operate the Littlefield Garage in violation of City of

Austin building codes and in a grossly negligent manner. 165 Although the operation of a parking

garage—in and of itself—is a lawful purpose, agreeing to do so in a grossly negligent manner and

in knowing violation of applicable laws constitutes an unlawful means, and gives rise to a valid

claim for civil conspiracy. 166

b. Ms. Bowmer’s other claims for participatory and vicarious liability are
valid under Texas law.

On similar grounds, GTT also moves for summary judgment on Ms. Bowmer’s other

theories of participatory and vicarious liability—joint enterprise, assisting and encouraging,

assisting and participating, and concert of action. 167 GTT claims that these theories are only valid

when they are based on intentional torts. 168 Ms. Bowmer addresses this argument with regard to

each of these theories in turn.

i. Joint Enterprise

There are four essential elements of a joint enterprise theory of liability under Texas law:

(1) an express or implied agreement; (2) a common purpose; (3) a community of pecuniary interest;

and (4) an equal right to voice a direction in the enterprise. 169 GTT wrongly asserts that there is a

164
Peavy v. WFAA-TV, Inc., 221 F.3d 158, 173 (5th Cir. 2000).
165
Exh. B, Plaintiff’s 2d Amended Petition, ¶ 49.
166
See, e.g., Chapa, 377 S.W.2d at 635.
167
Motion at 8.
168
Id.
169
Texas DOT v. Able, 35 S.W.3d 608, 613 (Tex. 2000).

- 38 -
fifth factor under Texas law for joint enterprise claims: that a member of the joint enterprise

committed an intentional tort. 170

The Supreme Court of Texas has upheld findings of joint enterprise liability in negligence

cases. 171 It wrote that joint enterprise liability operates to hold each party “responsible for the

negligent act of the other.” 172 Texas courts have also held that the primary undertaking of a joint

enterprise could be a contract (as opposed to a tort). 173 And the Fourteenth Court of Appeals

assumed without deciding in Seureau v. ExxonMobil Corp. that the theory of joint enterprise in

Texas applied to fraud and contract claims. 174

Finally, Plaintiff has pleaded that GTT and Premier committed acts and omissions of gross

negligence, which would satisfy any requirement of intentional tort, even though there is no such

requirement.

Because GTT has failed to establish that Texas law requires an intentional tort to be the

underlying cause of action for a joint enterprise theory of liability, this ground for summary

judgment should be denied.

ii. Assisting and encouraging

To prove that a defendant assisted or encouraged the commission of a tort, a plaintiff must

show: the primary actor committed a tort, (ii) the defendant had knowledge that the primary actor’s

conduct constituted a tort, (iii) the defendant had an intent to assist the primary actor in committing

the tort, (iv) the defendant gave the primary actor assistance or encouragement, and (v) the

170
Motion at 8.
171
See Able, 35 S.W.3d at 613–15.
172
Id. at 613.
173
See Duncan v. Thompson, 29 S.W.2d 441, 443 (Tex. Civ. App.—Dallas 1930, no writ).
174
See 274 S.W.3d 206, 218 n.9 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2008, no pet.).

- 39 -
defendant’s assistance or encouragement was a substantial factor in causing the tort. 175

GTT cites no case law to support its argument that liability for assisting and encouraging

can only attach to intentional torts as opposed to negligence claims. The Restatement (2d) of Torts

suggest otherwise, holding, “If the encouragement or assistance is a substantial factor in causing

the resulting tort, the one giving it is himself a tortfeasor and is responsible for the consequences

of the other’s act. This is true both when the act done is an intended trespass . . . and when it is

merely a negligent act . . . .” 176

However even if intentional conduct is required, Ms. Bowmer has asserted a valid claim

for assisting and encouraging, because she has pleaded that Defendants intentionally violated

applicable laws in operating the Littlefield Garage in a grossly negligent manner. 177 Specifically,

Ms. Bowmer has alleged that GTT and Premier, “knew what they were doing was a violation of

the building code, city ordinances and the standard of care” and that they “had knowledge that

their actions were conduct constituting a tort.” 178 Because GTT has failed to establish that Texas

law requires an intentional tort to be the underlying cause of action for assisting and encouraging

theory of liability, and because Ms. Bowmer has pleaded intentional conduct and gross negligence

on the part of Defendants, this ground for summary judgment should be denied.

iii. Assisting and participating

To prove a defendant assisted and participated in committing a tort, the plaintiff must show:

(i) the primary actor’s activity accomplished a tortious result; (ii) the defendant provided

substantial assistance to the primary actor; (iii) the defendant’s own conduct, separate from the

175
See Juhl, 936 S.W.2d at 281–82 (Tex. 1996); Shinn v. Allen, 984 S.W.2d 301, 310-11 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st
Dist.] 1998, no pet.).
176
RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF TORTS § 876(b) (1979)
177
Exh. B, Plaintiff’s 2d Amended Petition, ¶ 46.
178
Id.

- 40 -
primary actor’s, was a breach of duty to the plaintiff; and (iv) the defendant’s participation was a

substantial factor in causing the tort. 179

Once again, GTT cites no case law to support its argument that liability for assisting and

participating can only attach to intentional torts as opposed to negligence claims. And again, the

Restatement (Second) of Torts suggests otherwise, holding:

When one personally participates in causing a particular result in accordance with

an agreement with another, he is responsible for the result of the united effort if his
act, considered by itself, constitutes a breach of duty and is a substantial factor in
causing the result, irrespective of his knowledge that his act or the act of the other
is tortious. 180

However even if intentional conduct is required, Ms. Bowmer has asserted a valid claim

for assisting and participating, because she has pleaded that Defendants intentionally violated

applicable laws in operating the Littlefield Garage in a grossly negligent manner. 181 Specifically,

Ms. Bowmer has alleged that GTT and Premier, “knew what they were doing was a violation of

the building code, city ordinances and the standard of care” and that they “had knowledge that

their actions were conduct constituting a tort.” 182

Because GTT has failed to establish that Texas law requires an intentional tort to be the

underlying cause of action for assisting and participating theory of liability, and because Ms.

Bowmer has pleaded intentional conduct and gross negligence on the part of Defendants, this

ground for summary judgment should be denied.

iv. Concert of action

179
RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF TORTS § 876(c) & cmt. e.
180
Id. (emphasis added).
181
Exh. B, Plaintiff’s 2d Amended Petition, ¶ 46.
182
Id.

- 41 -
 To prove a claim for concert of action, a plaintiff must show: (1) the defendant and another

actor committed an intentional tort or were grossly negligent; (2) the tort was highly dangerous,

deviant, or antisocial group activity likely to cause serious injury or death to a person or certain

harm to a large number of people; (3) the defendant agreed (explicitly or tacitly) to cooperate in a

particular plan or to accomplish a particular result; (4) the defendant’s own conduct was tortious;

and (5) the tortious conduct of the defendant and the other actor cause the plaintiff’s injury. 183

GTT claims that Ms. Bowmer’s concert of action theory of liability should be dismissed

because she has no valid claim for an intentional tort. However, a claim for gross negligence—

which Ms. Bowmer has pleaded—can also support a concert of action claim. 184

And as explained above, even if intentional conduct is required, Ms. Bowmer has asserted

a valid claim for concert of action, because she has pleaded that Defendants intentionally violated

applicable laws in operating the Littlefield Garage in a grossly negligent manner. 185 Specifically,

Ms. Bowmer has alleged that GTT and Premier, “knew what they were doing was a violation of

the building code, city ordinances and the standard of care” and that they “had knowledge that

their actions were conduct constituting a tort.” 186 For all of these reasons, GTT’s motion for

summary judgment should be denied.

C. GTT’s No-Evidence Motion for Summary Judgment Should be Denied.

Ms. Bowmer incorporates the summary judgement evidence referenced in each section

above, including in Part II, into her response to GTT’s no-evidence Motion for Summary

183
See Juhl v. Airington, 936 S.W.2d 640, 643-45 (Tex. 1996); III Forks Real Estate, L.P. v. Cohen, 228 S.W.3d
810, 815-16 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2007, no pet.); RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF TORTS § 876(a) (1979).
184
See Cohen, 228 S.W.3d at 815-16 (noting that without allegations of specific intent or gross negligence, liability
would not be imposed under the concert of action theory).
185
Exh. B, Plaintiff’s 2d Amended Petition, ¶ 46.
186
Id.

- 42 -
Judgment.

1. More than a scintilla of evidence exists that GTT was grossly negligent.

Plaintiffs in Texas, such as Ms. Bowmer, are entitled to recover exemplary damages for

harm that results from gross negligence. 187 GTT argues that there is no evidence that it acted with

gross negligence in this case. 188

To survive a no-evidence motion for summary judgment, a gross negligence plaintiff must

produce more than a scintilla of evidence that:

(1) the defendant’s act or omission, when viewed objectively from the defendant’s
standpoint at the time it occurred, involved an extreme degree of risk, considering the
probability and magnitude of the potential harm to others; 189 and

(2) the defendant had actual, subjective awareness of the risk but proceeded with
conscious indifference to the rights, safety, or welfare of others. 190

a. GTT’s failure to properly maintain the cable vehicle barrier system in its
multi-story, open-faced garage involved an extreme degree of risk.

An act or omission involves an extreme degree of risk when there is a likelihood of serious

injury to the plaintiff. 191 The plaintiff is not required to prove that the defendant anticipated the

precise manner in which the extreme risk would cause injury or identified the exact individual that

would be subjected to it. 192

Ms. Bowmer has produced more than a scintilla of evidence to show that GTT’s failure to

maintain the cable barrier system involved an extreme degree of risk when viewed from the

standpoint of GTT. At his deposition, GTT’s corporate representative admitted that between GTT

187
Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §41.003(a)(3).
188
Motion at 14-15.
189
Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §41.001(11)(A).
190
Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §41. 001(11)(B).
191
U-Haul Int’l v. Waldrip, 380 S.W.3d 118, 137 (Tex. 2012)
192
Id.

- 43 -
and Premier, one of them should have been inspecting the cable barrier system to make sure that

it was adequate and not dangerous. 193 GTT further admitted that it knew that the purpose of the

cable barrier system was to prevent cars from plunging off of the multi-story Littlefield Garage, 194

and that the risk of harm to somebody from a failed cable barrier system could be devastating and

potentially fatal. 195 Upon viewing the video of the cable barrier system fail and Ms. Bowmer

plummet from the garage, GTT admitted that the cable barrier failure comprised “an extremely

dangerous situation” that involved an “extreme risk” of injury and death both to Ms. Bowmer and

passers-by. 196 When GTT’s representative was questioned regarding photographs of garage’s

cable barrier system at or near the time of Ms. Bowmer’s accident, he repeatedly answered that

the system presented an “obviously dangerous.” 197

Additionally, as set forth more fully in his report, Ms. Bowmer’s expert engineer, Carl

Larosche, opined that GTT’s failure to maintain the cable barrier system up to the building code

and the standard of care made it “grossly negligent” in its operation of the garage. 198

For these reasons, and in light of all the facts set forth in Part II above, far more than a

scintilla of evidence exists to show that GTT’s acts or omissions with regard to the cable barrier

system involved an extreme degree of risk and a likelihood of serious injury to persons such as

Ms. Bowmer.

b. At the time of Ms. Bowmer’s accident, GTT was subjectively aware of the risk
but proceeded with conscious indifference to the rights of others by keeping
its garage open to the public without making proper repairs.

193
Exh. R, O’Brien Dep. 56:13-18.
194
Id. at 85:5-13; 18-23.
195
Id. at 70:13–71:2.
196
Id. at 147:6-13.
197
See id. at 119:13–124:9.
198
Exh. D, Larosche Aff., ¶ 7, Exh. B.

- 44 -
 To prove a defendant had actual, subjective awareness of the risk but proceeded with

conscious indifference, the plaintiff must show the defendant knew about the risk but acted (or

failed to act) anyway. 199 This conscious indifference refers to the rights, safety, or welfare of other

people in general, not of the plaintiff in particular. 200

More than a scintilla of evidence exists for this prong of gross negligence as well. Under

Texas law, the knowledge of an agent is charged to the principal. 201 As set forth above, GTT’s

own managing agent for the garage (Premier) had actual knowledge that the system had been

improperly repaired in violation of the code and standard of care. 202 Because Premier served as

GTT’s agent in operating the garage, Premier’s knowledge of the unsafe, unlawful condition of

the barrier cable system is imputed to GTT.

However, even if Premier’s knowledge is not imputed to GTT, the evidence shows that

GTT was still subjectively aware of extreme risks posed by the cable barrier system, yet chose to

do nothing to rectify it. For example, in 2016, after the cable barrier system failed to restrain Mr.

O’Connor’s vehicle from falling off of the 9th floor of the garage, GTT was warned by an engineer

to have all of the cables in the garage inspected. 203 Despite the engineer’s recommendation, GTT

admittedly took no action to have the garage’s cable barrier system inspected by a qualified

199
See Goodyear Tire & Rubber, Co. v. Rogers, 538 S.W.3d 637, 646.
200
See St. Luke’s Episcopal Hosp. v. Agbor, 952 S.W.2d 503, 506 (Tex. 1997)
201
Grissom v. Watson, 704 S.W.2d 325, 327 (Tex. 1986) (“[I]t is universally recognized that notice to the agent is
notice to the principal”); see Elite Towing Lsi Fin. Grp., 985 S.W.2d 635, 644 n.16 (finding that notice to agent was
imputed to principal under Texas law); Bergman Produce Co. v. Brown, 172 S.W. 554, 558 (Tex. Civ. App.—
Amarillo 1914, no writ) (“The knowledge of the agent obtained in the business of his principal, and while acting
within the scope of his apparent authority, is notice to the principal -- is elementary”); Farrar v. Sabine Mgmt.
Corp., 362 S.W.3d 694, 700 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2011, no pet.) (holding that notice of defect to agent of
a property owner was evidence of notice of defect to property owner/operator).
202
See e.g., supra, Part II; see Exh. E, Deposition of Curtis Brown (“Brown Dep.”) at 17-18, 52-53 (testifying that
Premier employees were aware of all repairs performed by Curtis Brown Construction, and that Premier never
disclosed to Curtis Brown that an engineer had refused to repair the cable barrier system unless it was brought up to
code).
203
Exh. X, 09/10/2016 Letter from Martin to Kahn.

- 45 -
installer. Specifically, when asked whether GTT hired, retained, asked, or commissioned a barrier

cable installer to inspect the cables below the ninth floor after Mr. O’Connor’s incident, but before

Ms. Bowmer’s incident, GTT’s corporate representative answered, “No.” 204

In the months following the O’Connor incident, GTT continued to see evidence that the

cable system was broken and dangerous. As cited above, in March and June of 2017, just months

before Ms. Bowmer’s incident, GTT and Premier continued to received reports of broken and

dilapidated cables in the Littlefield Garage. These were all red flags and clear evidence to the

Defendants of the defective and dangerous condition.

It is clear that after Mr. O’Connor’s incident in 2016—yet before Ms. Bowmer’s in 2017—

GTT was subjectively aware that its cable barrier system was inadequate to prevent vehicles from

falling off its garage. Indeed, GTT received a recommendation by a registered engineer that it

should have its entire cable barrier system inspected by a qualified installer. It ignored this advice

which led directly to Ms. Bowmer’s accident and her catastrophic injuries nearly a year later.

Accordingly, more than a scintilla of evidence exists that GTT had actual, subjective

awareness of the risks posed by its cable barrier system at the time of Ms. Bowmer’s accident, but

proceeded with conscious indifference to her rights, safety, or welfare. For these reasons, and in

light of the evidence put forth in Part II above, GTT’s summary judgment motion should be denied.

2. More than a scintilla of evidence exists that GTT was negligent per se.

GTT violated the building codes made applicable by City of Austin Ordinance No.

20130606-089, which adopted the 2012 International Building Code (“IBC”) and the 2012

International Existing Building Code (“IEBC”). 205 GTT also violated the codes made applicable

204
Exh. R, O’Brien Dep. At 108.
205
Exh. B, Plaintiff’s 2d Amended Petition, ¶ 33(n)(iv); Exh. JJ, City of Austin Ordinance 20130606-089, pp. 1, 72.

- 46 -
by City of Austin Ordinance No. 20130926-145, which adopted the 2012 International Property

Maintenance Code (“IPMC”). 206 These violations proximately caused Ms. Bowmer’s injuries.

The elements of a cause of action for negligence per se are the following:

(1) the plaintiff belongs to the class of persons the statute was designed to protect, and her
injury is of the type the statute was designed to prevent;

(2) The statute is one for which tort liability may be imposed when violated;

(3) The defendant violated the statute without excuse;

(4) The defendant’s act or omission proximately caused the plaintiff’s injury. 207

Because there is at least some evidence on each of these elements, this Court must deny GTT’s

no-evidence motion for summary judgment.

a. The City of Austin ordinances governing vehicle barrier systems in garages

were designed to protect people like Ms. Bowmer from the type of injuries
she suffered.

First, Ms. Bowmer belonged to the class of persons the city ordinances were designed to

protect, and her injury was of the type the ordinances were designed to prevent. For example, in

Nixon v. Mr. Property Management Co., a minor who was abducted in front of vacant apartments,

taken inside, and attacked was within the class of persons sought to be protected by a city ordinance

requiring landlords to keep vacant buildings closed. 208 Likewise, in Osti v. Saylors, the court found

that a mother and her children who were burned in a building fire were within the class sought to

be protected by building codes that required two exits for every story above the first floor. 209

206
Exh. B Plaintiff’s 2d Amended Petition, ¶33(n)(v); Exh. KK, City of Austin Ordinance 20130926-145, p. 1.
Perry v. S.N., 973 S.W.2d 301, 305 (Tex. 1998); Nixon v. Mr. Prop. Mgmt. Co., 690 S.W.2d 546, 549 (Tex.
207

1985).
208
Nixon, 690 S.W.2d at 549.
209
991 S.W.2d 322, 327 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1999, pet. denied).

- 47 -
 Ms. Bowmer has provided more than a scintilla of evidence in this case that she was among

the class of persons sought to be protected by the city ordinances, and that the injury she suffered

was of the type the statute was designed to prevent. Carl Larosche, a professional engineer retained

by Ms. Bowmer, opined that the City of Austin building codes regarding vehicle barrier systems

required barriers that would “resist a concentrated load of 6,000 pounds,” which would prevent

accidents like Ms. Bowmer’s from happening. 210 Further, the building codes required GTT to

maintain the barrier system “so as not to pose a threat to the public health, safety or welfare.”211

In deposition testimony, Troy Collins, a code official with the City of Austin, agreed that “it’s

important for cables [in a parking garage] to be able to hold a vehicle to the standard of care and

the code.” 212

Likewise, GTT’s corporate representative, admitted that the purpose of the cable barrier

system in a parking garage is “to protect the leading edge of the garage . . . . [f]rom a car going off

or from a person going off.” 213 GTT also agreed that the intent behind the vehicle restraint system

in the Littlefield Garage was to prevent further physical damage in the event that a patron

approached too closely to the edge of the garage, as Ms. Bowmer did. 214 Further, GTT admitted

that following an engineer’s advice in repairing the garage in the wake of Ms. Bowmer’s accident

was important because “he knows the code better than I do[,]” and failing to follow the engineer’s

advice and adhere to the codes could cause serious injuries. 215

210
See Exh. D, Larosche Aff. ¶¶ 5-7, Exh. B, pp. 4–5, 15-18.
211
Id., Exh. B, p. 10.
212
Exh. AA, Collins Dep. at 54:15-18.
213
Exh. R, O’Brien Dep., at 47:24–48:6.
214
Id., at 150:25–151:24.
215
Id. at 97:9-17.

- 48 -
 Because even GTT admits that the purpose of having effective vehicle barrier systems in

place, as required by the relevant building codes, is important to prevent the kind of accident

experienced by Ms. Bowmer, more than enough evidence exists to show that Ms. Bowmer was

within the class of persons the ordinances were designed to protect.

b. Tort liability may be imposed from the ordinances, when violated.

Next, it is clear that tort liability may be imposed from the Austin building codes at issue.

Appellate courts routinely permit plaintiffs to base negligence per se claims on violations of city

ordinances and building codes. 216 In deciding whether to impose tort liability for a violation of a

statute or ordinance, courts have considered several factors, including whether the statute is

penal in nature, 217 whether it imposes mandatory conduct, 218 and whether imposing tort liability

for violation of that statute will be “fair, workable, and wise.” 219 The city of Austin ordinances

at issue here meet each of these factors.

First, violations of statutes and ordinances that are “penal” in nature will support a

negligence per se claim. 220 A penal statute is one that defines a criminal offense and specifies a

corresponding fine, penalty, or punishment. 221 Violations of city ordinances, traffic regulations,

and civil statutes have all supported negligence per se claims. 222

216
See, e.g., Nixon, 690 S.W.2d at 549; 991 S.W.2d at 327.
217
Pack v. Crossroads, Inc., 53 S.W.3d 492, 509-10 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2001, pet. denied).
218
Supreme Beef Packers, Inc. v. Maddox, 67 S.W.3d 453, 456 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2002, pet. denied).
219
Perry, 973 S.W.2d at 305-06.
220
E.g. Ridgecrest Ret. & Healthcare v. Urban, 135 S.W.3d 757, 763 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2004, pet.
denied).
221
See Pack, 53 S.W.3d at 509.
222
See, e.g., Nixon, 690 S.W.2d at 549 (violation of city building ordinance served as basis for negligence per se
claim).

- 49 -
 The building codes at issue here are penal in nature. John Hale, a code official with the

city of Austin testified that there were criminal penalties for not following the building code. 223

Also, the Notice of Violation that GTT received from the City of Austin in the wake of Ms.

Bowmer’s accident made clear that building code violations were punishable by criminal charges

and fines. 224

Second, for the reasons set forth earlier in this response, the building codes prescribe a

mandatory standard of conduct, and do not require the person bound to exercise judgment. 225 For

example, under the 2012 IEBC, which was in effect at the time of Ms. Bowmer’s accident, and

which was made applicable by City of Austin ordinance 20130606-089, the barrier cable system

in the Littlefield Garage presented a “dangerous condition” as defined by the IEBC. 226 Under that

code, dangerous conditions “shall be eliminated” and repaired or replaced in strict compliance

with the 2012 IBC. 227 Thus, the cable barrier system should have been brought up to the 2012

IBC standards, such that it would withstand a concentrated load of 6,000 pounds. 228 When asked

whether a building owner in Austin can choose not to follow the building codes, one Austin code

enforcer testified, “only if they are located out of the city limits.” 229

There is nothing about these ordinances that leaves GTT with room for discretion regarding

whether or how to follow them. For these reasons, and for those cited in Part III.B.2 of this

response, there is ample evidence to show that the Austin building codes at issue impose a

223
Exh BB, Hale Dep. p. 23:23–24:2.
224
Exh. LL, 07/18/2017 Notice of Violation, at Bowmer 001650.
225
See supra, Part III.B.2.
226
Exh. D, Larosche Aff., ¶¶ 4–7.
227
Id.
228
Exh. D, Larosche Aff., ¶¶ 4-7, Exh. B.
229
Exh. BB, Hale Dep., at 23:1-4.

- 50 -
mandatory standard that can give rise to negligence per se.

It is also easy to see that imposing tort liability for violation of the Austin building code in

this case would be “fair, workable, and wise.” The Texas Supreme Court has provided a list of

nonexclusive factors that a court should consider when making this determination. 230 These

factors include: (i) whether the statute supplies a standard of conduct for an existing common-law

duty; (ii) whether the statute puts the public on notice by clearly defining the required conduct;

(iii) whether violating the statute would result in “ruinous damages” that are disproportionate to

the seriousness of the statutory violation; (iv) whether violating the statute would impose liability

without fault; and (iv) whether the plaintiff’s injury is a direct or indirect result of the statutory

violation. 231

Here, these factors weigh in favor of imposing negligence per se liability based on the

building codes, as adopted by the ordinances. First, it is well-settled under Texas law that a

property owner has a common-law duty to use reasonable care to keep premises under his control

in a safe condition. 232 Imposition of negligence per se liability for the building code violations at

issue will not create a new legal duty, it simply supplies a certain standard of conduct by which to

gauge whether that duty has been breached. When a statute is not the only source of the duty in

question—i.e, the duty already exists under common law—this factor weighs in favor of imposing

negligence per se liability. 233 The fact that the building codes in question criminalize conduct that

is also governed by a common law duty also serves to negate any argument that the imposition of

230
Perry, 973 S.W.2d at 309.
231
Id.
232
Redinger v. Living, Inc., 689 S.W.2d 415, 416 (Tex. 1985).
233
See Perry, 973 S.W.2d at 306-07.

- 51 -
negligence per se in this case creates liability without fault (factor 4). 234

Second, this Court should consider whether the building codes put the public on notice by

clearly defining the required conduct. 235 For all of the reasons discussed above in Parts III.B.2,

this factor also weighs in favor of imposing negligence per se liability.

Third, applying negligence per se in this case does not impose ruinous liability

disproportionate to the seriousness of defendant’s conduct. The conduct in question involves the

failure to provide vehicle restraint systems on a multi-level parking garage which were capable of

preventing cars and drivers from plunging off of the garage—a potentially fatal occurrence. When

considering this element in the context of a building code requiring fire escapes, the court in Osti

v. Saylor determined that the potential liability faced by the violator was not disproportionate to

the importance of protecting against a potentially life-threatening event. 236 Similarly, the potential

damages faced by GTT for violating the building codes in this case is not disproportionate to the

life-threatening conditions faced by Ms. Bowmer and other garage patrons.

Finally it is clear from the facts of this case that GTT’s violation of the ordinances at issue

was a direct cause of Ms. Bowmer’s injuries: 237

In sum, these factors and the evidence presented weigh heavily in favor of imposing

234
See Osti, 991 S.W.2d at 328.
235
Perry, 973 S.W.2d. at 309.
236
Osti, 991 S.W.2d at 328.
237
See Exh. D, Larosche Aff., ¶ 5, Exh. B, pp. 15-17.

- 52 -
negligence per se liability against GTT as a result of its blatant disregard of the applicable building

codes.

c. Some evidence exists that GTT violated the ordinances, and there is no
evidence it had an excuse to do so.

Sufficient evidence exists that GTT violated the applicable building codes, as made

applicable through the City of Austin ordinances. For example, immediately in the wake of Ms.

Bowmer’s incident, GTT received notice that it was in violation of the applicable building codes,

and would be required to bring its cable barrier system into compliance with the 2012 IBC.238

Engineer Carl Larosche has also opined that GTT’s garage was clearly was in violation of the

applicable building codes, which directly caused Ms. Bowmer’s injuries. 239

GTT claims that it is entitled to summary judgment because “Plaintiff failed to provide

evidence that GTT Parking violated the statute or code without excuse. . . .” 240 But GTT has

presented no summary judgment evidence that it had an excuse to violate the building codes.

When no evidence of an excuse is raised, a plaintiff is only required to show that the defendant

violated the statute. 241 Engineer Carl Larosche has reviewed the record in this case, and has “seen

no evidence that the owners/operators of the Littlefield Garage at the time of Ms. Bowmer’s

accident had any valid excuse to violate the 2012 IEBC and 2012 IBC, as adopted under City of

Austin Ordinance No. 20130606-089.” 242 And as code enforcer John Hale testified, it is

238
Exh. MM, 07/26/2017 Notice of Violation, at Bowmer 001653.
239
See Exh. D, Larosche Aff., ¶ 5, Exh. B, pp. 15-17.
240
Motion at 16.
241
See Murray v. O&A Express, Inc., 630 S.W.2d 633, 636 (Tex. 1982).
242
See Exh. D, Larosche Aff., ¶ 6.

- 53 -
mandatory for an operator of a parking garage within the city limits to follow the applicable

building code. 243

GTT also cites to Impson v. Structural Metals, Inc., for the proposition that “evidence that

a defendant neither knew nor should have known of the occasion for compliance excuses the

violation of a statute imposing negligence per se.” 244 GTT then argues: “In this case, there is no

evidence that GTT Parking had knowledge that the Littlefield Garage violated any statutes or

building code.” 245

But as the party pleading the excuse, GTT, bears the burden of presenting evidence of a

legally acceptable excuse. 246 It does not fall on Ms. Bowmer to prove the non-existence of an

excuse, lest she be required to prove a negative. 247 In the case at bar, GTT has presented no

summary judgment evidence that it did not know, and should not have known, of its obligations

to make the garage safe by complying with the building codes. To the contrary, Austin building

code enforcer Troy Collins testified that it was not a valid excuse to code compliance for a building

owner to simply claim that they did not know what the building code was. 248

Furthermore, under it is axiomatic that everyone—including GTT—is presumed to know

the law. 249 Because GTT, as an operator of a parking garage within the city of Austin, is presumed

243
Exh. BB, Hale Dep. p. 23:5-9.
244
Motion at 15 (citing 487, S.W.2d 694, 696 (Tex. 1972) (citing RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF TORTS § 288A
(1965)).
245
Motion at 15.
246
Moughon v. Wolf, 576 S.W.2d 603, 604-05 (Tex. 1978).
247
See id.
248
Exh. AA, Collins Dep. p. 36:15-19.
249
E.H. Stafford Mfg. Co. v. Wichita School Supply Co., 23 S.W.2d 695, 697 (Tex. 1930) (“The rule is too
elementary to require the citation of authority that all persons are conclusively presumed to know the law.”); accord
Hicks v. State, 419 S.W.3d 555, 558 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2013, pet. ref’d) (“For over a century, it has been clear
that ‘(e)very one is conclusively presumed to know the law, both as to civil and criminal transactions.’”); Unsell v.
Fed. Land Bank, 138 S.W.2d 305, 309 (Tex. Civ. App.—Texarkana 1940, writ dism’d by agr.) (“[T]he presumption
- 54 -
to know the law, and because it has failed to present summary judgment evidence conclusively

establishing that it did not know and did not have a reason to know of the building codes, its motion

for summary judgment must fail.

d. Some evidence exists that GTT’s violation of the ordinance proximately

caused Ms. Bowmer’s injuries.

Ms. Bowmer has presented sufficient evidence that her injuries were proximately caused

by GTT’s violation of the ordinances in question. For example, engineer Carl Larosche offers the

opinion: 250

Mr. Larosche also opines that:

“It does not appear that [GTT] actively responded to codified, safety-related
maintenance items regarding the barrier cable system. The circumstances of the
September 2016 [O’Connor] barrier cable system failure and associated code
considerations should have resulted in a more comprehensive assessment and repair
approach. . . .Actions resulting from a more comprehensive assessment and repair
approach would have likely resulted in more redundant and resilient barrier cable
system capable of resisting the July 2017 impact.” 251

Even GTT, through their corporate representative, recognizes that the failure of the cable

barrier system was a proximate cause of Ms. Bowmer’s injuries. When asked whether the intent

is conclusive that every person knows the law by which the conduct of all persons is to be governed in any particular
character of transaction.”).
250
Exh. D, Larosche Aff., ¶ 5.
251
Exh. D, Larosche Aff., Exh. B, p. 18.

- 55 -
of the cable barrier system was to prevent minor accidents from becoming catastrophic ones,

GTT’s corporate representative agreed. 252

Because it is clear from the evidence in this case that the failure of the cable barrier system

was a proximate cause of Ms. Bowmer’s injuries, GTT’s motion for summary judgment should be

denied.

3. More than a scintilla of evidence exists that a joint enterprise existed between GTT
and Premier.

GTT next claims that there is no evidence to support any of the elements of joint enterprise

liability. The elements of joint enterprise under Texas law are (1) an express or implied agreement;

(2) a common purpose; (3) a community of pecuniary interest; and (4) an equal right to voice a

direction in the enterprise. 253 Because Ms. Bowmer has already presented evidence of elements

three and four in Part III.B.3 above, she will limit her discussion in this section to elements one

and two.

Regarding element one, a plaintiff must produce evidence that there was an express or

implied agreement among members of the group. 254 Here, this element is easily met by the

existence of the services agreement between GTT and Premier regarding the operation of the

garage. 255 It is also met by GTT’s testimony that there were oral agreements between GTT and

Premier regarding the operation of the garage. 256

Regarding element two, the plaintiff must produce some evidence that members of the

252
Exh. R, O’Brien Dep., pp. 150:25–151:14.
253
Texas DOT v. Able, 35 S.W.3d 608, 613 (Tex. 2000).
254
St. Joseph Hosp. v. Wolff, 94 S.W.3d 513, 526 (Tex. 2002).
255
Exh. T, Services Agreement.
256
See, e.g., Exh. S, Kahn Dep. 2, pp. 210:14–211:7.

- 56 -
group shared a common purpose. 257 This is also met by referencing the services agreement, which

provides that GTT and Premier would work together to operate the Littlefield Garage for a

profit. 258 Additionally, GTT testified that it relied on Premier as its “eyes and ears” in making

sure operating the garage safely. 259 In Able, for example, the Texas Supreme Court found a

common purpose existed between TxDOT and METRO for the purpose of operating a highway

system, even though TxDOT had delegated most of the day-to-day responsibilities for highway

operations to METRO. 260 Likewise, GTT and Premier acted with a common purpose in operating

the Littlefield Garage in an attempt to make a profit, and it makes no difference that GTT delegated

responsibility for maintenance to Premier.

IV. CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff Christi J. Bowmer respectfully requests that this Court

enter an order denying Defendant GTT Parking, L.P.’s motion for partial summary judgment. Ms.

Bowmer also requests that this Court award her any and all further relief to which she may be

entitled.

257
St. Joseph Hosp., 94 S.W.3d at 526.
258
Exh. T, Service Agreement.
259
Exh. S, Kahn Dep. 2, pp. 209:23–211:7.
260
See Able, 35 S.W.3d at 613–15.

- 57 -
Dated: February 28, 2018 Respectfully submitted,

HOWRY BREEN & HERMAN, L.L.P.

_____________________________________
Randy Howry
State Bar No. 10121690
Sean E. Breen
State Bar No. 00783715
Chris Lavorato
State Bar No. 24096074

1900 Pearl Street

Austin, Texas 78705-5408
(512) 474-7300 Phone
(512) 474-8557 Facsimile
rhowry@howrybreen.com
sbreen@howrybreen.com
clavorato@howrybreen.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff Christi Bowmer

- 58 -
 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that a true and correct copy of this document was served by E-Service in accordance with
Rules 21 and 21a of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, to all counsel of record of record, on
February 28, 2018:

Tasha Barnes
THOMPSON COE COUSINS & IRONS, LLP
701 Brazos St., Suite 1500
Austin, TX 78701
tbarnes@thompsoncoe.com

Attorneys for GTT Parking, LP and Sheldon

David Kahn

Paul Starr
GERMER BEAMAN & BROWN, PLLC
301 Congress Avenue, Suite 1700
Austin, Texas 78701
pstarr@germer-austin.com

Attorneys for Premier Parking of Tennessee,

LLC

Curtis J. Kurhajec
NAMAN, HOWELL, SMITH & LEE, PLLC
8310 N. Capital of Texas Highway, Suite 490
Austin, Texas 78731
ckurhajec@namanhowell.com

Attorneys for Weitzman Management

Corporation

Sean Breen

- 59 -
 CAUSE NO. D-1-GN-17-004456

CHRISTI J. BOWMER, § IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF

Plaintiff, §
§
vs. § TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS
§
GTT PARKING, LP, SHELDON DAVID §
KAHN, PREMIER PARKING OF §
TENNESSEE, LLC, and WEITZMAN §
MANAGEMENT CORPORATION §
Defendants. § 353rd JUDICIAL DISTRICT

APPENDIX OF EXHIBITS TO PLAINITFF CHRISTI J. BOWMER’S RESPONSE TO

DEFENDANT GTT PARKING, L.P.’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY
JUDGMENT ON TRADITIONAL AND NO EVIDENCE GROUNDS

Exh. Description/Title Date

A Declaration of Sean E. Breen 02/28/2019
B Plaintiff’s Second Amended Petition 02/11/2019
C Littlefield Garage Certificate of Occupancy 01/01/1981
D Affidavit of Carl J. Larosche, P.E. 02/26/2019
E Deposition Transcript of Curtis Brown 01/15/2019
F E-mail from J. Wright to W. Smith et al. (PREMIER-00138) 04/25/2014
G Service Contract between Premier and 6th & Congress, LLC 08/20/2013
H E-mail chain among E. Herron, M. Donoghue, et al. 06/18/2014
I E-mail from W. Smith to J. Wright et al. (PREMIER-00147) 05/08/2014
J Deposition Transcript of Bob Chapman 01/09/2019
K E-mail from J. Wright to W. Smith et al. (PREMIER-00140) 05/08/2019
L E-mail and attachment from E. Herron to S. Pfeiffer 07/03/2014
M E-mails from E. Herron to L. Sallis et al. 07/14/2014
N E-mail from M. Donoghue to E. Herron et al. (CB 0030) 06/16/2014
O Letter from M. Donoghue to E. Herron 06/23/2014
P E-mail from N. Branson to E. Herron 06/30/2014
Exh. Description/Title Date
Purchase Agreement Between GTT and 6th & Congress
Q 7/25/2015
Properties, LLC
Deposition Transcript of Sean O’Brien
R 06/19/2018
(GTT Corporate Representative)
Deposition Transcript of Sheldon David Kahn (Vol. 2)
S 08/15/2018
(GTT Corporate Representative)
T Service Agreement between GTT and Premier 09/08/2015
U Deposition Transcript of Ryan Hunt 01/09/2019
Deposition Transcript of Sheldon David Kahn (Vol. 1)
V 06/19/2018
(GTT Corporate Representative)
35-year-old cables played key role in Austin’s ‘dangling car’
W 09/13/2016
mishap, AUSTIN AMERICAN-STATESMAN
X Letter from R. Martin, P.E., to D. Kahn (GTT 064) 09/10/2016
Y Notice of Violation 09/15/2016
Z E-mail from C. Murray to R. Hunt et al. (GTT 054) 9/15/2016
AA Deposition Transcript of Troy Collins 02/20/2019
BB Deposition Transcript of John Hale 02/20/2019
CC E-mail from B. Bonniwell to G. Jones et al. 03/24/2017
DD E-mail from C. Murray to S. O’Brien et al. (GTT 154) 06/09/2017
EE Deposition of Christi J. Bowmer 06/15/2018
FF Affidavit of Cam Cope 02/26/2019
GG Placeholder for Crash Video 1 07/13/2017
HH Placeholder for Crash Video 2 07/13/2017
II Excerpt from plaintiffs’ response to interrogatories 10/19/2017
JJ City of Austin Ordinance 20130606-089 06/06/2013
KK City of Austin Ordinance 20130926-145 09/26/2013
LL Notice of Violation 07/18/2017
MM Notice of Violation 07/26/17
NN Key documents obtained and produced in discovery Various
OO Placeholder for Video
Exhibit A
 CAUSE NO. D-1-GN-17-004456

CHRISTI J. BOWMER, § IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF

Plaintiff, §
§
vs. § TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS
§
GTT PARKING, LP, SHELDON DAVID §
KAHN, PREMIER PARKING OF §
TENNESSEE, LLC, and WEITZMAN §
MANAGEMENT CORPORATION §
Defendants. § 353rd JUDICIAL DISTRICT

DECLARATION OF SEAN E. BREEN

1. The document attached to “Appendix of Exhibits to Plaintiff Christi J. Bowmer’s

Response to Defendant GTT Parking, L.P.’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment
on Traditional and No Evidence Grounds” (hereinafter the “Appendix”) as
“Exhibit B” is a true and correct copy of Plaintiff’s Second Amended Petition in
this matter.

2. The document attached to the Appendix as “Exhibit C” is a true and correct copy
of the Littlefield Garage Certificate of Occupancy obtained from the City of Austin.

3. The document attached to the Appendix as “Exhibit F” is a true and correct copy
of a 04/25/2014 e-mail between J. Wright and W. Smith et al., produced by Premier
Parking during discovery in this case.

4. The document attached to the Appendix as “Exhibit G” is a true and correct copy
of the Service Contract between Premier and 6th & Congress, LLC, dated August
20, 2013, produced during discovery in this case.

5. The document attached to the Appendix as “Exhibit H” is a true and correct copy
of an email chain among E. Herron, M. Donoghue, et al., dated 06/18/2014,
produced during discovery in this case.

6. The document attached to the Appendix as “Exhibit I” is a true and correct copy of
an e-mail chain between W. Smith and J. Wright., dated 05/08/2014, produced by
Premier during discovery in this case.
7. The document attached to the Appendix as “Exhibit K” is a true and correct copy
of an e-mail from J. Wright to W. Smith et al., dated 05/08/2014, produced by
Premier during discovery in this case.

8. The document attached to the Appendix as “Exhibit L” is a true and correct copy
of an e-mail and attachment from E. Herron to S. Pfeiffer et al., dated 07/03/2014,
produced during discovery in this case.

9. The document attached to the Appendix as “Exhibit M” is a true and correct copy
of an e-mail chain from E. Herron to L. Sallis et al., dated 07/14/2014, produced
during discovery in this case.

10. The document attached to the Appendix as “Exhibit N” is a true and correct copy
of an e-mail chain from E-mail from M. Donoghue to E. Herron et al., dated
06/16/2014, produced by Curtis Brown during discovery in this case.

11. The document attached to the Appendix as “Exhibit O” is a true and correct copy
of a letter from M. Donoghue to E. Herron, dated 06/23/2014, produced during
discovery in this case.

12. The document attached to the Appendix as “Exhibit P” is a true and correct copy
of an e-mail from N. Branson to E. Herron, dated 06/30/2014, produced during
discovery in this case.

13. The document attached to the Appendix as “Exhibit Q” is a true and correct copy
of the Purchase Agreement between GTT and 6th & Congress Properties, LLC,
dated 07/27/2015, produced by GTT during discovery in this case. Portions of this
document have been redacted at GTT’s request.

14. The document attached to the Appendix as “Exhibit T” is a true and correct copy
of the Service Agreement between GTT and Premier, dated 09/08/2015, produced
by GTT during discovery in this case.

15. The document attached to the Appendix as “Exhibit W” is a true and correct copy
of an article from the Austin American-Statesman website titled “35-year-old cables
played key role in Austin’s ‘dangling car’ mishap”, dated 09/13/2016, produced
during discovery in this case.

16. The document attached to the Appendix as “Exhibit X” is a true and correct copy
of a letter from R. Martin, P.E., to D. Kahn, dated 09/10/2016, produced by GTT
during discovery in this case.
 17. The document attached to the Appendix as “Exhibit Y” is a true and correct copy
of a “Notice of Violation” from the Austin Code Department to GTT, dated
09/15/2016, produced during discovery in this case.

18. The document attached to the Appendix as “Exhibit Z” is a true and correct copy
of an e-mail from C. Murray to R. Hunt et al., dated 09/15/2016, produced by GTT
during discovery in this case.

19. The document attached to the Appendix as “Exhibit CC” is a true and correct copy
of an e-mail from B. Bonniwell to G. Jones et al., dated 03/24/2017, produced
during discovery in this case.

20. The document attached to the Appendix as “Exhibit DD” is a true and correct copy
of an e-mail from C. Murray to S. O’Brien et al., dated 06/09/2017, produced by
GTT during discovery in this case.

21. The document attached to the Appendix as “Exhibit II” is a true and correct excerpt
of plaintiff’s responses to interrogatories in this case, dated 10/19/2017.

22. The document attached to the Appendix as “Exhibit JJ” is a true and correct copy
of City of Austin Ordinance 20130606-089, dated 06/06/2013.

23. The document attached to the Appendix as “Exhibit KK” is a true and correct copy
of City of Austin Ordinance 20130926-145, dated 09/26/2013.

24. The document attached to the Appendix as “Exhibit LL” is a true and correct copy
of a “Notice of Violation” from the Austin Code Department to GTT, dated
07/18/2017, produced during discovery in this case.

25. The document attached to the Appendix as “Exhibit MM” is a true and correct copy
of a “Notice of Violation” from the Austin Code Department to GTT, dated
07/26/2017, produced during discovery in this case.

My name is Sean E. Breen. I am an attorney for Plaintiff Christi J. Bowmer in the above-
referenced matter. My date of birth is October 16, 1964, and my business address is 1900 Pearl
St., Austin, Texas 78705, USA. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and
correct.

Executed in TRAVIS COUNTY, State of TEXAS, on the 28nd day of February, 2019
________________________________
Declarant
Exhibit B
 2/11/2019 1:27 PM
Velva L. Price
District Clerk
Travis County
CAUSE NO. D-1-GN-17-004456 D-1-GN-17-004456
Nancy Ramirez

CHRISTI J. BOWMER § IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF

§
  §
Plaintiff, §
§
vs. § TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS
§
GTT PARKING, L.P., PREMIER PARKING §
OF TENNESSEE, LLC, and WEITZMAN §
MANAGEMENT CORPORATION §
§
  §
Defendants. § 353rd JUDICIAL DISTRICT

PLAINTIFF’S SECOND AMENDED PETITION

Comes Now Plaintiff CHRISTI J. BOWMER and files this action against GTT PARKING,

L.P., PREMIER PARKING OF TENNESSEE, LLC, and WEITZMAN MANAGEMENT

CORPORATION, (collectively “Defendants”), and for cause of action respectfully shows as

follows:

I. DISCOVERY CONTROL PLAN

Discovery in this case is intended to be conducted under Level 3 pursuant to Texas Rules of

Civil Procedure §190. The injuries to Plaintiff are serious and with permanent effect. At the time of

filing this lawsuit, Plaintiff seeks monetary relief over $1,000,000.00, including damages of any

kind, exemplary damages, penalties, costs, expenses, pre-judgment and post-judgment interest in

accordance with TRCP §47 (c)(5). Plaintiff will ask that a jury determine the full value and extent

of all damages and full and fair compensation. GTT has insisted that Plaintiff put in the petition the

maximum amount of damages she seeks. Plaintiff trusts the jury to decide the total amount of

damages and full and fair compensation and, in order to comply with the GTT request for a

Page 1 of 27
maximum amount, Plaintiff re-iterates she will allow a jury to decide the total and states she will not

seek more than Fifty Two Million Dollars, a figure with an important connection to the garage and

which GTT and Premier are quite familiar. Should Defendants attempt to bring attention to, argue

about or criticize that maximum amount, Plaintiff reserves the right to explain the derivation and

reason for that figure. Plaintiff also reserves the right to amend this petition, including this

provision, as the case continues.

II. PARTIES

1. Plaintiff CHRISTI J. BOWMER, is an individual who resides in Cedar Park, Texas.

2. Defendant, GTT PARKING, L.P. (“GTT”) is a Texas limited partnership that was

served with process through service upon its registered agent for service of process, Sheldon David

Kahn, 804 Congress Ave., Suite 300, Austin, TX 78701 and has appeared and answered.

3. Defendant PREMIER PARKING OF TENNESSEE, LLC (“PREMIER PARKING”),

is a foreign limited liability company formed in the State of Tennessee and operating in the State of

Texas. PREMIER PARKING was served with process through service upon its registered agent for

service of process, George W. Clay, Parking Garage Office, 508 Brazos Street, Austin, Texas 78701

and has appeared and answered.

4. Defendant WEITZMAN MANAGEMENT CORPORATION (“WEITZMAN”) is a

Texas corporation that was served with process through service upon its registered agent for service

of process, Kim Fredenburg, 3102 Maple Avenue, Suite 500, Dallas Texas 75201 and has appeared

and answered.

III. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

5. This Court has jurisdiction over the parties because they are residents of the State of

Texas or do business in the State of Texas.

Page 2 of 27
 6. This Court has jurisdiction over this lawsuit because the amount in controversy

exceeds this Court’s jurisdictional requirements.

7. Venue is proper in Travis County, Texas, under Section 15.002(a)(3) of the Texas

Civil Practice & Remedies Code because it is the county where Defendants GTT and PREMIER

PARKING’s principal offices are located.

8. Venue is also proper in Travis County, Texas, under Section 15.002(a)(1) because all

or a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to Plaintiff’s claims occurred in Travis

County. Specifically, the incident made the basis of this suit occurred in Travis County, Texas.

9. Venue is proper in Travis County, Texas, under Section 15.002(a) (2) of the Texas

Civil Practice & Remedies Code, because it is the county of Defendant KAHN’s residence at the

time the incident made the basis of this suit occurred.

10. Because venue is proper as to at least one defendant in Travis County, Texas, venue

is proper for all defendants in Travis County under Section 15.005.

IV. RULE 194 REQUESTS FOR DISCLOSURE

11. Plaintiff requests that Defendants disclose and produce the information described in

the Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 194.2, including all liability insurance policies (not merely

declaration pages, but entire policies, and any excess policies that existed at the time of the incident

described below).

V. FACTS

12. This case is about Defendants putting profits over safety and knowingly exposing

parking garage users to foreseeable dangers. Defendants own, operate, manage, and/or control a

parking garage in downtown Austin, Texas known as the “Littlefield Garage”. Defendants did so as

a team. GTT was the owner and Premier was the managing agent of the owner. The garage is nine

Page 3 of 27
stories high with open-air levels. Defendants know that people who use the garage are not perfect

drivers. Defendants know that one crucial and important safety responsibility of operating a high

rise parking garage is that each floor should have adequate barriers to keep a vehicle from falling off

in case of an accident. Accidents happen in parking garages, just as they do elsewhere on streets and

highways. And just like the law and standard of care requires vehicles to have seat belts and

passenger restraint systems to protect people in case of an accident, the law, building codes and

standard of care likewise requires parking garage owners and operators to have adequate barriers and

restraint systems in place to keep vehicles from plunging off their floors in the case of an accident.

In this case, the Defendants simply ignored and then violated the law, violated building codes and

statutes and the standard of care, they ignored warnings and admissions from professionals, they

ignored prior similar events, and even in the aftermath of a nationally publicized accident where a

vehicle went through and plunged from the top level of their dangerous garage due to what they

knew and were told then was an inadequate barrier/restraint system, Defendants simply rolled the

dice with their patrons’ lives and did nothing to fix the known danger, continuing to collect and

share profits and betting that no other vehicle would plunge from the garage. Defendants were

wrong and their bet almost cost Christi Bowmer her life.

13. At the time the restraint system failed to hold Christi’s car in the west side of the

garage, the parking garage used a cable barrier system that was supposed to consist of 5 cables that

ran alongside the west-side opening of the parking structure (see Figures 1-2 below).

Page 4 of 27
 Figure 1.

Figure 2.

14. The Littlefield Garage (and cable barrier system) was constructed in 1979. At the

time of the incident described herein, the cable barrier system employed by Defendants was

dangerous, dilapidated, violated the building codes, ordinances and statutes, violated the standard of

Page 5 of 27
care and was in need of serious upgrade and repair at various locations statutes within the garage—

including the 7th floor where Plaintiff CHRISTI BOWMER’s vehicle went off the garage. And

Defendants knew it but kept the garage open without making it safe.

15. In 2014, the garage was owned by 6th and Congress, LLC, 6th and Congress

Properties, LLC, and Stream Realty Partners-Austin, L.P. (Stream) and managed by Premier

Parking. Premier had begun managing the garage in 2013. Premier was integrally involved in

control of safety in the garage, including inspection and maintenance of the vehicle barrier system.

Stream wanted to sell the garage. Stream wanted to spruce up the garage for sale. Premier knew

this and assisted. At the time in 2014, the cable barrier system was a total joke – it was dilapidated,

in total disrepair and did not function in any meaningful way to serve as a barrier for cars or

pedestrians. The dismal and dangerous condition of the barrier system was shocking, and included

missing cables, broken cables, rusted cables, and detached cables. Premier knew that. Premier

managed a multi-level garage that Premier knew had no vehicle restraint barrier.

16. Stream and Premier solicited engineers to come inspect the facility. Stream and

Premier told the engineers they did not want to bring the cable barrier system up to code or the

standard of care, but instead to only “repair” it. Premier has admitted it knew this was dangerous

and a violation of the standard of care. Obviously, Premier and Stream wanted to spend as little

money on the project as possible. One engineering group walked the garage with Premier and told

Premier the garage was dangerous and the engineering group could not and would not participate in

any “repair” plan that did not include bringing the barrier system up to code and the standard of care

because that was not safe. Premier and the owner ignored that advice. Another engineering group

was likewise solicited and after only a ten minute walk through the garage, quickly and easily

determined the vehicle barrier system was dangerous, dilapidated and not up to building code or the

Page 6 of 27
standard of care. Premier and the owner clearly indicated the specific intent to leave the vehicle

barrier system below what was required by the building code and leave it below the standard of care

and instead only “repair” the cables. The engineer noted it would be “onerous” (i.e. expensive) to

bring the garage up to code or the standard of care and that he could not be involved in designing a

“repair” plan if it did not meet those minimum safety standards. Premier and the owner again

specifically decided not to do a repair that would bring the vehicle restraint system up to code and

the standard of care. Premier shared in the profits from the operation of the garage. Notably,

Premier and the owner left the garage open for business to collect profits in this timeframe despite

being explicitly warned of the dangerous conditions. Premier and the owner continued to charge

money and to collect and share profits despite exposing the patrons to what Premier and the owner

knew was an extreme danger. It was left open even though vehicles had accidents in the garage and

penetrated the cable barrier system which clearly failed to hold them. Chillingly, this pattern of

conduct by Premier would continue with a new owner GTT later as well.

17. Premier and the previous owner Stream, not being able to find any competent

engineers to bless and perform the “repairs”, instead turned to a local lake dock contractor (Curtis

Brown) who they knew was unqualified to install or repair a cable vehicle restraint system and who

they knew had no experience in design or repair of vehicle barrier systems. Instead, he was chosen

because the price was right (cheap) and he could do it quick. Premier and the owner hired Mr.

Brown and he did exactly what they asked him to do – not bring it up to code or the standard of care,

but simply replace the barrier cables in a quick, cheap way, i.e. spruce it up. Premier and the owner

knew Brown was unqualified, had unqualified workers and methods, had no engineered plan and

was doing the work below the standard of care. Premier and the owner knew they should get a

permit from the City of Austin for the repairs, but did not do so as alerting the City would have

Page 7 of 27
meant spending more money to bring the garage up to code and the standard of care. Mr. Brown did

his work as instructed by Premier and the owner and it looked better, and it was inspected and

accepted by Premier and the owner, but Premier and the owner knew what they had done was simply

cosmetic. They had simply hidden the obvious nature of the danger without making it safe. Premier

and Stream knew that the “repaired” cable system was not up to code and not up to the standard of

care and thus dangerous and not safe. Yet they kept the garage open.

18. In the summer of 2015, GTT was interested in buying the garage and interfaced with

the owner and Premier. Premier and the owner said nothing about the previous dire engineering

inspections or the fact they knew the vehicle restraint system violated the building code and was

below the standard of care and dangerous. GTT claims it performed no inspection before buying the

garage and claims it did not notice the dangerous condition of the cable barrier system. But GTT

should have. As part of that process, Premier approached GTT and asked to stay on as property

manager and be the managing agent for the owner. Among other things, Premier indicated that it

was the best in the business, exceedingly qualified, that it could manage and operate the garage as

the agent for the owner, that it would be the eyes and ears of the owner, that it had experience in

garage design and operation, that they would manage the garage from an office on site in the garage

and the owner would not even have to show up, and that they would handle the maintenance and

safety items and repairs such as the cable barrier system, doing those and then billing the owner.

GTT indicates it expected Premier to handle safety issues such as the defective cable barrier.

19. Premier said nothing to GTT then that Premier and the previous owner had authorized

improper, illegal and substandard “repairs” to the cable barrier system. GTT hired Premier. GTT

and Premier executed a contract, but it clearly did not contain all the terms of their agreement. GTT

has sworn the contract did not contain all the terms of the agreement and that contention is

Page 8 of 27
unrebutted by Premier. Among other things, the contract said Premier would be the managing agent

of GTT for the garage. As an agent of and for GTT, all of the knowledge, notice and acts and

omissions of Premier are imputed to GTT. That included the knowledge of what occurred when

Premier was managing the garage with Stream. Plus, the safety of the garage and those that use it is

non-delegable. So regardless of whether Premier is considered by the jury to be an agent or an

independent contractor, both Premier and GTT are connected at the hip and jointly and severally

liable.

20. Premier began work as property manager for GTT in September of 2015. Among

other things and in the alternative if necessary, Plaintiff alleges Premier and GTT operated the

garage in a joint enterprise. They shared control and profits. Premier was paid a portion of the net

operating income from the garage. The less spent on maintenance and repairs meant the more

money GTT and Premier made in the enterprise. They had an agreement (express and/or implied), a

common purpose to be carried out by the enterprise (operating the garage), a community of

pecuniary interest in that common purpose (they shared in the profits of the garage) and an equal

right to direct and control the enterprise (GTT indicates that although it was the owner, both it and

Premier could independently call for and implement repairs in the building, with the cost calculated

into the sharing of the net operating income). They also shared a common problem: the cable barrier

system in the garage was dangerous, violated the building code and statutes, was below the standard

of care and the “repairs” done in 2014 were un-permitted, un-engineered, and ineffective. Premier

knew that but apparently said nothing to GTT about it at the time. But GTT should have known

anyway.

21. In the first year of operation, there were ample reasons for the Defendants to know

the garage was dangerous and needed to be brought up to code and the standard of care. But they

Page 9 of 27
left the garage open. Then, as a direct result of the condition of the premises and the

contemporaneous negligent activity of Premier and GTT, in September of 2016, the defective barrier

failed to keep a vehicle from going over the edge of the Defendants’ garage at the ninth floor. In

that instance, a young man (O’Connor) in a SUV accidentally crashed into the barrier. A properly

designed and constructed barrier would have contained the vehicle from leaving the building. But

the defective cable barrier system failed to keep that vehicle from going over the edge of the

building. Instead, the vehicle travelled off the 9th floor but through pure luck, the cable held the

vehicle teetering to the side of the building below by one or more cables wrapped around a wheel

(see Figure 3 below).

Figure 3

The incident received major local and national media exposure and became a sensation on the

internet, particularly since the driver narrowly escaped injury from what everyone knew would have

Page 10 of 27
been one of the most devastating, terrifying and harrowing injury and fatality incidents anyone can

imagine: plunging multiple stories to the ground in a falling car.1

22. The Defendants’ actions and omissions following the O’Connor incident are nothing

short of shocking. Immediately after the O’Connor incident, Premier knew the cable barrier violated

the building code, was below the standard of care, had been “repaired” in a way that was

unpermitted by the City and expressly disapproved by engineers and done in an incompetent way by

an unqualified contractor and had failed to prevent a vehicle from leaving the 9th floor of a the

garage. But Premier apparently said nothing to GTT about what Premier knew. Curiously, Premier

volunteered to GTT to reach out and get further details about the previous “repairs” from the former

owner and Curtis Brown even though it fully knew the exact story of those repairs. GTT claims

Premier then did nothing and continued to fail to disclose what it did know about the previous

“repairs.” But as managing agent for GTT, the knowledge of Premier is imputed to GTT. Curtis

Brown testified that he heard about the O’Connor accident and was waiting for GTT or Premier to

call him so he could explain his “repairs.” But GTT and Premier never called Brown. Meantime, an

engineer working for GTT inspected the 9th floor where the barrier failed and among other things

recommended to GTT that a qualified cable repair person inspect the cables in the entire building.

GTT ignored and disregarded that engineering advice. GTT did not have a qualified person inspect

the cables in the building as advised by an engineer. Instead, GTT and Premier made a claim against

O’Connor for damage to the garage and for lost profits for spaces that were closed during repairs.

Defendants also authorized and completed spot repairs to the 9th floor without proper permits and in

violation of city and building codes. They rushed to get the garage fully open so they could cash in

1 Ben Wear, 35-Year Old Cables Played Key Role in Austin’s ‘Dangling Car’ Mishap, Austin American-Statesman,
Sept. 13, 2016 and Myriah Towner, Miraculous escape for motorist after he accidently drives off ninth floor of a
parking garage only for the car wheels to get caught up in high tension wires, DailyMail.com, Sept. 9, 2016.

Page 11 of 27
on parking demand for the Austin City Limits Festival. They also derided O’Connor for “milking

his 15 minutes of fame” when the media covered the event. At every turn in that event, Defendants

chose profits over safety.

23. Immediately after the O’Connor incident, Defendants knew or should have known

that their garage was dangerous and the cable barrier system was in need of repair, replacement,

revision, and/or modification in order to make it safe for its patrons, including Plaintiff CHRISTI

BOWMER, but failed to do so, despite the history from 2014 onward, despite cars going through

barriers in the interior of the garage and despite the O’Connor incident of September 2016.2

24. In the months following the O’Connor incident, Defendants continued to see

evidence that the cable system was defective and broken and dangerous, something that Premier

clearly knew and had been told and something GTT knew and/or should have known. Evidence of

the dangerous condition continued to mount. Four months after the O’Connor incident, GTT noticed

several broken cables on among other places the alley side of the 5th floor and asked Premier to have

them fixed. In March of 2017, Premier and GTT also noticed broken cables on the 8th floor and on

the 7th floor, the same floor where the cables later failed to restrain Bowmer’s vehicle. These were

all red flags and clear evidence to the Defendants of the defective and dangerous condition. In

addition, the Defendants knew or should have known that people had complained that the system

itself caused visual and perception disturbances when drivers approached the edge of the building on

the west side. These were all ignored. Although Defendants now try to blame the previous owner

and Curtis Brown for the dangerous condition, Texas law does not allow the Defendants to pass the

buck to Brown or the previous owner because the Defendants (especially Premier) knew or had

2 A notice of violation was sent to Defendants GTT Parking and Kahn on or about September 15, 2016, describing
violations related to the cable barrier system. It further documented that repairs must be made within 30 days. (Ref.
City of Austin Code Department Case Number CV-2016-112643).

Page 12 of 27
reason to know of the dangerous condition before Bowmer was injured and they did nothing to warn

or make it safe.

25. Despite the September accident, despite the lucky break that allowed that driver to

cheat death, despite being told to fix the inadequate barriers, despite knowing that another accident

was likely to occur at some point, despite knowing the danger, despite knowing the garage violated

code and was below the standard of care, Defendants did nothing to fix the barrier. Instead, the

Defendants continued to invite and charge patrons to use their dangerous and potentially deadly

garage. Further, Defendants were actively negligent, including active negligence in their inspection,

actively negligent in maintenance, actively negligent in delaying repairs, actively negligent in

performing repairs during the timeframe of the incident, actively negligent in keeping the garage

open, actively negligent in representing the garage was safe and lawfully open — even though they

had prior notice that the garage was dangerous and potentially deadly. Defendants’ negligence,

gross negligence, breaches and unlawful conduct were a proximate cause of the grave injuries to

Plaintiff CHRISTI BOWMER, injuries that would not have occurred had the garage complied with

the code and standard of care.

26. On July 13, 2017, Plaintiff CHRISTI BOWMER was invited to and lawfully drove

her BMW vehicle into the Littlefield parking garage and up to the seventh floor in order to park. A

tenant of the garage invited Bowmer to the premises and she had no reason or notice from the

Defendants to indicate she was not invited. As a guest of the tenant, Bowmer is an invitee.

Moreover, Defendants consented to and tolerated the type of invitation Bowmer received to be on

the premises. Also, when a statute or code creates a duty to prevent injury to a class of person the

plaintiff belongs to, as is the case here, the plaintiff’s status is not relevant. Defendants had

previously been warned by one or more people or experts that the visual presentation of the edge of

Page 13 of 27
the garage was disturbing and potentially dangerous to people parking there. Defendants did

nothing to fix it. That visual phenomenon affected Christi Bowmer. While attempting to park, she

had an accident that was foreseeable to Defendants and her foot slipped off the break and onto the

gas, causing her vehicle to move forward into the cable system, a system that should have been

designed and maintained to prevent vehicles from plunging from the building in this exact type of

accident. But because of the negligence and gross negligence of Defendants, the shoddy, dangerous

barrier/restraint system failed to serve its purpose and Plaintiff CHRISTI BOWMER’s BMW vehicle

went forward into and through the inadequate cable barrier system like a hot knife through butter.

The restraint system restrained nothing and Christi plunger seven terrifying floors to the ground

below, thinking it must be some bad dream from which she would surely awake. It was no dream.

She was crushed and suffered horrific injuries. As a direct result of the inadequate, unsafe and

perilous cable barrier system, Plaintiff CHRISTI BOWMER horrifically fell from the seventh story

of the garage, while in her BMW, which nose-dived into alleyway below. Thankfully, all of the

restraint systems in the vehicle deployed and actually did their job. Miraculously, although seriously

and permanently injured, CHRISTI survived the fall and crash and was rescued through the heroic

efforts of good Samaritans and first responders, people for whom Christi is forever grateful. It is

nothing short of a miracle that she survived the fall and crash.

27. The garage was dangerous and authorities who investigated the Bowmer accident

confirmed so. City inspectors who visited the site after the incident found signs that the cable

system as a whole did not meet code, it was hazardous and dangerous because of loose cables,

missing cables, bad guard spacing and previously unpermitted repairs on various levels. Because of

the hazardous conditions, the City ordered the entire cable system should be brought into compliance

with the 2012 building code. That is exactly what engineers had told Premier in 2014. The City

Page 14 of 27
noted that repairs done by GTT on level 9 after the O’Connor incident were not permitted and that

an engineering letter proffered by GTT to the City states the repairs on the 9th floor were done in

compliance with the Code but they were not. That was fraud. Because it was dangerous, the City

ordered the garage areas where there were cables closed until the Defendants took steps to hire and

engineer, get a competent plan and and make it safe, something the Defendants should have done

before the Bowmer incident. Had they done so, Bowmer would never have been injured.

28. Incredibly, despite their clear negligence and gross negligence, Defendants blame

Bowmer for her injuries. Defendants assert that if Bowmer had not accidentally hit her accelerator,

none of this would have happened. But the attempt by the Defendants to shift and avoid

responsibility for Bowmer’s injuries should be rejected. Bowmer struck the barrier at a low speed,

likely 10 mph or less. Defendants’ own experts concede the barrier should be designed and

constructed to prevent a vehicle like hers at that speed from plunging from the building. That is

what the barrier is for – to prevent a small accident from becoming a catastrophic injury. Had

Defendants complied with their duties and provided an adequate safety barrier, Bowmer would have

suffered no injury. Instead, the Defendants acts and omissions proximately caused Bowmer grave

and serious injury and the Defendants should be held accountable.

29. CHRISTI J. BOWMER’s injuries are severe and permanent and included a broken

back, broken sternum, broken ribs, broken elbow, broken ankle, and a broken elbow, among others.

Plaintiff CHRISTI J. BOWMER has sustained permanent injuries, continues to treat those injuries,

and will require medical treatment permanently.

VI. RESPONDEAT SUPERIOR/AGENCY

30. Plaintiff alleges and incorporate by reference all paragraphs herein, for all purposes,

the same as if set forth verbatim.

Page 15 of 27
 31. At all relevant times described herein, all agents, servants, and/or employees of the

Littlefield garage and Defendants’ were acting within the course and scope of employment and/or

official duties or scope of their agency. Furthermore, at all times material hereto, all agents,

servants, and/or employees of the Littlefield garage and Defendants’ were acting in furtherance of

the duties of their office and/or employment. Premier was acting as the managing agent of and

garage property manager for GTT. Defendants are jointly responsible for all damages resulting

from the negligent acts and/or omissions of themselves, their agents, servants and/or employees

pursuant to the doctrines of joint and several liability, including those of agency and/or Respondeat

Superior.

VII. CAUSES OF ACTION

A. Negligence and Negligence per se

32. Plaintiff realleges and incorporate by reference the preceding fact paragraphs for all

purposes, the same as if set forth herein and pleads the below in the alternative to the extent needed.

33. Defendants and their employees/agents were negligent and negligent per se and such

negligence and negligence per se was a proximate cause of injury and damage to Plaintiff. The

negligence and/or negligence per se were acts and omissions. It includes the following:

a. Failed to take proper preventative measures to help eliminate known risks and
dangers as a reasonable person/corporation would do under the same or similar
circumstances;

b. Actively took improper safety measures and made improper, substandard and illegal
repairs in the garage;

c. actively negligent, including active negligent in their inspection, actively negligent in

maintenance, actively negligent in delaying repairs, actively negligent in performing
repairs during the timeframe of the incident, actively negligent in keeping the garage
open, and actively negligent in representing the garage was safe and lawfully open;

d. Failed to provide safe, operable and adequate vehicle restraint barrier system within
the Littlefield garage;

Page 16 of 27
e. Failed to close the garage when they knew or should have known it was unsafe;

f. Failed to properly investigate incidents and accidents leading up to the Bowmer

incident;

g. Failed to heed and follow and actively disregarded the advice of professionals that if
the garage was not brought up to code and the standard of care it would not be safe;

h. Failed to warn patrons of the dangerous condition of the Littlefield garage and
specifically the dangerous cable barrier system;

i. Failed to provide their employees/agents with proper training to inspect and/or

maintain the Littlefield garage, and specifically the cable barrier system;

j. Negligently hired, trained and retained employees and/or agents;

k. Failed to properly repair, modify, correct, and/or revise the cable barrier system even
though they knew or should have known of its dangerous condition;

l. Failed to implement a safe barrier system within the Littlefield garage;

m. Hired / retained incompetent employees, agents, representatives and/or personnel

regarding the upkeep, repairs, maintenance, and general condition of the cable barrier
system and failed to properly supervise, train and/or retain them;

n. Violating one or more statute, ordinance and/or code. A summary of relevant

provisions violated is as follows, and in the alternative where needed:

i. 2012 INTERNATIONAL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT CODE

301.2 Responsibility. The owner of the premises shall maintain the structures
and exterior property in compliance with these requirements, except as
otherwise provide for in this code. A person shall not occupy as owner-
occupant or permit another person to occupy premises which are not in a
sanitary and safe condition and which do not comply with the requirements
of this chapter…

304.1 General. The exterior of a structure shall be maintained in good repair,

structurally sound and sanitary so as not to pose a threat to the public health,
safety or welfare.

304.1.1 Unsafe Conditions. The following conditions shall be determined as

unsafe and shall be repaired or replaced to comply with the International
Building Code or the International Existing Building Code as required for
existing buildings:

5. Structural members that have evidence of deterioration or that are

Page 17 of 27
 not capable of safely supporting all nominal loads and load effects...

12. Exterior stairs, decks, porches, balconies, and all similar

appurtenances attached thereto, including guards and handrails, are not
structurally sound, not properly anchored or that are anchored with
connections not capable of supporting all nominal loads and resisting
all load effects…

304.4 Structural members. All structural members shall be maintained free

from deterioration, and shall be capable of safely supporting the imposed
dead and live loads.

304.12 Handrails and guards. Every handrail and guard shall be firmly
fastened and capable of supporting normally imposed loads and shall be
maintained in good condition.

ii. 2012 INTERNATIONAL EXISTING BUILDING CODE

115.1 Conditions. Buildings, structures or equipment that are or hereafter

become unsafe, shall be taken down, removed or made safe as the code
official deems necessary and as provided for in this code.

404.4 Less than substantial structural damage. For damage less than
substantial structural damage, repairs shall be allowed to restore the building
to its pre-damage state, based on material properties and design strengths
applicable at the time of original construction. New structural members and
connections used for this repair shall comply with the detailing provisions of
the International Building Code for new buildings of similar structure,
purpose and location.

606.1 General. Structural repairs shall be in compliance with this section and
Section 601.2. Regardless of the extent of structural or nonstructural damage,
dangerous conditions shall be eliminated. Regardless of the scope of repair,
new structural members and connections used for repair or rehabilitation
shall comply with the detailing provisions of the International Building Code
for new buildings of similar structure, purpose and location.

iii. 2012 INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE

406.4.2 Guards. Guards shall be provided in accordance with Section 1015.

Guards serving as vehicle barriers shall comply with Sections 406.4.3 and
1015.

1015.2 Where required. Guards shall be located along open-sided walking

surfaces, including mezzanines, equipment platforms, aisles, stairs, ramps,
and landings that are located more than 30 inches (762 mm) measured
vertically to the floor or grade below at any point within 36 inches (914 mm)

Page 18 of 27
 horizontally to the edge of the open side. Guards shall be adequate in strength
and attachment in accordance with Section 1607.8.

1015.4 Opening limitations. Required guards shall not have openings that
allow passage of a sphere 4 inches (102 mm) in diameter from the walking
surface to the required guard height.

iv. The 2012 IBC and 2012 IEBC and associated amendments were adopted
under City of Austin Ordinance No. 20130606-089. Thus, Defendants
violated that ordinance.

v. The 2012 IPMC and associated amendments were adopted under City of
Austin Ordinance No. 20130926-145. Thus, Defendants violated that
ordinance.

vi. Austin City Code Section : Unsafe Conditions (Sec.304.1.1), Handrails and
Guards (Sec 304.12).

o. Violating the standard of care;

p. Agreed to make safe a known dangerous condition and failed to do so;

q. Created a dangerous condition on the property;

r. Did not warn of concealed danger near the entrance or exit to the property;

s. The premises abuts public property and plaintiff was injured outside the premises
due to defendants’ conduct inside the premises; and/or

t. Vicarious liability can be imposed on the Defendants under the doctrine and theory
of nondelegable duty. When a duty is imposed by law on the basis of a concern for
public safety, such as that shown and outlined herein, the party bearing the duty
cannot escape it by delegating it to another, be it an agent or independent contractor.
Here, acts and omissions of Premier were a tort and a proximate cause of injury to
Ms. Bowmer and Premier committed that tort while performing the nondelegable
duties of GTT. GTT also violated duties. The Restatement (2d) of Torts sections
violated by the Defendants include the following – Section 413, Section 414, Section
414A, Section 416, and Section 424.

34. Defendants failed to use ordinary care as illustrated in the aforementioned acts and

omissions above, and these acts and/or omissions were a proximate cause of Plaintiff’s serious and

permanent damages.

Page 19 of 27
B. Gross Negligence

35. Plaintiff realleges and incorporate by reference the preceding fact paragraphs for all

purposes, the same as if set forth herein.

36. Plaintiff’s injuries resulted from Defendants’ gross negligence, which entitles

Plaintiff to exemplary damages under Texas Civil Practice and Remedies section 41.003(a).

Defendants’ conduct, when viewed objectively at the time of this incident, and with knowledge of

the condition of the garage from 2014 until the Bowmer incident, the ignored admonitions from

engineers, the un-engineered and unqualified “repairs” by Curtis Brown they knew about, other

improper and unpermitted repairs, failing and missing cables, other vehicles driving through the

cable barriers, a prior similar incident in September 2016 involving the barrier system failing and a

vehicle hanging on the side of the building (O’Connor), and the knowledge (actual and/or

constructive) that Defendants possessed for years regarding the dangerous and dilapidated cable

barrier system, and the failure to warn Plaintiff CHRISTI BOWMER of the known risk or make it

safe, especially considering the probability and magnitude of the potential harm to Plaintiff

CHRISTI BOWMER and others and leaving the garage open—constitutes gross negligence.

Defendants had actual subjective awareness of the risk but proceeded anyways with a conscious

indifference to the rights, safety, or welfare of Plaintiff CHRISTI BOWMER and others. And they

did so for profits and money.

C. Premises Liability

37. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference the preceding fact paragraphs for all

purposes, the same as if set forth herein and pleads in the alternative to the extent needed.

38. Plaintiff CHRISTI BOWMER was an invitee of the Littlefield Garage, the premises

at issue.

Page 20 of 27
 39. Defendant(s) was an owner and/or occupier and/or possessor and/or manager of the

premises at issue.

40. A condition or conditions of the premises posed an unreasonable harm to Plaintiff

CHRISTI BOWMER and others.

41. Defendants knew or reasonably should have known of the danger.

42. Defendants breached their duty of ordinary care by failing to warn Plaintiff CHRISTI

BOWMER of the dangerous condition or conditions and failing to make the condition(s) reasonably

safe.

43. Defendants’ failure to exercise reasonable care to eliminate or reduce the risks was a

proximate cause of Plaintiff’s injuries.

D. Joint Enterprise

44. Plaintiff incorporates the factual allegations above here in full by reference and

pleads in the alternative to the extent needed.

45. Premier and GTT operated the garage in a joint enterprise. They had an agreement to

operate the garage (express and/or implied), a common purpose to operate the garage be carried out

by the enterprise, a community of pecuniary interest in that common purpose and an equal right to a

voice in the direction of the enterprise, which gave them equal right to control over the operation of

the garage. They shared control of safety measures in the garage and they shared profits from the

operation of the garage. The Defendants are thus jointly and severally liable.

E. Assisting and Encouraging

46. Plaintiff incorporates the factual allegations here by reference. Pleading further in

the alternative if needed, Defendants assisted and encouraged each other in committing one or more

torts as outlined above and the assistance and encouragement was a substantial factor in causing the

Page 21 of 27
tort. Both GTT and Premier had a duty to Plaintiff and breached that duty in the ways outlined

above. They assisted each other in the breach of the duties. They knew what they were doing was a

violation of the building code, city ordinances and the standard of care. They had knowledge that

their actions were conduct constituting a tort. They intended to assist each other. They gave each

other assistance and encouragement and that was a substantial factor in bringing about the tort.

Thus, Defendants are considered tortfeasors and are jointly and severally responsible for the tort.

F. Assisting and Participating

47. Plaintiff incorporates the factual allegations here by reference. Pleading further in the

alternative if needed, Defendants assisted and participated in causing a particular result with each

other making Defendants responsible for the result of the united effort because the acts and

omissions were a breach of duty and a substantial factor in causing the result. The Defendants’

activity accomplished a tortious result. The Defendants provided each other substantial assistance in

accomplishing that result. Each Defendant breached a duty to Plaintiff as outlined above. Each

Defendant’s participation was a substantial factor in causing the tort.

G. Concert of Action

48. Plaintiff incorporates the factual allegations here by reference. Pleading further and

in the alternative if needed, Defendants participated in an action that was planned, arranged and

agreed on by the parties together to further some scheme or cause, making all involved liable of the

actions of one another. More specifically, Defendants committed an intentional tort and/or were

grossly negligent when they deliberately left the garage open with knowledge of the condition of the

garage in 2014 until the Bowmer incident, the admonitions from engineers, the un-engineered and

unqualified “repairs” by Curtis Brown they knew about, other improper and unpermitted repairs,

failing and missing cables, other vehicles driving through the cable barriers, a prior similar incident

Page 22 of 27
in September 2016 involving the barrier system failing and a vehicle hanging on the side of the

building (O’Connor), and the knowledge (actual and/or constructive) that Defendants possessed for

years regarding the dangerous and dilapidated cable barrier system, and the failure to warn Plaintiff

CHRISTI BOWMER of the known risk or make it safe, especially considering the probability and

magnitude of the potential harm to Plaintiff CHRISTI BOWMER and others.

H. Conspiracy

49. Plaintiff incorporates the factual allegations above by reference. Pleading further and in the

alternative if needed, Defendants engaged in a conspiracy and agreed to act toward a common goal

and it was not a conspiracy to commit negligence. The defendants were a member of a combination

of two or more persons. The object of the combination was to accomplish and unlawful purpose or a

lawful purpose by unlawful means. The members had a meeting of the minds on the object or course

of action. One or more of the members committed an unlawful, overt act to further the object or

course of action. The Plaintiff suffered injury as a proximate result of the wrongful act. Two or

more business entities may conspire with each other. A business may conspire with a person.

Defendants also conspired with third persons or parties. Each Defendant in the conspiracy is liable

for the acts of the other that were done in the furtherance of the common purpose. Here, the object

of the conspiracy was to operate the garage in violation of codes, statutes and laws and in a grossly

negligent manner as set out above. Defendants chose to operate the garage with knowledge of the

following: the condition of the garage from 2014 until the Bowmer incident, the ignored

admonitions from engineers that it was below code and the standard of care and should be inspected

by a qualified person, the un-engineered and unqualified “repairs” by Curtis Brown they knew

about, other improper and unpermitted repairs, failing and missing cables, other vehicles driving

through the cable barriers, a prior similar incident in September 2016 involving the barrier system

Page 23 of 27
failing and a vehicle hanging on the side of the building (O’Connor), and the knowledge (actual

and/or constructive) that Defendants possessed for years regarding the dangerous and dilapidated

cable barrier system, and the failure to warn Plaintiff CHRISTI BOWMER of the known risk or

make it safe, especially considering the probability and magnitude of the potential harm to Plaintiff

CHRISTI BOWMER and others.

VIII. DAMAGES

50. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs for all

purposes, the same as if set forth herein verbatim.

51. As a proximate result of the aforementioned causes of action set forth above, Plaintiff

CHRISTI BOWMER suffered in the past and will continue to suffer in the future, both personal and

economic injuries. Specifically, Plaintiff suffered and will continue to suffer in the future physical

injuries, physical pain, physical impairment, disfigurement, mental anguish and medical expenses.

Plaintiff has incurred reasonable and necessary medical expenses in the past and will continue to

incur these expenses in the future. Plaintiff has and will suffer economic damages, past and future,

including lost and diminished earning capacity.

IX. JURY TRIAL REQUEST

52. Plaintiff requests a trial by jury and tenders the necessary fee.

X. PRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE

53. Plaintiff, through her counsel, already sent a letter of preservation to Defendants GTT

and PREMIER PARKING on July 19, 2017 (6 days after the incident). Another request for

preservation was sent to counsel for GTT on July 31, 2017. Plaintiff hereby reiterates her prior

requests and demands that all Defendants preserve and maintain all evidence pertaining to any claim

or defense related to the incident made the basis of this lawsuit, or the damages resulting therefrom.

Page 24 of 27
This request and demand includes any statements, photographs, video footage, audio, surveillance,

security footage, information, business records, incident reports, equipment (i.e. cable(s), cement

parking chalks(s), parking garage ticket(s), invoices, checks, correspondence, facsimile, email,

voice-mail, text messages and any evidence involving the incident in question. Failure to maintain

such evidence will constitute a “spoliation” of evidence.

XI. PRAYER

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiff CHRISTI J. BOWMER respectfully

requests that this Court issue citation for Defendants GTT PARKING, L.P., SHELDON DAVID

KAHN, PREMIER PARKING OF TENNESSEE, LLC, and WEITZMAN MANAGEMENT

CORPORATION to appear and answer, and that Plaintiff be awarded judgment against those

defendants for the following:

i. Actual damages;

ii. Exemplary damages;

iii. Joint and several liability;

iv. Prejudgment interest and post-judgment interest at the maximum rates allowed
by law;

v. Costs of court; and

vi. Any other and further relief, at law or in equity, to which Plaintiff may be justly
entitled.

Page 25 of 27
 Respectfully submitted,

HOWRY BREEN & HERMAN, LLP

____________________________
Randy Howry
State Bar No. 10121690
Sean E. Breen
State Bar No. 00783715
Chris Lavorato
State Bar No. 24096074
1900 Pearl Street
Austin, Texas 78705-5408
(512) 474-7300 Phone
(512) 474-8557 Facsimile
rhowry@howrybreen.com
sbreen@howrybreen.com
clavorato@howrybreen.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff Christi J. Bowmer

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that a true and correct copy of this document was served by E-Service, in accordance
with Rules 21 and 21a of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, to all counsel of record of record,
on February 11, 2019:

Tasha Barnes  
THOMPSON COE COUSINS & IRONS, LLP
701 Brazos St., Suite 1500
Austin, TX 78701
tbarnes@thompsoncoe.com
Attorneys for GTT Parking, LP  
 
Christopher L. Rhodes  
HOLSTEIN & ASSOCIATES
9601 McAllister Freeway, Suite 910
San Antonio, Texas 78216
CRhodes2@Travelers.com

Page 26 of 27
  
Paul Starr  
GERMER PLLC  
301 Congress Avenue, Suite 1700  
Austin, Texas 78701  
pstarr@germer-austin.com  

Attorneys for Premier Parking of Tennessee,  

LLC
 
Curtis J. Kurhajec  
NAMAN, HOWELL, SMITH & LEE, PLLC
8310 N. Capital of Texas Highway, Suite 490
Austin, Texas 78731
ckurhajec@namanhowell.com
Attorneys for Weitzman Management  
Corporation

Sean E. Breen

Page 27 of 27
Exhibit C
 City of Austin EXHIBIT
j
CER IFICATE OF OCCUPANCY
ING PERMIT NO. 1979-000539 BP
ISSUE DATE: 04/01/1981

BUILDING ADDRESS: 508 Brazos St eet A .00000

LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT 11&12 B CK 056 ORIGINAL CITY (TOTAL SQ FT 15640) PLUS VAC ALLEY

PROPOSED OCCUPANCY:
C- 328 Commercial Other Nonresident Bldg
New - 8 Stry Comm Bldg

REMODEL BUILDING SQUARE FOO AGE: 0

SPRINKLER SYSTEM:
CODE YEAR: CODE TYPE:
FIXED OCCUPANCY: NON FIXED OCCUPANCY:

CONTRACTOR:

******* 1:******** CERTIF CATE OF OCCUPANCY******************

THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE BUI DING OR STRUCTURE AT THE ADDRESS LISTED ABOVE HAS
BEEN INSPECTED FOR COMPLIAN E WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE AUSTIN CITY CODE
FOR THE GROUP A D DIVISION OF OCCUPANCY LISTED ABOVE.

NEITHER Tl IE ISSUANCE OF THIS CERTIFICATE NOR THE INSI ECTIONS MADE SHALL LESS EN THE RESPONSIBILITY OR LIABILITY OF ANY PERSON. FIRM OR
CORPORATION

OWNING, OPERATING. CONTROLLING OR INSTALLING ANY 'l'LIANCE OR Mi\rERIAL UPON Tl-IE PREMISE. OR DOING ANY WORK Wlli\J'SOEYER ON SUC H PREMISE.

THE CITY OF AUSTIN DOES NOT ASSUME ANY RES PO SIBILITY OR LIABILITY BY REASON OF THE INSPECTION OR REINSPECTION OF THE
PREMISE; OR THE ISSUANCE OF THIS "CERTIFICATE F OCCUPANCY"; OR BY ANY REASON OF ANY APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL.

BUILDING CODE REVIEWER:

For Jose G. R9Building Official

 7/31/2017

REISSUED
RTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY
EVELOPMENT SERVICE DEPARTMENT
CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS

BUILDING PERMIT NO: 186770

ORIGINAL DA TE: OCTOBER 16, 979

LEGAL DESCRIPTION AS ON ORI INAL DOCUMENT: ORIGINAL CITY

ZONING: COMMERCIAL

THIS IS TO CERTIFY THA , THE BUILDING OR STRUCTURE AT THE ADDRESS

LISTED BELOW WAS INS ECTED AT THE TIME OF THE ORIGINAL DATE FOR
COMPLIANCE WITH THE EQUIREMENTS OF THE AUSTIN CITY CODE FOR USE
LISTED BELOW.

ADDREss: 508 Brazos Stree

USE: PARKING GARAGE

OWNER/BUILDER. C.J SHAC

REMARKS: PARKING STRUCTUR , RETAIL SPACE, 24 APARTMENTS

BY:

PLEASE NOTICE

'NEITHER THE ISSUANCE OF THI CERTIFICATE NOR THE INSPECTIONS MADE SHALL LESSEN THE
RESPONSIBILITY OR LIABILITY F ANY PERSON, FIRM OR CORPORATION, OWNING, OPERATING,
CONTROLLING OR INSTALLING NY APPLIANCE OR MATERIAL UPON THE PREMISES, OR DOING ANY
WORK WHATSOEVER ON SUCH P EMISES.

THE CITY OF AUSTIN DOES NOT SSUME ANY RESPONSIBILJTY OR LIABILITY BY REASON OF THE
INSPECTION, OR REINSPECTION, F THE PREMISES; OR THE ISSUANCE OF THIS "CERTIFICATE OF
OCCUPANCY"; OR BY REASON O ANY APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL.'
Exhibit D
 CAUSE NO. D-1-GN-17-004456

CHRISTI J. BOWMER, § IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF

Plaintiff, §
§
vs. § TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS
§
GTT PARKING, LP, PREMIER PARKING §
OF TENNESSEE, LLC, and WEITZMAN §
MANAGEMENT CORPORATION §
Defendants. § 353 rd JUDICIAL DISTRICT

AFFIDAVIT OF CARL J. LAROSCHE, P.E.

STATE OF TEXAS §
§
COUNTY OF TRAVIS §

Before me, the undersigned authority, this day personally appeared Carl J. Larosche, P.E.,
who, being by me duly sworn, deposed as follows:

1. "My name is Carl J. Larosche. I am over 21 years of age, of sound mind, and
capable of making this affidavit. I have never been convicted of a felony or any crime involving
a dishonest act or false statement. All statements contained in this affidavit, and in the attachments
to this affidavit, are based on my personal knowledge and are true and correct.

2. The knowledge, education, and experience that qualify me to make this affidavit,
and to form the opinions contained in the attachments to this affidavit, are set forth in my
curriculum vitae, a copy of which is attached to this affidavit as Exhibit A. All information set
forth in the attached curriculum vitae is true and correct.

3. The expert report I prepared for this lawsuit is attached to this affidavit as Exhibit
B. The information contained in my report is true and correct, forms the basis for my opinions
articulated in the report, and it and the evidence it references are incorporated for all purposes into
this affidavit.

4. Furthermore, as reflected in my report and for the reasons set forth therein, it is my
opinion within a reasonable degree of engineering certainty that, prior to Ms. Bowmer' s accident
on July 13, 2017, the barrier cable system in the Littlefield Garage presented a 'dangerous'
condition as that term is defined in the 2012 IEBC. In particular, the barrier cable system was a
'portion, member, appurtenance or ornamentation' of the Littlefield Garage which posed a
'significant risk of collapse, detachment or dislodgment ... under service loads.'

5. Under Section 606.1 of the 2012 IEBC, dangerous conditions 'shall be eliminated'

Page 1 of 2
and repaired or replaced in compliance with the provisions of the 2012 IBC for new buildings of
similar structure, purpose and location. Thus, prior to Ms. Bowmer' s accident, the barrier cable
system in the Littlefield Garage should have been brought up to the standards set forth in the 2012
IBC, which included the requirement that the barrier be able to resist a concentrated load of 6,000
pounds. Had the barrier cable system met this standard on July 13, 2017, it would have prevented
Ms. Bowmer's fall from the garage and subsequent injuries.

6. I have seen no evidence in this case that the owners/operators of the Littlefield
Garage at the time of Ms. Bowmer's accident had any valid excuse to violate the 2012 IEBC and
2012 IBC, as adopted under City of Austin Ordinance No. 20130606-089.

7. As indicated in my report, I was provided the definitions of negligence and gross

negligence. Those are set out on pages 2 and 3 of the report, respectively. As I disclosed and
discussed in my deposition and also for the reasons I set out in the report, I am of the opinion that
the ownership group of GTT Parking, LP and Premier Parking of Tenness, LLC were negligent
and grossly negligent and a proximate cause of the injuries to Ms. Bowmer as those terms are
defined and set out in the report."

SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me on February ~ , 2019.

My commission expires: q /i.~ (2-02-0

FOR THE

S'*-~r.??~ JANELLE DAVIS

gt fj\f?E Notary Public, State of Texas
\~····~Comm.Expires 09-28-2020
,.,,,,fil,,\,,,.
Notary ID 129072938
, Ja ne I\R Da.\t\s
Notary 's printed name

Page 2 of 2
Exhibit A to Larosche Affidavit
WJE
EDUCATION
 University of Texas at Austin
 Bachelor of Science in Civil
Engineering, 1993
 Master of Science, Structural
Engineering, 1999
PRACTICE AREAS
 Structural Evaluation
 Bridges and Civil Infrastructure
 Litigation Consulting
 Nuclear Facilities
 Exterior Envelope
Commissioning
 Historic Preservation/
Rehabilitation
REGISTRATIONS
 Professional Engineer in AL, AZ,
CO, FL, ID, KS, LA, MO, NM, OH,
OK, and TX
 AWS Certified Welding Inspector
PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS
 American Concrete Institute
(ACI), Fellow
 Association for Preservation
Technology (APT)
 International Concrete Repair
Institute (ICRI)
 American Welding Society (AWS)
CONTACT
clarosche@wje.com
512.257.4811
www.wje.com
CURRICULUM VITAE
Carl J. Larosche | Principal
EXPERIENCE
Carl Larosche joined WJE in 2004 with over
twenty years of experience specializing in
consulting services for the preservation and
restoration of historic and existing structures.
In addition to his preservation work, Mr.
Larosche has extensive experience in building
envelope, including traditional building
materials, as well as current state-of-the-art
materials.
Mr. Larosche’s infrastructure experience
includes projects at Austin Bergstrom
International, Dallas Love Field, Denver
International, and Tulsa International Airports,
as well as-preparing a feasibility report to
restore a lenticular truss in Caldwell County,
Texas; developing and designing plans and
specifications for the rehabilitation of
damaged bridge joints in Beaumont, Texas;
and designing and consulting services to raise
and slide the Bridge Lift at SH 190 back to its
original location in Dallas, Texas.
Prior Experience
Mr. Larosche was a Principal of Sparks,
Larosche & Associates and worked for ten
years in bridge design, construction, and
maintenance for The Texas Department of
Transportation (TxDOT) prior to joining WJE.
Prior to his engineering career, Mr. Larosche
worked in the construction field for fourteen
years.
REPRESENTATIVE PROJECTS
Structural Evaluation
 Bay County Water Treatment Plant -
Panama City, FL: Condition assessment of
clarifiers, filters, and sedimentation basins,
including coating evaluation and joint
leakage
 Miami-Dade Water and Sewer Department:
Investigation of PVC-lined tank
 The Hammocks at Marathon - Marathon, FL:
Assessment of seawall
 Regional San Water Treatment Plant -
Sacramento, CA: Condition assessment of
primary sedimentation basins including
concrete structure and ancillary steel
components for corrosion related distress
 University of Texas Cooling Tower Basin -
Austin, TX: Condition assessment of
deteriorated concrete basin for corrosion-
related distress
 Port of Houston Authority - Houston, TX:
Developed Facility Inspection and Condition
Assessment Program (FICAP) and associated
training course to assist the Port with asset
management
 Palo Verde Water Reclamation Facility -
Tonopah, AZ: Visual and materials condition
assessment and comprehensive
maintenance and repair plan
Bridges and Civil Infrastructure
 Tulsa International Airport: Peer review of
structural investigation for concourse
framing
 Love Field - Dallas, TX: Construction
administration services for modernization
program
 Austin Bergstrom International Airport:
Terminal/apron expansion mix design
testing; steel coating delamination
evaluation; and pier reinforcement
 Houston Metro Bridge Inspections -
Houston, TX: Conducted FHWA elemental
baseline assessment for seven Metro
bridges. Bridge types included steel truss,
concrete box and conventional rail bridges
 Alcoa Three Oaks Mine - Elgin, TX:
Comprehensive investigation and forensic
evaluation of Three Oaks Mine Bridge
Collapse
 Pressler Bridge - Austin, TX: Development of
structural design concepts and bridge
programming for vehicular and pedestrian
bridge in downtown Austin
TECHNICAL COMMITTEES
 ACI 437 - Strength Evaluation of Existing
Concrete Structures
 ACI E702 - Designing Concrete Structures
 ACI 349/359 - Concrete Nuclear Structures
Secretary
 ACI 562 - Evaluation, Repair, and
Rehabilitation of Concrete Buildings, Sub-
committee Chair
 ACI 563 - Specifications for Repair of
Structural Concrete in Buildings
 AWS D1.7 - Strengthening and Repair of
Existing Structures
 ACI Technical Activities Committee (TAC)
Bowmer 004432
WJE
CURRICULUM VITAE
Carl J. Larosche | Principal
PUBLICATIONS  Larosche, Carl J., and Jeremiah D. Fasl, et.
al. “Ductility Behavior of Corroded Bars in
Concrete Slabs.” Concrete International,
Vol. 38, Issue 4 (2016): 55-61.
 Larosche, Carl J., and Mohamed
ElBatanouny. “Classification of Alkali-silica
Reaction and Corrosion Distress Using
Acoustic Emission.” American Institute of
Physics Publishing, 42nd Annual Review of
Progress in Quantitative Nondestructive
Evaluation (2016).
 Larosche, Carl J., Mohamed ElBatanouny,
and Derek Cong. “Damage Evaluation of
Alkali-silica Reaction Using Acoustic
Emission.” American Institute of Physics
Publishing, 42nd Annual Review of Progress
in Quantitative Nondestructive Evaluation
(2016).
 Larosche, Carl J., Jeremiah Fasl, and John
Fraczek. “Ductility Behavior of Corroded
Bars in Concrete Slabs.” Concrete
International (2016).
 Larosche, Carl J., and Stephen Foster, and
Jonah Kurth. “Assessment, Prioritization,
Help Slow Corrosion at Water Treatment
Plant.” Materials Performance, October
2016 Issue (2016): 12-14.
 Larosche, Carl J. and Mohamed
ElBatanouny. “Load Testing Techniques for
Strength Evaluations of Existing Reinforced
Concrete Structures.” Forensic Engineering
7th Congress (2015).
 Larosche, Carl J., M. ElBatanouny, J.D. Fasl,
and J. Fraczek. “Classification of Alkali-Silica
Reaction and Corrosion Distress Using
Acoustic Emission: A Proof-of-Concept
Study.” Construction and Building Materials
95 (2015): 406-413.
Larosche, Carl J., Marwa Abdelrahman, et.
al. “Classification of Alkali-Silica Reaction
Damage Using Acoustic Emission: A Proof-
of-Concept Study.” Construction and
Building Materials 95 (2015): 406-413.
 Larosche, Carl J. “General Inspection of
Buildings and Bridges.” Inspection, Testing,
and Monitoring of Buildings and Bridges,
Ch. 2. (2011).
 Larosche, Carl J., and Matthew P. Carlton.
“Load Testing in Structural Repair and
Rehabilitation Projects: Worth a Thousand
Calculations?” Structures Congress 2010
(2010).
 Larosche, Carl J., “Thin on Brick: Evaluating
the Long-term Durability of Thin Masonry
Systems,” Journal of ASTM International
(2010).
 Larosche, Carl J., “Types and Causes of
Cracking in Concrete Structures.” Failure,
Distress and Repair of Concrete Structures
(2009): 57-134.
 Larosche, Carl J., and Kevin D. Copeland.
“Pervious Concrete for Use within the Plaza
System at the LBJ Library.” ASCE, 2009.
 Larosche, Carl J., and ACI Committee 437.
“Test Load Magnitude, Protocol, and
Acceptance Criteria.” American Concrete
Institute (2005).
 Larosche, Carl J. “Test Method for
Evaluating Corrosion Mechanisms in
Standard Bridge Columns.” Master of
Science Thesis, The University of Texas
(1999).
Bowmer 004433
WJE
CURRICULUM VITAE
Carl J. Larosche | Principal
PRESENTATIONS  Laboratory and Field Testing in Engineering
Forensic Studies, ACI Arizona Chapter
Meeting, February 2018.
 Repairs to Parking Garage Double-tee Beam
Distress, ASCE Forensic Concerence,
January 2018.
 Ductility Behavior of Corroded Bars in
Concrete Slabs, Internal WJE Webinar,
November 2017.
 Assess and Prioritize: Keys to Asset
Management, International Concrete
Repair Instititute 2017 Fall Convention,
November 2017.
 Assess and Prioritize: Keys to Asset
Management, American Association of Port
Authorities, October 2017.
 Assess and Prioritize: The Key to Managing
Aging Concrete Infrastructure, 2017 Texas
Civil Engineer Conference, September 2017.
 Guide to ACI 562-16 Repair Code: Chapter
6, Strctural Engineers Association of Ohio
2017 Annual Conference, September 2017.
 Post-tensioning Repair Evaluation and
Repair, International Concrete Repair
Institute South Texas Chapter Luncheon,
April 2017.
 Civil Infrastructure Rehabilitation, Structural
Engineers Association of Texas Meeting,
January 2017.
 ACI 562-16 - The Concrete Repair Code,
International Concrete Repair Instititute
Gulf South Chapter and Structural Engineers
Association of Alabama Conference and
EXPO, December 2016.
 Guide to ACI 562-16 Repair Code: Example
of Precast/Prestressed Double-Tee Repair,
American Concrete Institute 2016 Fall
Convention, November 2016.
 Guide to ACI 562-16 Repair Code: Chapter
6, International Concrete Repair Instititute
Metro New York Chapter Symposium,
October 2016.
 Guide to ACI 562-16 Repair Code: Example
of Precast/Prestressed Double-Tee Repair,
American Concrete Institute University
Webinar, September 2016.
 Evaluation and Instrumentation: Case
Studies of Existing Structures, 2016 National
Council of Structural Engeineers
Associations Structural Engineering Summit,
September 2016.
 ACI 562-16 - The Concrete Repair Code,
2016 National Council of Structural
Engeineers Associations Structural
Engineering Summit, September 2016.
 Facility Inspection and Condition
Assessment Program (FICAP): Task 2
Progress - Inspection Manual and Forms,
Public Housing Agency of Houston FICAP
Task 2 Progress Meeting, September 2016.
 Risk vs. Reward: Is There Value in Cathodic
Protection Systems?, Things That Matter:
WJE Conference 2016, May 2016.
 Civil Infrastructure: Untapped Market or
Perilous Minefield?, Things That Matter:
WJE Conference 2016, May 2016.
 Large and Complex Projects at WJE, Things
That Matter: Wiss, Janney, Elstner
Conference 2016, May 2016.
 Post-tensioning Strand Evaluation and
Repair, International Concrete Repair
Instititute Texas Chapter Meeting, March
2016.
 Load Testing Techniques for Strength
Evaluation of Existing Reinforced Concrete
Structures, Forensic Engineering 7th
Congress, November 2015.
 Ductility Behavior of Corroded Bars in
Concrete Slabs, American Concrete Institute
Fall Convention, November 2015.
 Wireless Remote Monitoring of Alkali-silica
Reaction Using Acoustic Emission, Acoustic
Emission Working Group, May 2015.
Bowmer 004434
WJE
CURRICULUM VITAE
Carl J. Larosche | Principal
PRESENTATIONS, CONTINUED  Advanced Concrete Repair for Contractors
& Engineers, 2015 World of Concrete
Education Program, February 2015.
 Understanding and Benefiting from the
New ACI 562 Code, 2015 World of Concrete
Education Program, February 2015.
 Palo Verde: Preserving Water for Power in
the Desert, International Concrete Repair
Institute Fall National Convention,
November 2014.
 Realizing High Performance Buildings: The
Benefits of Building Enclosure
Commissioning, Texas Society of Architects
75th Annual Convention and Design Expo,
November 2014.
 Acoustic Emission for Assessment of Alkali-
Silica Reaction in Concrete Structures,
American Concrete Institute Fall
Convention, October 2014.
 Practice Makes Purpose: The Science of
Sustainable Solutions, WJE “Ask the
Structure” Series, October 2014.
 History & Background of ACI 562-13: Code
Requirements for Evaluation, Repair and
Rehabilitation of Concrete Buildings,
Structural Engineers Association Northwest
Conference, September 2014.
 Wireless Assessment of Damage Due to
Alkali-Silica Reaction, Electric Power
Research Institute Symposium, May 2014.
 Evaluation of Existing Structures, American
Concrete Institute 2014 Spring National
Convention, March 2014.
 Using Acoustic Emission to Detect ASR
Growth, American Concrete Institute 2014
Spring National Convention, March 2014.
 Building Enclosure Commissioning, The
University of Texas at Austin, February
2014.
 Using Acoustic Emission to Detect ASR
Growth, American Concrete Institute
Strategic Development Council, February
2014.
 Stumbling through the Rubble: Load
Testing, International Concrete Repair
Institute Central Texas Chapter, May 2013.
 Load Testing in Structural Repair and
Rehabilitation Projects, Worth a Thousand
Calculations? OSEA, March 2012.
 Palo Verde: Preserving Water for Power in
the Desert, WJE Company Conference, May
2011.
 Evaluation of Existing Structures using NDT,
American Concrete Institute National
Convention, Spring 2007.
 Test Load Magnitude, Protocol, and
Acceptance Criteria, WJE Texas Technical
Session, Winter 2007.
 Test Load Magnitude, Protocol, And
Acceptance Criteria, Structural Engineers
Association of Texas, Fall 2006.
 Design Peer Review, Waterproofing and
Façade Consulting, Roof System Design and
Engineering, and Testing Services, Overland
Partners, Fall 2006.
 Masonry Construction (twice). American
Concrete Institute Local Chapter, 2004 and
2005.
 Bridge Maintenance, (NHI Course-Multiple
Presentations), Multiple State Agencies.
 Moveable Bridge Maintenance, Texas
Department of Transportation.
Bowmer 004435
WJE
CURRICULUM VITAE
Carl J. Larosche | Principal
LITIGATION SUPPORT  Brushy Creek Regional Utility Authority
Expert Testimony, Ongoing
 Littlefield Garage Barrier System Failure
Litigation Support Services, Ongoing
 City of Edinburgh v. Joe Williamson
Construction Company
Expert Testimony, Ongoing
 Corpus Christi Border Patrol Station
Pavement and Piping Distress
Foundation Assessment and Litigation
Support Services, Ongoing
 KCI USA, Inc. v. Koontz McCombs Slab
Foundation Litigation
Expert Testimony, Ongoing
 Jones Road Commercial Storage and
Warehouses Concrete Pavement Cracking
Litigation Support Services, Ongoing
 Fort Sam Houston Barracks Fire Suppresant
System Failure
Litigation Support Services, 2017
 Firewheel Apartments Foundation Distress
Litigation Support Services, 2017
 Karnes County Jail Crawlspace Related
Distress
Expert Testimony, 2017
 Commons at Avery Ranch Notched Beam
and Girder Distress
Litigation Support Services, 2017
 H&E Equipment Services Facilities Concrete
Pavement Damages
Expert Testimony, 2017
 2400 Nueces Apartments Fire Suppresant
System Distress
Litigation Support Services, 2016
 Dyson Residence Foundation Surface
Defects
Litigation Support Services, 2016
 City of Desoto Wall Failure
Litigation Support Services, 2015
 Caballo Ranch Pool and Retaining Wall
Distress or Caballo Ranch Investments, LP v.
J. Jacobs Construction, LLC
Litigation Support Services, 2015
 City of Austin Water Treatment Plant No. 4
Litigation Support Services, 2015
 Volkswagen Dealership Concrete Pavement
Cracking
Litigation Support Services, 2015
 Williamson County Jail Concrete Slab
Strength Deficiency
Litigation Support Services, 2015
 TTG Utilities Boring Failure
Litigation Support Services, 2014
 East Texas Fish Hatchery Kettle Distress or
ALLCO v. HDR Engineering
Litigation Support Services, 2014
 Benavides Independent School District
Litigation Support Services, 2014
 North Tributary Regional Flood Control
Litigation Support Services, 2014
 Galveston Water Boring
Litigation Support Services, 2013
 Best Western Czech Inn
Litigation Support Services, 2013
 Medical Education Training Complex, Fort
Sam Houston
Litigation Support Services, 2013
 McLean Construction Ltd. Trench
Construction
Litigation Support Services, 2013
 NAES Corporation v. City of Austin/Austin
Energy
Litigation Support Services, 2013
Bowmer 004436
WJE
CURRICULUM VITAE
Carl J. Larosche | Principal
LITIGATION SUPPORT,  Decker Lake Solar Array Frame Failure
CONTINUED Litigation Support Services, 2013
 The United States of America and Korte
Company v. AMEC Earth & Environmental,
Inc.
Litigation Support Services, Lackland Air
Force Base, 2013
 Luis M. Flores and San Juana Flores v. City
of Pharr
Litigation Support Services, 2013
 Sandy Patterson v. Keller Family Medical
Center
Litigation Support Services, 2013
 Barton Creek Senior Living Center, Inc. v.
SpawGlass Contractors, Inc. and Young &
Pratt, Inc.
Expert Witness, Testimony during
Deposition, 250th Judicial District Court,
Travis County, Texas, 2012
 Dimmit County Border Station
Litigation Support Services, 2012
 Randolph Air Force Base Attic
Litigation Support Services, 2012
 Washington 4600, LTD. v. Hermes
Architects
Testimony during Deposition and Trial,
189th Judicial District Court, Harris County,
Texas, 2012
 Sam Houston State University Parking
Garage
Litigation Support Services, 2012
 Port Isabel
Litigation Support Services, 2012
 JW Marriott San Antonio Hill Resort
Litigation Support Services, 2010
 The Parking Spot Parking Structure at
Austin-Bergstrom Airport
Litigation Support Services, 2010
 Bandera View, LLC v. Bandera Oaks, LNB,
LTD, et. al
Testimony during Deposition, 37th Judicial
District Court, Bexar County, Texas, 2010
 Dell Pediatric Research Institute
Litigation Support Services, 2009
 Alamo Crane Services, Inc. v. RSUI
Indemnity Company v. F.T. Woods
Construction and D&BR Building Systems
Litigation Support Services, 146th Judicial
District, Bell County, Texas, 2009
 Pinnacle at Oak Hills
Testimony during Deposition, 2009
 Christus Spohn Shoreline Hospital Garage
Testimony during Deposition, 2008
 Alcoa, Inc. v. Contech Construction Projects,
et al
Testimony during Mediation, United States
District Court for the Western District of
Texas, Austin Division, 2007
 24 Hour Fitness: Alamo Crane Services, Inc.
v. Raymond Construction Inc., et al
Testimony during Deposition, District Court
of Travis County, Texas, 2006
 404 Rio Grande Apartments
Testimony during Deposition, 2005
 Maxfield Residence: Lou Ann Smith and
Jimmy Jackson Smith, et al v. Black +
Vernooy, et al
Testimony during Trial, 345th District Court,
Travis County, Texas, 2004
 SBC Center: William Dee Phillip Kuhlman v.
Hunt Construction Group, et al
Expert Testimony, 408th Judicial District,
Bexar County, Texas, 2004
Bowmer 004437
Exhibit B to Larosche Affidavit
 LITTLEFIELD GARAGE

WJE Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure

Austin, Texas

Preliminary Report
March 28, 2018
WJE No. 2017.4422.0

Prepared for:
Howry Breen & Herman, LLP
1900 Pearl Street
Austin, Texas 78705

Prepared by:
Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc.
9511 North Lake Creek Parkway
Austin, Texas 78717
512.257.4800 tel | 512.219.9883 fax
Texas Registered Engineering Firm F-0093

Bowmer 001352
 LITTLEFIELD GARAGE

WJE Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure

Austin, Texas

Dean J. Deschenes, EIT

Associate III

Carl J. Larosche, PE
Principal

Preliminary Report
March 28, 2018
WJE No. 2017.4422.0

Prepared for:
Howry Breen & Herman, LLP
1900 Pearl Street
Austin, Texas 78705

Prepared by:
Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc.
9511 North Lake Creek Parkway
Austin, Texas 78717
512.257.4800 tel | 512.219.9883 fax
Texas Registered Engineering Firm F-0093

Bowmer 001353
 ENGINEERS

WJE AR.CHITECTS
MATERJALS SCIENTISTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................... 1
Background ................................................................................................................................................... 1
Document Review ......................................................................................................................................... 2
Building Code Requirements .................................................................................................................... 3
1976 Uniform Building Code ................................................................................................................ 3
2012 International Existing Building Code ........................................................................................... 4
2012 International Building Code and ASCE 7-10 ............................................................................... 4
Industry Guidance ..................................................................................................................................... 5
PTI Post-Tensioning Manual and Guide Specification ......................................................................... 5
Precision-Hayes International GRABB-IT Submittal Documentation .................................................. 6
Austin Code Department Case File ........................................................................................................... 6
Complaint CC-2016-112272 ................................................................................................................. 7
Complaint CC-2017-085979 ................................................................................................................. 7
Replacement Barrier Cable System ........................................................................................................... 9
Field Investigation ........................................................................................................................................ 9
Documentation of Failed Barrier Cables (Seventh Level) ........................................................................ 9
Basic Configuration ............................................................................................................................... 9
Cable Anchorage ................................................................................................................................. 10
Cable Displacement and Deformation ................................................................................................. 10
Sampling of Failed Barrier Cables (Seventh Level)................................................................................ 10
Assessment of Barrier Cable System (Remaining Levels) ...................................................................... 11
Laboratory Analysis .................................................................................................................................... 12
Visual and Radiographic Examinations .................................................................................................. 12
Tensile Testing ........................................................................................................................................ 13
Impact Analysis .......................................................................................................................................... 14
Discussion ................................................................................................................................................... 15
Maintenance ............................................................................................................................................ 15
Post-failure Assessment and Repair Approach ....................................................................................... 16
Backstressing ........................................................................................................................................... 17
Preliminary Findings ................................................................................................................................... 18
Figures ........................................................................................................................................................ 19
Appendix A - Plan and Elevation ............................................................................................................... 46
Appendix B - GRABB-IT Submittal .......................................................................................................... 47
Appendix C - JTC Laboratory Report......................................................................................................... 48

Bowmer 001354
 ENGLNEERS

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERJALS SCLENTLSTS

LITTLEFIELD GARAGE
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
Austin, Texas

INTRODUCTION
At the request of Mr. Chris Lavorato of Howry Breen & Herman, LLP, Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates,
Inc. (WJE) has completed an investigation of the July 12, 2017 barrier cable system failure at the Littlefield
Garage. The investigation included document review, field observations, laboratory analyses, and impact
analysis. The methods and results of our investigation, and the conclusions drawn therefrom, are presented
in this report.

BACKGROUND
The Littlefield Garage (garage) is a nine-level, open parking structure, located at 508 Brazos Street in
Austin, Texas. The garage was permitted in 1979, finished in 1981, and is currently owned by GTT Parking,
LP. The structural framing of the garage is comprised of cast-in-place, post-tensioned concrete floor slabs
supported by cast-in-place, post-tensioned beams, and reinforced concrete columns.

The vehicle access ramp for the garage is located on the east elevation of the structure at the physical
address noted above. The east and south elevations of the garage adjoin a mixed-use building and a modern
parking structure, respectively. The north elevation of the garage is located along 6th Street, and the west
elevation of the garage is located along an alley. The exterior openings and interior split-level ramps of the
garage are protected by a combination of barrier cable systems and partial height concrete masonry unit
(CMU) block walls. The use of barrier cable systems is primarily limited to the west elevation of the garage
and along the interior split-level ramps. The barrier cable systems generally consist of five parallel cables
tensioned along the exterior and interior column lines and are reportedly intended to function as both vehicle
barriers and pedestrian guards. Reference Figures A1 and A2 of Appendix A for illustrations of a typical
garage level and barrier cable elevation, respectively.

The barrier cable system at the west elevation of the garage has been subject to two failures under vehicle
impact loads within the last 18 months. The circumstances of each failure are briefly described below:

 September 9, 2016. A Toyota 4Runner breached the barrier cable system on the ninth level at the west
(alley) elevation of the garage. The vehicle traveled beyond the edge of the garage floor system, but its
fall was arrested by entanglement of the cables with one or more of the vehicle wheels.

 July 12, 2017. A two-door BMW 428i breached the barrier cable system on the seventh level at the
west (alley) elevation of the garage at approximately 8:30 in the morning. The vehicle traveled beyond
the edge of the garage floor system, contacted the building at the opposite side of the alley, and impacted
the pavement before coming to rest.

The driver involved in the July 2017 failure retained Howry Breen & Herman, LLP (Howry Breen) for
legal representation shortly after the incident. WJE was thereafter retained by Howry Breen to investigate
the barrier cable system failure. The scope of the investigation included document review, field
observations, laboratory analyses, and impact analysis.

Bowmer 001355
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 2

DOCUMENT REVIEW
WJE primarily reviewed building code requirements and industry guidance related to the design and
installation of vehicle barriers and pedestrian guards. Available documentation specific to the garage was
limited to case files from the Austin Code Department. Our review included the following below
documents, followed by the insights gained during our review.

 Building Code Requirements:

⁰ 1976 Uniform Building Code
⁰ 2012 International Property Management Code
⁰ 2012 International Existing Building Code and Commentary
⁰ 2012 International Building Code
⁰ ASCE 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures

 Industry Guidance:
⁰ Post-Tensioning Manual, 6th Edition
⁰ PTI Guide Specification: Specification for Seven-Wire Prestressing Steel Strand for Barrier Cable
Applications, 2nd Edition
⁰ ASTM A416-17, Standard Specification for Low-Relaxation, Seven-Wire Steel Strand
⁰ ASTM A475-03, Standard Specification for Zinc-Coated Steel Wire Strand
⁰ Precision-Hayes International GRABB-IT Submittal Documentation

 Austin Code Department Case File:

⁰ Complaint CC-2016-112272
⁰ Complaint CC-2017-085979

As part of our review, we were provided the following definitions by Howry Breen and asked to use
those in our analysis:
 Negligence
“Negligence” means failure to use ordinary care, that is, failing to do that which a person / company of
ordinary prudence would have done under the same or similar circumstances or doing that which a
person / company of ordinary prudence would not have done under the same or similar circumstances.
“Ordinary Care” means that degree of care that would be used by a person / company of ordinary
prudence under the same or similar circumstances.
 Condition of the Premises
With respect to the condition of the premises, Defendants were negligent if:
1. The condition posed an unreasonable risk of harm, and
2. Defendants knew or reasonably should have known of the danger, and
3. Defendants failed to exercise ordinary care to protect Christi Bowmer from the danger, by both
failing to adequately warn her of the condition and failing to make that condition reasonably safe.
“Ordinary Care,” when used with respect to the conduct of Defendants as an owner or occupier of a
premises, means that degree of care that would be used by an owner or occupier of ordinary prudence
under the same or similar circumstances.

Bowmer 001356
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 3

 Proximate Cause
“Proximate cause” means a cause that was a substantial factor in bringing about an [injury]
[occurrence], and without which cause such [injury] [occurrence] would not have occurred. In order
to be a proximate cause, the act or omission complained of must be such that a person / company
using ordinary care would have foreseen that the [injury] [occurrence], or some similar [injury]
[occurrence], might reasonably result therefrom. There may be more than one proximate cause of an
[injury] [occurrence].
 Gross Negligence
Do you find by clear and convincing evidence that the harm to Christi Bowmer resulted from gross
negligence?
“Clear and convincing evidence” means the measure or degree of proof that produces a firm belief
or conviction of the truth of the allegations sought to be established.
“Gross negligence” means an act or omission by Defendants,
1. which when viewed objectively from the standpoint of Defendants at the time of its occurrence
involves an extreme degree of risk, considering the probability and magnitude of the potential
harm to others; and
2. of which Defendants has actual, subjective awareness of the risk involved, but nevertheless
proceeds with conscious indifference to the rights, safety, or welfare of others.

Building Code Requirements

Based on the purported permitting and construction timeline, design of the garage was most likely
completed in accordance with the 1976 Uniform Building Code (1976 UBC). More recent repairs and/or
modifications to the garage would have been subject to the requirements of the 2012 International Existing
Building Code (2012 IEBC) and 2012 International Building Code (2012 IBC), both of which were
effective in the City of Austin until January 1, 2018. Relevant provisions from each of the aforementioned
codes are summarized below.

1976 Uniform Building Code

The requirements for open parking garages are included in Section 1109 of the 1976 UBC. With respect to
vehicle barriers and pedestrian guards, the 1976 UBC requires “adequate curbs and railings” at every
opening. The code does not provide any further requirements for curbs, but does stipulate a minimum railing
(or “guardrail”) height of 42 inches with intermediate rails such that a 9-inch-diameter sphere cannot pass
through (refer to Section 1716). The guardrails are further required to resist a distributed load of 50 pounds
per linear foot applied horizontally to the top rail.

The 1976 UBC does not include explicit requirements for barrier cable systems or vehicle barriers in
general. In July 1980, The Parking Consultants Council (PCC) of the National Parking Association
published Recommended Building Code Provisions for Open Parking Structures. The recommendations
included a rational design method that required the barrier cable system to resist a static ultimate force of
10,000 pounds applied over a 1-square-foot area at a distance of 18 inches above the floor.1 The PCC

1
International Code Council, "2007/2008 Proposed Changes to the International Building Code," February 2008.
[Online]. Available: https://www.iccsafe.org/cs/codes/Documents/2007-08cycle/ProposedChanges/V1_G73-92.pdf.
[Accessed March 2018].

Bowmer 001357
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 4

recommendations were first incorporated into the 1990 supplement of the UBC, which was eventually
replaced by the International Building Code in 2000.

2012 International Existing Building Code

Violation reports were issued by the Austin Code Department (ACD) after each of the barrier cable system
failures. As further detailed in the ‘Austin Code Department Case File’ section below, ACD cited “Unsafe
Conditions” per Section 304.1.1 of the 2012 International Property Maintenance Code (2012 IPMC)
following the first failure. Section 304.1.1 of the 2012 IPMC requires unsafe conditions to be “repaired or
replaced to comply with the International Building Code or the International Existing Building Code as
required for existing buildings.”

The 2012 IEBC definition of the term “unsafe” (ref. Section 202) includes “Buildings, structures, or
equipment… in which the structure or individual structural members meet the definition of dangerous.”
The 2012 IEBC definition of the term “dangerous” includes conditions in which “There exists a significant
risk of collapse, detachment or dislodgement of any portion, member, appurtenance or ornamentation of
the building or structure under service loads.”

Unsafe conditions are directly addressed in Section 115 of the 2012 IEBC: “Buildings, structures or
equipment that are or hereafter become unsafe, shall be taken down, removed or made safe as the code
official deems necessary and as provided for in this code.” Subordinate sections generally describe the
responsibility of the code official to issue reports and provide notice of necessary repairs. Section 115.5
also states that repairs or alterations required to restore a building to a safe condition shall comply with the
applicable requirements of the 2012 IEBC.

Dangerous conditions are independently addressed within the provisions of the prescriptive and work area
compliance methods of the 2012 IEBC (Sections 401.3 and 606.1, respectively). Section 401.3 of the 2012
IEBC simply states that the “building official shall have the authority to require elimination of conditions
deemed to be dangerous.” Section 606.1more specifically states that dangerous conditions shall be
eliminated and that “new structural members used for repair or rehabilitation shall comply with the detailing
provisions of the International Building Code for new buildings of similar structure, purpose and location.”

2012 International Building Code and ASCE 7-10

The basic requirements for pedestrian guards and vehicle barriers in a public parking garage are outlined in
Section 406.4 of the 2012 IBC. Pedestrian guards shall be provided in accordance with Section 1013, and
vehicle barriers shall be placed at the end of parking spaces where the vertical distance to the ground or
surface below is greater than 1 foot. Pedestrian guards serving as vehicle barriers are also required to comply
with the vehicle barrier loading requirements of Section 1607.8.3. Relevant requirements from the
aforementioned code sections are paraphrased below.

 Section 1013, Guards. Guards shall not be less than 42 inches in height as measured from the adjacent
walking surface. Guard openings shall not allow passage of a sphere 4 inches in diameter from the
walking surface to the require guard height.

Bowmer 001358
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 5

 Section 1607.8.3, [Loads on] Vehicle Barriers. Barriers for passenger vehicles shall be designed to
resist a concentrated load of 6,000 pounds in accordance with Section 4.5.3 of ASCE 7-10, Minimum
Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures.

Per ASCE 7-10, design of the vehicle barrier must be based on the maximum demands resulting from
horizontal application of the 6,000 pound load at a distance of 18 to 27 inches above the floor. The loaded
area of the barrier shall not exceed 12 inches by 12 inches. Further, the barrier cable system shall have
anchorages or attachments capable of transferring the concentrated load to the structure.

Industry Guidance
WJE reviewed relevant industry guidance for the design, specification, and installation of barrier cable
systems to support our analysis of the existing barrier cable system. Relevant documents included standards
published by the Post-Tensioning Institute (PTI) and submittal sheets provided by a common barrier cable
anchorage supplier.

PTI Post-Tensioning Manual and Guide Specification

Chapter 16 of PTI’s Post-Tensioning Manual (PTI Manual) addresses the design of prestressed barrier cable
systems. Design, detailing, and installation recommendations are presented to address potential failure
modes of the barrier cable system upon impact, including failure of the cable anchorages, excessive
deflection of the barrier cables, and yielding of the barrier cables. Relevant recommendations from the PTI
Manual and associated Specification for Seven-Wire Prestressing Steel Strand for Barrier Cable
Applications (Specification) are summarized below.

Cable Anchorage
The PTI Manual recognizes that wedge-type anchorage devices commonly used in barrier cable systems
are subject to relatively low jacking force “that is not adequate to properly seat the wedges and form the
mechanical connection that the system relies on.” The Specification therefore requires seating of wedge-
type anchorages, including barrel anchors (Section 3.2.1) and adjustable replacement cable anchors (Section
3.2.2), through mechanical or hydraulic means before or after cable installation and stressing.

Wedge seating after cable installation and stressing is typically accomplished through backstressing, as
specified in Section 3.5 and reproduced below. Complementary depictions of the backstressing operation
are included as Figure 1 and Figure 2.

All anchorages shall be backstressed. This backstressing procedure is performed after the
cable is stressed. The jack is removed after the initial tensioning force is achieved and placed
so that the jack nose is bearing on the opposite side of the bearing member. The cable shall
then be stressed to a force equal to 80% of MUTS [minimum ultimate tensile strength] of the
strand.

The associated commentary reiterates that the stress required to prevent sagging of the cable is not sufficient
to seat wedge-type anchorages and that “Failure of the barrier strand slipping through the wedges will occur
if they are not properly seated using this backstressing method.”

Cable Capacity
The PTI Manual includes a rational method for determining the cable tension and deflection due to a vehicle
impact of known mass and velocity. The method is based on energy concepts presented by Preswalla in

Bowmer 001359
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 6

1989 and assumes conversion of the vehicle kinetic energy into strain energy (i.e., deflection) within the
barrier cable system.

A schematic of a typical straight run of the barrier cable from the Manual is included as Figure 3. The
schematic only depicts three openings, but the anchored cable length (L) may span across several openings
without affecting the applicability of the method. The cable tension (T) upon impact is determined on the
basis of the vehicle mass (M) and velocity (V) as well as the stiffness and initial tension of the cable. The
cable tension, vehicle width (b), opening width (l), and anchored cable length (L) are then used to determine
the cable deflection. Corresponding PTI Manual recommendations regarding the allowable cable tension
and deflection are summarized below.

 Cable Tension. The cable tension imposed by the impact should not exceed the yield strength of the
cable material. Section 2.2 of the Specification states that prestressing steel used for barrier cable shall
be seven-wire steel strand conforming to the requirements of ASTM A416, Standard Specification for
Low-Relaxation, Seven-Wire Steel Strand for Prestressed Concrete. Galvanizing, if present, is required
to conform to the requirements of ASTM A475, Standard Specification for Zinc-Coated Steel Wire
Strand. The minimum yield strength of 1/2-inch, grade 270 strands, as required in ASTM A416, is
37,170 pounds.

 Cable Deflection. The PTI Manual recommends an allowable cable deflection of 18 inches “in order
to prevent the front wheels of an impacting vehicle from traveling over the edge of the slab.”
Recommendations to limit the cable deflection include increasing the initial stress in the cables and/or
adding intermediate anchorages to shorten the anchored cable length.

Precision-Hayes International GRABB-IT Submittal Documentation

Precision-Hayes International manufactures and supplies adjustable cable anchors (trademarked as
GRABB-IT®) for use in the construction and repair of barrier cable systems. A scale drawing, product data
sheet, and test report typically provided in a GRABB-IT submittal package are included in Appendix B.

A typical GRABB-IT anchor, as depicted in the scale drawing of Appendix B, consists of a segmented
conical wedge (Item No. 4) retained within a chuck body (Item No. 1) by a chuck cap (Item No. 2) and
spring (Item No. 5). As shown in the submittal, the barrier cable is inserted into the conical wedge at the
narrow end of the chuck body. Serrations (teeth) at the interior face of the conical wedge (not shown)
mechanically engage the perimeter of the barrier cable. Provided that the conical wedge is properly engaged
with the barrier cable, tension placed on the cable will draw the conical wedge toward the narrow end of
the chuck body and fully restrain any cable displacement.

The product data sheet included in Appendix B recognizes the importance of proper wedge engagement as
follows: “GRABB-IT wedges are required to be backseated in the GRABB-IT body prior to installation.
This ensures that the [cable] will not pull loose with expansion and contraction over time.” As noted within
the PTI Guide Specification, the backseating operation would have to impose a stress equal to 80 percent
of the minimum ultimate tensile strength of the cable through compression applied at the backside of the
wedge or tension applied to the cable.

Austin Code Department Case File

Austin Code Department (ACD) case files related to the garage were obtained through a public information
request made by a local news outlet. The local news outlet published an investigative article regarding the

Bowmer 001360
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 7

barrier cable failures and their findings from the ACD case files on February 28, 2018. The online posting
included links to the ACD case files, which WJE downloaded for review.

The case files include two separate complaints corresponding to the two barrier cable system failures
identified within the background of this report. Each of the complaints are accompanied by ACD
investigator notes and photographs, as well as email communications with the garage owner and the Austin
Building Official. Pertinent insights gained during the review of the documents associated with each
complaint are summarized below.

Complaint CC-2016-112272
ACD responded to the first barrier cable system failure on September 9, 2016 and “found a vehicle hanging
on side of the building due to a vehicle running off the roof of a parking garage breaking the barrier cable
system.” Photographs taken by the investigator depict general damage to the barrier cable system at the
ninth level, but do not include the detail necessary to opine on the failure mechanism.

ACD issued a violation report to the garage owner on September 15, 2016. The investigator cited “Unsafe
Conditions” per Section 304.1.1 of the 2012 International Property Maintenance Code (2012 IPMC) and
characterized the barrier cable systems as “broken loose damaged.” The violation report included the
following recommended resolution: “Obtain a structural engineer letter and report for the cable system and
concrete slab. Make repairs within 30 days.” ACD’s closure of the violation appeared to be contingent on
inspection of the repairs, with schedule of the inspection to be determined by the owner.

The complaint includes a copy of letter correspondence between Richard Martin, PE, of MJ Structures, and
the garage owner on September 28, 2016. Mr. Martin indicates in his letter that the damaged barrier cables
were repaired to “restore the building to it’s predamaged state in accordance with the provisions for repairs
prescribed in the 2012 Existing Building Code.” He further indicates that the “damaged cables and end
anchors were removed and replaced with new cables and anchors,” though he does not indicate to what
extent the repairs were implemented.

ACD closed the violation on October 27, 2016 due to voluntary compliance. The notes indicate that a
“Permit was pulled under the littlefield address with a letter from an engineer.” It is unclear if the letter
attached to the complaint (summarized above) is the same as the letter that supported the permit.

Complaint CC-2017-085979
ACD responded to the second barrier cable system failure on July 13, 2017, and “observed that the steel
cable guards had been stretched by the collision of the car and were no longer able to perform their intended
purpose.” While the investigator’s visit occurred within 2 hours of the incident, emergency response
personnel had already towed away the vehicle, pulled loose cabling back onto the seventh level, and placed
caution tape along the unprotected openings. Pertinent features captured within the investigator’s
photographs are outlined below.

 It appeared that the impact displaced a significant length of the barrier cables into the opening where
the vehicle exited the garage (Figure 4).
 The anchored ends of the first and third cables (indexed from garage floor, typical) appeared to be
dislodged from the northernmost column (Figure 5).

Bowmer 001361
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 8

 The anchored ends of the second and fourth cables appeared to be dislodged from the southernmost
column (Figure 6).

The ACD investigator, the Building Official, and representatives from the City of Austin Development
Services Department (DSD) completed a follow-up, on-site assessment of the garage on July 19, 2017. The
purpose of the assessment was to further define requirements for permitting of the repairs. Pertinent findings
from the assessment, as documented in the investigator’s notes on July 24, 2017, are summarized below.
Representative photographs from the complaint are included as figures when appropriate.

 “The cable system had been repaired on 3 floors without obtaining a permit…” The complaint includes
multiple photographs of replacement cable anchor installations (Figure 7).

 “…the guard spacing was greater than 9 inches in several areas of the perimeter and interior cables…”
Barrier cable clear spacing up to approximately 11 inches was observed (Figure 8).

 “…several cables were loose in several areas of the perimeter and interior cables...” Loose barrier cables
at interior and exterior locations are shown in Figure 9 and Figure 10, respectively.

 “…the owner will need to barricade or block off the perimeter parking spaces where the cable system
exists.”

ACD issued two violations to the garage owner on the basis of their July 13, 2017 and July 19, 2017
observations. Both violations cited Section 304.12, Handrails and Guards, of the 2012 IMPC, and generally
referenced the loose or missing condition of the barrier cables. Beyond the violations, the Building Official
made several determinations regarding the past, current, and future code compliance of the barrier cable
system. The following determinations were initially rendered by the Building Official on July 20, 2017,
and further clarified by the ACD investigator on August 21, 2017.

 The barrier cable system did not meet the guardrail requirements of 1976 UBC, which was adopted by
the City of Austin during the period of design and construction. The determination appears to be based
on the excessive clear spacing and loose condition of the barrier cables.

 Contrary to the letter issued by Mr. Martin on September 28, 2016, it did not appear to the Building
Official that the ninth level barrier cable system was replaced or appropriately tensioned after the first
failure. The Building Official further implied that the dangerous condition of the ninth level barrier
cable system should have triggered system upgrades under Section 606.1 of the 2012 IEBC.

 Forthcoming repairs shall comply with Section 606.1 of the 2012 IEBC and will require replacement
of the barrier cable system. The new barrier cable system shall comply with the guardrail and vehicle
barrier requirements of the 2012 IBC, including the requirement to resist a concentrated load of 6,000
pounds as specified in Section 4.5.3 of ASCE 7.

Based on our review of the complaint, ACD actively tracked the garage owner’s efforts to upgrade the
barrier cable system through the end of 2017. A new barrier cable system was permitted in November 2017,
with replacement expected to be complete in February 2018.

Bowmer 001362
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 9

Replacement Barrier Cable System

The garage owner retained an engineering consultant, Walker Consultants (Walker) of Austin, Texas, to
design replacement barrier cable systems for the interior and exterior openings of the garage. In a letter
dated October 19, 2017, Walker proposed installation of a face-mounted barrier cable system to comply
with the 2012 IBC. The proposal included the use of 1/2-inch-diameter galvanized barrier cables spaced at
4 inches on center vertically and stressed between face-mounted, galvanized steel angles (Figure 11).
Walker further stated that “The new cable system shall be installed by a competent PT contractor to ensure
that the appropriate means and methods are implemented during stressing of the new cables.”

Walker also recommended the installation of an aluminum panel/louvered guard wall at each of the
openings along the west (alley) elevation of the garage. This recommendation was purportedly made to
address owner concerns regarding the lack of measures to “alert drivers to the parking area extents.” The
lack of such measures “causes confusion by those parking as to the actual extents of the parking structure,
which has, and could potentially lead to additional vehicular impacts.”

FIELD INVESTIGATION
Carl “Chuck” Larosche, PE, Mr. Dean Deschenes, and Mr. Lane Thompson, all of WJE, visited the garage
on August 2, 2017 to document and sample the failed barrier cables on the seventh level, and assess the
general condition of the barrier cable system on the remaining levels.

Our on-site assessment was completed in parallel with similar efforts by Mr. Cam Cope of Auto Fire &
Safety Consultant, Inc., and Sampson Nguyen, PE, of Haag Engineering2, among others. Legal counsel
representing the garage owner was present during the full duration of the site visit, which was approximately
4 hours in length.

Documentation of Failed Barrier Cables (Seventh Level)

WJE documented the condition of the failed barrier cables and surrounding PT concrete structure along the
full length of the west garage elevation. Measurements were taken, as necessary, to document the basic
configuration of the barrier cable system. Visual observations were performed to determine the anchorage
and displaced position of each barrier cable. On-site observations and measurements were documented
through notes, sketches, and photographs. Pertinent observations and measurements are summarized below.

Basic Configuration
The basic plan and elevation geometry of the barrier cable system is depicted in the figures of Appendix A
and described below.

1. The center-to-center spacing of the columns along the west elevation varied between 17 feet and 22
feet, 8 inches. The center-to-center column spacing at the opening where the vehicle exited the garage
was 19 feet (Figure 12).

2. The physical extent of each parking space was demarcated by yellow striping along the side lengths
and a concrete wheel stop at the west end (Figure 12).

Mr. Nguyen was retained by Ms. Tasha L. Barnes of Thompson Coe—legal counsel representing the garage owner.
2

Bowmer 001363
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 10

3. The barrier cable system at each opening consisted of five cables passing through, and/or anchored to,
successive pairs of 20-inch square columns. Each cable was a 1/2-inch diameter, seven-wire
prestressing strand with a zinc galvanizing coating.

4. The spacing of the cables with respect to the garage floor and each other was generally determined by
the fixed location of pipe block-outs in the reinforced concrete columns. The nominal center-to-center
spacing of the barrier cables was 9 inches, with the lowest and highest strands nominally positioned 9
inches and 45 inches above the garage floor, respectively.

5. The cables ran continuously along the west elevation and were anchored between the southernmost
column (south column) and the column immediately south of the north elevator and stairwell (north
column). The overall continuous length of the barrier cable system was 160 feet over eight openings.

Cable Anchorage
6. Anchorage of the cables at the north column consisted exclusively of barrel anchors embedded and
grouted in the north face of the column (Figure 13). The first and third cables were dislodged from their
respective anchorage locations at the time of our site visit (Figure 14).

7. Anchorage of the cables at the south column consisted of a combination of adjustable replacement cable
anchors (e.g., GRABB-IT anchors) and embedded barrel anchors (presumed). The second and fourth
cables were dislodged from their respective anchorage locations at the time of our site visit (Figure 15).

8. The fifth (top) cable was the only cable that remained anchored at both the south and north columns
after the vehicle impact (Figure 12, Figure 14 and Figure 15).

9. No witness marks related to backstressing of the cables along the west elevation of the seventh level
were observed. The backstressing operation typically results in discrete marks (corresponding to the
serrated wedges of the hydraulic monostrand jack) within a few feet of each anchorage device.

Cable Displacement and Deformation

10. The vehicle impact drew the dislodged ends of the cables toward the opening where the vehicle exited
the garage. We presume that the displaced length of cable was pulled back into the garage and placed
on the floor during the accident response (Figure 12).

11. The approximate displaced position of the cable ends are depicted in Figure A2 of Appendix A. The
ends of the first and third cables were displaced across one to three openings or over a distance of
approximately 20 to 60 feet from the north column. The ends of the second and fourth cables were
displaced across one to two openings or over a distance of approximately 20 to 40 feet.

12. WJE did not observe cable deformation (i.e., elongation) consistent with development of the cable yield
strength. The only evidence of cable strength development was limited to the dislodged end of the
fourth cable, which exhibited a mild ‘bird-caged’ condition (Figure 16 and Figure 17)

Sampling of Failed Barrier Cables (Seventh Level)

WJE sampled components of the barrier cable system along the west garage elevation at the seventh level
for the purposes of laboratory examination and testing. Each sample was taken at a dislodged or anchored

Bowmer 001364
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 11

end of a cable as shown in Figure A2 of Appendix A. The samples ranged from 4 to 12 feet in length and
included representative anchorage devices as indicated in Table 1. All of the samples were cut from the full
cable length using an angle grinder with an abrasive wheel. The samples were immediately transported to
our Austin laboratory, subdivided as necessary, catalogued, and shipped to the WJE Janney Technical
Center (JTC) in Northbrook, Illinois. Further information regarding the samples is provided in the
Laboratory Analysis section of this report.

Table 1. Barrier Cable Sample Inventory

Sampling Location
ID Description
Cable Index* Cable End
A-1 II North Short cable segment with barrel anchor
A-2 II North 5+ foot intact cable segment
B-1 I North Short cable segment with dislodged end
B-2 I North 5+ foot intact cable segment
C-1 IV South Short cable segment with dislodged end
C-2 IV South 5+ foot intact cable segment
D I South Short cable segment with GRABB-IT anchor
* Position relative to garage floor; reference Figure A3 of Appendix A.

Assessment of Barrier Cable System (Remaining Levels)

WJE completed a visual assessment at the remaining levels of the garage to determine the general condition
of the barrier cable system and identify previous modifications or repairs. Conditions encountered at
multiple locations during the visual assessment are characterized below.

 Loose or Dislodged Cables. WJE observed loose and fully dislodged cables at multiple locations in the
garage. These conditions were observed at both interior (Figure 18 through Figure 20) and exterior
barrier cable systems (Figure 21 and Figure 22) and typically coincided with the installation of
adjustable replacement (GRABB-IT) cable anchors. The dislodged cable ends were relatively unmarred
and exhibited limited evidence of anchor wedge engagement (Figure 20).

 GRABB-IT Anchors. It appeared that GRABB-IT anchors had been used extensively to modify or
repair the original barrier cable system. Observed GRABB-IT anchors were typically threaded into
inserts (Figure 23), or onto threaded studs (Figure 24), which were installed at the interior face the
column. WJE observed torch-cut strand ends and abandoned studs at current GRABB-IT anchor
installations (Figure 25), suggesting that the barrier cable system had been modified multiple times
over the garage life.

Visual observations of loose cables were supplemented with measurements of the cable tension in a
sampling of the interior and exterior barrier cables. The tension forces in the cables were measured at
locations selected at random using a Dillon Quick-Check Tension Meter (Serial No. DWTM103796), and
a total of three readings were measured at each location to ensure consistency. The results of the cable
tension measurements are provided below in Table 2. The measured tension in the barrier cables varied
between 1,240 and 3,400 pounds with an overall average barrier cable tension of 2,300 pounds.

Bowmer 001365
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 12

Table 2. Cable Tension Measurements

Measured Tension [lbf]
Level Location Cable Index*
1 2 3 Average
3 A IV 2,120 2,100 2,120 2,110
3 B V 2,480 2,460 2,480 2,470
3 C V 2,040 2,020 2,060 2,040
4 A V 3,400 3,340 3,360 3,370
4 B III 3,160 3,180 3,200 3,180
6 A IV 1,680 1,700 1,720 1,700
8 A III 2,280 2,240 2,240 2,250
9 A III 1,240 1,260 1,240 1,250
*Position relative to garage floor; ref. Figure A3 of Appendix A.

LABORATORY ANALYSIS
WJE staff at the Janney Technical Center (JTC) completed visual examinations and tensile testing of the
submitted samples to characterize the condition and mechanical properties of the barrier cables. The full
scope of the laboratory analysis is shown in Table 3.

Table 3. Scope of Laboratory Analyses

ID Visual Exam Radiography Tensile Test
A-1 X
A-2 X
B-1 X
B-2 X
C-1 X
C-2 X
D X X

The laboratory analysis was completed in general accordance with our proposed laboratory work plan,
dated September 1, 2017, and the results were summarized in an internal memorandum, dated March 5,
2018 (reference Appendix C).

Visual and Radiographic Examinations

Samples A-1, B-1, and C-1 were examined by naked eye and through the use of a stereo microscope to
identify witness marks (if present) related to wedge-type anchor engagement along the cable length.
Pertinent observations made during the course of the examinations are summarized below.

 Removal of one wedge half from the anchored end of Sample A-1 revealed mild corrosion of the
serrated surfaces (Figure 26). Discrete marks corresponding to the wedge serrations were observed at
the crowns of the steel wires, but appeared to be confined to the zinc galvanizing (Figure 27 and
Figure 28).

 Magnified observations of the dislodged ends of Samples B-1 (Figure 29 and Figure 30) and C-2
(Figure 31 and Figure 32) revealed removal of the zinc galvanizing that appeared to be the result of
wedge slippage along the cable perimeter. Neither cable end exhibited surface deformations
characteristic of wedge engagement under the significant tensile forces imposed by backstressing.

Bowmer 001366
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 13

 There were no indications of wedge-type anchor engagement away from the anchored or dislodged
ends of Samples A-1, B-1, and C-1, suggesting that backstressing or other wedge seating operations
were not performed during cable installation.

Two-dimensional radiographic imaging was used to examine and document engagement between the
GRABB-IT wedges and barrier cable of Sample D prior to destructive testing (Figure 33). The radiographic
image depicts the cable extending completely through the wedge assembly within the GRABB-IT anchor.
The radiographic image analysis software was used to measure the internal diameter of the wedge
serrations, which was approximately 0.493 to 0.500 inches (Figure 34). Based on the permissible steel
strand diameter variation of 0.494 to 0.526 inches defined in ASTM A416, the wedge serrations had likely
penetrated the zinc galvanizing, but did not necessarily engage the crowns of the steel wires. Maximum
penetration of the wedge serrations into the steel wires comprising the strand (cable) was less than 0.013
inches.

Tensile Testing
Samples A-2, B-2, and C-2 were tested (Figure 35) in accordance with ASTM A1061, Standard Test
Methods for Testing Multi-Wire Steel Prestressing Strand, to determine the mechanical properties of the
barrier cables and assess their conformance with the requirements of ASTM A416. All tensile tests were
completed on January 16, 2018, at the JTC and were witnessed by Mr. Nguyen. The yield and breaking
strengths of each sample are listed in Table 4.

Table 4. Summary of Tensile Testing Results

ID Yield Strength [lbf] Breaking Strength [lbf] Failure Mode
A-2 36,430 42,970 Strand Fracture
B-2 35,790 42,920 Strand Fracture
C-2 34,960 43,170 Strand Fracture
ASTM A416 ≥ 37,170 ≥ 41,300 --

Samples A-2, B-2, and C-2 failed at the approximate mid-length of each sample (Figure 36) in a ductile
manner that resulted in a ‘cup-and-cone’ fracture surface at each wire (Figure 37). The measured yield
strength ranged between 34,960 and 36,430 pounds and did not conform to the minimum yield strength of
37,170 pounds required by ASTM A416. The measured breaking strength ranged between 43,170 pounds
and 42,970 pounds and exceeded the minimum breaking (ultimate tensile) strength of 41,300 pounds
required by ASTM A416. The discrepancy between the measured and required yield strength is likely
attributable to the zinc galvanizing process. As noted in the PTI Guide Specification, the individual wires
of the galvanized prestressed concrete strand (i.e., barrier cable) are required to meet the requirements of
ASTM A416 prior to galvanizing. The barrier cable is then stress relieved after stranding and galvanizing.

Sample D, which included a GRABB-IT anchor, was also tested in accordance with ASTM A1061 to
evaluate the performance of the anchorage device. The sample failed at an applied tension of 37,070 pounds
when the upset end of the GRABB-IT anchor stem sheared and pulled out of the chuck cap (Figure 38).
The failure load corresponded to approximately 90 percent of the minimum ultimate tensile strength of the
barrier cable. While the PTI Guide Specification requires anchorage devices to develop at least 95 percent
of the minimum ultimate tensile strength, the measured strength was consistent with the ultimate tensile
strength of 38,600 pounds reported by the manufacturer (reference Appendix B).

Bowmer 001367
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 14

Upon completion of the tensile tests, the chuck body of Sample D was cut and removed to enable
examination of the wedge engagement with the perimeter of the cable (Figure 39). The wedge serration
marks at the crown of each steel wire were well defined (Figure 40) and indicative of significant force
transfer between the barrier cable and the wedges of the anchorage device. Furthermore, the observed
wedge serration is indicative of the witness marks (and level of engagement) that would result from proper
backstressing of the barrier cables.

IMPACT ANALYSIS
WJE performed a limited analysis of the failed barrier cable system at the seventh level using the rational
method outlined in Chapter 16 of the PTI Manual. The purpose of the analysis was to determine the
maximum vehicle velocity corresponding to failure of the barrier cable system as controlled by either
excessive deflection (i.e., loss of wheel support) or yielding of the impacted barrier cables. Key input
parameters for the analysis and associated source documents are identified in Table 5. Pertinent
characteristics of the two-door BMW 428i were obtained by Auto Fire & Safety Consultant, Inc. (AFSC)
through a Vehicle Identification Number search and forwarded to WJE.

Table 5. Input Parameters for Impact Analysis

Parameter Description Source Value
E Cable Modulus of Elasticity PTI Manual 28,400 ksi
A Cable Cross-Sectional Area PTI Manual 0.153 in2
Fy Cable Yield Strength Laboratory Analysis 35,720 lbf
L Anchored Cable Length Field Investigation 160 ft
l Column Spacing of Interest Field Investigation 19 ft
Fe Initial Cable Stress PTI Manual 3,000 lbf
W Vehicle Weight Expert AutoStats via AFSC 3,965 lbs
b Vehicle Width Expert AutoStats via AFSC 71.5 in
aaxle Bumper-to-Axle Distance Expert AutoStats via AFSC 31 in
aedge Barrier-to-Slab Edge Distance Field Investigation 10 in

The analysis assumptions were generally conservative in nature and intended to minimize the maximum
vehicle velocity corresponding to failure. The rationale behind each of the analysis assumptions is described
below.

 Number of Cables (N). The analysis was based on the conservative assumption that no more than two
barrier cables were engaged during the impact. This assumption was based on the geometric
relationship between the vehicle bumper and the barrier cable system (Figure B3 of Appendix B) as
well as the load height and area requirements of ASCE 7-10.

 Allowable Cable Deflection (amax). The allowable barrier cable deflection was determined to be the
sum of the bumper-to-axle distance (aaxle) and the barrier-to-slab edge distance (aedge), or 41 inches. As
shown in Figure B3 of Appendix B, this distance corresponded to the vehicle travel that would result
in a loss of wheel support.

 Cable Yield Strength (Fy). The allowable barrier cable stress was taken as the average of the yield
strengths measured during the laboratory tensile tests. This provided an accurate representation of the
in-situ conditions and accounted for the previously mentioned nonconformities with respect to ASTM
A416.

Bowmer 001368
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 15

 Initial Cable Stress (Fe). WJE did not calculate the initial stress required to eliminate cable sag, but
instead assumed that each cable was stressed to a minimum final effective force of 3,000 pounds per
foot. This value was selected on the basis of the PTI Manual commentary (Section C3.5) and is
favorable with respect to the actual tension likely present at the time of impact. The average barrier
cable tension obtained from in-situ tension measurements was approximately 2,300 pounds.

The results of our analysis indicate that the barrier cable system along the west elevation of the seventh
level could have resisted the impact of a two-door BMW 428i traveling at less than 18 miles per hour.
Impact at a vehicle velocity of 18 miles per hour corresponds to the onset of cable yielding (Fy) and cable
deflection (a) of approximately 34 inches. Under the assumed conditions and at velocities less than 18 miles
per hour, no loss of wheel support would occur and the barrier cable system would prevent the vehicle from
breaching the garage perimeter. This result is predicated on the validity of the assumptions outlined above
as well as proper seating/backstressing of the wedge-type anchorage devices used at both ends of the barrier
cable system.

Based on discussions with Mr. Cope of Auto Fire & Safety Consultant, Inc., the two-door BMW 428i was
traveling at approximately 9 to 12 miles per hour when it traveled over the wheel stop and impacted the
barrier cable system on July 12, 2017. Analysis of the data recorded by the vehicle event data recorder
(EDR) also suggested that vehicle impact with the cables did not result in a meaningful change in the vehicle
velocity.

DISCUSSION
Impact analysis of the barrier cable system per standard industry guidance indicates that the original, as-
designed configuration of the system was capable of resisting the July 2017 vehicle impact. This result is
predicated on proper seating/backstressing of barrier cable anchorages, among the other valid assumptions
outlined above. Insights gained from the document review, field investigation, and laboratory analysis
suggest that multiple factors, including ineffectual maintenance, inappropriate repairs, and a lack of
backstressing, likely contributed to the failure and full breach of the barrier cable system. The role of each
of the aforementioned factors is discussed below.

Maintenance
The original design of the barrier cable system was likely based on the pedestrian guard requirements of
the 1976 UBC. Observations and measurements made by the ACD indicate that portions of the original
installation did not comply with the design basis; cable clear spacing in excess of 9 inches was observed.
The hazards posed by the original construction defects were exacerbated by ineffectual maintenance and
repair of the barrier cable system during its subsequent service life.

Irrespective of the original condition, periodic re-tensioning of the barrier cable system would have been
required to maintain proper center-to-center spacing of the cables. Barrier cable systems are subject to
cyclic thermal demands and incidental vehicle impacts that may cause the cables to loosen over time,
especially if there are errors in the original installation. Assuming that wedge-type barrel anchors were
originally installed at both ends of each cable, periodic re-tensioning or replacement of a cable would have
required access to the exterior faces of the outermost columns. The only alternative for maintenance of the
cable tension from the garage interior would have been the installation of adjustable replacement (GRABB-
IT) cable anchors.

Bowmer 001369
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 16

The presence of GRABB-IT anchors and evidence of multiple barrier cable system modifications indicate
that past attempts have been made to maintain adequate tension in the cables. However, the frequency of
misaligned, loose or dislodged cables in the garage, as observed by the ACD and WJE, suggests that those
maintenance attempts were ineffectual. The efficacy of maintenance would have been dependent on the
responsible party’s understanding of the applicable code requirements and a corresponding recognition of
the need for both adequate initial tension and anchorage backstressing. Errors were made with respect to
each of the aforementioned items: (a) offset installation of the GRABB-IT anchors resulted in misalignment
and excessive vertical spacing of the cables; (b) in-situ cable tension ranged as low as 1,300 pounds, or well
below the minimum final effective force of 3,000 pounds recommended in the PTI Guide Specification;
and finally, (c) evidence of backstressing operations was not identified in the field or in the laboratory.

The PTI Guide Specification recognizes the intricacies associated with the proper installation of a barrier
cable system and requires contractor certification as a PTI Certified Installer of Unbonded Post-Tensioning.
The garage owner’s current engineering consultant does not explicitly require such certification, but does
recommend the use of a “competent PT contractor to ensure that the appropriate means and methods are
implemented during stressing of the new cables.” WJE has not had the opportunity to review any
maintenance records related to the garage, but the condition of the barrier cable system at the time of the
site visit suggested that past maintenance was completed without a basic understanding of the applicable
building code requirements and standard industry guidance. Ineffectual maintenance of the barrier cable
system likely contributed to the failures that occurred in September 2016 and July 2017.

As stated in Section 304.1 of the 2012 IPMC, the garage owner was required to maintain the structure “in
good repair, structurally sound and sanitary so as not to pose a threat to the public health, safety or welfare.”
Specific maintenance responsibilities included providing handrails and guards as follows: “Every handrail
and guard shall be firmly fastened and capable of supporting normally imposed loads and shall be
maintained in good condition.” While the 2012 IPMC does not prescribe maintenance intervals, it is
reasonable to assume that safety-related maintenance items would be corrected in a sufficiently expeditious
manner to preclude the development of multiple safety-related items in the garage. It does not appear that
the owner actively responded to codified, safety-related maintenance items based on the observed frequency
of loose and dislodged cables in the garage.

Post-failure Assessment and Repair Approach

Based on our review of the Austin Code Department case file, response to the September 2016 failure of
the ninth level barrier cable system did not include any efforts to identify the root cause. The ACD did issue
a violation letter citing “Unsafe Conditions” and requiring “a structural engineer letter and report,” but did
not specify the engineer’s responsibilities or the potential need for code upgrades. As stated in his
September 28, 2016 letter, Mr. Martin outlines a scope of work limited to “determining the extent of
damage… specifying the repairs… and observation of the installation work.” The letter does not reference
any attempts to investigate the circumstances of the failure for the purposes of informing the specified repair
approach.

WJE has been involved in the assessment and repair of at least two barrier cable systems that failed under
vehicle impact. Neither of the failures, including one in Dallas, Texas, resulted in significant injuries to the
vehicle occupants. Initial on-site observations revealed a potential lack of anchorage backstressing and
prompted a more thorough assessment of the barrier cable systems. Assessment of the barrier cable systems
included detailed visual surveys of the system components as well as in-situ or laboratory load testing of
the barrier cable anchorage devices. These efforts were necessary to identify any deficiencies in the

Bowmer 001370
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 17

components or construction of the barrier cable systems that required repair, and reflected the engineer’s
understanding of the hazards posed by a potentially defective barrier cable system.

The repairs ultimately specified by Mr. Martin in September 2016 were limited to those necessary “to
restore the building to it’s predamaged state in accordance with the provisions for repairs prescribed in the
2012 Existing Building Code.” The prescriptive and work area compliance methods of the 2012 IEBC
(Sections 404.4 and Section 606.2.1, respectively) do permit restoration of damaged elements to their
predamaged condition on the basis of “less than substantial structural damage.” Such an approach
completely disregards the ACD citation of “Unsafe Conditions” and associated requirements within the
2012 IPMC and 2012 IEBC. Consideration of “Unsafe Conditions” within the context of the 2012 IEBC
should have either prompted a request for further clarification from the Building Official (Sections 115 and
401.3) or the design and installation of repairs compliant with the 2012 IBC (Section 606.1). During the
response to the July 2017 failure, the Building Official did imply that the dangerous condition of the ninth
level barrier cable system should have triggered system upgrades under Section 606.1 of the 2012 IEBC.

The current response to the July 2017 failure includes replacement of the barrier cable system, and the
conceptual design drawings provide an indication of what may have resulted from a more rigorous
assessment and repair approach. Permitted replacement of the barrier cable system would have required
installation of up to eleven more closely spaced cables engineered to resist the loads specified in the 2012
IBC and ASCE 7-10. Application of standard industry guidance to the replacement barrier cable system
would have further required installation by a qualified contractor and verification of cable backstressing
operations. The enhanced redundancy and resiliency of such a barrier cable system would have likely
prevented future full breach failures under vehicle impacts at or below typical garage speed limits (10 to 15
miles per hour).

Backstressing
Prescriptive requirements for backstressing and setting of wedge-type anchorage devices were identified in
standard industry guidance, including the PTI Manual, PTI Guide Specifications, and the GRABB-IT
submittal documentation. Backstressing and setting of wedge-type anchorage devices is necessary to form
a reliable mechanical connection between the anchorage device and the cable. As cautioned in the PTI
Guide Specification, “Failure of the barrier strand slipping through the wedges will occur if they are not
properly seated using this backstressing method.”

Evidence of backstressing typically consists of discrete witness marks (corresponding to the serrated
wedges of the hydraulic monostrand jack) within a few feet of each anchorage device. WJE did not observe
any such evidence during the field investigation or laboratory analyses. Moreover, examination of the intact
anchorages and dislodged cable ends provided confirmation that no attempt was made to properly
backstress the cables.

 Condition of Intact Anchorages. An intact barrel anchor and an adjustable replacement cable anchor
were subjected to magnified observations and radiographic imaging, respectively. Engagement of the
barrel anchor wedges with the cable end appeared to be limited to penetration of the zinc galvanizing
at the crown of each steel wire. Measurements of the internal diameter of the wedge serrations within
the adjustable replacement cable anchor also suggested that engagement was limited to penetration of
the zinc galvanizing. Proper engagement of the anchors with the cables would have resulted in more
significant deformation of the wire surface, as evidenced by the post-test condition of Sample D.

Bowmer 001371
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 18

 Condition of Dislodged Cable Ends. Dislodged cable ends were identified at multiple locations outside
of the failed barrier cables on the seventh level. The dislodged ends were relatively unmarred and
exhibited limited evidence of wedge engagement. Correspondingly, magnified examination of the
dislodged ends of the failed barrier cables revealed removal of the zinc galvanizing as a result of wedge
slippage along the crown of each steel wire. The dislodged cable ends did not exhibit surface
deformations characteristic of wedge engagement under significant tensile forces.

Laboratory testing of representative barrier cable samples and an anchorage device demonstrated that the
system components had sufficient strength and ductility to resist the July 2017 vehicle impact. Based on
the observed lack of cable deformation or fractures after the vehicle impact, it is clear that no significant
strength development occurred prior to pull-out of the cable ends. This insight is further corroborated by
the lack of a meaningful change in the vehicle velocity upon impact, as reported to WJE by Auto Fire &
Safety Consultant, Inc. Premature failure of the barrier cable system as a result of cable pull-out is
attributable to a lack of proper seating/backstressing of the wedge-type anchorage devices.

PRELIMINARY FINDINGS
Impact analysis of the barrier cable system, in combination with laboratory testing of representative
components, indicated that the original, as-designed configuration of the system was capable of resisting
the July 2017 vehicle impact. Based on the reported velocity of the two-door BMW 428i at the time of
impact, the barrier cable system would have deflected without breaking, and the front wheels of the vehicle
would have remained on the garage floor.

Field and laboratory observations of the barrier cable system indicate that failure to properly backstress and
seat the wedge-type anchorage devices resulted in pull-out of the cable ends prior to development of the
cable strength. Failure to properly backstress and seat the anchorage devices, in combination with the
quality of previous repairs or modifications, suggest that past maintenance was completed without a basic
understanding of the applicable building code requirements and standard industry guidance. It does not
appear that the owner actively responded to codified, safety-related maintenance items regarding the barrier
cable system.

The circumstances of the September 2016 barrier cable system failure and associated code considerations
should have resulted in a more comprehensive assessment and repair approach. The Engineer-of-Record
for the repairs should have sought clarification from the Building Official or specified upgrade of the barrier
cable system to meet current code requirements. Actions resulting from a more comprehensive assessment
and repair approach would have likely resulted in more redundant and resilient barrier cable system capable
of resisting the July 2017 impact.

Our findings are based on review of documents, information, and conditions made available to us at the
time of our assessment. Other conditions or information may exist, or may become available over time,
which were not observed during the development of this report. WJE reserves the right to supplement or
modify these findings if additional information becomes available.

Bowmer 001372
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 19

FIGURES

Figure 1. Reproduction of Figure 16.4 of the PTI Manual, Backstressing

of Barrier Cables.

Bowmer 001373
 ENG INEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 20

1~ 20"
1~
½"0 GALVANIZED
. .. ~·
.. .. ..
BARRIER CABLE
~ ~ ··1'" •
HYDRAULIC
MONOSTRAND JACK
~.. . • 4
..
~

BLOCKOUT
..
SLEEVE .e,. '
REINFORCED WEDGE- TYPE
CONCRETE COLUMN BARREL ANCHOR

Figure 2. Schematic of backstressing operation for a wedge-type barrel

anchor.

M
T
a D
,4 B
, _, £.b/2 _,
i I

f L
Figure 3. Reproduction of Figure 16.7 of the PTI Manual - Barrier Cable
Deflection on Impact.

Bowmer 001374
 ENG INEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 21

Figure 4. Excess barrier cable length at opening where vehicle exited

garage (from ACD Complaint CC-2017-085979).

Figure 5. Anchored condition of strands at northernmost column; arrows

indicate dislodged cables (from ACD Complaint CC-2017-085979).

Bowmer 001375
 ENG INEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 22

Figure 6. Anchored condition of strands at southernmost column; arrows

indicated dislodged cables (from ACD Complaint CC-2017-085979).

Bowmer 001376
 ENG INEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 23

Figure 7. Replacement cable anchor installation, as photographed by

ACD (from ACD Complaint CC-2017-085979).

Bowmer 001377
 ENG INEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 24

.,
Figure 8. Approximately 11-inch cable spacing photographed by ACD
(from ACD Complaint CC-2017-085979).

Figure 9. Loose interior barrier cable photographed by ACD (from ACD

Complaint CC-2017-085979).

Bowmer 001378
 ENG INEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 25

Figure 10. Loose exterior barrier cable photographed by ACD (from

ACD Complaint CC-2017-085979).

Figure 11. Representative photos of barrier cable system recommended

by owner’s engineering consultant. Typical end anchorage at left and
typical intermediate support at right.

Bowmer 001379
 ENG INEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 26

Figure 12. Typical opening at west elevation of garage.

Bowmer 001380
 ENG INEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 27

Figure 13. Embedded, grouted barrel anchors at north face of north

column.

Bowmer 001381
 ENG INEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 28

Figure 14. Condition of barrier cable anchorages at south face of north

column; arrows indicated dislodged cables.

Bowmer 001382
 ENG INEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 29

Figure 15. Condition of barrier cable anchorages at north face of south

column; arrows indicated dislodged cables.

Bowmer 001383
 ENG INEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 30

Figure 16. Observed location of dislodged end of fourth cable.

Figure 17. Dislodged end of fourth cable with mild bird-caged condition.

Bowmer 001384
 ENG INEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 31

Figure 18. Loose cable observed at interior barrier on sixth level.

Bowmer 001385
 ENG INEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 32

Figure 19. Dislodged cable observed at interior barrier on eighth level.

Bowmer 001386
 ENG INEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 33

Figure 20. Dislodged end of cable depicted in Figure 19; note the limited
evidence of anchor wedge engagement.

Figure 21. Disengaged GRABB-IT anchor observed at exterior barrier at

fifth level.

Bowmer 001387
 ENG INEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 34

Figure 22. GRABB-IT anchor components depicted in Figure 21. Stem and chuck
cap at left. Chuck body, wedge set, and spring at right.

STEM
INSERT
BODY

CAP

Figure 23. Typical male GRABB-IT anchor installation.

Bowmer 001388
 ENG INEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 35

Figure 24. Typical female GRABB-IT anchor installation.

Figure 25. Evidence of current and prior cable anchorage methods.

Bowmer 001389
 ENG INEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 36

Figure 26. Mild corrosion on serrated surface of wedge half removed

from anchored end of Sample A-1.

Figure 27. Anchored end of Sample A-1 after removal of wedge half
shown in Figure 26.

Bowmer 001390
 ENG INEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 37

Figure 28. Magnified observation of wedge marks and remaining wedge

engagement at anchored end of Sample A-1.

Figure 29. Dislodged end of Sample B-1 with zinc galvanizing removal
indicative of wedge slippage.

Bowmer 001391
 ENG INEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 38

Figure 30. Magnified observation of zinc galvanizing removal at

dislodged end of Sample B-1.

Figure 31. Dislodged end of Sample C-1 with zinc galvanizing removal
indicative of wedge slippage.

Bowmer 001392
 ENG INEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 39

Figure 32. Magnified observation of zinc galvanizing removal at

dislodged end of SampleC-1.

Bowmer 001393
 ENG INEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 40

Figure 33. 2-dimensional radiographic image of GRABB-IT anchor of

Sample D. Image oriented with cable at bottom of image.

Bowmer 001394
 ENG INEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 41

0.500”

0.493”

0.496”

0.496”

Figure 34. Measurement of internal diameter of wedge serrations.

Bowmer 001395
 ENG INEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 42

Figure 35. Tensile testing of barrier cable sample.

Bowmer 001396
 ENG INEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 43

.•
.I
•..
''
•..
'
I

't -
I

':'
:
.
-
''...
...
.. .
Figure 36. Typical failure mode of Samples A-2, B-2, and C-2 at
approximate mid-length.

Bowmer 001397
 ENG INEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 44

Figure 37. Cup-and-cone fracture surfaces indicative of ductile material

behavior.

Figure 38. Failed GRABB-IT anchor components after tensile testing of

Sample D.

Bowmer 001398
 ENG INEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 45

Figure 39. Anchored end of Sample D with corresponding wedges and

retaining ring after application of 90 percent of minimum ultimate tensile
strength.

Figure 40. Wedge serration marks at the crown of each wire of Sample D
after application of 90 percent of minimum ultimate tensile strength.

Bowmer 001399
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 46

APPENDIX A - PLAN AND ELEVATION

Bowmer 001400
© Copyright 2018. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. NO PART OF THIS DOCUMENT MAY BE REPRODUCED IN ANY FORM OR BY ANY MEANS WITHOUT
PERMISSION FROM WISS, JANNEY, ELSTNER ASSOCIATES, INC. (WJE). WJE DISCLAIMS ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR ITS UNAUTHORIZED USE.

62'-0" 62'-0" 33'-10" 1'-4"

0 ---

~
l!:!!::!l 0- - -

d
d
E2.S
0 -_ - -
~
w
9 I-
co en
(0
>-
en

0- - -
w
0....1
_, ID
0 <(

;- X ~(.)
0:::
0
N
I w
0::
0:::
©- - - -----

X
<(
ID

I s:
0
....I
--- w
ID
en
en
co X
w
I (.)
N
N
I (.)
<(

□ □

NORTH

TEXAS REGISTERED ENGINEERING FIRM F-0093

WJE I ENGINEERS
ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
LITTLEFIELD GARAGE INVESTIGATION OF BARRIER CABLE SYSTEM FAILURE
Austin, Texas
TITLE:

GARAGE LEVEL 7 PLAN

FIGURE No:

A1
Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc. PROJECT No,: 2017.4422.0

Bowmer 001401
© Copyright 2018. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. NO PART OF THIS DOCUMENT MAY BE REPRODUCED IN ANY FORM OR BY ANY MEANS WITHOUT
PERMISSION FROM WISS, JANNEY, ELSTNER ASSOCIATES, INC. (WJE). WJE DISCLAIMS ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR ITS UNAUTHORIZED USE.

18'-4"
T 22'-8"
T 20'-4"
T 20'-4"
,s•·-o·T
19'-0"
T 20'-4"
T 20'-4"
T 17'-0"
T
BAY OF VEHICLE IMPACT

~ . . .. . t
I I
r i t::=Af=
a ========3 b:
~========:::========~ t==================l E==f=======:::======l
I I
~ ,===========3 b=========::~::=:3=
i

I I=--__:~ ----= - '-

i

. •, . ... .
i =----!--t=
r::::==-- A~ : i
® '

- -

LEGEND

x - DISLODGED CABLE END

- EXISTING CABLE PRESENT IN BAY

- EXISTING CABLE NOT PRESENT IN BAY

® - FIELD SAMPLE (4 TOTAL)

TEXAS REGISTERED ENGINEERING FIRM F-0093

WJE I ENGINEERS
ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
LITTLEFIELD GARAGE INVESTIGATION OF BARRIER CABLE SYSTEM FAILURE
Austin, Texas
TITLE:

BARRIER ELEVATION
FIGURE No:

A2
Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc. PROJECT No,: 2017.4422.0

Bowmer 001402
© Copyright 2018. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. NO PART OF THIS DOCUMENT MAY BE REPRODUCED IN ANY FORM OR BY ANY MEANS WITHOUT
PERMISSION FROM WISS, JANNEY, ELSTNER ASSOCIATES, INC. (WJE). WJE DISCLAIMS ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR ITS UNAUTHORIZED USE.

REINFORCED CONCRETE
I~OLUMN BEYON~ I
20"SQ.

STRAND INDEX l BLOCKOUT SLEEVE

BEYOND AT EACH CABLE

►
2014 BMW 428i
½"0 GALVANIZED
~ V 0
...J BARRIER CABLE
<(
z
d :iE
oz
(,9

d zt5
~cl:
IV

~ Cl) Cl)
w
...J
0:::
w
Ill I- Ill ®
<( z
Ow
0::: CJ
w'
_z
c:::o II ®
0::: =
<( 0)
Ill
§:

en
+I
T.O. LEVEL 7 ~
.. ~ . .!I
-. . _41· . ·.4

.
4'4_ -:. . . . . ./J "<1 •• 4· <1,
',.d._, <I·" .4 ."·4
.4. _4 ,i . . -~

..
• <1 •• LJ.- _
'.ti: .
;;
·• " ..,,,- ·"' 4_ .d <I . 4:
·. '•,•<I. .. ·_4· <1·
•.
.•
. 4 <1_ . <1£1: .. 4 .
~ . <1 ·. ·4
4
<1
"' .. .. <1
4.
4· ·: q

10" ±31"

TEXAS REGISTERED ENGINEERING FIRM F-0093

WJE I ENGINEERS
ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
LITTLEFIELD GARAGE INVESTIGATION OF BARRIER CABLE SYSTEM FAILURE
Austin, Texas
TITLE:

BARRIER CABLE SYSTEM

AT IMPACT LOCATION
FIGURE No:

A3
Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc. PROJECT No,: 2017.4422.0

Bowmer 001403
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 47

APPENDIX B - GRABB-IT SUBMITTAL

Bowmer 001404
 = PRECISION-HAYES
I N'TERNA'TI ON.AL Barrier Cable Products
The simple, reliable, cost-effective solution to cable installation and repair problems -
especially where space is limited and access is a problem.

GRABB-IT® Splice
(
I
F21000 (0.5'') I F21600 (0.6")

F22500

U.S. Patont
No. 8,051,615

GRABB-IT® barrier cable chucks are

easy-to-use devices:
New GRABB-IT® Rail
• Cable can be assembled and tensioned prior
to installation (with wedges fully seated)

Prefabricated GRABB-rr®
• Excessive lateral forces from tensioning are
not exerted on columns Termination for easy installation
into columns.
• Neat appearance-no chipping or removal
of concrete required • All required spacing in place.

• Easy maintenance and repair of damaged cable • Installation time significantly

reduced.
• A cost-effective method of installing or
re-tensioning barrier cable • Can be ordered with any
number of termination points.
Traditional methods of cable installation and
repair can't compare to GRABB-IT®.

From stressing accessories to hardware, Precision

carries the most complete line of jacks and related GRABB·IT~ Rml System,
Patonl # US9, 194, 155
components in the industry.

GRABB-IT® is a registered trademark of Precision SURE-LOCK".

www.precision-hayes.com

PHI0100 Rev. 4 01/16

Bowmer 001405
 a PRECISION-HAYES
INTER NA.Tl ONA.I....
Safety and longevity
GRABB-IT® wedges are required to be backseated in the
GRABB-IT® body prior to installation. This ensures that the
will not pull loose with expansion and contraction over time.
This method also allows installation without putting undue
lateral forces on the columns.
NEW Swivel GRABB-IT®
The new Swivel GRABB-IT® is designed to be used when
Ferrule Loops are not installed properly in the column (Fig. 2). If
some are installed at an angle, the new Swivel GRABB-IT® will
compensate for this misalignment by allowing the GRABB-IT®
body to swivel and remain parallel with the other strands.
The new swivel GRABB-IT® can also be used on ramps with
a 5° grade (Fig. 4). This will allow for cleaner better looking
installation.
Barrier Cable Products
Superiority in new construction
GRABB-IT® is installed in new structures with the use
of a ferrule insert or PSL GRABB-IT® Rail cast into the
concrete column. The cable is pushed into the open end
of the GRABB-IT® chuck where it is locked into place.
This eliminates the use of temporary cable pieces, pocket
formers, and extensive concrete patching.
Replacement of damaged cables
With GRABB-IT®, replacement of damaged cables is simple.
Just unthread the stem from the insert, remove the old
cable and GRABB-IT®, push the new cable into the new
GRABB-IT®, and rethread into the insert. This method is
much simpler and less costly than cutting cables, chipping
concrete, attaching new barrel anchors, stressing cables,
and repatching concrete.

Easy installation in existing structures

GRABB-IT® is easily installed in existing structures with
the use of an epoxy insert drilled in the face of the existing
column. Since work is done at the inside face of tl,e column,
there is no need to remove existing precast curtain wall, or
other exterior treatments. Inserts must be properly chosen
and designed for the specific installation.
Female
GIBB-IP
/1/2" Dia. Cable
Cable maintenance
With GRABB-IT®, tightening of sagging cables is as simple
as threading the stem into the insert. A few turns is usually all
it takes.
Cost effectiveness
Cable installation with the GRABB-IT® method can be
significantly less costly than traditional methods. Further
savings will be seen in future cable maintenance, tightening,
replacement, etc.

GRABB~rr Dead•End Male GRABB-IT"

Face of Concrete---
~
Barrier Cable Chuck
/

@ Male
GRABB-ITD Standard Ferrule
FLOOR
Loop Insert

Face of Concrete-
FLOOR
(Angled at
5• as• Grade)
Male
Swivel GRABB-I1"
~ PRECISION-HAYES
I Nill ER N Aw I CD NA Li
DALLAS OFFICE HOUSTON OFFICE
704 W Simonds Road 14030 Florence Road
5" maximum offset Seagoville, TX 75159 Sugar Land, TX 77498
972-287-2390 • FAX 972-287-4469 281-565-8111 • FAX 281-565-8116
Face of Concrete---

Bowmer 001406
Drawing Number REV. CHKD DESCRIPTION DATE
Q520030

2
4 5
6
3

i----------,~----4i-----------

318
(Ref.)
a14
(Ref.)

Notes:
1) Clear zinc plate in accordance with ASTM B633-11: .0002-.0005" thick. PRECISION SURE-LOCK"
Unspecified Tolerances This drawing and Jnfonnalion herein is confidential and
Bill of Materials (in Inches) proprietary and Is the property of Enerpac Precision
DmMlby: SURE·LOCK. It is not to be copied or reproduced without
Item No. Qty. Part# Description DECIMAL: written pennlsslon.
KB
1 520000 Grabb-I1 Chuck Body Plated X.X~015

2 520010 Grabb-lt Chuck Cap Plated

"""""""
RB
x.xx= ±0.010
x.xxx
=±0,005
Material
As noted
Approved by: Description
3 520020 Grabb-lt Male Stem Plated FRACTIONAL: ± ½2
JG ANGULAR: ± 1.0° F18500 ½" Male Grabb-I1
4 501430 F500SL3P Slack½ 3 pc clear zinc Release Date
10-25-13 Purchase Part Number Sheet Drawing Number
5 350110 Grabb-lt Spring Scale
6 350300 .750 x 1.5 x .04 steel ring 1:1 1 of 1 Q520030

Bowmer 001407
 Construction Testing Sciences
CONSTRUCTION) P.O. Box 824483, Dallas, TX 75382-4483
TESTING
( SC I E N C E S Phone: 21 4.703.891 1
www.ctsciences.com
Report of GRABB-IT Barrier Cable Chuck Testing
Client: Precision SURE-LOCK Report No.: 11007
Project: F18500 Male GRABB-IT Cable Chuck Date of Service: 08/26/14
Project No.: 101214 P.O. No.: 0051365-00

Construction Testing Sciences (CTS) was retained by Precision SURE-LOCK to perform

ultimate tensile testing on one GRABB-IT barrier cable chuck.
Scope
Perform an ultimate tensile test on one (1) F18500 Male barrier cable chuck.
Purpose
Determine the ultimate tensile strength of the F18500 Male barrier cable chuck when tested in
a condition simulating actual installation.

Sample Preparation
One (1) F18500 Male GRABS-IT chuck was threaded into a high strength rod coupler. A piece
of 1/2" diameter seven wire strand was inserted into the GRABB-IT chuck. The assembly was
then placed in the test machine. Threaded rod was attached to the other end of the rod coupler
and extended through one platen of the test machine. A steel plate with a center hole was
installed on the threaded rod and secured with a nut against the platen. Another center hole
steel plate was installed on the 1/2" strand and secured with a reusable chuck, securing it to
the other platen in the test machine. This assembly simulates installation of the GRABB-IT
chuck to a column insert and barrier cable.

Test Procedure
The F18500 Male GRABS-IT chuck was subjected to tensile loading at a rate of 5,000 lbs.
per minute until failure. Upon failure, the maximum load and mode of failure were recorded.
The test was performed on a Tinius-Olsen universal test machine calibrated on 04-15-14.

Results
Failure ocurred at an ultimate load of 39,700 lbs. The mode of failure observed was two wires
in the strand breaking at the reusable chuck. No visible damage was sustained by the F18500

k&
GRABB-IT chuck.

* ~~,
,_.,.,,,,,,,
.r...-.,o,i
..........f_,t,,,,

1~
Kenneth Bownds, P.E.

LlMITATlONS: The test rcsolls prucntcd hcMn were prepared

,.I"
;" Cb,,••
I• I

~ \ 76345 7"'
t~ •• ~~p •
.. ,.
•·•f.p t
$·;;:;;·•..................••i.d
~....:..~~~-~:.~.<?,~NDsilJ
• •

~ -J
ack ary, eral Manager

~ le.sling.. \Ye assume no resJ)O(Uibility for variation in quality (composi1lo11,

-,>peamnce., pcrfocmaoce. etc.)°' any other feature ofsimila, sobjec •,Af..- J ~ ~ over which we have no contTol Our lc11trs and rcpon~ arc for the c:cclu.,ive

,.~,,,,...
use 0(1he clicnls 10 whoro Ihey are addressed and shall noc be reproductd L.i".f'Ull'~~lffl approval of Cons1rucrion Ttsring: Scicncn., U.C.
.

Bowmer 001408
Drawing Number REV. DESCRIPTION DATE
520031 A KB RB replaced item 1) detail,
4-16-14
updated logo, added note 1)

4 2

@
N~= @ PRECISION SURE-LOCK~
1) Clear zinc plate in accordance with ASTM B633-11: .0002 - .0005" thick. Unspecified Tolerances This drawing and information herein is confidential and
(In Inches) proprietary and is the property of Enerpac Precision
Drawn by: SURE-LOCK. It is not to be copied or reproduced without
Bill of Materials DECIMAL: written permission.
1,~;;,,1ro;;;;:T,;;;;tii,T KB
_____n,;;;;Tr;;;;;-;;------k~~,.J11.;i'.!!.:~ x.x~o1s ~M~,~"~,~,,~------------l
Item# Qty. Part# Description Chrn:kedby:
X .XX = ± 0.010 As noted
1 1 520002 RB
Swivel Grabb-lt Chuck Body _ _.J-;;;~ioi;f"-if.;-''-=J X.XXX
I---C---I---C-l-::'.=:~'.'.:._--1--__:~~~'..'.'.'.~'.'...::~~.:'.'.'.1 Appro\11ldby; = ± 0.005 ho~,~sc~,,~,~
0
,~------------l
2 520004 Swivel Grabb-lt Chuck Cap FRACTIONAL:±½, F18550 ½" Swivel
RB
l---:c--t----:-l-==:-::---t---:::---:---;-;::-;-;--;;-::-;--;-:--;:::-:-~--i----'-';~. J.c~.!:.cc=I ANGULAR: ± 1.0' Male Grabb-lt
3 520015 Swivel Grabb-lt Male Stem Release Date
12-11-12 heel Drawing Number
4 501430 F500SL3P SLOCK ½" 3 pc Clear Zinc Scale
5 350110 Grabb-lt Spring 1:1 1 of 1 520031

Bowmer 001409
 Construction Testing Sciences
CONSTRUCTION) P.O. Box 824483, Dallas, TX 75382-4483
K TESTING
SCIENCES Phone: 214.703.8911
www.ctsciences.com
Report of GRABB-IT Barrier Cable Chuck Testing
Client: Precision SURE-LOCK Report No.: 11007
Project: F18550 Male Swivel GRABB-IT Chuck Date of Service: 08/26/14
Project No.: 101214 P.O. No.: 0051365-00
Construction Testing Sciences {CTS) was retained by Precision SURE-LOCK to perform
ultimate tensile testing on one GRABS-IT barrier cable chuck.
Scope
Perform an ultimate tensile test on one (1) F18550 Male Swivel barrier cable chuck.
Purpose
Determine the ultimate tensile strength of the F18550 Male Swivel barrier cable chuck when
tested in a condition simulating actual installation.

Sample Preparation
One (1) F18550 Male Swivel GRABB-IT chuck was threaded into a high strength rod coupler. A
piece of 1/2" diameter seven wire strand was inserted into the GRABS-IT chuck. The assembly
was then placed in the test machine. Threaded rod was attached to the other end of the rod
coupler and extended through one platen of the test machine. A steel plate with a center hole
was installed on the threaded rod and secured with a nut against the platen. Another center hole
steel plate was installed on the 1/2" strand and secured with a reusable chuck, securing it to the
other platen in the test machine. This assembly simulates installation of the GRABS-IT chuck to
a column insert and barrier cable.

Test Procedure
The F18500 Male Swivel GRABS-IT chuck was subjected to tensile loading at a rate of 5,000
lbs. per minute until failure. Upon failure, the maximum load and mode of failure were recorded.
The test was performed on a Tinius-Olsen universal test machine calibrated on 04-15-14.

Results
Failure ocurred at an ultimate load of 38,600 lbs. The mode of failure observed was stem
failure at the swivel head. No other visible damage was sustained by the F18550 Male Swivel

l!t.
GRABS-IT chuck.

~ ~ .........E"•~·,
--iOF?,,,
r.~,
,,.,, ~-··
, * ••
.,r.••·••:r:-r_
•' .•, *I•..••
••,.st
~ ~....
* ::........................:....
* •.~
. l KENNETH L. BOWNDS l
enneth~dsf i . ck Gary,
1.,_.. ··:·•·· •··"·""·""""' " ' : · ···" eral Manager
t. \ 76345 / " ·
LrMJTATIONS: The le.st results pre,cntC'd hcrcin wtre prepared tiuJl ~t
f '1i\, .-L~
,a-- ~·
•• ~ We assume no responsibility far variation in quality (compc»ition.
~ling.
appear1nte, pcrfClm'WK:c,. etc..} or any other feature ofsimilar subject J~ ~ • r.,:;: owr which we have no control. Our lettcn aod rtpon1 arc for the c...:clusi-.·c
use of the ditnt1 to whom they arc addressed and sha.U aot be rcpruduad c:.~ ·
,,,......... -~ approval of Construction Tcstillg Scicocu, LLC.

Bowmer 001410
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Investigation of Barrier Cable System Failure
March 28, 2018
Page 48

APPENDIX C - JTC LABORATORY REPORT

Bowmer 001411
 ENGINEERS Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc.

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
330 Pfingsten Road
Northbrook, Illinois 60062
847.272.7400 tel | 847.291.5189 fax
www.wje.com

INTERNAL MEMORANDUM
To: Dean Deschenes

From: Bernard Schulze, John Fraczek, John Pearson

Date: March 23, 2018

Project: Littlefield Garage - Investigation of Barrier Cable Failure

WJE No. 2017.4422

Subject: Laboratory Examination of Select Barrier Cables

Background
Seven cable segments were submitted to the Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc. (WJE) Janney Technical
Center laboratories for testing and examination. The cable samples are galvanized 1/2-inch-diameter,
seven-wire strand and are identified in Table 1. The Samples had been removed during an on-site
assessment at the Littlefield Garage, located at 508 Brazos Street, Austin, Texas on August 2, 2017.

Table 1. Sample Inventory

Sample ID Brief Description
A-1 Short cable segment with anchorage wedge and grouted end
A-2 5+ foot intact cable segment
B-1 Short cable segment with dislodged end
B-2 5+ foot intact cable segment
C-1 Short cable segment with dislodged/birdcaged end
C-2 5+ foot intact cable segment
D Short cable segment with GRABB-IT anchor

Laboratory Examination and Testing Summary

All seven samples submitted to the laboratory were examined. Samples A-2, B-2, C-2, and D were subjected
to tensile testing; Samples A-1, B-1, C-1, and D were closely examined to identify and document wedge
engagement, if present. Prior to tensile testing, the GRABB-IT anchor on Sample D was inspected using
2D radiography to allow nondestructive documentation of the anchor internals and engagement.

Tensile Testing
WJE tested four 1/2-inch-diameter, 270-ksi, low-relaxation, galvanized seven-wire strands. Tensile tests
were conducted following the requirements of American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) A1061,
Standard Test Methods for Testing Multi-Wire Steel Prestressing Strand. Samples A-2, B-2, C-2, and D all
consisted of a galvanized strand section of a cable barrier system. Sample D also had a GRABB-IT anchor
with associated threaded anchor rod connected at one end (Figure 1).The Samples were tested to determine
yield strength and breaking strength.

Bowmer 001412
 ENGLNEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHLTECTS
MATERIALS SCLENTISTS
Barrier Cable Investigation
March 23, 2018
Page 2

Each sample was tested in a 500,000-pound Riehle universal test machine, except for the GRABB-IT end
of Sample D. Each sample strand end was gripped using wedge grips with smooth, semi-cylindrical grooves
packed with a sand slurry to prevent slippage. These grips allow load to be distributed along the entire
length of the grips without creating stress risers. The end of Sample D (with the anchor rod) was bolted to
an end plate that reacted against the top head of the test machine (Figure 2).

A 24-inch long extensometer was used to measure strand elongation to just beyond 1 percent. The preload
method was used for each test to set the grips prior to installing the extensometer. The preload method
consists of applying an initial load of 10 percent of the required minimum breaking strength of the strand
and then attaching the extensometer (Figure 3). An elongation of 0.1 percent is assumed to occur at the 10
percent load. Load-elongation data were collected using a computer-based data acquisition system.

Load was applied in a uniform manner up to an elongation of approximately 1.05 percent. The applied load
was paused after the elongation reached 1.05 percent to allow for removal of the extensometer to prevent
damaging it when the strand failed. Loading was then resumed until failure occurred.

The results of the testing for each sample is summarized in Table 2. A load-elongation plot for Sample A-
2 is provided as Appendix A. This plot is also representative of those for Samples B-2 and C-2.

Table 2. Tensile test Results

Sample ID Yield Load Breaking Load Breaking Load (lbf)
(lbf) (lbf)
A-2 36,430 42,970 Strand break
B-2 35,790 42,920 Strand break
C-2 34,960 43,170 Strand break
End anchor rod
D 34,890 37,070
failure

An example of the failure mode for Samples A2, B2, and C2 is shown in Figure 4 and Figure 5. Sample D
failed with shearing of the upset end of the threaded anchor rod, causing it to detach from the housing
(Figure 6).

Laboratory Examination
Samples A-1, B-1, and C-1 were closely examined visually and using a stereo microscope at magnifications
up to 50X. Observations of the strand condition and/or witness marks are summarized as follows:

Table 3. Strand Condition Observations

Sample ID Observations
A-1 Sample A-1 contained two halves of a barrel wedge along with remnants of the grout
(Figure 7). The wedge teeth were intact with light corrosion and showed no indication of
damage (Figure 8). The anchor wedge engagement with the strand is shown in Figure 9 and
Figure 10. Close-up examination of the wedge engagement shows discrete teeth marks on
the strand surface that appear to penetrate the galvanized layer (Figure 11 through
Figure 13). No additional engagement marks were observed along the remaining length of
the strand sample.

Bowmer 001413
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Barrier Cable Investigation
March 23, 2018
Page 3

B-1 Sample B-1 was a length of strand with slightly dislodged wires at one end (Figure 14
through Figure 16). A close-up examination of the wires at the dislodged end showed
indications of wedge engagement and slippage. (Figure 17 through Figure 20). No
additional engagement marks were observed along the remaining length of the strand
sample.
C-1 Sample C-1 was a length of strand with dislodged and bird-caged wires at one end (Figure 21
through Figure 23). A close-up examination of the wires at the dislodged end showed
indications of wedge engagement and slippage (Figure 24 through Figure 27). No additional
engagement marks were observed along the remaining length of the strand sample.
D Sample D was a length of strand attached to a GRABB-IT anchor. The GRABB-IT anchor
was examined with 2D radiography to allow nondestructive documentation of the internal
parts and wedge engagement prior to tensile testing (Figure 28 and Figure 29). The anchor
was sectioned after tensile testing to expose the internals and wedge engagement marks
(Figure 30). Close-up examination of the wires showed discrete wedge teeth engagement
that penetrated through the galvanized layer into the strand metal during the tensile testing
(Figure 31).

Conclusions and Discussion

Based on the tensile test results and sample observations, we have made the following conclusions:
1. Barrier cable Samples A-2, B-2, and C-2 exceeded the ultimate strength requirement of 41,300 pounds
for 1/2-inch diameter, Grade 270, low-relaxation, seven-wire strand according to ASTM A416,
Standard Specification for Low-Relaxation, Seven-Wire Steel Strand for Prestressed Concrete.
However, these samples failed to meet the minimum yield strength requirement of 37,170 pounds,
possibly as a result of the galvanizing process.
2. Sample D with the GRABB-IT anchor failed in the threaded connector prior to strand failure at 37,070
pounds, which is approximately 90 percent of the ultimate strength requirement for the strand. This
failure strength is less than that required by the Post-Tensioning Institute (PTI) in PTI M10.2-17,
Specification for Unbonded Single Strand Tendons and the American Concrete Institute (ACI) in ACI
423.6-01, Specification for Unbonded Single-Strand Tendons and Commentary. PTI requires
anchorages to develop at least 95 percent of the specified tensile strength, and ACI requires anchorages
to develop at least 95 percent of the actual breaking strength of the prestressing steel.
3. The anchor wedge engagement of Sample D was well-defined with discrete tooth marks in the wires
that penetrated the galvanized layer and into the strand metal with no evidence of slippage. This wedge
engagement likely resulted from the tensile test performed.
4. Sample A-1 had indications of anchor wedge engagement that was primarily confined to the galvanized
layer with no indication of slippage.
5. Samples B-1 and C-1 had indications of wedge engagement and slippage that was primarily confined
to the galvanized layer of the wires.
6. There was no indication of additional wedge engagement away from the strand ends in any of the
samples submitted, suggesting that no back stressing operation was performed.

Although Sample D failed below 95 percent of the ultimate strength the strand, the wedges were exposed
to a load that was approximately 10 percent above the specified backstressing load of 80 percent of the
ultimate strength requirement. The wedge engagement in this sample provides a good example of the type
of wedge tooth engagement that can be expected from properly applied back stressing.

Bowmer 001414
 ENGLNEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE AR.CH lTECTS

MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Barrier Cable Investigation
March 23, 2018
Page 4

The limited amount of tooth engagement observed in Sample A-1 and the slippage observed in Samples B-
1 and C-1 suggest that these strand ends did not have properly engaged anchor wedges, likely due to the
absence of a backstressing operation.

Bowmer 001415
 ENGlNEER5 Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHlTECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Barrier Cable Investigation
March 23, 2018
Page 5

Figures

Figure 1. GRABB-IT end anchorage on Sample D.

Bowmer 001416
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATE RIALS SC I ENTI STS
Barrier Cable Investigation
March 23, 2018
Page 6

Figure 2. Threaded end of Sample D, GRABB-IT anchorage at top head of test machine.

Bowmer 001417
 ENGLNEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Barrier Cable Investigation
March 23, 2018
Page 7

--.......
--...
.._

.....
........
-....... ....

.....--....
.--.......
.....
Ila
...•...
......
..
~

.......
~

--
r...
~

--
5,,,-
~

w-
Figure 3. 24-inch extensometer on strand sample.

Bowmer 001418
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATE RIALS SC I ENT! STS
Barrier Cable Investigation
March 23, 2018
Page 8

Figure 4. Failure of seven wires at mid-length. All seven wires failed in the three samples tested. Note
that failure of all seven wires in a strand test is unusual.

Bowmer 001419
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Barrier Cable Investigation
March 23, 2018
Page 9

Figure 5. Typical cup-and-cone ductile failure of wires.

Bowmer 001420
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATE R.IALS SC I ENTI STS
Barrier Cable Investigation
March 23, 2018
Page 10

Figure 6. Sample D failure of GRABB-IT anchor connecting rod.

Bowmer 001421
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE AR.CHITECTS
MATE R.IALS SC I ENTI STS
Barrier Cable Investigation
March 23, 2018
Page 11

1
W)E
'

Figure 7. Sample A-1, overall picture showing as-received section of barrier cable.

Figure 8. Sample A-1, picture showing inside surface of the loose anchor wedge.

Bowmer 001422
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATE RIALS SC I ENTI STS
Barrier Cable Investigation
March 23, 2018
Page 12

Figure 9. Sample A-1, picture showing anchor wedge and remaining portion of grout.

Bowmer 001423
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Barrier Cable Investigation
March 23, 2018
Page 13

I I I I I I I I 'I
5
Figure 10. Sample A-1, picture showing anchor wedge and remaining portion of grout after sample has
been rotated down from view shown in Figure 9.

Bowmer 001424
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATE RIALS SC I ENTI STS
Barrier Cable Investigation
March 23, 2018
Page 14

Figure 11. Sample A-1, picture showing anchor wedge and remaining portion of grout after sample has
been rotated down from view shown in Figure 9.

Bowmer 001425
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE AIKHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Barrier Cable Investigation
March 23, 2018
Page 15

Figure 12. Sample A-1, stereo microscope picture showing wedge engagement and wedge marks (arrows)
on the wire. Note, the sample has been rotated 180 degrees from the orientation shown in Figure 9
through Figure 11.

Bowmer 001426
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Barrier Cable Investigation
March 23, 2018
Page 16

Figure 13. Sample A-1, stereo microscope picture showing wedge engagement and wedge marks on the
wire. The exposed bright metal in some of the wedge marks suggest the galvanized coating has been
penetrated in some areas. This is a higher magnification view of the region shown in Figure 12.

Bowmer 001427
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE AR.CHITECTS
MATE R.IALS SC I ENTI STS
Barrier Cable Investigation
March 23, 2018
Page 17

... .. •• <• •• •• ~-
• • ~ l !t • , • • 1
, ••

Figure 14. Sample B-1, picture showing as-received section of barrier cable.

Figure 15. Sample B-1, picture showing end of barrier cable that exhibited dislodged wires.

Figure 16. Sample B-1, close-up picture from Figure 9 (above) showing end of barrier cable that
exhibited dislodged wires.

Bowmer 001428
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Barrier Cable Investigation
March 23, 2018
Page 18

Figure 17. Sample B-1, close-up view of barrier cable end that shows indications of anchor wedge
engagement and slippage along the length of the wire (arrows).

Bowmer 001429
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Barrier Cable Investigation
March 23, 2018
Page 19

Figure 18. Sample B-1, higher magnification view of barrier cable end that shows indications of anchor
wedge engagement and slippage along the length of the wire (arrows).

Figure 19. Sample B-1, close-up view of barrier cable end that shows indications of anchor wedge
engagement and slippage along the length of the wire (arrows).

Bowmer 001430
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Barrier Cable Investigation
March 23, 2018
Page 20

Figure 20. Sample B-1, higher magnification view of barrier cable end that shows indications of anchor
wedge engagement and slippage along the length of the wire (arrows).

- ..::

Figure 21. Sample C-1, picture showing as-received section of barrier cable.

Bowmer 001431
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE AIKHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Barrier Cable Investigation
March 23, 2018
Page 21

Figure 22. Sample C-1, picture showing end of barrier cable that exhibited dislodged and bird-caged
wires.

Figure 23. Sample C-1, picture showing end of barrier cable that exhibited dislodged and bird-caged
wires. Sample has been rotated down from view shown in Figure 16.

Bowmer 001432
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE AIKHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Barrier Cable Investigation
March 23, 2018
Page 22

Figure 24. Sample C-1, close-up view of barrier cable end that shows indications of anchor wedge
engagement and slippage along the length of the wire (arrows).

Figure 25. Sample C-1, higher magnification view of barrier cable end that shows indications of anchor
wedge engagement and slippage along the length of the wire (arrows).

Bowmer 001433
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Barrier Cable Investigation
March 23, 2018
Page 23

Figure 26. Sample C-1, close-up view of barrier cable end that shows indications of anchor wedge
engagement and slippage along the length of the wire (arrows).

Figure 27. Sample C-1, higher magnification view of barrier cable end that shows indications of anchor
wedge engagement and slippage along the length of the wire (arrows).

Bowmer 001434
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Barrier Cable Investigation
March 23, 2018
Page 24

Figure 28. GRABB-IT anchor on Sample D, 2D radiographic image of anchor showing internal parts and
engagement. See Figure 23 for close-up view of anchor internals.

Bowmer 001435
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Barrier Cable Investigation
March 23, 2018
Page 25

Barrier cable extending

through anchor wedges.
Projection is
approximately 0.15 inch

Anchor wedges

Anchor wedges

Barrier cable

Figure 29. GRABB-IT anchor on Sample D, 2D, close-up radiographic image of anchor showing internal
parts and engagement.

Bowmer 001436
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Barrier Cable Investigation
March 23, 2018
Page 26

Figure 30. GRABB-IT anchor on Sample D, photograph showing anchor wedges and engagement marks
on the wires after tensile testing.

Bowmer 001437
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Barrier Cable Investigation
March 23, 2018
Page 27

Figure 31. GRABB-IT anchor on Sample D, close-up photograph showing anchor wedge engagement
marks on the wires after tensile testing.

Bowmer 001438
 ENGINEERS Littlefield Garage

WJE ARCHITECTS
MATERIALS SCIENTISTS
Barrier Cable Investigation
March 23, 2018
Page 28

APPENDIX A - A2 STRAND 1 PLOT

Bowmer 001439
Exhibit E
 Curtis Brown
January 15, 2019 1
Page 1
·1· · · · · · · · · CAUSE NO. D-1-GN-17-004456

·2· · CHRISTI J. BOWMER,· · · · ·) IN THE DISTRICT COURT

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·)
·3· · · · · · Plaintiff,· · · · ·)
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·)
·4· · vs.· · · · · · · · · · · · ) TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·)
·5· · GTT PARKING, LP, PREMIER· ·)
· · · PARKING OF TENNESSEE,· · · )
·6· · LLC, and WEITZMAN· · · · · )
· · · MANAGEMENT CORPORATION,· · )
·7· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·)
· · · · · · · Defendants.· · · · ) 353RD JUDICIAL DISTRICT
·8

·9· ********************************************************

10· · · · · · · ORAL AND VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF

11· · · · · · · · · · · · ·CURTIS BROWN

12· · · · · · · · · · · ·JANUARY 15, 2019

13· ********************************************************

14· · · ·ORAL AND VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF CURTIS BROWN,

15· produced as a witness at the instance of the PLAINTIFF

16· and duly sworn, was taken in the above-styled and

17· numbered cause on the 15th day of January, 2019, from

18· 10:10 a.m. to 12:36 p.m. before TEENA L. HARMON-DAVIS,

19· a Certified Shorthand Reporter in and for the State of

20· Texas, reported by machine shorthand at the offices of

21· Thompson, Coe, Cousins & Irons, 701 Brazos, Suite 1500,

22· Austin, Texas, pursuant to the Texas Rules of Civil

23· Procedure and/or the provisions stated on the record or

24· attached hereto.

25

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100
 Curtis Brown
January 15, 2019 2 to 5
Page 2 Page 4
·1· · · · · · · · · · A P P E A R A N C E S ·1· EXHIBITS/continued:
·2 ·2· No.· Description· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · Page
· · FOR THE PLAINTIFF: ·3· 69· ·E-mail Chain, Subject: Barrier Cable
·3· · · ·Mr. Sean E. Breen · · · · ·Materials Pricing
· · · · ·HOWRY, BREEN & HERMAN, L.L.P. ·4· · · ·...........................................· 71
·4· · · ·1900 Pearl Street
·5· 70· ·June 27, 2014 Maritech Engineering Due
· · · · ·Austin, Texas· 78705
·5· · · ·sbreen@howrybreen.com · · · · ·Diligence Report
·6· FOR DEFENDANTS GTT PARKING and SHELDON DAVID KAHN: ·6· · · ·...........................................· 75
· · · · ·Ms. Tasha Barnes ·7· 71· ·E-mail Chain with Maritech DD Report,
·7· · · ·THOMPSON, COE, COUSINS & IRONS, LLP · · · · ·Subject: Littlefield Garage Review
· · · · ·701 Brazos, Suite 1500 ·8· · · ·...........................................· 77
·8· · · ·Austin, Texas· 78701 ·9· 72· ·E-mail Chain, Subject: 501 Congress
· · · · ·tbarnes@thompsoncoe.com · · · · ·Submittal 03 30 00-18 - Garage - Barrier
·9 10· · · ·Cable Shop Drawings
· · FOR DEFENDANT PREMIER PARKING OF TENNESSEE, LLC: · · · · ·...........................................· 77
10· · · ·Mr. Christopher L. Rhodes
11
· · · · ·HOLSTEIN & ASSOCIATES
11· · · ·9601 McAllister Freeway, Suite 910 · · 73· ·Barrier Cable Shop Drawings
· · · · ·San Antonio, Texas· 78216 12· · · ·...........................................· 79
12· · · ·crhodes2@travelers.com 13· 74· ·Drawing of Stressing and Back Stressing
· · and- · · · · ·...........................................· 80
13· · · ·Mr. Paul Byron Starr 14
· · · · ·GERMER, BEAMAN & BROWN, PLLC · · 75· ·E-mail from Eric Herron Regarding Setting
14· · · ·301 Congress Avenue, Suite 1700 15· · · ·Up Meeting with CB Construction for Barrier
· · · · ·Austin, Texas· 78701 · · · · ·Cable Replacement
15· · · ·pstarr@germer.com 16· · · ·...........................................· 83
16· FOR DEFENDANT WEITZMAN MANAGEMENT CORPORATION:
17· 76· ·E-mail with Agenda for Kick Off Meeting
· · · · ·Mr. Curtis J. Kurhajec
17· · · ·NAMAN, HOWELL, SMITH & LEE, PLLC · · · · ·...........................................· 87
· · · · ·8310 N. Capital of Texas Highway, Suite 490 18
18· · · ·Austin, Texas· 78731 · · 77· ·7/21/14 Service Contract Between Owner and
· · · · ·ckurhajec@namanhowell.com 19· · · ·Contractor
19 · · · · ·...........................................· 87
· · ALSO PRESENT: 20
20 · · 78· ·August 4, 2014 E-mail from Ryan Johnson to
· · · · ·Mr. Sampson Nguyen 21· · · ·Curtis Brown Re: Needing CB's Website
21· · · ·Mr. Brent Kirby, Videographer · · · · ·Address
22· REPORTED BY:
22· · · ·...........................................· 88
23· · · ·Teena L. Harmon-Davis, TX CSR #4900
· · · · ·U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC. 23· 79· ·E-mail Chain Between Chris Cupina and Eric
24· · · ·701 Brazos, Suite 380 · · · · ·Herron with CB Construction Change Order #1
· · · · ·Austin, Texas· 78701 24· · · ·...........................................· 89
25· · · ·(512) 292-4249 25· · · · · · · · (Continued on following page)

Page 3 Page 5
·1· · · · · · · · · · · · · · INDEX ·1· EXHIBITS/continued:
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · Page ·2· No.· Description· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · Page
·2
·3· 80· ·E-mail Chain Between Curtis Brown and Andy
· · Appearances ....................................· ·2
·3 · · · · ·Kochis Re: Rebar Detectors
· · CURTIS BROWN ·4· · · ·...........................................· 91
·4 ·5· 81· ·E-mail Chain Between Jessica Wright and
· · · · ·Examination by Mr. Breen ..................· ·6
·5 · · · · ·Curtis Brown with Wheel Stop Quote
· · · · ·Examination by Ms. Barnes ................. 102 ·6· · · ·...........................................· 92
·6 ·7· 82· ·E-mail Chain Between Premier Parking and
· · · · ·Examination by Mr. Rhodes ................. 119
· · · · ·Stream Realty, Subject: Curtis Brown
·7
· · Signature and Changes .......................... 125 ·8· · · ·...........................................· 93
·8 ·9· 83· ·G-mail Reminder Re: 10/10/14 Punch List
· · Reporter's Certificate ......................... 127 · · · · ·Meeting
·9
10· · · ·...........................................· 96
10· · · · · · · · · · · · · EXHIBITS
11· No.· Description· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · Page 11· 84· ·E-mail from Eric Herron to Curtis Brown
12· 63· ·Photographs · · · · ·Re: CB Construction Punch List
· · · · ·...........................................· 42 12· · · ·...........................................· 97
13
· · 64· ·E-mail Chain Between Premier Parking, 13· 85· ·News Article Regarding Theft from Parking
14· · · ·Stream Realty, and Structural Technologies, · · · · ·Meters
· · · · ·Subject: Barrier Cable Repair 14· · · ·...........................................· 97
15· · · ·...........................................· 49 15· 86· ·(Not marked)
16· 65· ·E-mail Chain Between Curtis Brown and Andy
· · · · ·Kochis with Pictures of GRABB-IT and Barrel 16· 87· ·(Not marked)
17· · · ·Anchors 17· 88· ·(Not marked)
· · · · ·...........................................· 55 18· 89· ·E-mail Chain Between Christina Murray and
18
· · · · ·Blue Construction, Subject: Littlefield
· · 66· ·E-mail Chain Between Stream Realty and
19· · · ·Michael Donoghue, Subject: Littlefield 19· · · ·Garage Cable Wires
· · · · ·Garage Barriers · · · · ·...........................................· 99
20· · · ·...........................................· 64 20
21· 67· ·E-mail from Curtis Brown to Eric Herron
21
· · · · ·with Proposal
22· · · ·...........................................· 70 22
23· 68· ·E-mails from Bryan Rust, Subject: 1/2" EHS 23
· · · · ·Guy Wire, and Material 24
24· · · ·...........................................· 70
25· · · · · · · · (Continued on following page) 25

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Curtis Brown
January 15, 2019 6 to 9
Page 6 Page 8
·1· · · · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· This is the videotaped ·1· · · ·A.· ·North Texas, construction of all shape, forms,
·2· oral deposition of Curtis Brown.· Today's date, ·2· and fashion.· I built apartment complexes when I was
·3· January 15, 2019; the approximate time, 10:10 a.m.· We're ·3· young, houses, transferred, started working on
·4· recording and on the record. ·4· communication towers.· I built radio and TV towers,
·5· · · · · · · · · · · · CURTIS BROWN, ·5· serviced radio and TV towers for about 15 years, traveled
·6· having been first duly sworn, testified as follows: ·6· all over the nation doing that.· After that I got into
·7· · · · · · · · · · · · ·EXAMINATION ·7· building floating structures, and I've done a number of
·8· BY MR. BREEN: ·8· projects around the lakes that are -- that are known,
·9· · · ·Q.· ·Good morning, sir.· Would you state your name ·9· so --
10· for the record, please. 10· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Some of those, for example, would be
11· · · ·A.· ·Curtis Wayne Brown. 11· what, Mr. Brown?
12· · · ·Q.· ·Mr. Brown, my name is Sean Breen.· I represent 12· · · ·A.· ·I built a house -- a three-story -- a
13· Christi Bowmer.· Ms. Bowmer was injured when her car went 13· two-story, three-bedroom house on Lake Travis that's the
14· through the vehicle restraint system on the seventh floor 14· only one that's allowed.· It's grandfathered and it's
15· of the Littlefield Garage and she plunged seven floors 15· pretty unique.
16· down to the ground.· Do you understand who I am and who 16· · · ·Q.· ·Is that Mickey Redwine's house?
17· I represent? 17· · · ·A.· ·I'm sorry?
18· · · ·A.· ·Yes. 18· · · ·Q.· ·Mickey Redwine?
19· · · ·Q.· ·You've been kind enough to show up here for 19· · · ·A.· ·No.· This is --
20· your deposition this morning.· Do you roughly understand 20· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.
21· what a deposition is? 21· · · ·A.· ·-- Rick Durepos.
22· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.· You're just trying to find the truth. 22· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· Where is that on the lake?
23· · · ·Q.· ·Yes, sir, that's exactly right. 23· · · ·A.· ·It's on -- it's up by Jonestown Park.· And it's
24· · · ·A.· ·Okay. 24· been there -- I built that in, I think, '98.· Well, maybe
25· · · ·Q.· ·This process is being recorded by video and in 25· not.· Maybe it -- it was 2000, somewhere around there.

Page 7 Page 9
·1· a booklet, and it can be played to the jury just as if we ·1· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.
·2· were sitting over there in the courthouse at the time of ·2· · · ·A.· ·But anyway --
·3· trial, okay? ·3· · · ·Q.· ·And so how long have you been in the Central
·4· · · ·A.· ·Okay. ·4· Texas area?
·5· · · ·Q.· ·If you don't mind, a few agreements.· If, for ·5· · · ·A.· ·I moved here in '89 --
·6· some reason, you don't understand one of my questions or ·6· · · ·Q.· ·And then --
·7· one of these other good lawyers' questions will you just ·7· · · ·A.· ·-- from North Texas.
·8· let us know at the time? ·8· · · ·Q.· ·Did you start a business in '89 here in Central
·9· · · ·A.· ·Yes. ·9· Texas?
10· · · ·Q.· ·If you can just let us finish our question 10· · · ·A.· ·I was building and servicing radio and TV
11· before you start your answer, we'll let you finish your 11· towers at the time.
12· answer, and that way we have a clean booklet, all right? 12· · · ·Q.· ·And then when did you then begin to do the lake
13· · · ·A.· ·Yes. 13· work?
14· · · ·Q.· ·If you answer with a yes or a no or an 14· · · ·A.· ·That would have been in about '95, I think is
15· explanation instead of a nod of the head, that's better 15· when I started working on the first structures.
16· because then we have a clear record, all right? 16· · · ·Q.· ·And did you have a business, Mr. Brown, or just
17· · · ·A.· ·Yes. 17· do it as yourself or what did you do?
18· · · ·Q.· ·If you need a break at any time just let us 18· · · ·A.· ·No, it was a business.
19· know.· As long as we're not in the middle of a question 19· · · ·Q.· ·What was it called?
20· or an answer we'll take a break, and then we'll all get 20· · · ·A.· ·That one was On The Water Systems, was the name
21· back together, all right? 21· of that business.
22· · · ·A.· ·Yes. 22· · · ·Q.· ·And did On The Water Systems have anything to
23· · · ·Q.· ·Could you tell me just a little bit about your 23· do with, for instance, doing vehicle restraint systems in
24· personal background, where you grew up and your work 24· parking garages?
25· history. 25· · · ·A.· ·No.

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Curtis Brown
January 15, 2019
Page 10
·1· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· After On The Water Systems what was ·1· · · ·A.· ·It was me, and I had one partner at the time.
·2· your company or work history?
·3· · · ·A.· ·Again it was -- it was mainly floating
·4· structures and securing floating structures, you know,
·5· which involves cabling and things.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·Yes, sir.· On Lake Travis in particular they
·7· have anchors that use cables to keep the docks in place?
·8· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·And did you receive any kind of special
10· training in anchoring or cabling?
11· · · ·A.· ·Just years of experience.
12· · · ·Q.· ·Your experience with the radio towers is what
13· you primarily relied upon?
14· · · ·A.· ·That was a different type of cable.· That
15· was -- that was called a -- I've got to go back to my
16· memory now.· There's -- there's different styles.· That's
17· a one by seven cable similar to barrier cables, has the
18· same -- the same kind of strengths and needs.
19· · · · · · · · ·(Cell phone interruption)
20· · · ·Q.· ·Is that your telephone?
21· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.
22· · · ·Q.· ·Do you need to keep that on?· If not, maybe we
23· can turn it off.
24· · · ·A.· ·No.· Let me turn it off.
25· · · ·Q.· ·Yes, sir.
10 to 13
Page 12
·2· · · ·Q.· ·Who was that?
·3· · · ·A.· ·William J. Maddux.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·And then how long did Trader Bay stay open?
·5· · · ·A.· ·I think we -- we parted company on that one in
·6· 2000 or 2001, somewhere in there.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.
·8· · · ·A.· ·So just a couple of years.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·And what company then did you open?
10· · · ·A.· ·I went for a number of years without any
11· companies.
12· · · ·Q.· ·What were you doing --
13· · · ·A.· ·And then --
14· · · ·Q.· ·-- in that time frame?
15· · · ·A.· ·Just odds and ends, working on some repair work
16· to structures, both floating and fixed, and just
17· different things.
18· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And how long were you doing odds and
19· ends, from 2001 to when?
20· · · ·A.· ·I'm not really sure.· I don't remember. I
21· formed Curtis Brown Construction somewhere in that
22· timeline, within -- within a five-year period of closing
23· down Trader Bay.
24· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· So maybe sometime around 2006?
25· · · ·A.· ·That sounds about right.

Page 11 Page 13
·1· · · ·A.· ·I just forgot about it. ·1· · · ·Q.· ·And then what did you do with Curtis Brown
·2· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· After the On The Water Systems did you ·2· Construction?
·3· have any other businesses in Central Texas from '95 up to ·3· · · ·A.· ·It sat idle for a good amount of time.· I set
·4· 2014 that you were involved with? ·4· it up for a particular project, and I don't even remember
·5· · · ·A.· ·No.· It was mainly on -- it was -- On The Water ·5· what that was, and then it laid idle, and then I picked
·6· Systems closed, and then we started another construction ·6· it back up and -- and actually set up accounts and
·7· company.· I couldn't get away from construction. ·7· started it.· And I don't remember what the first job was.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· When was that? ·8· But it was the company that we were -- I was using
·9· · · ·A.· ·That would have had to have been '98, I think, ·9· whenever I did the work on the barrier cable.
10· when we -- 10· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· So sometime around the 2014 time
11· · · ·Q.· ·Did -- when you say it closed, did it go 11· frame you recall you were contacted by somebody at
12· bankrupt? 12· Stream Realty about doing work on a barrier cable system
13· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.· We -- we hit some pretty rough times. 13· at Littlefield Garage?
14· It was -- it was -- 14· · · ·A.· ·Doing repair work was what I was asked to do.
15· · · ·Q.· ·Yes, sir.· And then after '98 what did you 15· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· And I'll get to that in a second.
16· restart as? 16· What I want to do is kind of do an overview, sort of a
17· · · ·A.· ·Trader Bay, I think was the name of the -- of 17· bird's-eye view of the -- of the scenario first, and then
18· the company.· We actually started one that was specific 18· I'll get down to some specifics with you.
19· to Lake Travis, and we had more -- more clients to keep 19· · · ·A.· ·Okay.
20· us going. 20· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· And you and I have visited a couple
21· · · ·Q.· ·And what was the nature of Trader Bay?· What 21· of times on the telephone, but not really about the
22· did y'all do? 22· specifics of what you did; is that true?
23· · · ·A.· ·Again it was floating structures. 23· · · ·A.· ·True.
24· · · ·Q.· ·Who all was involved in that?· When you say 24· · · ·Q.· ·And when I called you up I identified myself to
25· "we," who is that? 25· you and I simply asked you some questions and then asked

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Curtis Brown
January 15, 2019 14 to 17
Page 14 Page 16
·1· you to give me the documents that you had related to the ·1· in some repair on a cable barrier system; is that right?
·2· Littlefield Garage, right? ·2· · · ·A.· ·If I would be interested in looking at it.
·3· · · ·A.· ·True. ·3· That's correct.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·And did you provide those to me? ·4· · · ·Q.· ·Who was that that called you?
·5· · · ·A.· ·Yes. ·5· · · ·A.· ·That was Eric Herron.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·Provide all of them to me? ·6· · · ·Q.· ·And were you related somehow to Mr. Herron?
·7· · · ·A.· ·Best of my knowledge. ·7· · · ·A.· ·He's my son-in-law.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·If any of the lawyers here had picked up the ·8· · · ·Q.· ·Was he your son-in-law in 2014?
·9· phone and called you and asked you to have those ·9· · · ·A.· ·I think -- yeah.· That was the year they got
10· documents would you have sent them to them? 10· married, I think.
11· · · ·A.· ·Sure. 11· · · ·Q.· ·If -- if not actually, he was close to being
12· · · ·Q.· ·If at any time before, say, July of 2017 12· your --
13· somebody from Stream or Premier Parking had picked up the 13· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
14· phone and called you and asked you to give your documents 14· · · ·Q.· ·-- son-in-law?
15· to them or to visit with them about the repairs you did 15· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
16· in the garage would you have told them? 16· · · ·Q.· ·And your daughter's name?
17· · · ·A.· ·Absolutely. 17· · · ·A.· ·Is Kelly.
18· · · ·Q.· ·Would you have been honest? 18· · · ·Q.· ·Kelly.· All right.· So Mr. Herron certainly was
19· · · ·A.· ·Sure. 19· familiar with your background.
20· · · ·Q.· ·Would you have answered their questions? 20· · · ·A.· ·Absolutely.
21· · · ·A.· ·Absolutely. 21· · · ·Q.· ·And Mr. Herron was familiar with the fact that
22· · · ·Q.· ·If they had concerns about things that weren't, 22· you hadn't designed, installed, or repaired cable barrier
23· they thought, repaired properly would you have talked 23· systems in a parking garage before, true?
24· with them and addressed that with them? 24· · · ·A.· ·That's true.
25· · · ·A.· ·Everything was inspected after the -- after the 25· · · ·Q.· ·And at the time you understood that Stream or

Page 15
·1· construction was completed.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·I understand that.· But if somebody had called
·3· you after you completed the construction did you have
·4· anything to hide?
·5· · · ·A.· ·No.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·You'd have been transparent and told them
·7· what -- what you did and what you were asked to do?
·8· · · ·A.· ·Absolutely.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·Now, back in 2014, before you did the repairs
10· on the Littlefield Garage did you have any experience
11· designing a cable barrier system?
12· · · ·A.· ·No.
13· · · ·Q.· ·Did you have any experience installing a cable
14· barrier system?
15· · · ·A.· ·No.· But it -- but it's cable, and I had worked
16· with a tremendous amount of cable in my life.
17· · · ·Q.· ·Fair enough.· But let's -- for right -- these
18· purposes let's ask about garage work.· Had you ever
19· installed cable barriers on a parking garage before?
20· · · ·A.· ·No.
21· · · ·Q.· ·Had you ever repaired cable barriers on a
22· parking garage before?
23· · · ·A.· ·No.
24· · · ·Q.· ·You got a call from somebody at Stream Realty
25· in 2014 asking if you could take a look and be involved
Page 17
·1· entities affiliated with Stream were the owner of the
·2· garage, right?
·3· · · ·A.· ·That's true.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·And that Premier Parking was the manager of the
·5· garage.
·6· · · ·A.· ·I learned that after I started the project.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·Did you learn after you started the project
·8· that Premier Parking was the property manager for Stream?
·9· · · ·A.· ·Yes, I understood.
10· · · ·Q.· ·And did that involve you working with a woman
11· by the name of Jessica Wright?
12· · · ·A.· ·It did.
13· · · ·Q.· ·Did you ever meet a gentleman by the name of
14· Bob Chapman?
15· · · ·A.· ·Sounds familiar.
16· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Did you ever meet a gentleman by the
17· name of Ryan Hunt of Premier?
18· · · ·A.· ·Don't remember, no.
19· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· So your primary contact would have
20· been through Premier with Jessica Wright.
21· · · ·A.· ·True.
22· · · ·Q.· ·And Ms. Wright and Premier had an office there
23· in the Littlefield Garage, right?
24· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
25· · · ·Q.· ·And did you see her essentially on a daily

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Curtis Brown
January 15, 2019 18 to 21
Page 18 Page 20
·1· basis while you were at the garage? ·1· been extremely improperly installed.· They had -- this
·2· · · ·A.· ·Yes. ·2· cable, you have to understand, is extremely rigid.· It
·3· · · ·Q.· ·So from your perspective was there any reason ·3· doesn't like to bend.· And there were a number of
·4· you believed that Ms. Wright and Premier didn't know what ·4· instances where they had literally taken that cable and
·5· you were doing? ·5· run it through an eye and bent it back and used cable
·6· · · ·A.· ·No.· I mean, they -- we worked together daily. ·6· clamps, which was ridiculous.· There were many cables
·7· I mean, we had to shut down areas of the garage to be ·7· that were down on the ground.· As we got into it, the
·8· able to -- and it was a critical thing.· You know, it's ·8· reason it got to be such an extreme amount of work was
·9· parking space, making money. ·9· because the rotting that was going on inside of the
10· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Who did you interface the most with on 10· columns.· When we started pulling those apart and looking
11· behalf of Stream? 11· at them they were in -- I mean, they were going to fail.
12· · · ·A.· ·Probably Eric.· I mean, it was just -- and you 12· Some of them failed, just rotted out and fell on the
13· have the e-mails. 13· ground.· So we repaired all those things.
14· · · ·Q.· ·Yes, sir. 14· · · ·Q.· ·And that condition was -- when you first walked
15· · · ·A.· ·All the conversations we've had. 15· onto the premises in 2014 you noticed this?
16· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Other than Mr. Herron, was there anybody 16· · · ·A.· ·Some of the things were visual that you could
17· else that was the primary interface for you with Stream? 17· see.· The other things we had to take apart to realize
18· · · ·A.· ·No. 18· that there was more problems than we had originally
19· · · ·Q.· ·Other than Ms. Wright, was there anybody else 19· looked at.
20· that was the primary interface with you with Premier? 20· · · ·Q.· ·Now, when, from a sort of bird's-eye view, you
21· · · ·A.· ·No. 21· were given instructions about the project did -- after
22· · · ·Q.· ·Now, from your dealings with Premier was 22· giving the instructions did you have a pre-construction
23· Premier present, for instance, when you did walk-throughs 23· meeting that involved the owner and the property manager?
24· of the building? 24· · · ·A.· ·I don't remember the property manager,
25· · · ·A.· ·I believe so.· It was one of the partners. I 25· honestly, but -- but definitely with Stream to -- to give

Page 19 Page 21
·1· cannot remember who.· We did some -- ·1· my estimation of what we had to do.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·Was it a man? ·2· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· One of the e-mails you and I will look
·3· · · ·A.· ·We did some additional work after that.· I did ·3· at here in a minute has an agenda with a pre-construction
·4· all the exterior cladding on that building -- I'd never ·4· meeting, and included on it has a list of names.· That
·5· done that before -- and it turned out beautiful. ·5· would be the --
·6· Everybody loves it.· So just because I haven't done ·6· · · ·A.· ·Okay.
·7· something one time doesn't mean I'm not capable. ·7· · · ·Q.· ·-- best place for us to look?
·8· · · ·Q.· ·Yes, sir.· I understand.· And that was the ·8· · · ·A.· ·Absolutely.
·9· philosophy you had coming in to doing the vehicle ·9· · · ·Q.· ·During the construction did you interface daily
10· repairs? 10· with the owner and the property manager?
11· · · ·A.· ·I'd never built a two-story floating house 11· · · ·A.· ·Yeah, the property manager for sure.· I didn't
12· before I built the one, so -- 12· interface daily with the -- with the owner.
13· · · ·Q.· ·So in terms of the vehicle barrier system, this 13· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· During the punch list walk-through did
14· was the first time you'd ever done a repair on one, but 14· you do that with the owner and the property manager?
15· you felt competent? 15· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
16· · · ·A.· ·Absolutely.· I walked through it, inspected it, 16· · · ·Q.· ·And you said you did some work afterwards on
17· and found other things that made it more extreme than 17· the exterior cladding; is that right?
18· what we had originally looked at.· It -- you've seen the 18· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh.
19· photographs. 19· · · ·Q.· ·Yes?
20· · · ·Q.· ·Yes, sir. 20· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
21· · · ·A.· ·They were rough.· It was pretty rough when we 21· · · ·Q.· ·And is that the sort of trellis-looking work
22· repaired it. 22· that's on the outer part of the west side of the garage?
23· · · ·Q.· ·How would you describe the condition of the 23· · · ·A.· ·On both -- on three sides of the --
24· cable system when you first got on the premises in 2014? 24· · · ·Q.· ·On three sides.
25· · · ·A.· ·Terrible.· I mean, there were cables that had 25· · · ·A.· ·-- the garage.

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Curtis Brown
January 15, 2019
Page 22
·1· · · ·Q.· ·Just give me a brief rundown of what that was ·1· · · ·Q.· ·And I take it neither the owner nor the
·2· all about and your involvement.
·3· · · ·A.· ·It was changing the aesthetics of the building
·4· to improve the look of it.· It is -- was pretty rough on
·5· the outside, and they wanted something that would clean
·6· it up, and so I came up with that design, and they liked
·7· it, and so we built it and installed it.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·Now, in terms of the work that you were doing
·9· in the garage, was that work approved by the owner and
10· the property manager?
11· · · ·A.· ·Which -- which work?
12· · · ·Q.· ·The work from the day you started the cable --
13· · · ·A.· ·All of it.
14· · · ·Q.· ·-- repair.
15· · · ·A.· ·Anything I did on that building was approved.
16· · · ·Q.· ·Did you hide any of the things that you were
17· doing?
18· · · ·A.· ·Absolutely not.
19· · · ·Q.· ·Was the work you were doing open and
20· transparent?
21· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
22· · · ·Q.· ·Did you take your instructions and directions
23· on the global scope of the project from the owner and the
24· property manager?
25· · · ·A.· ·Not really.· They said, "Fix it."
Page 23
·1· · · ·Q.· ·All right.
·2· · · ·A.· ·And that was -- that was up to me to -- what
·3· that involved.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·And did you bounce off of the owner and
·5· property manager what you intended to do?
·6· · · ·A.· ·If there was something that came up it would be
·7· in the e-mails.· If there was a concern I would've -- I
·8· would've e-mailed so I had documentation that I
·9· contacted.
10· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· And once the project was over did
11· they look at it, approve it, accept it, and thank you for
12· it?
13· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
14· · · ·Q.· ·Now, did the owner or the property manager ever
15· ask you to bring the cable barrier system up to code?
16· · · ·A.· ·No.
17· · · ·Q.· ·At the time is it fair to say that you didn't
18· even know what the code required?· Isn't that true?
19· · · ·A.· ·No, I was pretty well aware that four inch on
20· center is pretty much code for that because of other
21· handrails and things I'd done in -- you know, over time.
22· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Well, other than four inch on center,
23· was there anything else about the IBC or any other
24· building code you knew of?
25· · · ·A.· ·No.
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
22 to 25
Page 24
·2· property manager ever asked you to look at the code,
·3· right?
·4· · · ·A.· ·No.· It was a repair job.· It was not meant to
·5· be an upgrade job.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·You didn't ever intend for what you were doing
·7· to bring the system up to code; is that true?
·8· · · ·A.· ·That's true.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·And no one ever asked you to bring it up to
10· code; is that true?
11· · · ·A.· ·That is true.
12· · · ·Q.· ·And both the owner and the property manager
13· knew you weren't bringing it up to code; isn't that true?
14· · · ·A.· ·That is true.
15· · · ·Q.· ·Now, did you know at the time you started that
16· at least two engineers had declined to work on the
17· project because it wasn't being brought up to code?
18· · · ·A.· ·I wasn't aware of that.
19· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· So Premier and the owners never
20· told you about engineers who had declined to work on the
21· project unless it was brought up to code?
22· · · ·A.· ·No.
23· · · ·Q.· ·In terms of the specifics, for instance, of the
24· 1976 Uniform Building Code, is it fair to say that you
25· don't know those now and you didn't know those then?
Page 25
·1· · · ·A.· ·That is correct.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·In terms of the specifics of the 2012
·3· International Existing Building Code, is it fair to say
·4· you didn't know those then and you don't know them now?
·5· · · ·A.· ·I did not.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And in terms of the 2012 International
·7· Building Code and ASCE 7-10, is it fair to say you didn't
·8· know those then and didn't know -- and don't know them
·9· now?
10· · · ·A.· ·That's correct.
11· · · ·Q.· ·And in terms of any of those requirements, the
12· owner or the property manager never asked you to bring
13· the building up to those requirements, true?
14· · · ·A.· ·That's true.
15· · · ·Q.· ·Now, were you ever told by the owner or the
16· property manager to bring the cable barrier system up to
17· the standard of care?
18· · · ·A.· ·I would -- I feel like that's true because
19· that's what I was in there to do was to bring it up to
20· where it -- it was functional.
21· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Difference between functional and
22· standard of care, so let me differentiate for you.
23· · · · · · · · ·Do you even know what the standard of care
24· is for a garage owner to have a vehicle barrier system?
25· · · ·A.· ·No.
YVer1f
 Curtis Brown
January 15, 2019 26 to 29
Page 26 Page 28
·1· · · ·Q.· ·Did anybody from Stream ever ask you:· Curtis, ·1· · · ·Q.· ·And I take it the property manager and the
·2· bring this system up to the standard of care? ·2· owner knew what you were doing.· Right?
·3· · · ·A.· ·No. ·3· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·Did Premier ever ask you:· Curtis, bring this ·4· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.
·5· up to the standard of care? ·5· · · ·A.· ·I mean --
·6· · · ·A.· ·No. ·6· · · ·Q.· ·Now --
·7· · · ·Q.· ·Did you ever indicate to the owner or the ·7· · · ·A.· ·Well, again, they trusted me to do the right
·8· property manager that you knew what the standard of care ·8· thing.
·9· was? ·9· · · ·Q.· ·I understand.
10· · · ·A.· ·No. 10· · · ·A.· ·So --
11· · · ·Q.· ·Now, in terms of some other specifics, did the 11· · · ·Q.· ·They trusted you to follow the instructions
12· owner or the property manager ever ask you to use the PTI 12· they gave you, right?
13· Post-Tensioning Manual and guide specifications? 13· · · ·A.· ·That's correct.
14· · · ·A.· ·No. 14· · · ·Q.· ·Said to repair the system.
15· · · ·Q.· ·And you didn't use those, did you? 15· · · ·A.· ·Repair the system.
16· · · ·A.· ·Well, we -- what -- what we did -- there was an 16· · · ·Q.· ·But not to bring it up to standard of care or
17· engineer that was involved, and because we could not find 17· the code.
18· the structural records of the -- of the building, we -- 18· · · ·A.· ·Repair the system.
19· we went down to about 1,000 psi of tension on the cables 19· · · ·Q.· ·Now, who was it that you talked with that told
20· where normally you would pull more, but it was because we 20· you how to use the tensioner that y'all rented?
21· did not know the structural integrity of the building. 21· · · ·A.· ·I'd have to go back to the e-mails and the
22· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· So in terms of either with the engineer 22· contact information.
23· or with the property manager or with the owner, did any 23· · · ·Q.· ·Fair enough.· We'll look at those in a sec.
24· of those three ever ask you to use the PTI 24· · · ·A.· ·Okay.
25· Post-Tensioning Manual and guide specification? 25· · · ·Q.· ·And the tension that you determined, this
Page 27 Page 29
·1· · · ·A.· ·No. ·1· 1,000 psi, how did you determine to use that amount of
·2· · · ·Q.· ·Did you, in your work, compare what you did to ·2· tension?
·3· the PTI Post-Tensioning Manual and guide specification? ·3· · · ·A.· ·It was a safe number for the amount of cables
·4· · · ·A.· ·No. ·4· that we were pulling on.· We knew we wouldn't do any
·5· · · ·Q.· ·Did you compare what that calls for in terms of ·5· structural damage at that -- at that level.
·6· cable anchorage or cable capacity to what you did? ·6· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And in terms of utilizing the tensioner
·7· · · ·A.· ·What I did is I went to the company that -- ·7· that you rented, did it come with instructions or were
·8· that manufactures or -- or sells barrier cable.· I talked ·8· these just verbal instructions given to y'all?
·9· to them extensively about every aspect of it, including ·9· · · ·A.· ·Verbal instructions.
10· the GRABB-ITs, the connecting points, everything about 10· · · ·Q.· ·And was there a certain process that you were
11· tensioning, rented a tensioner from them.· We test -- the 11· going to follow in order to use the tensioner?
12· tensioner was tested so that we knew everything was 12· · · ·A.· ·Absolutely.
13· accurate, and that's what I used to pull the tension on 13· · · ·Q.· ·Can you describe that for us?
14· the cables. 14· · · ·A.· ·We would set one end, and then on the -- on the
15· · · ·Q.· ·And had you ever tensioned cables in a vehicle 15· opposite side of it you had to set the tensioner on it to
16· restraint system before? 16· lock the -- the -- the wedges into the GRABB-IT, and then
17· · · ·A.· ·No.· But that -- I asked the questions:· What 17· you'd go to the other end and you'd tension up and you'd
18· do I need to do to make this thing work right? 18· do the same thing.· You'd lock both sides.
19· · · ·Q.· ·And the person who rented you the tensioner 19· · · ·Q.· ·And was this from where in relation to the
20· told you what to do? 20· cable, on the outside of the columns or in the columns or
21· · · ·A.· ·Absolutely. 21· what?
22· · · ·Q.· ·Did you use anybody in the process that was 22· · · ·A.· ·It was -- no.· It was on the outside.· The way
23· actually trained specifically in tensioning cables for 23· the GRABB-ITs work is you feed the cable through the
24· vehicle restraint systems? 24· column and through a tube that's about two inches in
25· · · ·A.· ·No. 25· diameter with a tapered shaft inside.

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Curtis Brown
January 15, 2019
Page 30
·1· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.
·2· · · ·A.· ·It has a series of three wedges that go into
·3· that tapered area, so when you pull you use the -- the
·4· hydraulic tensioner goes against those wedges, and as you ·4· repairs that Stream was involved with or contemplating
·5· pull the cable through it's applying pressure to the
·6· wedges to lock, and that's how the system works.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·And I take it, then, from your testimony that
·8· during this process where you were using the rented
·9· tensioner you weren't referring to the PTI guide and
10· specifications about, for instance, intricacies
11· associated with the proper installation of barrier cable
12· systems.
13· · · ·A.· ·No.
14· · · ·Q.· ·And did you know that there are requirements of
15· contractor certification as a PTI-certified installer of
16· unbonded post-tensioning cable in garage systems?
17· · · ·A.· ·No.
18· · · ·Q.· ·I take it nobody on your team, including you,
19· was PTI-certified.· Is that true?
20· · · ·A.· ·That's true.
21· · · ·Q.· ·And was there anybody on your team that had
22· actually before used appropriate means and methods of
23· a vehicle restraint system in a garage on this job in
24· Littlefield?
25· · · ·A.· ·No.
30 to 33
Page 32
·1· project, you finished the job, the punch list was done?
·2· · · ·A.· ·No.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·Did you know at the time you were doing the
·5· selling the garage?
·6· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·Who told you that?
·8· · · ·A.· ·Eric.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·And what did Mr. Herron tell you about that?
10· · · ·A.· ·Not much.· They had the whole block up for
11· sale, as I understand it.
12· · · ·Q.· ·And did Mr. Herron indicate to you that's part
13· of the reason why you were doing the work on the garage?
14· · · ·A.· ·No.· It was because there was a need.· It
15· was -- it was unsafe, and he wanted to make it safe.
16· · · ·Q.· ·Did Mr. Herron indicate to you who had told him
17· it was unsafe?
18· · · ·A.· ·He parked in the garage every day, so it was
19· obvious.· I mean, when you see cables laying on the
20· ground that are supposed to be tensioned up to -- to
21· prevent cars and they -- apparently in the past they had
22· had cars drive through barriers in the inside of the
23· garage, so --
24· · · ·Q.· ·Tell me what you know about that.
25· · · ·A.· ·-- yeah, he wanted to fix that.· Well, he

Page 31 Page 33
·1· · · ·Q.· ·Did you do anchorage back-stressing with the ·1· just -- he said, "We need to make this safe."
·2· rented system you had? ·2· · · ·Q.· ·Tell me what you know about cars driving
·3· · · ·A.· ·That's what I just explained.· That is ·3· through the barrier cables before you did your work.
·4· back-stressing. ·4· · · ·A.· ·Just -- I mean, it -- it was just conversation.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·You call that back-stressing? ·5· He was saying that it had happened a couple of times
·6· · · ·A.· ·Yeah. ·6· where they had -- where they had driven through the
·7· · · ·Q.· ·And did you just explain for me the process ·7· internal barrier cables and -- so anyway, he was just
·8· that you guys used in back-stressing any of the cables? ·8· wanting to make it safe.
·9· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.· I mean, once you tension it up you lock ·9· · · ·Q.· ·Did he tell you when that had happened?
10· the wedges in by applying reverse pressure to them.· You 10· · · ·A.· ·No.· I don't remember.
11· pull the cable through the wedge, and that sets the 11· · · ·Q.· ·Did he tell you that it had happened when --
12· wedges, and then you put -- on the other side you apply 12· for instance, in the year or two before the time you were
13· pressure, tension the cable against the column, and that 13· doing your work?
14· sets the wedges tighter. 14· · · ·A.· ·Again, I don't remember, no.
15· · · ·Q.· ·Did you or the property manager or the owner 15· · · ·Q.· ·Did he tell you who was involved with doing any
16· ever look to see what the either code, standard of care, 16· repairs?
17· or other document showed was the minimal final effective 17· · · ·A.· ·No.
18· force in regard to the tensions of the cables? 18· · · ·Q.· ·Could you see --
19· · · ·A.· ·No. 19· · · ·A.· ·As I understood it -- and this is my
20· · · ·Q.· ·Now, you finished the cable barrier system 20· assumption.· It was the guys that do maintenance for the
21· repair sometime in the fall of 2014; is that right? 21· buildings and things that were actually doing the repair,
22· · · ·A.· ·Sounds right. 22· and that's why they were pretty haphazard.
23· · · ·Q.· ·And did you have any type of contact or 23· · · ·Q.· ·Meaning the -- the people that work for
24· involvement with either the owner or the property manager 24· Premier?
25· about the barrier restraint system after y'all walked the 25· · · ·A.· ·No.· It was before.· I mean, this was old

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Curtis Brown
January 15, 2019 34 to 37
Page 34 Page 36
·1· stuff.· Some of these cables were -- had not been ·1· 2015 there were any potential buyers of the garage?
·2· repaired in years. ·2· · · ·A.· ·Again, no.· That's not my business.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·So -- ·3· · · ·Q.· ·Did you ever hear about or have contact with
·4· · · ·A.· ·And it was before Premier, I think. ·4· anybody from GTT, the entity that now owns the garage?
·5· · · ·Q.· ·When you looked at the cable system in doing ·5· · · ·A.· ·No.
·6· your work to repair it was it evident to you that repairs ·6· · · ·Q.· ·Now, between July of 2015 and September of 2015
·7· had been done since 1980 when the garage opened? ·7· did you have any kind of contact from, for instance, the
·8· · · ·A.· ·Yes. ·8· new owners, GTT, about work you had done in the garage?
·9· · · ·Q.· ·Could you tell how many? ·9· · · ·A.· ·No.
10· · · ·A.· ·I mean, I sent you pictures of everything I 10· · · ·Q.· ·Did Premier, the property manager that was the
11· had. 11· same property manager for Stream as it was for the new
12· · · ·Q.· ·Okay. 12· owner, did they ever contact you in that time frame?
13· · · ·A.· ·I might not have documented every single thing, 13· · · ·A.· ·No.
14· but I tried to document the -- the worst of the damage. 14· · · ·Q.· ·If they had would you have provided any
15· · · ·Q.· ·So if we looked at the pictures we would be 15· information they requested?
16· able to tell from your view what previously may have been 16· · · ·A.· ·Sure.
17· repaired? 17· · · ·Q.· ·Now, did you hear in September of 2016 that a
18· · · ·A.· ·Yes. 18· car had gone through the barrier cables, but had tangled
19· · · ·Q.· ·Now, before July of 2015 -- okay?· So that's -- 19· up near the ninth floor and not fallen to the ground?
20· right?· You finish up in the fall of 2014, right? 20· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
21· · · ·A.· ·(Nods head) 21· · · ·Q.· ·Who told you that?
22· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· So are you with me -- 22· · · ·A.· ·The news.
23· · · ·A.· ·Yes. 23· · · ·Q.· ·You saw it on the news?
24· · · ·Q.· ·-- on the time frame? 24· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.
25· · · ·A.· ·Okay. 25· · · ·Q.· ·Did anybody from Stream call you after that

Page 35
·1· · · ·Q.· ·Before July of 2015 did anyone ever contact you
·2· with questions, for instance, about potential buyers,
·3· information potential buyers wanted to know, anything --
·4· · · ·A.· ·No.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·-- like that?
·6· · · ·A.· ·No.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·If a potential buyer had contacted you and
·8· asked you what you had done to the barrier system would
·9· you have told them?
10· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
11· · · ·A.· ·Sure.
12· · · ·Q.· ·Would you have given them all the information
13· you shared with us in this case if they asked for it?
14· · · ·A.· ·Absolutely.
15· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
16· · · ·Q.· ·What was your answer?
17· · · ·A.· ·(No response)
18· · · ·Q.· ·Let me ask the question, because there was an
19· objection.
20· · · ·A.· ·Okay.· I'm sorry.
21· · · ·Q.· ·If you had been asked by a potential buyer for
22· your file like I asked you for it would you have given it
23· to them?
24· · · ·A.· ·Sure.
25· · · ·Q.· ·Did you know in the time frame of summer of
Page 37
·1· incident occurred?
·2· · · ·A.· ·Sure.· I talked to Eric about it.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·Tell me what you remember about that.
·4· · · ·A.· ·We were just talking about how the car was hung
·5· up in the cables and -- and there wasn't anything more
·6· than that.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· In that time frame did anybody from
·8· the then current owner, GTT, call you about what you had
·9· done on the building?
10· · · ·A.· ·No.
11· · · ·Q.· ·If they had would you have withheld any
12· information from them?
13· · · ·A.· ·No.
14· · · ·Q.· ·Did the property manager, Premier, after the
15· incident in September of 2016 with Mr. O'Connor, call you
16· about anything to do with the barrier system?
17· · · ·A.· ·No.
18· · · ·Q.· ·If they had would you have withheld any
19· information from them?
20· · · ·A.· ·No.
21· · · ·Q.· ·Did you see any of the footage that showed the
22· car dangling off of the garage?
23· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
24· · · ·Q.· ·Did anybody from the city or any other safety
25· governmental institution call you about your work at that

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Curtis Brown
January 15, 2019 38 to 41
Page 38 Page 40
·1· time? ·1· my son-in-law there was brief conversation, "Did you" --
·2· · · ·A.· ·No. ·2· I think at dinner one night he asked me, "Did you see
·3· · · ·Q.· ·Now, if, in the time frame right after ·3· that?"· And I said, "Yeah, I seen it on the news."· And
·4· Mr. O'Connor's accident, somebody called you and asked ·4· so that was about the extent of that.
·5· you if you had brought the garage up to code when you did ·5· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· So did anybody, for instance, from
·6· your repairs what would you have answered? ·6· Premier contact you after Ms. Bowmer went off the garage
·7· · · ·A.· ·No. ·7· to ask you about what you had done out there?
·8· · · ·Q.· ·If they called and asked whether you had been ·8· · · ·A.· ·No.
·9· asked to bring the garage up to the standard of care ·9· · · ·Q.· ·When is the last time, sir, you were actually
10· would you tell them what you've already told us in this 10· in the garage there at Littlefield?
11· deposition? 11· · · ·A.· ·I went up probably -- it might have been as
12· · · ·A.· ·Absolutely. 12· little as three months ago.· I was downtown and I was
13· · · ·Q.· ·You weren't asked to do that and you didn't do 13· curious and I just wanted -- wanted to see what had --
14· that. 14· what improvements -- what had been done.
15· · · ·A.· ·It was never -- it was never my job 15· · · ·Q.· ·What did you see?
16· description. 16· · · ·A.· ·I seen a different connection system where
17· · · ·Q.· ·Now, in between Mr. O'Connor's incident there's 17· they'd anchored to the post a different way and had
18· a time period before July of 2017 when Ms. Bowmer went 18· the -- up to code.
19· off the garage, okay?· Did you hear about Ms. Bowmer 19· · · ·Q.· ·And you weren't asked to do that, were you?
20· going off the garage? 20· · · ·A.· ·No.
21· · · ·A.· ·Absolutely. 21· · · ·Q.· ·That's not something that was ever even on your
22· · · ·Q.· ·How did you hear about that? 22· radar to do back in the summer of 2014, was it?
23· · · ·A.· ·The news. 23· · · ·A.· ·No.
24· · · ·Q.· ·And what were your thoughts when you heard 24· · · ·Q.· ·Did you ever discuss with either Premier or the
25· about a second car now had gone off the garage? 25· owner, Stream, your capabilities of doing something like

Page 39 Page 41
·1· · · ·A.· ·That -- I -- it was just -- it -- it astounds ·1· that?
·2· me that that could happen.· There's -- there's wheel ·2· · · ·A.· ·No.
·3· stops.· I mean, the -- the speed -- the -- the way that ·3· · · ·Q.· ·Are you okay?· You need a break or anything?
·4· had to happen -- you know, I think another thing -- ·4· · · ·A.· ·No.
·5· just -- just to kind of give a perspective of what ·5· · · ·Q.· ·You good to go forward?
·6· happened, in 1980 when they originally built the garage ·6· · · ·A.· ·Sure.
·7· the cars were much more blunt-nosed.· There was -- there ·7· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Everybody okay?· We need a
·8· was not the problem that you have now with the -- the ·8· break?
·9· aerodynamics of cars are one of the things, I think, go ·9· · · · · · · · ·MR. KURHAJEC:· Let's take five.
10· through the cables and spread the cables where you don't 10· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Okay.
11· have that, and that's the reason for closer cabling, and 11· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Well, in 15 minutes we have
12· I understand that, so -- 12· to take a break probably because of the salute.· They're
13· · · ·Q.· ·Did you take that in consideration when you did 13· doing a 19-gun salute.
14· your repairs? 14· · · · · · · · ·MR. KURHAJEC:· I can make it 15 minutes.
15· · · ·A.· ·My job was to repair what was existing. 15· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· You good?· You need my
16· · · ·Q.· ·So your intent wasn't to try to take into 16· deposition catheter?
17· consideration any type of engineering or safety 17· · · · · · · · ·MR. KURHAJEC:· I'm just squirming.
18· principles; it was simply to repair what was existing. 18· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Okay.
19· · · ·A.· ·It was repair what -- what was existing. 19· · · · · · · · ·MR. RHODES:· Get Depends.
20· · · ·Q.· ·That's what you were asked, and you did what 20· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Fifteen more minutes, and when
21· you were asked. 21· the guns start we'll take a little break there, okay?
22· · · ·A.· ·I did what I was asked. 22· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· That's fine.
23· · · ·Q.· ·Now, did anybody from Premier call you after 23· BY MR. BREEN:
24· Ms. Bowmer's car went off the garage? 24· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· So when I was visiting with you
25· · · ·A.· ·No.· Again, there -- you know, because Eric is 25· a little while ago we talked about the fact that I was

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Curtis Brown
January 15, 2019 42 to 45
Page 42 Page 44
·1· going to start from the top and then move to some ·1· around and clamped it.· And that's -- that was one of the
·2· documents, so I just want to move -- try to move through ·2· things that was -- as you'll see in the other pictures,
·3· efficiently with you a few documents, okay? ·3· that was done a number of times in the building.
·4· · · ·A.· ·Sure. ·4· · · ·Q.· ·Now, these cables look to be highly rusted.· Is
·5· · · · · · · · ·(Exhibit No. 63 marked) ·5· that accurate?
·6· · · ·Q.· ·You were kind enough, as part of your file, to ·6· · · ·A.· ·Extremely.
·7· produce photographs that I've marked as Exhibit now 63. ·7· · · ·Q.· ·And are they extremely degraded?
·8· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh. ·8· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·And in your photographs, Mr. Brown, they were ·9· · · ·Q.· ·And are they essentially worthless?
10· digital, so they were -- they had time dates on the 10· · · ·A.· ·Absolutely.
11· properties. 11· · · ·Q.· ·You have heard the phrase "like a hot knife
12· · · ·A.· ·Sure. 12· through butter"?
13· · · ·Q.· ·Right? 13· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh.
14· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir. 14· · · ·Q.· ·Would that accurately describe about what good
15· · · ·Q.· ·So what I've done is just taken the liberty of 15· these cables would do if something passed through them?
16· organizing them in terms of the dates.· You see that down 16· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.· They wouldn't do any good.
17· there on the bottom? 17· · · ·Q.· ·Exhibit 3 -- pardon me.· It's not Exhibit 3.
18· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir. 18· It's from Exhibit 63, page 3.
19· · · ·Q.· ·And it looked like there was three or four 19· · · ·A.· ·Okay.
20· groups.· One group was taken June 22, 2014; is that 20· · · ·Q.· ·What is that?
21· right? 21· · · ·A.· ·Again this is cables missing and just -- and
22· · · ·A.· ·Yeah, that's what -- I mean, I -- 22· just poorly attached.
23· · · ·Q.· ·If that's what the time stamps say? 23· · · ·Q.· ·Picture 4, the next page, what is that?
24· · · ·A.· ·Yeah. 24· · · ·A.· ·It appears to be a rusted-out -- that's where
25· · · ·Q.· ·All right. 25· one of the cables had completely rusted in two inside of

Page 43
·1· · · ·A.· ·I wouldn't argue with it.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·Another group had a time stamp of August 4th of
·3· 2014.· Do you see those?
·4· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·Yes?
·6· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·And then there was another group at August 17.
·8· · · ·A.· ·Okay.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·A group at August 22, okay?
10· · · ·A.· ·Okay.
11· · · ·Q.· ·And what was the purpose of you taking these
12· photographs?
13· · · ·A.· ·I just document things occasionally.
14· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· Let's try to efficiently look at
15· Exhibit 63.· Let's start with the first one from June 22
16· at CB 0002.
17· · · ·A.· ·Okay.
18· · · ·Q.· ·See that there's a number in the bottom
19· right-hand corner?
20· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
21· · · ·Q.· ·Could you describe for the jury what we're
22· looking at in that picture, CB 0002.
23· · · ·A.· ·Well, you're looking at -- you're -- the --
24· the -- what I was talking about earlier where they just
25· ran the -- the barrier cable through and bent it back
Page 45
·1· the column.· And that was -- that caused us to have to
·2· penetrate the column.· I bought special equipment that
·3· could see inside and see where the rebar was so we could
·4· miss any structural internals on the column so we could
·5· be able to penetrate the column and put another --
·6· another cable in.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·Page 5, what is -- what are we looking at
·8· there?
·9· · · ·A.· ·Again just -- just -- you can see the rust
10· running down, you know, from where the cables were.· And
11· that was the concern where I started pulling some of the
12· ones that were still tensioned to check them and found
13· that they were rotted inside of the columns.
14· · · ·Q.· ·Look at Bates CB 0006 with me.
15· · · ·A.· ·Okay.
16· · · ·Q.· ·There seems to be several sheets of plywood
17· that are put up in Exhibit -- in page 6 of Exhibit 63.
18· Do you see that?
19· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.· That was just a barrier for the
20· construction that was going on next door.
21· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· So are there cables on the other side of
22· that?
23· · · ·A.· ·No.
24· · · ·Q.· ·So there are no cables where the plywood is?
25· · · ·A.· ·I have to think about that.· I'm not sure

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Curtis Brown
January 15, 2019
Page 46
·1· exactly what direction we're looking.· There could have ·1· · · ·A.· ·I did.· We blew them and brushed them and --
·2· been.· Yeah, there were.· That was the alley side.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·That's the west side of it?
·4· · · ·A.· ·I apologize.· Yeah, that was the alley side.
·5· There were cables behind that.· In fact, we had to remove
·6· plywood at the -- at the post to be able to pull new
·7· cables through.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·Whose plywood was that?
·9· · · ·A.· ·Again, I don't know if it was the construction
10· that was going on next door that -- that drove that or --
11· I don't know.· It was there.
12· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Now, the next group are pictures that
13· were taken on August 4.
14· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh.
15· · · ·Q.· ·See that cluster?· It goes CB 0007 through
16· CB 0016.
17· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh.
18· · · ·Q.· ·Yes?
19· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
20· · · ·Q.· ·And these, I take it, are pictures that you
21· took on August 4 that show conditions in the garage.
22· · · ·A.· ·That's correct.
23· · · ·Q.· ·And what was your purpose for taking these?
24· · · ·A.· ·Again, I just documented everything that --
25· that I felt like needed to be replaced.
Page 47
·1· · · ·Q.· ·The next cluster is from August 17.· It's a few
·2· pages that start at CB 0023.· I take it, again, you're
·3· just documenting various conditions in the garage?
·4· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·And is there any particular reason why you took
·6· these pictures on the dates that are listed here?
·7· · · ·A.· ·None.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·And then the final cluster is August 22.
·9· That's the last several pages of the exhibit.· Likewise,
10· these are just conditions that you're documenting?
11· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
12· · · ·Q.· ·Would you look at 0017 with me there on
13· August 22?
14· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
15· · · ·Q.· ·What does that show us?
16· · · ·A.· ·What I was doing was rigging up -- I built a
17· mechanism to pull the rotted cable out.· A lot of times
18· when the GRABB-IT on one side -- it would rot in the
19· wall, and I'd have just enough of a piece that I could
20· build a special piece -- a special piece of equipment to
21· get ahold of it, and I used the tensioner to retract it,
22· to pull it out of the wall.· That was the only way I
23· could get it clear.
24· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· And did you put new cables in the
25· same holes where you extracted the old cables?
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
46 to 49
Page 48
·2· and cleaned the holes and then put new cables in them.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·What are we looking at in 0019 from August 22?
·4· · · ·A.· ·That is the tensioner.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·And who is using that?
·6· · · ·A.· ·I'm not sure which one of my hands.· I can't
·7· tell by that -- that picture, but --
·8· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· And whichever hand it was, as you
·9· indicated before, it would have been somebody who wasn't
10· specifically trained in using the tensioner.· Is that
11· accurate?
12· · · ·A.· ·Well, again, in that -- in that -- what you're
13· seeing there is not us tensioning new cable; it's
14· retracting -- extracting old cable.
15· · · ·Q.· ·Got you.· So you were actually using the
16· tensioner to -- to get the old cable out before you put
17· the new cable in.
18· · · ·A.· ·That's correct.
19· · · ·Q.· ·Now, if you look at 0021, CB 0021, again is
20· this a picture of a typical state of most of the cabling
21· that was in the garage when you began your work?
22· · · ·A.· ·A good part of it.· That was why -- that's why
23· it became as extreme as it did.
24· · · ·Q.· ·And in page 0022 there, the last picture, what
25· do we see?· What's going on there, somebody working on
Page 49
·1· extraction still?
·2· · · ·A.· ·Yeah, or it could even be -- we had to chip out
·3· the mortar.· These things were -- when you finish them
·4· you -- you go back in with a grout, a non-shrink grout,
·5· and you cover them, so in some cases we were -- you know,
·6· in all cases we had to break that out to be able to get
·7· to the -- to the GRABB-IT or the connecting point.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·And again, you were doing this based on your
·9· years of experience with cable projects other than
10· garages.· Is that accurate?
11· · · ·A.· ·That would be accurate.
12· · · ·Q.· ·Yes, sir.· Thank you so much.· What we'll do is
13· we'll just create a stack here --
14· · · ·A.· ·Okay.
15· · · ·Q.· ·-- at the front, and you don't have to mess
16· with them.· They'll just sit there.
17· · · · · · · · ·(Exhibit No. 64 marked)
18· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· Let me show you 64, which
19· previously also -- I apologize, but -- has been marked as
20· Exhibit 58 in the case, but sometimes I have senior
21· moments.
22· · · · · · · · ·Okay.· This is an e-mail, sir, from
23· April 25th of 2014 and it is Ms. Jessica Wright from
24· Premier Parking exchanging e-mails with an engineering
25· group, Structural Tech, VSL Structural.· Were you ever
YVer1f
 Curtis Brown
January 15, 2019 50 to 53
Page 50 Page 52
·1· made aware of communications between the parking garage ·1· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·2· manager and engineering -- an engineering group, VSL ·2· · · ·Q.· ·And that, unfortunately, modifications cannot
·3· Structural? ·3· be made to a system out of compliance without bringing
·4· · · ·A.· ·No. ·4· the whole system up to code.· Do you see that?
·5· · · ·Q.· ·Did you know or were you ever told by Jessica ·5· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·6· or her superiors, Bob or Ryan Hunt, who are on this ·6· · · ·Q.· ·Did anybody from Premier ever indicate to you
·7· e-mail, that they had coordinated and met with an ·7· that they had met with an engineering group, Structural
·8· engineer from VSL about what they describe as broken, ·8· Technologies, that specifically told them modifications
·9· corroded, and loose cables throughout the nine levels? ·9· couldn't be made to the system out of compliance without
10· · · ·A.· ·Not to my -- I don't remember that. 10· bringing the whole system up to code?
11· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And her description of cables presently 11· · · ·A.· ·I was not aware of it.
12· in place that are broken, corroded, and loose throughout 12· · · ·Q.· ·And do you see where it says:· "Knowing the
13· the nine levels, do you believe that's accurate? 13· severity of the garage's current condition, VSL will not
14· · · ·A.· ·Absolutely. 14· be able to perform your requested modifications"?
15· · · ·Q.· ·Any person who walked the garage in ten minutes 15· · · ·A.· ·I see it.
16· or less could have noticed that; isn't that true? 16· · · ·Q.· ·Did anybody from Premier ever divulge to you
17· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir. 17· that the Structural Technologies VSL group had indicated
18· · · ·Q.· ·So, for instance, if somebody from Premier were 18· to them that because of the severity of the current
19· to testify that they inspected the garage and it was fine 19· condition they were declining to perform the requested
20· and there were no problems with the cables, what would 20· modifications?
21· your reaction be to that? 21· · · ·A.· ·Not to my knowledge.
22· · · ·A.· ·That that would be incorrect. 22· · · ·Q.· ·See where it says:· "Should you and your team
23· · · ·Q.· ·Let me show you what's been marked already as 23· reconsider bringing the barrier cable system up to code,
24· Exhibit 59 in this case.· You see here where Ms. Wright 24· in turn making your garage safe, please let us know"?
25· is indicating that she and Bob from Premier are meeting 25· See that?

Page 51 Page 53
·1· with VSL Structural at 1:30 to walk the Littlefield ·1· · · ·A.· ·Where is that?
·2· Garage.· See that? ·2· · · ·Q.· ·It's the last sentence before "Best regards."
·3· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh. ·3· · · ·A.· ·Oh, yeah.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·By May 1st of 2014 had you been contacted or ·4· · · ·Q.· ·See that there where it says:· "If you
·5· involved in any way with the garage? ·5· reconsider bringing the barrier system up to code, in
·6· · · ·A.· ·No.· I don't remember the exact date I became ·6· turn making your garage safe, please let us know"?
·7· involved, but I don't think it was that early. ·7· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Let me show you Exhibit 60, which is a ·8· · · ·Q.· ·Did anybody from Premier ever divulge to you
·9· continuation of that e-mail exchange.· And do you see in ·9· that they had been told by an engineering group that if
10· the middle where Mr. Bob Chapman, the vice president of 10· they reconsidered bringing the barrier cable system up to
11· Premier, indicates that they only want to replace the 11· code, in turn making the garage safe, then the
12· loose and missing cables per the owner's direction? 12· engineering group would be involved?
13· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh. 13· · · ·A.· ·No.
14· · · ·Q.· ·Yes? 14· · · ·Q.· ·Let me show you Exhibit 62.· 62 is just a
15· · · ·A.· ·Yes. 15· continuation, Mr. Brown, of that chain where it shows
16· · · ·Q.· ·And is that similar to what the direction was 16· Ms. Wright and Bob, the vice president at Premier,
17· to you as well? 17· discussing what they should do with that engineering
18· · · ·A.· ·Yes. 18· information and indicating that it should be passed on to
19· · · ·Q.· ·Let me show you Exhibit 61 in the case, which 19· Stream.· Do you see that?· It says:· "What should I do --
20· is an e-mail back from Structural Technologies to 20· say to this?· Should I forward it on to Lance?"
21· Ms. Wright and the vice president, Bob, at Premier.· And 21· Obviously, Lance Sallis.· You know Lance Sallis, right?
22· do you see where in this e-mail the Structural 22· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
23· Technologies VSL person indicates that in order to repair 23· · · ·Q.· ·He was with Stream?
24· only those cables that are laying on the ground or 24· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
25· missing altogether, modifications would need to be made? 25· · · ·Q.· ·And the vice president indicates that, yes, the

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Curtis Brown
January 15, 2019 54 to 57
Page 54 Page 56
·1· Premier person, Jessica Wright, should forward the VSL ·1· Ready Cable.
·2· information on to Lance Sallis, right? ·2· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· What is the gist of what's going on
·3· · · ·A.· ·Yes. ·3· in Exhibit 65?
·4· · · ·Q.· ·And did Mr. Sallis or anybody at Stream ever ·4· · · ·A.· ·He's talking about -- that was where I was
·5· indicate to you that, in fact, Ms. Wright had passed on ·5· asking him -- I was unfamiliar with garages and wanted to
·6· the VSL information to them? ·6· make sure I did it right, so I just contacted him to find
·7· · · ·A.· ·No. ·7· out the correct ways of doing it.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·Let me show you Exhibit 46.· And there's some ·8· · · ·Q.· ·Fair enough.· And Mr. Herron is included on
·9· pictures on the back of Exhibit 46.· Would you mind just ·9· this?
10· taking a quick look at those?· See how Exhibit 46 has 10· · · ·A.· ·I'm not sure if Eric was in on this one or not.
11· pictures that show loose cables and cables laying on the 11· · · ·Q.· ·Well, he's on the second page there.
12· ground? 12· · · ·A.· ·Okay.
13· · · ·A.· ·Yes. 13· · · ·Q.· ·On 34.
14· · · ·Q.· ·May I have that back for one second from you? 14· · · ·A.· ·Okay.
15· · · ·A.· ·Yeah, here you go. 15· · · ·Q.· ·He's copied, at any rate.
16· · · ·Q.· ·Thank you, Mr. Brown.· Were you aware that in 16· · · ·A.· ·Yeah, I probably copied him on these things.
17· late May of 2014 the owner of the property had requested, 17· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· And Mr. Herron was certainly
18· among other places, help from Harvey-Cleary in doing some 18· familiar that you didn't have experience with these type
19· spot repairs on cables and cable problems in the garage? 19· of things in a parking garage, right?
20· · · ·A.· ·I wasn't aware of that. 20· · · ·A.· ·In a parking garage.· But I had extensive
21· · · ·Q.· ·Do you know folks from Harvey-Cleary? 21· experience with -- with cable.
22· · · ·A.· ·I did one other little, small project for them 22· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· Had you used male GRABB-ITs like
23· on Fifth Street as far as a railing, but other than that 23· the ones in Exhibit 65 before?
24· I don't really know any of them. 24· · · ·A.· ·No.· We used dead-end grips on -- on the
25· · · ·Q.· ·Okay. 25· majority of what we did.

Page 55
·1· · · · · · · · ·(Exhibit No. 65 marked)
·2· · · ·Q.· ·Let me show you Exhibit 65.
·3· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·Yes, sir, I know it's a little bit small.
·5· · · ·A.· ·I should have brought my glasses.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·Do you need some glasses?· I'd give you mine,
·7· but I'm actually talking and I need them to read them
·8· too.
·9· · · · · · · · ·MR. KURHAJEC:· Here.
10· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Thank you.
11· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Oh, thank you.
12· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Weitzman specializes in
13· glasses.
14· BY MR. BREEN:
15· · · ·Q.· ·I think -- Exhibit 65 to me appeared to be the
16· first e-mail in your file relating to the garage.· Does
17· that sound about right to you, that that was about the
18· time frame that you first were contacted, or at least
19· close to it, about working in the garage?
20· · · ·A.· ·Seems right.
21· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And in this there is some communications
22· between you and Andy at readycable.net.
23· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
24· · · ·Q.· ·Who is that?
25· · · ·A.· ·He was one of the salesmen/engineers with
Page 57
·1· · · ·Q.· ·Had you used barrel anchors like in Exhibit 65?
·2· · · ·A.· ·No.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·Had you used the intermediate barrel anchors
·4· like on Exhibit 65?
·5· · · ·A.· ·No.
·6· · · · · · · · ·MR. KURHAJEC:· Sean, when you get to a
·7· good stopping point --
·8· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Let's take a break.
·9· · · · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· We're off the record,
10· 11:04.
11· · · · · · · · ·(Recess from 11:04 a.m. to 11:11 a.m.)
12· · · · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· This is segment number
13· 2.· Back on the record, 11:11.
14· BY MR. BREEN:
15· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· Mr. Brown, we're back on the
16· record.· Let me show you what has already been marked as
17· Exhibit 47, which is out of your file, that's
18· Bates-stamped CB 0030, 0031, and 0032, okay?· So it's
19· e-mails out of your file, and these e-mails -- it looks
20· like they have to do with the Littlefield Garage
21· barriers, this string does, and it is from Monday,
22· June 16 to -- well, the whole day, it looks like, or at
23· least a good portion of the day, all right?· So up on the
24· top part here there's a Michael Donoghue,
25· D-O-N-O-G-H-U-E, from Maritech Engineering.· Do you see

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Curtis Brown
January 15, 2019
Page 58
·1· that?
·2· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·Do you remember Mr. Donoghue?
·4· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·Am I saying his name right?
·6· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·So Maritech Engineering was an engineering
·8· group that had been called out to the garage.· Did you
·9· understand that?
10· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
11· · · ·Q.· ·And what did you understand that Maritech's
12· role was?
13· · · ·A.· ·To determine the structural integrity of the
14· building so we'd know how to do the repairs correctly.
15· · · ·Q.· ·Did they actually do the plans for you?
16· · · ·A.· ·No.
17· · · ·Q.· ·Did they actually give you any specs or
18· drawings or, you know, diagrams, sheets, anything that
19· would indicate to you how to do what the repair was you
20· were attempting to do?
21· · · ·A.· ·Not that I remember.
22· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· In this e-mail, Exhibit 47, we see up
23· there Mr. Donoghue is e-mailing Mr. Herron and you're
24· copied on it.· Do you see that at the top of the page
25· at --
58 to 61
Page 60
·1· and he, "saw in a ten-minute tour there are definitely
·2· numerous basic safety issues to be addressed regarding
·3· the vehicle barriers."· Do you agree with that?
·4· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·"Looking at the current IBC code, there are
·6· also potential pedestrian and guardrail issues," is what
·7· he says.· I take it based on your testimony that,
·8· obviously, at the time you weren't asked to and you did
·9· not look at the IBC code.· True?
10· · · ·A.· ·True.
11· · · ·Q.· ·He goes on to note the absence of structural
12· documents only compounds the issues most likely and that
13· during the phone call he suggested the best place to
14· start in formulating some kind of approach is the
15· conduct -- is the conduct of a survey of the existing
16· conditions and then to visit with the owner about
17· assessing the goals.· Do you see that, that I just read?
18· · · ·A.· ·Show me where that is.
19· · · ·Q.· ·Middle -- middle paragraph right here.
20· · · ·A.· ·Oh, okay.
21· · · ·Q.· ·Right?
22· · · ·A.· ·I lost you.· Yeah.
23· · · ·Q.· ·That's all right.· So basically this
24· Maritech Engineering guy was talking about after this
25· cursory visit where all these basic safety issues were

Page 59 Page 61
·1· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh. ·1· noted, as you've talked about, he was going to get with
·2· · · ·Q.· ·-- 9:46 on June 16? ·2· the owner to assess the owner's goals, right?
·3· · · ·A.· ·Yes. ·3· · · ·A.· ·Correct.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·And it appears as if Mr. Herron had reached out ·4· · · ·Q.· ·And you knew that, right?
·5· to him by telephone and then Mr. Donoghue went and made a ·5· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·6· visit to the property with you.· Do you recall that? ·6· · · ·Q.· ·And he talks about that the owner had expressed
·7· · · ·A.· ·Yes. ·7· objectives and constraints.· And you were aware that
·8· · · ·Q.· ·He says:· "As you know, Curtis Brown and I made ·8· that's what the owner had expressed to you as well,
·9· a quick cursory visit to the above," referring to the ·9· right?
10· Littlefield Garage. 10· · · ·A.· ·It was to do repairs.
11· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh. 11· · · ·Q.· ·Right.· Constraints meaning you weren't
12· · · ·Q.· ·You do remember that? 12· bringing it up to code or the standard of care.· It was
13· · · ·A.· ·Yes. 13· just do repairs the best you could.
14· · · ·Q.· ·And then:· "Curtis sent a link of the available 14· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
15· drawings," meaning you sent Mr. Donoghue whatever 15· · · ·Q.· ·Now, the next part of the Exhibit 47, down
16· drawings were available? 16· below it, is at 9:56, so it's about ten minutes later,
17· · · ·A.· ·That's correct. 17· and Mr. Herron is responding back to him.· Do you see
18· · · ·Q.· ·He describes them as sparse and including no 18· that?
19· structural information.· Is that accurate? 19· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
20· · · ·A.· ·Yes. 20· · · ·Q.· ·And Mr. Herron notes that he needs to push the
21· · · ·Q.· ·So you didn't have any type of structural 21· solution ahead as quickly as possible.· Did Mr. Herron
22· drawings and you only really had sparse sort of 22· tell that to you as well?
23· schematics of the building? 23· · · ·A.· ·No.
24· · · ·A.· ·That's correct. 24· · · ·Q.· ·Mr. Herron indicates that the intent is not to
25· · · ·Q.· ·And he says:· "Based on what we," meaning you 25· bring the garage up to current code, but to make repairs

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Curtis Brown
January 15, 2019
Page 62
·1· to the existing cable railing to bring it back to the
·2· condition it was in when it was new, right?
·3· · · ·A.· ·Yes.· That was my understanding.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· But you didn't have any structural
·5· drawings or any other information or the code to know
·6· what it was like when it was new; isn't that true?
·7· · · ·A.· ·Well, I mean, to me I understood it to mean to
·8· use existing holes where the cables were originally
·9· attached.
10· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· That's what your instructions were from
11· the owner is use the original holes and put new cable in?
12· · · ·A.· ·No.· Because we had to -- there were -- there
13· were -- like I said earlier, there were instances where
14· the cable had rusted and we had no way to get it out of
15· those -- out of those holes, so we had to drill new
16· holes.· I bought a special piece of equipment that --
17· that could see inside of the columns so we would make
18· sure that we missed structural steel.
19· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.
20· · · ·A.· ·So I had a clear path.
21· · · ·Q.· ·Now, Mr. Herron then says:· "The existing
22· building code allows for repair of building elements
23· without being bound by current code requirements."· Do
24· you see that?
25· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh.
Page 63
·1· · · ·Q.· ·Is that what Mr. Herron told you?
·2· · · ·A.· ·He just told me to repair it.· I didn't get
·3· into the details, to my memory, of anything like that.
·4· It was just, "Repair it."
·5· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· So in terms of discussing whether
·6· or not it was ethical or permitted to do the repairs you
·7· were doing without bringing it up to the code, you were
·8· never told or discussed any of that with Mr. Herron or
·9· the Maritech engineer?
10· · · ·A.· ·No.
11· · · ·Q.· ·And, for instance, I showed you the e-mail
12· before from VSL where VSL clearly indicated that they
13· weren't going to be involved unless it was brought up to
14· code, right?
15· · · ·A.· ·Right.
16· · · ·Q.· ·And that was never told to you, was it?
17· · · ·A.· ·No.
18· · · ·Q.· ·Now, if you go to the next page, Mr. Donoghue
19· replies back to Mr. Herron and he says:· "Thank you for
20· your reply.· It's a relief not dealing with current
21· requirements, not to mention the standard of care.· They
22· are onerous."
23· · · ·A.· ·Okay.
24· · · ·Q.· ·You see that?
25· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
62 to 65
Page 64
·1· · · ·Q.· ·And you were copied on that, right?
·2· · · ·A.· ·I think so.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·So it was crystal clear as of June 16 that the
·4· owner was going to proceed and it was not going to be
·5· brought up to code, not going to be brought up to the
·6· standard of care.· Instead, the repairs that you had
·7· talked about is what was going to be done, right?
·8· · · ·A.· ·That's my understanding, yes.· Done with
·9· that -- that section?
10· · · ·Q.· ·Yes, sir.· Thank you very much.
11· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
12· · · · · · · · ·(Exhibit No. 66 marked)
13· · · ·Q.· ·Let me show you Exhibit 66.
14· · · ·A.· ·Okay.
15· · · ·Q.· ·Exhibit 66 is a June 18 e-mail from
16· Mr. Donoghue to Eric Herron that is following up about
17· the visit and -- following your inspection.· Do you see
18· that?
19· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh.
20· · · ·Q.· ·Yes?
21· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
22· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· If you go to the second page, you
23· and I have already looked -- and I think you'll recognize
24· there on the second page where Mr. Donoghue is remarking
25· that he's relieved not dealing with current requirements,
Page 65
·1· not to mention the standard of care.· Do you see that?
·2· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·Do you recall any specific discussions with
·4· Mister -- Mr. Donoghue about either the standard of care
·5· or the building code requirements?
·6· · · ·A.· ·If there was conversation it was brief and I
·7· don't remember it.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·Fair enough.· Let me show you what's been
·9· marked as Exhibit 55 in the case.
10· · · ·A.· ·Okay.
11· · · ·Q.· ·Again, Exhibit 55 is from Mr. Herron at
12· Stream Realty on June 23 and it deals with the Donoghue
13· inspection and work.· Do you see that?
14· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh.
15· · · ·Q.· ·Yes?
16· · · ·A.· ·Inspection -- hang on a second.
17· · · ·Q.· ·Do you recall you and I just looked at the
18· e-mails that showed that he was out there with you?
19· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
20· · · ·Q.· ·He indicated he was going to do some type of
21· letter or report for Stream based on what he had seen
22· with you.· You remember --
23· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
24· · · ·Q.· ·-- that?
25· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
YVer1f
 Curtis Brown
January 15, 2019 66 to 69
Page 66 Page 68
·1· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And then that's what this e-mail is with ·1· stand spaces at approximately 12 inches do exist, but
·2· his report attached to it in Exhibit 55. ·2· have fallen into disrepair to the extent that they offer
·3· · · ·A.· ·Okay. ·3· little, if any, hope of vehicle restraint and in several
·4· · · ·Q.· ·Do you see that? ·4· cases virtually no pedestrian safety.· Do you see that?
·5· · · ·A.· ·Yes. ·5· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·Was this report ever given to you? ·6· · · ·Q.· ·I take it from your inspection you agree with
·7· · · ·A.· ·I think it was. ·7· that.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Now, Mr. Donoghue notes on June 23 at ·8· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·9· 8:45 a.m. -- ·9· · · ·Q.· ·And he notes that the garage doesn't meet the
10· · · ·A.· ·Okay.· Where are you? 10· code or the standard of care.· See that?
11· · · ·Q.· ·I'm at the bottom of his e-mail here on page -- 11· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
12· what's Bates-labeled 0062. 12· · · ·Q.· ·Do you agree with that?
13· · · ·A.· ·Okay. 13· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
14· · · ·Q.· ·So he's writing to Mr. Herron. 14· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Would you go to page -- the Bates is
15· · · ·A.· ·Okay. 15· 109, which is page 3 of 4 on the letter.· You see it in
16· · · ·Q.· ·It's on the first page. 16· the bottom right-hand corner?
17· · · ·A.· ·Okay. 17· · · ·A.· ·Okay.· 3 of 4.· Okay.
18· · · ·Q.· ·And he's indicating that he is -- has some -- 18· · · ·Q.· ·So in this engineering report, in the project
19· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Strike that. 19· assessment part it says:· "We understand the owner
20· · · ·Q.· ·He notes the most he thinks is reasonable for 20· intends to only restore the vehicle barrier system to a
21· an engineer to do is a report on the status of the 21· tolerable state of safety and mitigate the perceived risk
22· structure and maybe look for other things that may not be 22· existing currently.· As we have stated, Maritech will not
23· obvious.· Do you see that? 23· be of benefit to the owner in that effort."· Do you see
24· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh. 24· that?
25· · · ·Q.· ·Yes? 25· · · ·A.· ·Yes.

Page 67
·1· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·Were you ever part of the discussions with
·3· Mr. Donoghue and Eric Herron about the limited role
·4· Maritech Engineering was going to play with the owner of
·5· the building at that time?
·6· · · ·A.· ·Yes.· I understood that he was going to write
·7· a report, is all he was doing.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And what was your understanding, just
·9· write a report?
10· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.· Just a recommendation based on what
11· information he had as far as structural drawings and
12· things that could help figure out what we needed to do.
13· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And you see that that June 23 report is
14· attached to the e-mail?
15· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
16· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And in it, among other things,
17· Mr. Donoghue indicates in the first paragraph that the
18· intent of the project is the remediation of the
19· dilapidated vehicle barrier components in the garage.
20· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
21· · · ·Q.· ·And you think dilapidated is a fair word, do
22· you not?
23· · · ·A.· ·Absolutely.
24· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· He notes on the bottom of the page there
25· that some nominal barriers in the form of stressed wire
Page 69
·1· · · ·Q.· ·And did you understand that at the time, that
·2· the owner had chosen to not use Maritech in that regard?
·3· · · ·A.· ·That was my understanding.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·And under the remediation it notes that
·5· Maritech Engineering will not be able to participate in
·6· any design of remedial measures related to the vehicle
·7· barrier systems in the building or the development of
·8· structural documentation for the project beyond
·9· incidental details that add to the marginal safety in the
10· structure on a case by case basis.· See where it says
11· that?
12· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
13· · · ·Q.· ·And, in fact, that's what happened, is it not,
14· that Maritech did not participate in any design of the
15· remedial measures.· True?
16· · · ·A.· ·True.
17· · · ·Q.· ·And everybody involved with the project you
18· were working on -- the owner, the property manager,
19· Maritech -- they knew that at the time, right?
20· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
21· · · ·Q.· ·And if anybody had ever asked you before
22· Ms. Bowmer's incident what the role of Maritech had been
23· you would have indicated what your understanding was;
24· isn't that true?
25· · · ·A.· ·True.

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Curtis Brown
January 15, 2019
Page 70
·1· · · · · · · · ·(Exhibit No. 67 marked)
·2· · · ·Q.· ·Would you look at what I'm going to hand you as
·3· Exhibit 67, which is an e-mail dated June 24 out of your
·4· file, Bates number 0035.
·5· · · ·A.· ·Okay.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·The title -- this e-mail --
·7· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Strike that.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·This e-mail exchange is between you and
·9· Mr. Herron.
10· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh.
11· · · ·Q.· ·Do you see that?· And in it you indicate your
12· proposal, in the text of the e-mail.
13· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
14· · · ·Q.· ·And is that, in fact, the proposal that you
15· gave for the repair work on the garage?
16· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
17· · · ·Q.· ·And does it accurately state what it was you
18· were intending to do and did at the garage?
19· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
20· · · · · · · · ·(Exhibit No. 68 marked)
21· · · ·Q.· ·Let me show you Exhibit 68.· 68 is a June 23
22· e-mail exchange having to do with 1/2-inch EHS guy wire
23· and material.
24· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh.
25· · · ·Q.· ·Who is Bryan Rust of Techline, Inc.?
Page 71
·1· · · ·A.· ·You know, I'm not real sure.· I don't remember. ·1· · · ·A.· ·I looked -- probably opened it, looked at it,
·2· It might have been somebody we were getting quotes from ·2· and didn't print it.
·3· on material.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.
·5· · · ·A.· ·And I don't even know if this was really
·6· applicable to that job because it's requiring thimbles
·7· and -- and preforms, I think.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·You think it's some other job?
·9· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.· I don't think that one relates to this
10· because we -- we, under no terms, were ever going to use 10· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.
11· thimbles and eyes on this.
12· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Fair enough.· We'll move on.
13· · · · · · · · ·(Exhibit No. 69 marked)
14· · · ·Q.· ·Exhibit 69, let me show you.· It's an e-mail
15· exchange dated June 23 entitled:· "Barrier Cable
16· Materials Pricing."
17· · · ·A.· ·Okay.
18· · · ·Q.· ·You were visiting with Andy --
19· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh.· Kochis.
20· · · ·Q.· ·-- Kochis, K-O-C-H-I-S, from readycable.net.
21· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
22· · · ·Q.· ·Who is Mr. Kochis?
23· · · ·A.· ·He's the gentleman that I bought the cable --
24· he was the salesman/engineer.· He was the one that, I
25· think, was referred to in that other e-mail or --
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
70 to 73
Page 72
·1· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· In this e-mail, but not included in
·2· the materials that you provided me, it references two
·3· attachments.· One of them is a PTI Technote 14 on barrier
·4· cables.
·5· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·You see that as an attachment?· You see here it
·7· says it?
·8· · · ·A.· ·Yes.· Yes.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·And then the other one is a selection guide to
10· the redhead multi-set something or other PDF.
11· · · ·A.· ·We were looking at options on anchoring.
12· · · ·Q.· ·What is the PTI Technote 14 on barrier cables?
13· · · ·A.· ·No idea.
14· · · ·Q.· ·Did you ever look at it at all?
15· · · ·A.· ·I probably did, but I don't remember -- I don't
16· remember -- I don't remember it.
17· · · ·Q.· ·Fair enough.
18· · · ·A.· ·Honestly.
19· · · ·Q.· ·It's not in your file.· Would that indicate to
20· you that you may not have even printed it off?
21· · · ·A.· ·I may not have even received it.· I don't
22· remember.· It shows it as an attachment, so if -- if
23· that's the case I probably didn't print it off.
24· · · ·Q.· ·Probably just looked at it if you even looked
25· at it?
Page 73
·3· · · ·Q.· ·In terms of what it is, what it says, what it
·4· calls for, how it applies, is it fair to say that you
·5· have no idea?
·6· · · ·A.· ·Yes, because all the -- the technical things
·7· that I needed -- I actually went to Barrier Cable (sic)
·8· in Fort Worth and -- and met with Andy, and he walked
·9· through the entire process.
11· · · ·A.· ·It was all hands-on instead of doing it by
12· written information.
13· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And tell me about that.· What -- just
14· give me a brief synopsis of what you did with Andy.
15· · · ·A.· ·I went up, and we looked at the anchoring
16· mechanisms.· We looked at replacing the -- the wedge
17· anchors because the wedge anchors had rot -- had
18· deteriorated, so we wanted to make sure that they were
19· going to grab the cable correctly.· We talked about the
20· tensioning process, how you do it.· He walked me through
21· using the -- the tensioner.· We actually set it up and
22· used it to -- to demonstrate exactly how it needed to
23· work.· Other than that, it was how the cable was
24· delivered to me.· It came in spools, and I -- I rented
25· a device that it set in so I could pull off what I needed
YVer1f
 Curtis Brown
January 15, 2019
Page 74
·1· as I needed it.· And so we precut the majority of the ·1· the building, as I remember, that were real steep that
·2· cables in the building and pulled them and laid them to
·3· speed the operation because we wanted to minimize the
·4· downtime disruption to the -- to the garage.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·In terms of his e-mail to you, is it safe to
·6· say, for instance, the PTI Technote 14 that you don't
·7· remember, you certainly don't have any recollection that
·8· you would have printed it out, looked at it, outlined
·9· what it said in terms of, if anything, on procedures, and
10· then followed it?· Is that accurate?
11· · · ·A.· ·That's accurate.· But again, that was because
12· I had the face-to-face meeting with Andy to go over all
13· the -- anything to do with technical.
14· · · ·Q.· ·Got you.· Was anybody else from Curtis Brown
15· Construction with you when you went up there to meet with 15· slab before being restrained in some sense by the cables.
16· Andy?
17· · · ·A.· ·No.
18· · · ·Q.· ·How long did your meeting with Andy last?
19· · · ·A.· ·Oh, 30 minutes to an hour.
20· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Did he provide you with any documents?
21· · · ·A.· ·No.
22· · · ·Q.· ·Did he provide you with any manuals?
23· · · ·A.· ·No.
24· · · ·Q.· ·Did you shoot any video?
25· · · ·A.· ·No.
Page 75
·1· · · ·Q.· ·Did he give you any video?
·2· · · ·A.· ·No.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·Did he give you a checklist of things to
·4· follow?
·5· · · ·A.· ·No.· That wasn't --
·6· · · ·Q.· ·Did you take any notes?
·7· · · ·A.· ·No.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·Did you record him in any way?
·9· · · ·A.· ·No.
10· · · · · · · · ·(Exhibit No. 70 marked)
11· · · ·Q.· ·Let me show you Exhibit 70.· Maritech
12· Engineering issued a second letter in the case to the
13· owner dated June 27.· Were you ever given a copy of that? 13· time?
14· · · ·A.· ·I'm sure I was, but I don't remember.· If it's
15· not in the -- all the paperwork that I provided you, then
16· maybe I wasn't, because I gave you everything I had.
17· · · ·Q.· ·Fair enough.· In this particular Exhibit 70 one
18· of the things that's observed by the engineers from
19· Maritech is a safety issue with end-of-the-aisle
20· visibility in the parking garage.· Were you made aware of
21· that?
22· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.· And I think what that -- what that
23· was -- there was additional work that we ended up doing,
24· and what we ended up doing was putting a flexible post
25· mounted to the ceiling to indicate -- there were areas in
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
74 to 77
Page 76
·2· fell off real quickly next to a parking space, and so we
·3· had to come up with some way to protect those.· And the
·4· way that they had done it in the past was to mount a
·5· flexible pole to the ground, and when the cars ran over
·6· them they just -- they just destroyed them, so they
·7· didn't last.· So we attached them to the ceiling, and as
·8· far as I know they're working to this day, an
·9· improvement.
10· · · ·Q.· ·In the first page of the report it talks about
11· rooftop end-of-aisle visibility and notes that it's not
12· unreasonable to think a driver may not perceive the
13· presence of the edge of the structure and inadvertently
14· collide with the barrier cables and find the edge of the
16· Did you ever work with Maritech to solve that problem?
17· · · ·A.· ·No.
18· · · ·Q.· ·Let me show you what's previously been marked
19· as Exhibit 56.· 56 is a June 30 e-mail from Mr. Herron
20· within his owner group, and in the bottom of this e-mail
21· Mr. Herron indicates that Stream was having trouble
22· finding someone to bid the recabling of the vehicle
23· barrier cables at Littlefield Garage.· Did he ever
24· indicate to you that Stream was having troubling finding
25· someone to bid the project that you ultimately did?
Page 77
·1· · · ·A.· ·No, not that I remember.
·2· · · · · · · · ·(Exhibit No. 71 marked)
·3· · · ·Q.· ·I'll show you Exhibit 71.· 71 is e-mails within
·4· the owner of the garage in 2014 about the garage repairs.
·5· It encloses the June 27 report from Maritech and it
·6· indicates that the timeline they were looking at is
·7· approximately four weeks for the barrier cable
·8· replacement and that Mr. Herron had spoken with the
·9· contractor, and the contractor has figured working around
10· cars when possible, marking off areas when necessary,
11· working nights or early mornings when necessary.· Would
12· that be you that Mr. Herron was referring to at that
14· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
15· · · ·Q.· ·You figured it would take approximately four
16· weeks to do the barrier cable replacement?
17· · · ·A.· ·That was my estimate at the time.
18· · · · · · · · ·(Exhibit No. 72 marked)
19· · · ·Q.· ·I'll show you Exhibit 72 out of your file.· 72
20· is a series of e-mails.· CB 0039 through 0042 are the
21· pages.
22· · · ·A.· ·Okay.
23· · · ·Q.· ·And they're dated July 1st of 2014.· Do you see
24· that?
25· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh.
YVer1f
 Curtis Brown
January 15, 2019 78 to 81
Page 78 Page 80
·1· · · ·Q.· ·Yes? ·1· · · ·Q.· ·Now, I see that when you blow it up you can
·2· · · ·A.· ·Yes. ·2· look at the barrier cable notes on the first page of
·3· · · ·Q.· ·It appears that Mr. Herron is forwarding ·3· Exhibit 73, and it has different information about
·4· barrier cable shop drawings from a different project that ·4· prestressing steel, tendon fabrication, stressing
·5· Stream was working on in town.· Do you see that? ·5· operation, anchorage protection, et cetera.
·6· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh. ·6· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·Yes? ·7· · · ·Q.· ·My understanding from your testimony is you
·8· · · ·A.· ·I think it was the building next door. ·8· didn't believe this to be pertinent and did not follow
·9· · · ·Q.· ·Okay. ·9· any of the instructions that are on Exhibit 73.· Is that
10· · · ·A.· ·As I remember. 10· accurate?
11· · · ·Q.· ·And that was the building that Harvey-Cleary 11· · · ·A.· ·Some of it would have been just the same things
12· was working on? 12· that we did.· I just didn't -- I mean, the tensioning
13· · · ·A.· ·That's correct. 13· systems and protecting the -- the anchor points, you
14· · · ·Q.· ·Harvey-Cleary, for the jury, is a large 14· know, those kind of things were things that we did.
15· construction company that acts as a general contractor in 15· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· I understand.· But if that happened --
16· the state of Texas on quite a few projects, right? 16· · · ·A.· ·Did --
17· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh. 17· · · ·Q.· ·-- it was by serendipity or accident, not
18· · · ·Q.· ·Yes? 18· because you followed Exhibit 73, right?
19· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir. 19· · · ·A.· ·That's correct.· I didn't go -- I didn't go
20· · · ·Q.· ·And a general contractor, for the jury, would 20· through this and look for parallels in what we were
21· be sort of like the -- the mother or father contractor, 21· doing.
22· and then it has a bunch of subcontractors that work 22· · · · · · · · ·(Exhibit No. 74 marked)
23· underneath it, right? 23· · · ·Q.· ·Let me show you Exhibit 74.· In -- for the
24· · · ·A.· ·That's correct. 24· jury, looking at Exhibit 74 there's two pictures.· The
25· · · ·Q.· ·And so what was your understanding of why these 25· one at the top's called "Stressing" and the one at the

Page 79
·1· drawings were being sent to you on July 1st of 2014?
·2· · · ·A.· ·Honestly, I don't remember.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·Do you remember looking at them?
·4· · · ·A.· ·I think I did -- I do remember looking at them.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·Do you remember following anything about the
·6· drawings in your repair project?
·7· · · ·A.· ·No.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·Do you specifically remember that you didn't
·9· follow what was in the drawings?
10· · · ·A.· ·Again, I don't remember if it was relevant to
11· anything I was doing.
12· · · ·Q.· ·The drawings are attached, but they're dad-gum
13· small, to be honest with you, so what I did was I've
14· taken 41 and 42 and blown them up.
15· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh.
16· · · ·Q.· ·I'm going to mark those as Exhibit 73, okay?
17· · · ·A.· ·Okay.
18· · · · · · · · ·(Exhibit No. 73 marked)
19· · · ·Q.· ·Let me hand you Exhibit 73.
20· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· And I brought a few extra
21· copies if anybody wants them.
22· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Okay.
23· · · ·Q.· ·Do you see that 73 are the drawings from
24· Exhibit 72?
25· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
Page 81
·1· bottom is called "Back Stressing."· Do you see that?
·2· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·Yes?
·4· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·Did you perform both of these types of
·6· maneuvers on the cables at the garage, that is, stressing
·7· and back-stressing, as pictured in Exhibit 74?
·8· · · ·A.· ·Actually, a step further.· When we would pull
·9· the cable through the -- the initial area we would
10· back-stress it on that point as well.
11· · · ·Q.· ·And back-stressing by your definition is the
12· same as the back-stressing that's exhibited in the bottom
13· of Exhibit 74?
14· · · ·A.· ·That's correct.· All that's doing is setting
15· the wedges tighter.
16· · · ·Q.· ·And what, in your mind, is the difference
17· between stressing and back-stressing?
18· · · ·A.· ·As I just explained, stressing is when you're
19· putting the cable up initially, pulling it between two
20· points, and you're using the -- the tensioner to pull the
21· set tension that you want for the cable.· And then when
22· you back-stress it what you're doing is you're -- you're
23· setting the wedges to where they won't release.
24· · · ·Q.· ·Did you use the same amount of pressure for the
25· stressing as the back-stressing?

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Curtis Brown
January 15, 2019 82 to 85
Page 82 Page 84
·1· · · ·A.· ·Again, I don't know.· I don't remember exactly ·1· · · ·Q.· ·On every level?
·2· what pressure we used on the back-stress, but we made ·2· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·3· sure that the cable was set, is the -- was the goal for ·3· · · ·Q.· ·So anywhere there was a cable in existence
·4· it. ·4· before you started in July of 2014 you then went in and
·5· · · ·Q.· ·Who all was on your crew, how many people? ·5· replaced that cable?
·6· · · ·A.· ·It varied.· I had from two to -- two to three ·6· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·7· different people. ·7· · · ·Q.· ·Mr. Herron is indicating to Mr. Simpson,
·8· · · ·Q.· ·Besides you? ·8· Mr. Vineyard, and Ms. Wright that he wanted to arrange
·9· · · ·A.· ·Yes. ·9· a meeting with the contractor and the team to discuss the
10· · · ·Q.· ·Had any of those gentlemen ever stressed or 10· logistics of the work, et cetera.· Do you see that?
11· back-stressed cables such as the ones in the Littlefield 11· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
12· Garage? 12· · · ·Q.· ·Is that what you did?
13· · · ·A.· ·No.· They were doing everything according to my 13· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
14· instruction. 14· · · ·Q.· ·And did that include Ms. Wright from Premier as
15· · · ·Q.· ·I'll show you what we've marked previously as 15· indicated there?
16· Exhibit 29.· Exhibit 29 are an e-mail exchange amongst 16· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
17· the owner of the garage in July of 2014, July 3rd of 17· · · ·Q.· ·Let me show you what has been marked as
18· 2014.· Do you see that? 18· Exhibit 30 in the case, an e-mail dated July 14.
19· · · ·A.· ·Yes. 19· Mr. Herron is communicating with other people within
20· · · ·Q.· ·In it Mr. Herron is noting that the request was 20· Stream Realty, and on the second page of that e-mail,
21· put to him to find someone who could take care of it 21· which is page 128 on the bottom, he indicates to the
22· quickly, and so he did.· Did Mr. Herron indicate that to 22· other representatives of the owner that he wanted to
23· you, that he needed somebody to take care of the garage 23· recommend they move forward with CB Construction for the
24· repairs quickly? 24· barrier cable replacement.· That's your company, right?
25· · · ·A.· ·He just asked what my schedule was, what I -- 25· · · ·A.· ·Yes.

Page 83
·1· when I could do it.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·Did you tell him that you had an opening in
·3· your schedule and that you could do it, as is indicated
·4· here?· It says --
·5· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·Yeah.· It says:· "He has an opening in his
·7· schedule."· Is that what you told Mr. Herron?
·8· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·All right.
10· · · · · · · · ·(Exhibit No. 75 marked)
11· · · ·Q.· ·I'll show you Exhibit 75.· Exhibit 75 is an
12· e-mail from Mr. Sallis and some others, including
13· Ms. Wright from Premier, on July the 8th of 2014.· Do you 13· · · ·Q.· ·He lists his results.· You're listed first,
14· see that?
15· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh.
16· · · ·Q.· ·Yes?
17· · · ·A.· ·Yes.· Sorry.
18· · · ·Q.· ·And in it Mr. Herron indicates that he was in
19· the process of wrapping up a contract with your
20· construction company to replace all the vehicle barrier
21· cables in the mall, meaning in the garage?
22· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
23· · · ·Q.· ·Is that what you did?· Did you replace all of
24· the cables in the garage?
25· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
Page 85
·1· · · ·Q.· ·He said:· "As you know, I've been working on
·2· this for some time to get a price for the work.· It's
·3· been a difficult task to find someone willing to do this
·4· work who can do it in a reasonable time frame and who
·5· will do it as a repair cable replacement and not a
·6· complete redesign to current code."· Do you see that?
·7· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·Did Mr. Herron ever admit to you that it had
·9· been a difficult task to find someone to do it as a
10· replacement as opposed to bringing it up to current code?
11· · · ·A.· ·No, not really.· It was just an opportunity,
12· was the way we saw it.
14· CB Construction, and then he puts in red:· "In the
15· interest for full disclosure, this is my future
16· father-in-law's company," meaning what you've already
17· told us.· Your daughter and he ended up getting married,
18· right?
19· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
20· · · ·Q.· ·Then he lists some of your experience:
21· Carlos & Charlie's, radio towers, et cetera.
22· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh.
23· · · ·Q.· ·None of that, as you told us, was or involved
24· even a single parking garage, true?
25· · · ·A.· ·True.

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Curtis Brown
January 15, 2019
Page 86
·1· · · ·Q.· ·And indicated you were interested in doing --
·2· having a relationship with Stream in the future, right?
·3· · · ·A.· ·True.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·And then what your estimated bid was at the
·5· time is listed there, right?
·6· · · ·A.· ·True.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·See right below it, it says:· "VSL Fort Worth
·8· big boys"?· You'll remember you and I looked at the
·9· e-mail from VSL Engineering where they --
10· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
11· · · ·Q.· ·-- had been out to the garage.
12· · · ·A.· ·True.
13· · · ·Q.· ·And it says:· "Previously looked at this with
14· Jessica and Nate."· Do you see that there?
15· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
16· · · ·Q.· ·"Will not do the work unless it is a fully
17· engineered barrier system to meet current code."
18· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
19· · · ·Q.· ·We already discussed that you did not know that
20· and nobody made you aware of that, true?
21· · · ·A.· ·True.· We keep going back to me not having
22· experience with -- with parking garages.· I did not have
23· experience with building a 10,000 or 20,000-square-foot
24· floating restaurant before I did one.· I did not have
25· experience doing many of the things that are on that. I
Page 87
·1· built one of -- one-of-a-kind many, many times in my
·2· life, so --
·3· · · ·Q.· ·Thank you very much.
·4· · · ·A.· ·-- a parking garage was not anything unusual.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·I appreciate that sentiment.· Thank you, sir.
·6· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· I just, for the record, will
·7· object as nonresponsive.
·8· · · · · · · · ·(Exhibit No. 76 marked)
·9· · · ·Q.· ·Let me show you Exhibit 76 that you were kind
10· enough to produce out of your file.· Exhibit 76 is an
11· e-mail talking about the garage recabling kickoff meeting
12· dated July 17 at 11:18 a.m.· Do you see that?
13· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh.
14· · · ·Q.· ·Yes?
15· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
16· · · ·Q.· ·And it lists who all is going to be on the
17· kickoff meeting, and that includes Ms. Jessica Wright
18· from Premier Parking.· See that up in the e-mail on the
19· first page?
20· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
21· · · ·Q.· ·And then attached to it was the agenda of the
22· kickoff meeting; is that right?
23· · · ·A.· ·That is correct.
24· · · · · · · · ·(Exhibit No. 77 marked)
25· · · ·Q.· ·Let me show you Exhibit 77.· Exhibit 77 appears
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
86 to 89
Page 88
·1· to be a copy of your contract -- service contract with
·2· Stream.· Does that look accurate?
·3· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·I take it this contract was a form that Stream
·5· wanted you to use?
·6· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·So they drafted it, "they" being Stream?
·8· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·9· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Can we take a quick bathroom
10· break?
11· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Yes, sir.· Let's take a break.
12· · · · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· We're off the record,
13· 11:49.
14· · · · · · · · ·(Recess from 11:49 a.m. to 11:55 a.m.)
15· · · · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· This is segment number
16· 3.· We're back on the record, 11:55.
17· · · · · · · · ·(Exhibit No. 78 marked)
18· BY MR. BREEN:
19· · · ·Q.· ·Mr. Brown, in August of 2014, it looks like,
20· somebody from AEC Architectural Engineers came out to the
21· site.· I've attached Exhibit 78, which is an August 4
22· e-mail, CB 0105.· You see that?
23· · · ·A.· ·Okay.
24· · · ·Q.· ·Looks like --
25· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.
Page 89
·1· · · ·Q.· ·It's a Ryan Johnson e-mail to you.
·2· · · ·A.· ·Okay.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·Do you remember what Mr. Ryan L. Johnson, the
·4· senior IBIM designer, was doing?
·5· · · ·A.· ·I don't have any idea.· I don't remember that
·6· at all.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·Do you know what an IBIM is?
·8· · · ·A.· ·No.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·Do you recall anything about Architectural
10· Engineers being involved with the cable repair you were
11· doing?
12· · · ·A.· ·No.
13· · · · · · · · ·(Exhibit No. 79 marked)
14· · · ·Q.· ·I'll show you Exhibit 79.· Exhibit 79 appears
15· to be an August 14 e-mail that has a change order --
16· · · ·A.· ·Okay.
17· · · ·Q.· ·-- for additional work to install a tread plate
18· to close gap in the building.
19· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
20· · · ·Q.· ·Could you just briefly describe what this was
21· for?
22· · · ·A.· ·Up on the top floor of it there was an area
23· that was -- where all the electrical, the air
24· conditioning and everything for the -- for the lofts that
25· are part of the Littlefield Building.
YVer1f
 Curtis Brown
January 15, 2019 90 to 93
Page 90 Page 92
·1· · · ·Q.· ·Yes, sir. ·1· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·2· · · ·A.· ·There was a gap between the two buildings, ·2· · · ·Q.· ·What did you get the GSSI scanner for?
·3· apparently, the way it was constructed, and they wanted ·3· · · ·A.· ·Cost?
·4· to put a walk plate over that, and that's what that was. ·4· · · ·Q.· ·No, no.· Yeah, the purpose of it.· Thank you
·5· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Let me show you what we've already ·5· for asking for clarification.· What was the --
·6· marked as Exhibit 31.· It's an August 20 e-mail from ·6· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.
·7· Jessica Wright to Eric Herron, among others.· In it she ·7· · · ·Q.· ·-- purpose of the GSSI scanner?
·8· indicates that Premier had run the numbers and could ·8· · · ·A.· ·To -- anytime we had to penetrate a column we
·9· perform work in-house much cheaper than having Curtis do ·9· wanted to know where the rebar was so we could make sure
10· it for $11,000.· Do you see that? 10· that we missed it so we didn't impact the rebar.
11· · · ·A.· ·Yes. 11· · · · · · · · ·(Exhibit No. 81 marked)
12· · · ·Q.· ·This involved the installation of wheel stops? 12· · · ·Q.· ·Let me show you Exhibit 81.· 81 is Curtis Brown
13· · · ·A.· ·Yes. 13· 0110 and 0111 and it is a wheel stop quote, and
14· · · ·Q.· ·Could you tell me what you recall about this, 14· Ms. Wright from Premier is delivering a wheel stop quote
15· wheel stops and the installation? 15· to you.· Do you see that?
16· · · ·A.· ·We -- we did some -- I thought we did that. 16· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh.
17· · · ·Q.· ·You, Curtis Brown Construction, ended up doing 17· · · ·Q.· ·Yes?· You see that there?· You just have to --
18· the wheel stops? 18· · · ·A.· ·Yes, yes.
19· · · ·A.· ·Yes. 19· · · ·Q.· ·-- answer audibly.
20· · · ·Q.· ·Did you know that Premier and Ms. Wright were 20· · · ·A.· ·I'm sorry.
21· coordinating with the owner and proposing that they could 21· · · ·Q.· ·That's all right.· And it's a sales order where
22· perform the work? 22· the name of the person ordering it was Premier Parking -
23· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.· But I think that -- I remember doing the 23· Littlefield Garage, shipped to Premier Parking -
24· wheel stops.· I don't remember if we reduced the -- I 24· Littlefield Garage, and it was 60 six-foot car stops or
25· don't remember the details of it, but I just remember -- 25· parking stops?

Page 91 Page 93
·1· I -- I remember them. ·1· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·Okay. ·2· · · ·Q.· ·And that's what you just visited with me about
·3· · · ·A.· ·I don't remember the details of how we got ·3· in terms of your coordination with Premier on putting
·4· them. ·4· those in?
·5· · · ·Q.· ·Did you end up doing it in conjunction with ·5· · · ·A.· ·Yes.· And again, that was one of the things
·6· Premier, that is, doing the wheel stops? ·6· that was used on that -- to locate the rebar in the -- or
·7· · · ·A.· ·They provided them, I believe was what ·7· not the rebar, but the tension cable.· That's tension
·8· happened.· They provided the -- the wheel stops, and then ·8· cable structures on the floor, so we wanted to make sure
·9· we ended up going in and installing them. ·9· that we missed those whenever we set the rods for the
10· · · ·Q.· ·Did you provide the advice for Stream to put in 10· wheel stops.
11· the wheel stops or was that Premier? 11· · · ·Q.· ·You're talking about --
12· · · ·A.· ·I think that was Premier. 12· · · ·A.· ·Just to be clear.
13· · · ·Q.· ·You need a little water there?· You okay? 13· · · ·Q.· ·-- the scanner?
14· · · ·A.· ·No, I'm good. 14· · · ·A.· ·Yeah, the scanner.
15· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· It's Tasha's perfume. 15· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Thank you.
16· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· I'm sure that's it. 16· · · · · · · · ·(Exhibit No. 82 marked)
17· · · · · · · · ·(Exhibit No. 80 marked) 17· · · ·Q.· ·Let me show you Exhibit 82.· 82 is an
18· · · ·Q.· ·Let me show you Exhibit 80.· You previously 18· October 9, 2014, e-mail from Ms. Wright to Eric Herron
19· were kind enough to mention in your testimony that you 19· and others at Stream regarding Curtis Brown.· Do you see
20· had actually gotten a device to help you detect 20· that?
21· reinforced bars or rebar that was in various locations of 21· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
22· the building; is that right? 22· · · ·Q.· ·This particular --
23· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir. 23· · · ·A.· ·Excuse me.
24· · · ·Q.· ·And this Exhibit 80, is that an e-mail exchange 24· · · ·Q.· ·-- string -- you okay to keep going?
25· related to that? 25· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh.

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Curtis Brown
January 15, 2019 94 to 97
Page 94 Page 96
·1· · · ·Q.· ·All right. ·1· redevelopments totaling over $3 million in Nashville, at
·2· · · ·A.· ·No, I'm fine. ·2· the bottom of the page.· Do you see that?· It's right in
·3· · · ·Q.· ·If you look, this is one that runs sort of ·3· the middle of the bottom of the page.
·4· backwards to forward.· So if you'd go to the back page, ·4· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.· Yes, sir.
·5· 121, and let me know when you're there. ·5· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Did Ms. Wright indicate to you also,
·6· · · ·A.· ·Okay. ·6· like she indicated to Ms. Herron -- to Mr. Herron, her
·7· · · ·Q.· ·At 121, that page, it indicates that on ·7· experience in managing redevelopments on large
·8· September 30 Ms. Wright was providing your contact ·8· construction projects?
·9· information to Nate Simpson and indicating that you were ·9· · · ·A.· ·No, we never discussed that.
10· in the process of anchoring them, she says, and should be 10· · · · · · · · ·(Exhibit No. 83 marked)
11· finished by middle of the next week.· Do you see that? 11· · · ·Q.· ·Let me show you Exhibit 83.· Exhibit 83 is
12· · · ·A.· ·Yeah. 12· a punch list e-mail, and it indicates who was to be
13· · · ·Q.· ·Do you know what you were in the process of 13· present for the punch list.· Do you see that?
14· anchoring late September of 2014? 14· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
15· · · ·A.· ·I don't remember. 15· · · ·Q.· ·It was Eric Herron, Curtis Brown, Nate Simpson,
16· · · ·Q.· ·Okay. 16· Lance Sallis, Jessica Wright, Diana Marmolejo --
17· · · ·A.· ·I mean, I -- 17· Marmolejo, yeah, M-A-R-M-O-L-E-J-O -- and Haleigh
18· · · ·Q.· ·That's fine.· I just was curious. 18· Nichols.· See that?
19· · · ·A.· ·Yeah, don't remember. 19· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.
20· · · ·Q.· ·If you'd go to page 119 with me. 20· · · ·Q.· ·Do you recall that punch list walk-through?
21· · · ·A.· ·Okay. 21· · · ·A.· ·Well, I do.· But I don't remember -- I
22· · · ·Q.· ·On 119, on the September 30, 2014, 3:30 p.m. 22· remember -- I think Nate was the building engineer, if
23· e-mail Ms. Wright indicates to Mr. Herron a report that 23· I remember right.
24· appears to involve you saying that you were in the office 24· · · ·Q.· ·Who was --
25· a few minutes ago and told Ms. Wright you're still 25· · · ·A.· ·Lance.· I knew Lance.

Page 95
·1· mounting the wheel stops and should be finished by the ·1· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.
·2· middle of next week.· See that?
·3· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·Yes?
·5· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·That's obviously you that she's visiting with
·7· there in the office, right?
·8· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·And then indicates that you had reported to her
10· that you were awaiting the delineators and were going to
11· do the mounting of those after those came in, correct?
12· · · ·A.· ·Correct.
13· · · ·Q.· ·And then Ms. Wright indicates she'd like to
14· walk the garage with Mr. Herron.· In addition to other
15· things, they have exposed cables along the wall that may
16· need to be addressed.· See that?
17· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
18· · · ·Q.· ·Did you ever walk the garage with Ms. Wright
19· for a purpose like that?
20· · · ·A.· ·We walked it several times, I mean, during the
21· process.· I don't remember that specific one, but --
22· · · ·Q.· ·Would you go to the first page with me, 117.
23· · · ·A.· ·Okay.
24· · · ·Q.· ·In this long e-mail to Mr. Herron, Ms. Wright,
25· among other things, has indicated that she's managed two 25· justice, but --
Page 97
·2· · · ·A.· ·Jessica.· I don't remember Diana --
·3· · · ·Q.· ·Marmolejo?
·4· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·All right.
·6· · · ·A.· ·-- or the other -- other person.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.
·8· · · ·A.· ·But yes.
·9· · · · · · · · ·(Exhibit No. 84 marked)
10· · · ·Q.· ·I'll show you Exhibit 84.· 84 appears to be an
11· e-mail summarizing the punch list items after the
12· walk-through that we looked at for 83.· Does that look
13· accurate?
14· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
15· · · · · · · · ·(Exhibit No. 85 marked)
16· · · ·Q.· ·I'll show you Exhibit 85.· Does 80 --
17· Exhibit 85, is that a picture of Jessica Wright, the
18· woman that you worked with who was the prime contact for
19· Premier in the garage for you?
20· · · ·A.· ·I think so.
21· · · ·Q.· ·I'm sorry.· Did you say, "I think so"?
22· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.· She always looked better than that, as
23· I remember.
24· · · ·Q.· ·Sometimes mug shots don't do the greatest

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Curtis Brown
January 15, 2019 98 to 101
Page 98 Page 100
·1· · · ·A.· ·Wow.· I didn't have any idea that's what ·1· · · ·Q.· ·No problem.· In between --
·2· happened to her. ·2· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Strike that.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·Did anybody from Premier ever indicate to you ·3· · · ·Q.· ·Separate and apart from you seeing on the news
·4· that is what happened to her? ·4· that vehicles were going off of the Littlefield Garage
·5· · · ·A.· ·No. ·5· did anybody else ever report to you that there were
·6· · · ·Q.· ·I'll show you Exhibit 18 that we've marked in ·6· problems with any of the cable repairs you had done in
·7· this case already.· You and I talked about the fact that ·7· the garage?
·8· in -- September 9th of 2016 you became aware that a young ·8· · · ·A.· ·I think there was one shortly after we
·9· man in a Toyota 4Runner went off of the ninth floor of ·9· completed the project that I went back and re-tensioned,
10· the Littlefield Garage.· You recall that? 10· but --
11· · · ·A.· ·I do. 11· · · ·Q.· ·Who brought that to your attention?
12· · · ·Q.· ·This e-mail exchange shortly after that between 12· · · ·A.· ·Eric did.
13· Mr. Ryan Hunt, Ms. Christina Murray from Premier, and 13· · · ·Q.· ·And did --
14· some other people from GTT indicates that Mr. Hunt had 14· · · ·A.· ·Said -- said -- asked me to go up and check it,
15· asked the owner at the time, GTT, if they wanted him to 15· and that's what I did.
16· reach out to Stream and get the details on the cabling 16· · · ·Q.· ·What level?
17· work Stream performed in early 2015.· Do you see that at 17· · · ·A.· ·I don't remember.
18· the bottom of the first page? 18· · · ·Q.· ·How did you re-tension it?
19· · · ·A.· ·Yes. 19· · · ·A.· ·With a tensioner.
20· · · ·Q.· ·It says:· "I believe it was performed by 20· · · ·Q.· ·What was causing it to be out so soon after you
21· someone Eric Herron knew well and had worked with 21· did your repair?
22· before."· Do you see that? 22· · · ·A.· ·Not a clue.· I even -- I even contacted Andy
23· · · ·A.· ·Yes. 23· and asked him his advice on that particular thing, so --
24· · · ·Q.· ·Did anybody from Premier reach out to you in 24· and there was no -- there was no obvious answer, so we
25· the time frame of September of 2016 to get the details on 25· re-tensioned it, and it stayed.

Page 99 Page 101

·1· the cabling work you performed? ·1· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Well, I'll represent to you that in
·2· · · ·A.· ·No. ·2· addition to that that you've just told me about, in --
·3· · · ·Q.· ·To your knowledge did anybody from Stream ·3· other times in between Mr. O'Connor's incident and
·4· indicate to you that somebody had reached out to Stream ·4· Ms. Bowmer's incident there were other cables that were
·5· to try to get in touch with you to figure out the details ·5· out in the building.· For example, if you look at
·6· on the cabling work that you had performed? ·6· Exhibit 89, Ms. Murray --
·7· · · ·A.· ·No. ·7· · · ·A.· ·On which page?
·8· · · ·Q.· ·If somebody had, in September of 2016, asked ·8· · · ·Q.· ·89 is just a one-pager.· Did I give it to you
·9· you for the details on the cabling work you performed ·9· already?
10· would you have provided your file and the answers to the 10· · · ·A.· ·No.
11· questions like you've been answering to me today? 11· · · ·Q.· ·My apologies.
12· · · ·A.· ·Yes. 12· · · ·A.· ·That's all right.
13· · · ·Q.· ·Have those been honest, true, and complete 13· · · ·Q.· ·It should be -- there you go.
14· answers? 14· · · ·A.· ·Oh, is that it?· I'm sorry.
15· · · ·A.· ·Yes. 15· · · ·Q.· ·No, that's okay.· You got 89 there?
16· · · · · · · · ·(Exhibit No. 89 marked) 16· · · ·A.· ·I do.
17· · · ·Q.· ·I'll show you Exhibit 89.· Before today had 17· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Did you ever meet Christina Murray from
18· anybody indicated to you, other than the news reports and 18· Premier?· She took over for Jessica Wright.
19· your visit with Mr. Herron, that there were problems with 19· · · ·A.· ·Yeah, I think I -- I remember her.· But I --
20· the cables in the garage in between the time you 20· I didn't have much contact with her, as I remember.
21· completed your repairs and the time Ms. Bowmer's car went 21· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· You see in this March 24, 2017,
22· off in July of 2017? 22· e-mail Ms. Murray is indicating to, in this case,
23· · · ·A.· ·I'm sorry.· Repeat that. 23· somebody at a group, Blue Construction, that in addition
24· · · ·Q.· ·Sure. 24· to a level that they had spoke of previously, Level 7 up
25· · · ·A.· ·I was reading it. 25· now also has wide cabling out.· Do you see that?

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Curtis Brown
January 15, 2019
Page 102
·1· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·Did anybody from Blue Construction or Premier
·3· contact you in March of 2017 to inquire about any of the
·4· repairs you had done?
·5· · · ·A.· ·After the initial one that we repaired, it was
·6· shortly after.· I didn't -- I don't think anybody
·7· contacted me ever.
·8· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Mr. Brown, thank you for your
·9· time today.· I pass the witness.
10· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· You want me to go, I assume.
11· Yeah.
12· · · · · · · · ·MR. RHODES:· Sure.
13· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· All right.
14· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· You need a mic?· Here you go.
15· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Are you going to go?· I don't
16· care.
17· · · · · · · · ·MR. RHODES:· You can go.
18· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Okay.· I'm good.· I've got a
19· mic.· Thank you.
20· · · · · · · · · · · · ·EXAMINATION
21· BY MS. BARNES:
22· · · ·Q.· ·Mr. Brown, I have some questions for you as
23· well.· I represent the current owner of the building,
24· GTT Parking.· What's your highest level of education?
25· · · ·A.· ·High school.
Page 103
·1· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Did you graduate high school?
·2· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·What year?
·4· · · ·A.· ·'70.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·Where did you graduate high school?
·6· · · ·A.· ·Wichita Falls High.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·What's your current home address?
·8· · · ·A.· ·4923 Cypress Ranch Boulevard, Spicewood, Texas. ·8· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·And is Curtis Brown Construction still in
10· business?
11· · · ·A.· ·No.· I mean, I use it just for minimal things,
12· so the answer is -- answer is yes, I guess.· Sorry.
13· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· So --
14· · · ·A.· ·I had to think about that a minute.
15· · · ·Q.· ·Do you have a business address?
16· · · ·A.· ·4923 Cypress Ranch Boulevard.
17· · · ·Q.· ·That would be the address for Curtis Brown
18· Construction as well?
19· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.· For all of my -- anything I do.
20· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Did you incorporate Curtis Brown
21· Construction?
22· · · ·A.· ·No.· It was a sole ownership.
23· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Is Curtis Brown Construction licensed to
24· do business in the state of Texas?
25· · · ·A.· ·No.· I mean, there's no license.
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
102 to 105
Page 104
·1· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· It doesn't have any kind of a
·2· contractor's license?
·3· · · ·A.· ·No.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·Is it registered with the State of Texas to do
·5· construction work?
·6· · · ·A.· ·I filed a d/b/a.· That's all I've done on it.
·7· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Making sure Brent didn't see
·8· that.· He didn't.· I dropped your mic.· Sorry.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·How many employees did you have on the
10· Littlefield parking garage job?
11· · · ·A.· ·It varied from two to three.
12· · · ·Q.· ·How did you find those employees?
13· · · ·A.· ·They had worked with me on other stuff, other
14· projects.
15· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· How did you hire them in the first
16· place?
17· · · ·A.· ·I was looking for help.· They needed work, and
18· I hired them.
19· · · ·Q.· ·Through what source?
20· · · ·A.· ·Just contacts.· I mean, just individuals.
21· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Do you know their names?
22· · · ·A.· ·Yeah, I -- one of them is my grandson --
23· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Who's that?
24· · · ·A.· ·-- that worked on that project, Weston Murray.
25· · · ·Q.· ·Is Weston in the Austin area?
Page 105
·1· · · ·A.· ·He's in college at Texas Tech.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Who else?
·3· · · ·A.· ·Alex.· I'd have to find his -- his name.· And
·4· then there was one other.· I can't remember his name.· He
·5· worked for me for a short period of time.· I'd have to go
·6· back to the records and look it up.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·How did you pay them, by the hour?
·9· · · ·Q.· ·Is that a yes?
10· · · ·A.· ·Yes.· Sorry.
11· · · ·Q.· ·I notice you brought a folder with you today.
12· Is there anything in there that relates to the
13· Littlefield Garage that you --
14· · · ·A.· ·It's everything that I provided.
15· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.
16· · · ·A.· ·So it's just a copy of everything that --
17· · · ·Q.· ·Nothing new?
18· · · ·A.· ·Nothing new.
19· · · ·Q.· ·That was my question.
20· · · ·A.· ·It's the same old -- same old stuff.
21· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· I also noticed you have a real
22· estate company, Ranch and River Real Estate, that's
23· somehow tied to your e-mail address or at the bottom of
24· your signature block.
25· · · ·A.· ·No.· Jeff Maddux is a friend of mine that owns
YVer1f
 Curtis Brown
January 15, 2019 106 to 109
Page 106 Page 108
·1· that, and he -- he had his bookkeeper keep track of ·1· · · ·A.· ·No.
·2· things for me during that project -- ·2· · · ·Q.· ·At any time did an engineer inspect your work?
·3· · · ·Q.· ·Okay. ·3· · · ·A.· ·I don't remember if -- if Michael -- I -- I
·4· · · ·A.· ·-- was all it was. ·4· don't remember if he came up even at the end.· I think
·5· · · ·Q.· ·Okay. ·5· the -- the people that were listed on the walk-through --
·6· · · ·A.· ·I mean, it was just a friend helping me out. ·6· if he wasn't in that I would say no.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·Is that Chris -- ·7· · · ·Q.· ·You're referring to Mr. Donoghue?
·8· · · ·A.· ·Yeah. ·8· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·-- someone?· Chris -- ·9· · · ·Q.· ·From Maritech?
10· · · ·A.· ·Chris Cupina. 10· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
11· · · ·Q.· ·Okay. 11· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And you don't recall whether he might
12· · · ·A.· ·Yeah. 12· have inspected at the end?
13· · · ·Q.· ·Is it fair to say you got that job because of 13· · · ·A.· ·I don't remember.
14· your relationship with Eric Herron? 14· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.
15· · · ·A.· ·Yeah. 15· · · ·A.· ·Unless that was part of his agreement with
16· · · ·Q.· ·And before you started the job did you do 16· Stream.· I don't know.
17· anything to familiarize yourself with parking garage 17· · · ·Q.· ·To your knowledge, when the cables were fully
18· vehicle barrier systems? 18· installed, you were done with the work, did any engineer
19· · · ·A.· ·I met with Andy at -- at Ready Cable. 19· come and do any kind of testing?
20· · · ·Q.· ·Okay. 20· · · ·A.· ·No.
21· · · ·A.· ·That's the guy that sells cables to all the 21· · · ·Q.· ·Before you started the work did you contact the
22· parking garages all over, so I figured if anybody would 22· City of Austin?
23· know he would know. 23· · · ·A.· ·No.
24· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· How did you get Andy's name? 24· · · ·Q.· ·Did you pull a permit for the work?
25· · · ·A.· ·Just research.· I was -- I was trying to find 25· · · ·A.· ·No, because it --

Page 107 Page 109

·1· the best price on cable, who could provide it, and who ·1· · · ·Q.· ·Why not?
·2· could give me the best information. ·2· · · ·A.· ·It was a repair, as I understood.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·Is it fair to say that you were relying on Andy ·3· · · ·Q.· ·It was your understanding that you did not need
·4· in order to perform your work on the Littlefield Garage? ·4· a permit?
·5· · · ·A.· ·No.· I mean, I -- I have a good understanding. ·5· · · ·A.· ·That was correct.
·6· I just wanted the details to make sure I did it ·6· · · ·Q.· ·Did you do anything to investigate whether you
·7· correctly. ·7· needed to pull a permit?
·8· · · ·Q.· ·Is Andy an engineer? ·8· · · ·A.· ·No.
·9· · · ·A.· ·I believe he is.· He's the -- he's the head ·9· · · ·Q.· ·So it's fair to say at -- you did not have any
10· sales, or was at that time.· I don't know what his 10· conversations with the City of Austin about the
11· position is now.· I haven't talked to him in years. 11· Littlefield Garage at any time.· Is that fair?
12· · · ·Q.· ·Have you ever talked to Andy about the two 12· · · ·A.· ·Fair.
13· accidents at the Littlefield Garage? 13· · · ·Q.· ·Do you have an understanding of when a permit
14· · · ·A.· ·No. 14· is necessary to do remodeling work?
15· · · ·Q.· ·What else did you do to familiarize yourself 15· · · ·A.· ·Sure.
16· with vehicle barrier systems? 16· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· What's your understanding?
17· · · ·A.· ·I mean, not really anything else for -- 17· · · ·A.· ·Well, I mean, I look at -- at what the project
18· · · ·Q.· ·Did you do anything to familiarize yourself 18· is as far as construction.· My -- I was not familiar with
19· with the applicable codes? 19· what was necessary for repair work, and I understood it
20· · · ·A.· ·No. 20· to be that I didn't need to follow up on that.
21· · · ·Q.· ·Other than possibly Andy, who may or may not be 21· · · ·Q.· ·Do you know what code was applicable to that
22· an engineer, did you coordinate with an engineer on your 22· garage when it was built?
23· work at the Littlefield Garage? 23· · · ·A.· ·No.
24· · · ·A.· ·No. 24· · · ·Q.· ·Do you know what code would have been
25· · · ·Q.· ·At any time did an engineer oversee your work? 25· applicable -- applicable at the time that you did your

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Curtis Brown
January 15, 2019 110 to 113
Page 110 Page 112
·1· repair work? ·1· anchors?
·2· · · ·A.· ·No. ·2· · · ·A.· ·We were at a stalemate as to how to get into
·3· · · ·Q.· ·And I understand from your prior testimony you ·3· that pole because of the bad connections there.· We had
·4· didn't do anything to make sure that the vehicle barrier ·4· to drill new holes, and we couldn't penetrate, so we had
·5· system complied with code.· Is that fair? ·5· to come up with some solution to attach them to the
·6· · · ·A.· ·That's fair. ·6· columns.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·And you didn't do anything to make sure it ·7· · · ·Q.· ·You couldn't come around from the back side?
·8· complied with the PTI manual.· Is that fair? ·8· · · ·A.· ·We couldn't get -- there were some of them that
·9· · · ·A.· ·That's fair. ·9· we just couldn't penetrate.
10· · · ·Q.· ·You produced pictures that you took of the 10· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.
11· garage before you started the work, correct? 11· · · ·A.· ·So we had to -- had to look at other options.
12· · · ·A.· ·Correct. 12· · · ·Q.· ·Did you ever use scaffolding to access anything
13· · · ·Q.· ·When you started the work were there any 13· in the garage?
14· GRABB-IT anchors at all in the Littlefield Garage? 14· · · ·A.· ·I built a special custom scaffold for the
15· · · ·A.· ·Yes. 15· outside that was lowered down to each floor as we
16· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Do you have a recollection of how many 16· accessed the outside corners.
17· or where they were located? 17· · · ·Q.· ·But from listening to your testimony and
18· · · ·A.· ·We used as many of them as we could.· We used 18· looking at the pictures it sounds like the work was done
19· the barrels that were cemented into the -- into the 19· primarily from the front face of those columns.· Right?
20· columns, and that's what we went back with.· We put new 20· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.· From the faces of the columns, yes.
21· wedges in the existing -- if they were okay, then we used 21· · · ·Q.· ·And I just want to make sure.· You went through
22· them.· If not, we moved as short a distance from them as 22· it earlier, but -- what steps did you take to make sure
23· possible and penetrated the -- the -- the column with a 23· that the cables were properly tensioned and properly
24· new hole. 24· back-stressed?
25· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· I think we might be talking about two 25· · · ·A.· ·We had a tensioner that was -- had been preset

Page 111 Page 113

·1· different things, because you're talking about barrel
·2· anchors and I had asked about GRABB-IT anchors.· Those
·3· are two different things, right?
·4· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.· Yeah.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.
·6· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·And so what I was asking -- I understand there
·8· were already barrel anchors there.
·9· · · ·A.· ·Okay.
10· · · ·Q.· ·Right?
11· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.· Fair enough.
12· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Were there GRABB-IT anchors before you
13· started your work?
14· · · ·A.· ·No.
15· · · ·Q.· ·The GRABB-IT anchors were new whenever you did 15· least 1,000.· I mean, I wouldn't have done less than
16· the repair work, right?
17· · · ·A.· ·Correct.
18· · · ·Q.· ·So we know if there were GRABB-IT anchors in
19· there, they were either installed by you or installed by
20· someone after you.· Is that fair?
21· · · ·A.· ·Correct.
22· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And did you use quite a few GRABB-IT
23· anchors in performing your work?
24· · · ·A.· ·Quite a few.
25· · · ·Q.· ·Why was the decision made to use GRABB-IT
·1· from the factory or from the person we rented it from. I
·2· was there when that was done.· And so we know what our --
·3· we knew what our tension would be at certain pressures,
·4· so we pressured it to that -- that point, and that was
·5· how we did them.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· So you talked about the tensioner
·7· earlier, that you made sure that they were 1,000 psi,
·8· correct?
·9· · · ·A.· ·Yeah, we pulled to 1,000.
10· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And what about the back-stressing
11· method?· What did you do to back-stress?
12· · · ·A.· ·Again, we just -- we tensioned it to where we
13· felt like everything was locked in.· There was no set --
14· I mean, I didn't -- more than likely we pulled it to at
16· that --
17· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Is that --
18· · · ·A.· ·-- to re -- to set it, but --
19· · · ·Q.· ·Go ahead.
20· · · ·A.· ·Go ahead.
21· · · ·Q.· ·I didn't mean to interrupt you.· Were you
22· finished with your answer?
23· · · ·A.· ·Yeah, finished.
24· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Was that two separate steps?
25· · · ·A.· ·Yes.

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Curtis Brown
January 15, 2019
Page 114
·1· · · ·Q.· ·Tensioning and back-stressing?
·2· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· So tell me the difference, because I'm
·4· not sure I understand.· What did you do to tension versus
·5· what you did to back-stress?
·6· · · ·A.· ·Tension is moving -- is pulling the cable
·7· between two points, and you're pulling tension on it.
·8· You're setting the wedges in the barrel, and that's what
·9· locks -- that's what sets the cable.· Then on the other
10· side you go back and you pull the opposite direction
11· where you're pulling against the wedges, and when you
12· pull against the wedges, that's what locks them into
13· place.
14· · · ·Q.· ·Did you use any equipment when you did the
15· back-stressing?
16· · · ·A.· ·Sure.· Used the same tensioner that we used on
17· the front.
18· · · ·Q.· ·Where did you arrive at the value of 1,000 psi?
19· · · ·A.· ·I think it was in a conversation with Michael
20· since we could not find any accurate structural drawings,
21· and it was -- he felt -- he felt and I felt it was a safe
22· number to -- to be able to pull to without doing damage
23· to the building.· We just -- because we didn't know.
24· · · ·Q.· ·Did you have conversations with Michael from
25· Maritech throughout the course of the project?
Page 115
·1· · · ·A.· ·Not really.· I think once he wrote the thing I
·2· might have had an e-mail or two, but I don't remember
·3· details on it.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·So any conversation you would have had with him
·5· would have been on the front end.
·6· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·Is that right?
·8· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·Before you started the work?
10· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
11· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Do you have any idea what code requires
12· for force on those cables?
13· · · ·A.· ·It was more than 1,000.· But again, because we
14· weren't familiar with the building we were afraid to do
15· more, so --
16· · · ·Q.· ·Did you think that was safe, the 1,000 value?
17· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
18· · · ·Q.· ·Were you completely finished with your work in
19· October of 2014?· Is that the right time frame?
20· · · ·A.· ·Sounds right.· I --
21· · · ·Q.· ·When you heard about the first incident, the
22· September of 2016 incident, did it occur to you that
23· there might be something wrong with the cables?
24· · · ·A.· ·Absolutely.· And I expected a call.
25· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· What was your thought?
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
114 to 117
Page 116
·1· · · ·A.· ·I just felt like somebody should have called
·2· me.· Somebody should have -- I mean, I expected questions
·3· and didn't get any.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· What questions did you expect?
·5· · · ·A.· ·What could have happened?· You know, I mean,
·6· it's just -- and I was never asked to go up and inspect
·7· them and look and give any opinion about what was going
·8· on.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·Did it occur to you that maybe there was
10· a problem with the installation of the cables?
11· · · ·A.· ·No.
12· · · ·Q.· ·You think they were --
13· · · ·A.· ·The fear --
14· · · ·Q.· ·Go ahead.
15· · · ·A.· ·The -- the concern I had was the spacing
16· between the cables and the aerodynamics of new cars
17· from -- I just -- but that was not my call.
18· · · ·Q.· ·Did you do anything to make sure the spacing
19· between the cables complied with applicable code?
20· · · ·A.· ·I replaced them as accurately as I could to
21· what was existing.
22· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· So you tried to maintain the same amount
23· of spacing as what was existing?
24· · · ·A.· ·That's exactly what I did.
25· · · ·Q.· ·If there's evidence in this case, physical
Page 117
·1· evidence, that the cables were not back-stressed, do you
·2· disagree with that?
·3· · · ·A.· ·There was a lot of cables in that building and
·4· we were moving at a pretty good pace, so I would say
·5· that -- did I miss one?· Possibly.· I don't -- I don't
·6· know.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·It's possible some --
·8· · · ·A.· ·And there's -- there's times, too, when I was
·9· not on the job 100 percent of the time, so you never --
10· I don't know.
11· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· So it's possible some of the cables were
12· not back-stressed?
13· · · ·A.· ·It could be -- it could be possible.
14· · · ·Q.· ·Have you ever been arrested before?
15· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
16· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Have you ever been convicted of
17· a felony?
18· · · ·A.· ·No.
19· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Tell --
20· · · ·A.· ·I don't think.
21· · · ·Q.· ·Have you been charged with a crime?
22· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
23· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Tell me what crimes you've been charged
24· with.
25· · · ·A.· ·It was when I was very young.· I don't -- I
YVer1f
 Curtis Brown
January 15, 2019
Page 118
·1· don't remember all the details of it.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Was -- did you have a DWI arrest?
·3· · · ·A.· ·I was charged, and it was -- it was dropped.
·4· It was changed from a DWI.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·In 2011?
·6· · · ·A.· ·That sounds right.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Was that Travis County?
·8· · · ·A.· ·I believe it was Williamson.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Were you convicted of anything?
10· · · ·A.· ·No.
11· · · ·Q.· ·Have you ever been arrested for theft?
12· · · ·A.· ·When I was very young.
13· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· How -- over 18?
14· · · ·A.· ·I think I was 17, 18, somewhere in there. I
15· don't remember.
16· · · ·Q.· ·Did you serve time in jail?
17· · · ·A.· ·No.
18· · · ·Q.· ·Have you had some other run-ins with the law?
19· · · ·A.· ·Possibly.· Do I need to -- do I need to get a
20· lawyer to --
21· · · ·Q.· ·No.
22· · · ·A.· ·Okay.· Well, I --
23· · · ·Q.· ·I'm just allowed to ask these questions because
24· it may be --
25· · · ·A.· ·I understand.
Page 119
·1· · · ·Q.· ·-- admissible concerning your credibility.
·2· That's the only reason.· I'm just doing my job.· I don't
·3· mean to offend you.
·4· · · ·A.· ·If I'd have -- I would've brought up -- I would
·5· have pulled my records if I'd have known you wanted them. ·5· which is real estate.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·No.· I'm just asking.
·7· · · ·A.· ·Okay.· Fine.· I don't remember years ago, so --
·8· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.
·9· · · ·A.· ·If you've got something pertinent I will answer
10· it.
11· · · ·Q.· ·Just asking you.
12· · · ·A.· ·Okay.
13· · · ·Q.· ·Have you been convicted of a felony in the last
14· ten years?
15· · · ·A.· ·No.
16· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Okay.· I believe those are
17· all the questions I have for now.· Thank you.· I might
18· have some more, Chris, when you're done.
19· · · · · · · · ·MR. RHODES:· Perfect.
20· · · · · · · · · · · · ·EXAMINATION
21· BY MR. RHODES:
22· · · ·Q.· ·Hi, Mr. Brown.· I represent Premier Parking of
23· Tennessee.· You agreed to perform the work and you got
24· paid for the work on the repairs of the cabling; isn't
25· that true?
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
118 to 121
Page 120
·1· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·You were told that we need to make this safe,
·3· or something like that; is that right?
·4· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Object to form.
·5· · · ·A.· ·We need to repair the cables.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·Were you told they needed to be made safe?
·7· · · ·A.· ·That was -- I mean, that's an obvious
·8· conclusion.· I -- I definitely wanted to make them safe.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·You represented to Stream and Premier that you
10· knew what to do to make the cables safe, right?
11· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Object to form.
12· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
13· · · ·Q.· ·What did you do to make the cables safe?
14· · · ·A.· ·I installed them.· I removed damaged cables
15· that were definitely unsafe and put back new cables that
16· were.
17· · · ·Q.· ·You did not have anyone inspect the work you
18· had done afterward, did you?
19· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Object to form.
20· · · ·A.· ·Once the owners walked through and everybody
21· approved it, that was -- that was the inspection.
22· · · ·Q.· ·Neither Stream nor Premier told you how to do
23· your work, did they?
24· · · ·A.· ·No.
25· · · ·Q.· ·And that was because Stream and Premier were
Page 121
·1· not cabling experts, right?
·2· · · ·A.· ·That's true as I understand it.· I would -- I
·3· would assume that Premier would be more knowledgeable
·4· because of the business you're in as opposed to Stream,
·6· · · · · · · · ·MR. RHODES:· Object to the nonresponsive
·7· portion.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·Did you ever tell Stream or Premier you were
·9· not going to rely on industry codes or standards in
10· performing your work?
11· · · ·A.· ·No.
12· · · ·Q.· ·You worked in cabling for more than 25 years
13· before this job in 2014 and you believed you knew how to
14· make the cables safe; is that right?
15· · · ·A.· ·The combination of the -- of the input I got
16· from Ready Cable and their engineer or salesperson, yes.
17· · · ·Q.· ·You told Stream and Premier you were competent
18· and knew what you were doing, right?
19· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
20· · · ·Q.· ·You said earlier that an engineer was involved
21· in assessing or assisting you in the repair design.
22· · · ·A.· ·Not assisting --
23· · · ·Q.· ·Is that right?
24· · · ·A.· ·-- me.· He was reporting to Stream and I was --
25· I was copied on some of the e-mails and things, but he
YVer1f
 Curtis Brown
January 15, 2019 122 to 125
Page 122 Page 124
·1· didn't report to me, no. ·1· car, the weight of the car on them.· You've got a
·2· · · ·Q.· ·And which engineer was that? ·2· multitude of things.· I mean, that's an engineering
·3· · · ·A.· ·Michael Donoghue, Maritech Engineering. ·3· question more than anything, not -- not me, but it's just
·4· · · ·Q.· ·Did Mr. Donoghue ever tell you that your work ·4· how I feel.
·5· needed to comply with PTI's post-tensioning manual? ·5· · · · · · · · ·MR. RHODES:· Pass the witness.
·6· · · ·A.· ·No, I mean, other than just the reference to ·6· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· I don't have anything further.
·7· some of the things in e-mails that I might have been ·7· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Nothing further.
·8· copied on. ·8· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Kurt?
·9· · · ·Q.· ·So you think he did tell you that you needed to ·9· · · · · · · · ·MR. KURHAJEC:· No, I don't have anything
10· follow that manual in e-mails? 10· for you.· Thank you.
11· · · ·A.· ·No.· I -- I'm talking about conversations that 11· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Thank you, Mr. Brown.· You're
12· I was copied on in e-mails that went to Stream.· He 12· concluded.
13· reported to Stream.· He didn't report to me. 13· · · · · · · · ·(Deposition concluded at 12:36 p.m.)
14· · · ·Q.· ·Did Mr. Donoghue ever quote parts of that 14
15· manual to you? 15
16· · · ·A.· ·No. 16
17· · · ·Q.· ·Have you worked with engineers on projects 17
18· before? 18
19· · · ·A.· ·Yes. 19
20· · · ·Q.· ·Do you expect an engineer to familiarize you 20
21· with applicable codes and industry standards? 21
22· · · ·A.· ·No. 22
23· · · ·Q.· ·And is that because the engineers themselves 23
24· are the ones familiar with codes and standards? 24
25· · · ·A.· ·Yes. 25

Page 123 Page 125

·1· · · ·Q.· ·Contract -- ·1· · · · · · · · · · CHANGES AND SIGNATURE

·2· · · ·A.· ·If they're engineers that I hire I expect them ·2· PAGE/LINE· · · CHANGE· · · · · · · · · · · REASON

·3· to tell me everything I need to know.· But I did not hire ·3· _______________________________________________________

·4· Michael Donoghue, so he was not responsible to tell me ·4· _______________________________________________________

·5· what to do.· I mean, it wasn't -- communications that he ·5· _______________________________________________________

·6· had with Stream was between him and Stream -- ·6· _______________________________________________________

·7· · · ·Q.· ·All right. ·7· _______________________________________________________

·8· · · ·A.· ·-- unless I was copied on the e-mail. ·8· _______________________________________________________

·9· · · ·Q.· ·Isn't it true that engineers are more familiar ·9· _______________________________________________________

10· with codes and standards than you, the contractor? 10· _______________________________________________________

11· · · ·A.· ·Absolutely.· Absolutely. 11· _______________________________________________________

12· · · ·Q.· ·You were asked some questions about Plaintiff 12· _______________________________________________________

13· Christi Bowmer's accident, and you began to talk about 13· _______________________________________________________

14· wheel stops and speeds.· Tell me about your opinion as to 14· _______________________________________________________

15· how speed or wheel stops played a role in her accident. 15· _______________________________________________________

16· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Object to form. 16· _______________________________________________________

17· · · ·A.· ·I mean, I -- anything I'd say would just be 17· _______________________________________________________

18· my -- my feeling.· I don't have any expertise in it, but 18· _______________________________________________________

19· I know when I've pulled up against a wheel stop it stops 19· _______________________________________________________

20· my car if I'm not going too fast.· If I'm going fast, 20· _______________________________________________________

21· then it launches my car.· And if it launches your car, 21· _______________________________________________________

22· then you've got a combination of things that are going on 22· _______________________________________________________

23· with the -- with the cabling.· You know, you've got loads 23· _______________________________________________________

24· in different ways.· You're not just holding the force of 24· _______________________________________________________

25· the car going against it.· You've got the load of the 25· _______________________________________________________

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100
 Curtis Brown
January 15, 2019
Page 126
·1· · · ·I, CURTIS BROWN, have read the foregoing deposition
·2· and hereby affix my signature that same is true and
·3· correct, except as noted above.
·4
·5
·6· · · · · · · · · · ___________________________________
· · · · · · · · · · · CURTIS BROWN
·7
·8· THE STATE OF __________)
·9· COUNTY OF _____________)
10
11· · · ·Before me, ___________________________, on this day
12· personally appeared CURTIS BROWN, known to me (or proved
13· to me under oath or through ___________________________)
14· to be the person whose name is subscribed to the
15· foregoing instrument and acknowledged to me that they
16· executed the same for the purposes and consideration
17· therein expressed.
18· · · · · · Given under my hand and seal of office this
19· _____ day of ________________________, _____.
20
21
22
· · · · · · · · · · · ___________________________________
23· · · · · · · · · · NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR
· · · · · · · · · · · THE STATE OF ______________________
24· · · · · · · · · · COMMISSION EXPIRES: _______________
25
Page 127
·1· · · · · · · · · CAUSE NO. D-1-GN-17-004456
·2· ·CHRISTI J. BOWMER,· · · · ) IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·)
·3· · · · · · Plaintiff,· · · ·)
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·)
·4· ·vs.· · · · · · · · · · · ·) TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·)
·5· ·GTT PARKING, LP,· · · · · )
· · ·PREMIER PARKING OF· · · · )
·6· ·TENNESSEE, LLC, and· · · ·)
· · ·WEITZMAN MANAGEMENT· · · ·)
·7· ·CORPORATION,· · · · · · · )
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·)
·8· · · · · · Defendants.· · · ) 353RD JUDICIAL DISTRICT
·9· · · · · · · · · ·REPORTER'S CERTIFICATION
· · · · · · · · · ·DEPOSITION OF CURTIS BROWN
10· · · · · · · · · · · ·JANUARY 15, 2019
11· · · ·I, TEENA L. HARMON-DAVIS, Certified Shorthand
12· Reporter in and for the State of Texas, hereby certify to
13· the following:
14· · · ·That the witness, CURTIS BROWN, was duly sworn by me
15· and that the transcript of the oral deposition is a true
16· record of the testimony given by the witness;
17· · · ·That the deposition transcript was submitted on
18· _____________________ to the witness or to the attorney
19· for the witness for examination, signature and return to
20· me by _______________________;
21· · · ·That pursuant to information given to me at the time
22· said testimony was taken, the following includes counsel
23· for all parties of record:
24· · · ·Mr. Sean E. Breen, Attorney for the Plaintiff
· · · · ·Ms. Tasha Barnes, Attorney for Defendants GTT
25· · · · · · Parking, LP and Sheldon David Kahn
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
126 to 129
Page 128
·1· · · ·Mr. Christopher L. Rhodes and Mr. Paul Byron Starr,
· · · · · · · Attorneys for Defendant Premier Parking of
·2· · · · · · Tennessee, LLC
· · · · ·Mr. Curtis J. Kurhajec, Attorney for Defendant
·3· · · · · · Weitzman Management Corporation
·4· · · ·That the amount of time used by each party at the
·5· deposition is as follows:
·6· · · ·Mr. Breen - 1 hour:50 minutes
· · · · ·Ms. Barnes - 0 hours:17 minutes
·7· · · ·Mr. Rhodes - 0 hours:06 minutes
· · · · ·Mr. Kurhajec - 0 hours:00 minutes
·8
·9· · · ·I further certify that I am neither counsel for,
10· related to, nor employed by any of the parties or
11· attorneys in the action in which this proceeding was
12· taken, and further that I am not financially or otherwise
13· interested in the outcome of the action.
14· · · ·Further certification requirements pursuant to
15· Rule 203 of TRCP will be certified to after they have
16· occurred.
17· · · ·Certified to by me this ___ day of ________________,
18· 2019.
19
20· · · · · · · · · · ___________________________________
· · · · · · · · · · · TEENA L. HARMON-DAVIS
21· · · · · · · · · · Texas CSR No. 4900
· · · · · · · · · · · Expiration Date:· 10/31/2021
22· · · · · · · · · · U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC.
· · · · · · · · · · · Texas CRCB No. 10558
23· · · · · · · · · · 701 Brazos, Suite 380
· · · · · · · · · · · Austin, Texas· 78701
24· · · · · · · · · · (512) 292-4249
25
Page 129
·1· · · · ·FURTHER CERTIFICATION UNDER RULE 203 TRCP
·2· · · ·The original deposition was/was not returned to the
·3· deposition officer on _________________________;
·4· · · ·If returned, the attached Changes and Signature page
·5· contains any changes and the reasons therefor;
·6· · · ·If returned, the original deposition was delivered
·7· to _________________________, Custodial Attorney;
·8· · · ·That $________ is the charge to the PLAINTIFF for
·9· preparing the original deposition transcript and any
10· copies of exhibits;
11· · · ·That the deposition was delivered in accordance with
12· Rule 203.3, and that a copy of this certificate was
13· served on all parties shown herein on and filed with the
14· Clerk.
15· · · ·Certified to by me this ___ day of ________________,
16· 2019.
17
18
· · · · · · · · · · · ___________________________________
19· · · · · · · · · · TEENA L. HARMON-DAVIS
· · · · · · · · · · · Texas CSR No. 4900
20· · · · · · · · · · Expiration Date:· 10/31/2021
21· · · · · · · · · · U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC.
· · · · · · · · · · · Texas CRCB No. 10558
22· · · · · · · · · · Austin Centre
· · · · · · · · · · · 701 Brazos, Suite 380
23· · · · · · · · · · Austin, Texas· 78701
· · · · · · · · · · · (512) 292-4249
24
25
Exhibit F
Mobile: 214-207-4329

wsmith@structuraltec.com
www.vsl.net
www.structural.net
From: Jessica Wright [ rp_arking.ggn]
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2014 1:37 PM
To: Wade Smith
Cc: Lance Sallis; Caitlyn Ryan; hob@prgmlerpmcãom; 'Ryan Hunt'
Subject: Barrier Cable Repair- Littlefield Garage- Austin, TX

Wade,

Thank you very much for taking time to speak with me today. Per our conversation, we have a garage
here in Austin, TX that is in need of repairs and/or replacement of the existing barrier cables.

The cables that are presently in place are broken, corroded, and loose throughout the 9 levels of this
parking facility.

Can you come out next week to evaluate the damages and provide us a quote on what it will require to
fix them?

I'm looking forward to hearing back from you. If you have any further questions or need me to take a

couple of pictures, please do not hesitate to ask.

My contact info is provided below in my signature.

Sincerely,

Jessica Wright

Jessica Wright / General Manager / 615-339-4937 /i §iiBËR mifd2BLUD&WE

Premier Parking Office: 512-536-1145
508 Brazos Street / Austin, TX 78701 / MERES 1610&&95

The information contained in this transmission and any attachments are for the sole use of the
intended recipient(s) and may be confidential, privileged, copyrighted or may constitute
intellectual property. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution of this
transmission and any attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in

error, please contact the sender and destroy all paper and/or electronic copies of this
transmission.

PREMIER-00138
Exhibit G
 Littlefield Garage - 508 Brazos St. \ Y\,>.J''{A'j
SERVICE CONTRACT EXHIBIT NO.~

Parking Management "l..C)\~ Kim Selbert

1,0,
TIIIS SERVICE CONTRACT (the "Agreement"), dated as of~y and between 6th & Congress
LLC, (hereinafter referred to as "Owner''), and Premier Parking of Tennessee, LLC (hereinafter
referred to as "Contractor"). Stream Realty Partners -Austin, L.P. (hereinafter referred to as "Manager")
is executing this Agreement solely in its capacity as managing agent for O\.\ner, and Manager is
authorized to execute this Agreement on behalf of Ov.ner.

WI1NESSETH

WHEREAS, Owner desires to ·avail itself of the services of Contractor to provide Parking
Management Service for that certain property located at 508 Brazos St. (the "Property"), and Contractor
is willing to so act,

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises herein contained the parties agree as
follows:

1. TERM:

Owner hereby engages Contractor as an independent contractor, to per(orm and provide the Service
hereinafter described for a period of twelve months, commencing o n ~ 2013, and expiring on
5m.~. 2014. Owner or Manager, may terminate this agreement (a) immediately upon written notice
- ~tractor in the event of the sale of all or any portion of the Property, (b) immediately upon
written notice to Contractor in the event of default by Contractor under this Agreement or (c) at any
time by giving Contractor thirty (30) days prior written notice of Owner's election to terminate.
Contractor may terminate this Agreement to be effective on the next annual anniversary date of the
commencement of this Agreement, provided that Contractor provides Manager written notice at least
ninety (90) days prior to such annual anniversary date of the commencement of this Agreement.

2. SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED:

For the consideration hereinafter set forth in Paragraph Number 3 hereof, Contractor agrees to
perform contractor services for the Property in accordance with the schedule and in the manner
specified in the specifications which are attached hereto as ''Exhibit A" and "Exhibit B" - Operating
Parameters", both made a part hereof by reference (the "Service").

3. CONSIDERATION:

During the term of this Agreement, Manager shall pay Contractor the sum set forth in Section 2 of
Exhibit B per month, plus applicable sales tax, for the Service.

4. RELATIONSHIP OF THE PARTIES:

Contractor does hereby acknowledge, represent and warrant that it is an independent contractor in its
relationship with Owner. In no event and/or under no circumstance shall Contractor, in the
perfonnance of the Service be deemed or considered to be acting as a servant, agent, or employee of
Owner or Manager. Contractor agrees that it is solely responsible for all payments due or to become

Stream Realty Partners -Austin, L.P.

Page I of8
S476S86v.2
 due to all its employees, or material suppliers including the withholding of appropriate taxes and the
compliance with any and all worker's compensation laws or similar employer obligations or
requirements with respect to its employees. Contractor acknowledges that (a) Manager has been
hired by Owner to manage the Property, (b) Manager is not affiliated with Owner, (c) Manager does
not have an ownership interest in the Property or Owner, and (d) Manager is acting under this
Agreement solely as the managing agent for Owner and not on Manager's own behalf.

5. PERSONNEL:

Contractor shall supply an adequate number of employees who have been trained and are competent
to perform the services required hereunder. The personnel provided shall be supervised and directed
by a supervisor, who shall be trained and duly qualified to act in such capacity. All personnel shall be
properly uniformed or suitably attired. Contractor agrees to maintain good order and shall be
responsible for the good behavior of its employees while in, on or about the Property. In the event
that Owner or Manager in the exercise of its reasonable discretion shall notify Contractor in writing
that Contractor's employee is unacceptable or unsatisfactory, Contractor immediately shall remove
such employee from the work force at the Property, and Contractor shall supply a replacement
therefor.

6. SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT:

Any and all supplies, equipment, uniforms and/or materials whatsoever, which may be necessary to
perform the Service, shall be furnished by Contractor pursuant to the terms hereof. All materials and
supplies shall be of a quality in keeping with the Budget.

7. COMPLIANCE WITII LAWS AND REGULATIONS:

Contractor agrees to comply with all Federal, State and Local laws, ordinances and/or rules and
regulations in connection with the performance of the Service under this Agreement. In addition,
Contractor agrees to provide to Owner a copy of the Texas Sales and Use Tax Permit which is
attached hereto as "Exhibit G".

8. AGREEMENT OF INDEMNITY AND INSURANCE:

Contractor shall fully defend, indemnify, and hold hannless Manager and Owner, and their respective
directors, officers, members, partners, shareholders, agents, affiliates, subsidiaries and employees
(collectively, the "Other Indemnified Parties"), from and against any and all claims, demands,
liabilities, causes of action, suits, judgments, and expenses (including attorney's fees), for any loss
arising out of or incident to or in connection with the performance of the Service or resulting from
Contractor's failure to perl'orm its other obligations under this Agreement (other than a loss arising
from the sole or gross negligence of Manager, Owner or the Other Indemnified Parties) even though
caused or alleged to be caused by the joint, comparative, or concWTent negligence or fault of Manager
and 0\\ner or the Other Indemnified Parties, and even though any such claim, cause of action, or suit
is based upon or alleged to be based upon the strict liability of Manager and Owner or the Other
Indemnified Parties. THIS INDEMNITY PROVISION IS INTENDED TO INDEMNIFY
MANAGER, OWNER AND THE OTHER INDEMNIFIED PARTIES AGAINST THE
CONSEQUENCES OF THEIR OWN NEGLIGENCE OR FAULT AS PROVIDED ABOVE
WHEN MANAGER, OWNER OR THE OTHER INDEMNIFIED PARTIES ARE JOINTLY,
COMPARATIVELY, OR CONCURRENTLY NEGLIGENT WIIB CONTRACTOR. This
indemnity provision shall sunive termination or expiration of this Agreement.

Stream Realty Partners - Austin, L.P.

Page 2 of8
5476586,·.2
 Contractor shall at all times carry and maintain,on its operations hereunder: Worker's Compensation
and Employer's Liability covering all of its employees in an amount reasonably acceptable to Owner
in keeping with the Budget; Comprehensive General Liability Insurance including Automobile
Liability, with limits of liability not less than $1,000,000 combined single limit. Such liability
insurance shall be endorsed to include the Owner, Manager, and the Other Indemnified Parties as
additional insureds, and to provide a cross liability provision. Contractor shall also provide Umbrella
Liability coverage in excess of the Employer's Liability, Automobile Liability and Comprehensive
General Liability listed above in an amount not less than $2,000,000 per occurrence/$2,000,000
aggregate.

Such insurance shall be with insurance companies licensed to do business in the State of Texas.
Before Contractor performs work at or on the Property or delivers material to the Property, Contractor
shall furnish evidence of the foregoing insurance co,·erage satisfactory to Owner and Manager. The
certificates of liability insurance shall state that the policies insure the Owner and Manager, as
Owner's agent, against liability for all claims arising out of or in connection with the Service to be
performed by the Contractor, and that the policies insure the performance of the Contractor's defense
and indemnity obligations described in the first grammatical paragraph of this Paragraph Number 8.
Said insurance certificates shall verify that Contractor's insurance policies will not be canceled or
reduced without ten (10) days prior written notice to Owner and Manager.

Contractor shall maintain all of the foregoing insurance coverage in full force and effect, and in
accordance with "Exhibit C" (titled Insurance Requirements for Service Contracts), until the term of
this Agreement is fully completed. The requirements for carrying the foregoing insurance shall not
derogate from the provision for indemnification ..

Contractor shall look solely to Owner for performance under this Agreement and recourse against
Owner hereunder shall be limited to proceeding against Owner's interest in the Property or the
proceeds of disposition of the Property.

9. PERMfITED ASSIGNMENT:

Contractor may not assign this Agreement without the prior written consent of Owner or Manager. If
Contractor does assign this Agreement without such prior written consent, Owner or Manager may
immediately tenninate this Agreement without penalty.

Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, Owner or Manager shall be permitted to
assign all of its right, title and interest in and to this Agreement to any other entity that is directly or
indirectly wholly-o\\ned by Owner or Manager. Such permitted assignment shall include any
assignment that may be deemed to occur by operation of law in connection with any merger or
consolidation of Manager with and/or into any other entity directly or indirectly wholly-owned by
Stream Realty Partners, L.P. (an "Intragroup Merger"). Any such lntragroup Merger shall not be
deemed a breach of, cause a default or trigger any right of termination under, any other provision of
this Agreement.

10. NOTICES:

Stream Realty Partners - Austin, L.P.

Page 3 of8
5476586v.2
 All notices or other writing in this Agreement to be given shall be deemed to have been fully given,
made or sent when hand delivered or deposited in the United States mail, certified or registered, and
postage prepaid and address as follows:

CONTRACTOR: Premier Parking of Tennessee,, LLC

421 Church Street_
Nashville, Tennessee
37219_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

MANAGER: Stream Realty Partners - Austin, L.P.

Attention: Property Manager
th
400 W. 15 Street
Suite 1250 Austin, Texas
512.481.3000
512.481.3001

With a copy to:

OWNER: Stream Realty Partners

Suzanne Pfeiffer
400 W. 15th Street Suite 1250
Austin, Texas 78701
512.481.3000
512.481.3001

The address to which any notice or other writing may be given, made or sent to either party, may be
changed by written notice given by such party as above described.

11. CONFLICT:

Should there be a conflict between this Agreement and any of the Schedules or Exhibits attached
hereto, this Agreement shall take precedence.

12. EMPLOYEE QUALIFICATIONS:

Contractor agrees to take reasonable steps to adequately screen its employees during the hiring
process to prevent employees or laborers from working on the Property if they have a conviction or
deferred-adjudication history of any crime that may pose a serious potential risk of injury to persons
working or visiting the Property. This requirement is subject to applicable law; and it includes, but is
not limited to, crimes such as rape, molestation, sexual assault, indecent exposure, indecency with a
child, murder and kidnapping. Contractor will be responsible for determining the best way to
exercise that due diligence. This employee screening requirement is consistent with the Contractor's
duty under the common law of negligent hiring and includes screening steps, such as using questions
on applications to check for criminal backgrounds, contacting previous employers listed in the
employment application, and utilizing online services such as www.publicdata.com and
www.txdps.state.tx.us. Costs incurred by Contractor in completing such screening will be
reimbursable Operating Expenses, as defined in Exhibit B.

13. PATENT INFRINGEMENT:

Contractor warrants that none of the methods or materials used by Contractor in perfonning the

Stream Realty Partners -Austin, L.P.

Page4 of8
S476586v.2
 Service will infringe any patent, trademark, copyright or other right of any third party.

14. CONFIDENTIALITY OF INFORMATION:

Contractor recognizes that in performing the Senice under this Agreement, Contractor may be given
access to Manager's or Owner's premises, processes and documents. Contractor agrees as folJows
with regard to any and all information and documents it comes into possession of while performing
the Service:

a. To keep in confidence and prevent disclosure to any persons or organizations outside its
organization, or to any persons within its organization not having a need to know, all
information heretofore or hereafter provided to Contractor by Manager or Owner or their
respective designees, provided, however, that Contractor shall not be liable for disclosure or
use of such information if it:

1) was in the public domain at the time it was disclosed;

2) was known to Contractor at the time of receipt (other than by previous disclosure to
Contractor by Manager or Owner);

3) is required to be disclosed to any governmental authority in the performance of the

obligations of either party related to this Agreement;

4) was independently developed by Contractor; or

5) becomes known to Contractor from a source other than Manager or Owner or their
affiliates without breach of this Agreement by Contractor.
b. At the conclusion of the tenn of this Agreement, upon Manager's written request and at no
expense to Contractor, Contractor agrees to turn over to Manager for Owner's benefit copies
of all notes, tapes, drafts, files, data, drawings and every other tangible piece of information
collected or prepared while performing the Service.

15. OWNERSHIP AND USE OF DOCUMENTS AND INVENTIONS:

a. All drawings and specifications, computations, sketches, test data, survey results,
photographs, renderings, models and other materials peculiar to the Service prepared by
Contractor or Contractor's consultants shall be and remain the property of Ov.ner and for
O\\ner's exclusive use and re-use at any time without further compensation to Contractor and
without any restrictions; provided, however, that if Owner uses such drawings, specifications
or other documents or data for any other project, Owner shall indemnify Contractor for any
claims or liabilities incurred by Contractor and resulting therefrom, other than any such
claims relating to the negligence, gross negligence, or intentional misconduct of Contractor.
Contractor shall treat all such materials and information as confidential, and Contractor shall
neither use any such materials or information or copies thereof on other work nor disclose
such materials or information to any other party without Manager's or Owner's prior written
approval.

b. Any and all discoveries, improvements or inventions that Contractor or its employees may
conceive or make pertaining to, resulting from, or suggested by the Service performed or any
information acquired during the performance of the Service, concerning any processes,
methods, machines or tools used or capable of being used, by or for Manager or Owner, shall

Stream Realty Partners -Austin, L.P.

Page 5 of8
5476586v.2
 be the property of Owner, and to that end Contractor agrees to assign to Owner all
Contractor's right, title and interest, including patent rights, in and to any and all such
discoveries, improvements and inventions. Contractor shall not use for its own benefit or
disclose or deliver any such infonnation or data to any other person or persons without
Manager's or Owner's prior written consent.

16. BINDING EFFECT:

It is the intention of the parties hereto that the terms, conditions and provisions of this Agreement
shall be legally binding upon and insure to the benefit of and be enforceable by each of the parties
hereto and their respective successors and assigns.

17. JURY WANER:

The parties hereby waive a jury trial in any suit relating to or arising out of this Agreement.

18. GOVERNING LAW:

This Agreement and the rights and obligations of the parties shall be interpreted, construed and
enforced in accordance with the laws of the state of Texas.

19. COUNTERPARTS/ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES:

This Agreement may be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an
original, and all of which, when taken together, shall constitute one instrwnent Documents executed
and transmitted by facsimile or electronic mail shall have the same force and effect as documents
bearing original signatures and transmitted by non-electronic means.

20. FULL AGREEMENT: AMENDMENTS.

This Agreement along with the Exhibits contains the parties' entire agreement regarding the subject
matter hereof. All understandings, discussions, and agreements previously made between the parties,
written or oral, are superseded by this Agreement, and neither party is relying upon any warranty,
statement or representation not contained in this Agreement. This Agreement may be modified only
by a written agreement signed by Contractor and Owner.

[Remainder ofpage intentionally left blank./

Stream Realty Partners -Austin, L.P.

Page6 of8
5476586v.2
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by their
duly authorized representatives on the date below.

CONTRACTOR: OWNER:

Premier Parking of Tennessee, LLC. Ownership Legal Entity.

By: Stream Realty Partners-Austin, L.P.,

a Texas limited partnership,
as managing agent of Owner .
0-.<-l-,t,.JJ "-#«t-iri-t-v- l-,t'-4. iJ,-t,~ft.B,4(J ,,,,, ; UJI},
L-{._ ,. rs bJ VUA<. .A-111r.--'~

By: 124.rz
Name: Ryan Chapman Name: Du2-i-~ L lhl D
Title: President Title: /11 ,t,l/lt6UL

Stream Realty Partners -Austin, L.P.

Page 7 of8
S476586v.2
 EXHIBIT A

Stream Realty Partners -Austin, L.P.

Page 8 of8
5476586v.2
 EXHIBITC

INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR SERVICE CONTRACT

PROPERTY: Property Name

Austin, TX

MANAGER: Stream Realty Partners - Austin, L.P.

OWNER: Legal Entity.

CONTRACTOR: Vendor

SERVICE: Type of Service

ADDITIONALLY
INSURED: Legal Entity. (Owner) and
Stream Realty Partners - Austin, L.P. (Manager)

LOSS PAYEE: Legal Entity. (Owner) and

Stream Realty Partners -Austin, L.P. (Manager)

COVERAGE
REQUIREMENTS: Refer to Section 8 in body of the contract for this requirement.

Stream Realty Partners - Austin, L.P.

Page 9 of8
S416586,.2
 EXHIBITB

OPERATING PARAMETERS

1. Gross Revenues, Operating Expenses, and Operating Surplus are defined as follows:

(a) "Gross Revenues" shall include all revenues received by Contractor (excluding all sales
taxes or other charges required to be remitted to any governmental agency) from its
operation of the Property.

(b) "Operating Expenses" shall include all the expenses of providing the management
services as set forth in the one-year Approved Budget, a copy of which is attached hereto
as Exhibit "D," other than (i) expenses of a capital cost nature; (ii) those expenses to be
borne by Contractor (set forth in Exhibit E; and (iii) those expenses to be borne by
Owner (set forth in Exhibit F). Operating Expenses shall include but shall not be limited
to:

1) Wages of supervisory personnel assigned or allocated to the Property, attendants,

cashiers, clerical and audit staff and a charge from Contractor for employee benefits
including, but not limited to payroll taxes, social security, workers' compensation
insurance, unemployment insurance, group health insurance, and retirement
benefits, and a fee for administering such benefits;

2) Telephone expenses; including office fax, cell phones and other data lines necessary
for computers, credit card processing and elevators communications.

3) Business taxes, other than franchise taxes on income or profits;

4) License and permits;

5) Advertising and promotion costs;

6) Insurance to the extent required of Contractor in this Agreement;

7) Sundry items such as uniforms, receipt paper, light bulbs, ballasts, paint, oil
absorbent, office supplies, tickets and janitorial supplies, etc;

8) Payroll processing and accounts receivable processing expense;

9) Voluntary settlement of patrons' claims for vehicle damage or loss of contents

provided that the same has been authorized by Manager and approved by
Contractor;

Stream Realty Partners - Austin, L.P.

Page 10 of8
S476586v.2
 10) Normal maintenance and repairs of the Property including snow removal, repainting
of stall markings, replacement or repair of signs, automated equipment and ticket
dispensing equipment;

11) Legal or audit charges directly attributable to the operation of the Property other
than those performed by the staff of Contractor or Manager if approved in advance
by Manager or Owner;

12) Costs of special audits perfonned by Contractor's staff auditor for the mutual
benefit of Contractor, Owner and Manager; provided, however, that the time and
manner of the taking of the audit is approved by Manager in advance. Costs
qualifying as Operating Expense shall be limited to a mutually agreed upon per
diem rate and actual out-of-pocket expenses of the auditor during the period of an
approved special audit;

13) Payment of the "deductible" amount of insurance claims settlement, and payment of
claims in excess of policy limits;
14) Expenses incurred by Contractor in screening employees who apply for work for
Contractor at the Property pursuant to Section 5 of the Service Contract.

(c) "Operating Surplus" shall be defined as "Gross Revenues" less "Operating Expenses."

(d) At least 15 days prior to the commencement of the frrst year of the term hereof (the frrst
"Contract Year"), Contractor shall prepare and submit to Manager for its approval a
proposed operating budget (the "Budget") for such first Contract Year. The Budget shall
include all expenses to be paid by Contractor in the operation of the Property pursuant to
the terms hereof. The Budget for each subsequent Contract Year of the tenn hereof shall
include an automatic adjustment tied to the Consumer Price Index for all Urban
Consumers (CPI-lJ). In the event the parties cannot agree on the proposed budget by the
beginning of the new contract year, Contractor shall utilize the last Approved Budget,
adjusted by the CPI-U until such time as the proposed budget is approved. Contractor
shall not, without first obtaining the prior written approval of Manager, incur any
expense item in excess of the greater of One Thousand Dollars ($1,000) or 110% of the
amount, for such item as shown on the Budget unless such item is necessitated by an
emergency which does not permit Contractor to obtain the prior written approval of
Manager; provided Manager shall be informed by the next business day of any such
expenditure.

(e) Contractor shall provide consulting and advisory services to Manager concerning the
Property without additional charge except for reimbursement of out-of-pocket expenses
such as postage, printing and supply charges, phone charges, drafting expenses in
connection with the performance of services requested or required by Manager, and
similar out-of-pocket expenses. Such expenses shall be supported by cash receipts or
other documentary proof of payment.

Stream Realty Partners - Austin, L.P.

Page 11 of8
5476586v.2
 2. Contractor covenants that it will use methods widely accepted in the parking industry to
collect or cause to be collected all of the gross receipts from the operation and use of the
Property, but Contractor is not a guarantor of revenues. The Gross Revenues for each
month's operation shall thereafter, on or before the fifteenth (15 th) day of the succeeding
month, be disbursed by Contractor as follows:

(a) Contractor shall pay all Operating Expenses,

(b) Contractor shall then pay to itself out of the Gross Revenue the following amount:

For each month commencing with the date of this Agreement, an amount based on an
annualized computation, which shall be mathematically adjusted monthly, equal to the
following Schedule:

3% of the first $1,500,000 of Operating Surplus per Contract Year; plus

5% of Operating Surplus above $1,500,000 per Contract Year

Thresholds shall be adjusted upwards (equal to excess amount) if total Operating

Expenses exceed 105% of the total Operating Expense Budget for a given Contract Year
with exception of "repairs and maintenance" or other unforeseen circumstances.

(c) After payment of the amounts as directed in (a) and (b) above, the balance of the
Operating Swplus shall be paid to Manager monthly in conjunction with Contractor's
monthly report to Manager listing Gross Revenues and Operating Expenses generated by
the Property in the preceding calendar month ("Monthly Report"). The Monthly Report
is to be submitted by Contractor for each month of the term hereof by the fifteenth (15th)
day of the next succeeding calendar month.

(d) If the Gross Revenues for any month are insufficient to make the payments required
under subparagraphs (a) and (b) above, Owner agrees to remit to Contractor the amount
of such deficit within ten (10) days after receipt of Contractor's report. In the event
Owner fails to reimburse Contractor within said ten (10) day period, and Owner does not
remedy such failure within five (5) days of receipt of written notice from Contractor,
then Contractor shall have the right to terminate this Agreement with immediate effect.
Within thirty (30) days of such termination, Owner shall remit to Contractor the full
amount of any non-reimbursed Operating Expenses paid by Manager. In no event shall
Contractor be obligated to pay Operating Expenses when sufficient Gross Revenues from
Contractor's operation of the Property are not available.

3. Contractor agrees to operate the Property in an efficient manner and on days and hours
customary in the trade, commensurate with parking demand in the area Such operation shall
be continuous unless Manager shall otherwise agree in writing. Charges for parking in the
Property will be commensurate with the demand for parking space and in accord with

Stream Realty Partners - Austin, L.P.

Page 12 of8
S476586v.2
 existing parking rates in the area. Parking rates shall not be varied without written approval
of the Manager.

4. Contractor agrees that it will keep records of Gross Revenue and Operating Expenses
pertaining to each Contract Year of its operation of the Property for one (I) year, following
such Contract Year and Client's rights of action against Manager shall be co-terminus with
said record retention period.

5. Owner agrees to maintain the sidewalks and curb cuts adjacent to the Property in accordance
with applicable municipal statutes. Owner shall also be responsible for all Property repairs
including, but not limited to: electrical, plumbing, pavement repair, painting of the structure,
replacement of all mercury or sodium lighting tubes and ballasts, repairs to the walls and
floors of the Property, booths, sinkholes, and maintenance of ventilation system and
elevators.

Contractor agrees to use reasonable diligence in the care and protection of the Property during
the term of this Agreement and to surrender the Property at the termination of this Agreement
in as good condition as received, ordinary wear and tear and casualty excepted.

Any structural, mechanical, electrical or other installations or any alterations required by statutes
or regulations pertaining to air quality, environmental protection, provisions for persons with
disabilities or other similar governmental requirements shall be the sole responsibility of Owner.
Owner acknowledges that Contractor's obligations hereunder do not include the rendering of
service, supervision, or furnishing of personnel in connection with the personal safety and security
of any persons within or about the Property, nor does any insurance provided by Contractor cover
such claims. Contractor has no knowledge or expertise as a guard or security service, employs no
personnel for that purpose, and Contractor's employees do not guard or protect customers or any
other persons or property against the intentional acts of third parties. Owner shall determine, in its
discretion, the extent to which precautionary warnings and security devices or services may be
required to protect persons in and about the Property.

It is agreed that any actions, costs, claims, losses, expenses, and/or damages resulting from design
or structural faults or defects are the responsibility of Owner.

Owner does hereby waive all rights of recovery, if any, against Contractor for damage to, or
destruction oi the Property in the event such damage or destruction is caused by fire or other
casualty which can be covered under a standard fire and extended coverage insurance policy.

Owner shall obtain and maintain liability insurance on elevators in the Property including
Contractor as additional insured.

Owner shall obtain fire and extended coverage insurance covering the Property and the
equipment contained therein.

Stream Realty Partners -Austin, L.P.

Page 13 of8
5476586".2
 All insurance coverages are subject to a deductible amount, not to exceed $2,500 per claim, except
Workers' Compensation which deductible shall be $0, and insurance for stolen vehicles, which
deductible shall be $5,000. The deductible amounts and insurance premiums may be changed
upon 60 days written notice to Manager. The payment of the deductible amount will be considered
an Operating Expense of the Property. It is understood that the liability policies carried by
Manager as noted above do not provide coverage for any claim pertaining to security issues or
services. Any losses not covered by the above insurance shall constitute expenses of the Owner

6. Upon completion of the first Contract Year of this Agreement, and again on every
subsequent anniversary date, this Agreement shall be automatically renewed for additional
one-year periods, unless either party shall give written notice to the other, at least sixty (60)
days prior to the expiration of the initial term or any renewal hereof, that the Agreement shall
not be so extended.

7. In the event Contractor shall intentionally fail to fully and faithfully deposit all the Gross
Revenues from the operation of the Property or shall intentionally fail to disburse same only
in the manner provided for herein, or in the event Contractor shall become bankrupt or
insolvent, or suffer the appointment of a receiver, or make an assignment for creditors,
Manager or Owner shall have the right to forthwith terminate this Agreement, regain
immediate possession of the Property, and hold the Contractor liable for any damages
resulting to Owner.

Stream Realty Partners - Austin, L.P.

Page 14 of8
5476586v.2
 EXHIBIT D -BUDGET

1.......

$95,000
$1,000
-, - $95,0IIO
$1,000
lrttlef•~ld G.l'il

MIIJ
..,....,_ Odo'lor ............
-
$95,000
$1,000
t.lli•TtW2

JJ,,1~00,,
·)96.aoo
$30,000
$133,000
$10,71ll
$W.Z!l!I

$4,165 $4,16! $6,245 $4,W $4,163 $4,16! $4,16' $6.245 $4,163 $4,163 $4,163 ~
$458 $458 $587 $458 $458 $4511 $458 $617 $458 $458 $458 ss.~

~--
$167 $107 $250 $167 $167 $167 $167 $250 $167 $167 $167 ~-m
$100 $100 $100 $100 $1D0 $100 $100 $100 $100 $100 $100 $1,'lOO
$677 $677 $1,015 $677 $677 $677 $677 $1,015 $677 $677 $677 1',f9!;.
$500 $500 $500 $500 $SDO $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500
$25 $25 $:IS $25 $25 $25 $25 $25 $25 $25 $25
$1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1.000 $1,ooo $1,000 $>.l,OOV
$150 $150 $15o $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 SUOI>
$150 $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 $1.M
$150 $150 $150 $150 $150 $15D $150 $150 $150 $150 $15o Sl,iOO
$50 $50 $50 $50 $50 $50 $SD $50 $50 $50 $50 ~
$150 $150 $150 $15o $150 $150 $150 $150 $15D $150 $150 $1.111111

--
$500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 .,,l!OO
$50 $50 $50 $50 $50 $50 $50 $50 $50 f600
$1.1'1 $1.J&t $Ult $1,219 SlJ,021 $l,Zl9 111.219
$U4,01I) $114,010 $11A,020 $11U10 $111,211 $:IM,81ll $114.1118 $UA,OIO
$3,407 $3,407 $3,407 $3,407 $3,407 $3,407 $3,407
tuo. $UG,W $UG,IU smm 774

Stream Realty Partners - Austin, L.P

Page 15 of8
S416S86v.2
EXHIBITE

EXHIBITE

EXPENSES OF CONTRACTOR

I. Salaries, travel and accommodation expenses of all executive personnel of Manager.

2. General and administrative expenses of Manager not allocable directly to operations at the
Property.

3. Personal property taxes of Contractor's property.

Stream Realty Partners - Austin, L.P

Page 16 of8
5476586v.2
 EXHIBITF

EXPENSES OF OWNER

1. Real and personal property taxes of Owner's property.

2. All claims, expenses and/or damages arising from, or caused by structural or design
deficiencies or by improper work or supervision during construction including, without
limitation, settlement, collapse or inadequacy of structure or equipment, and all repairs related
thereto.

3. Debt service with respect to land, building and equipment.

4. Costs of legal and auditing fees of Owner.

5. Salaries and wages of all employees of Owner.

6. Costs incurred by Manager in the supervision of obligations of Contractor.

7. Costs of maintaining elevators, sprinkler and ventilation systems.

8. Utilities expense of the Property.

9. Capital expenditures, improvements, alterations, additions and all new equipment, including all
architectural and engineering fees in connection therewith.

10. Costs of payroll and equipment of security personnel.

11. Cost of premiums for fire and extended coverage insurance covering the Property.

Stream Realty Partners -Austin, L.P.

Page 17 of8
5476586v.2
 Stream Realty Partners - Austin, L.P.
Page 18 of8
5476586v.2
Exhibit H
 .
.
'

EXHIBIT

Sounds great. Thanks again for lunch and your attention on this.

Eric

Eric A, Herron, AIA

VP - Construction & Development
e i-ic .herron@s t reamrealt y.com

STREAM REALTY PARTNERS

515 Congress Avenue, Suite 1300
Austin, Texas 78701
T: 512.481.3040
M: 512.694.7528
www.s t rearnrealty . com

From: C Michael Donoghue [mailto:cmd@maritechengineering.com]

Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 1:51 PM
To: Eric Herron
Subject: Re: Littlefield Garage Barriers

Eric,

It was a pleasure visiting with you today. Please look forward to a proposal from Maritech in a few days.

cmd
C Michael Donoghue, PE, LEED AP
Maritech Engineering, Inc
Austin, Texas, USA

From: Stream Realty <eric.herron@streamrealty.com>

Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 15:35:52 +0000
To: C Michael Donoghue <cmd@maritechengineering.com>
Cc: Curtis Brown <inventit.cb@gmail.com>
Subject: RE: Littlefield Garage Barriers

Mike,

My 10:30 meeting is starting a bit late, so I might have to push back to 11:45,

Eric

Eric A. Herron, AIA

VP - Construction & Development
eric.herron@st rea111real ty . com

124
 STREAM REALTY PARTNERS
515 Congress Avenue, Suite 1300
Austin, Texas 78701
T: 512. 481. 3040
M: 512.694.7528
www . streamrealty.com

From: C Michael Donoghue [mailto:cmd@maritechenglneering.com]

Sent: Monday, June 16, 201411:14 AM
To: Eric Herron
Cc: Curtis Brown
Subject: Re: Littlefield Garage Barriers

Thank you for your reply. It's a relief not dealing with current requirements, not to mention the standard of care. They are
onerous.

On Wednesday, I'll come to your office at 515 Congress at 11:30.

cmd
C Michael Donoghue, PE, LEED AP
Maritech Engineering, Inc
Austin, Texas, USA
··------ - ---·---·-
..•. - ·--···· ··-- - ··- - --····-··-· ···- ·- •· .. -------·---------·-----·-----
From: Stream Realty <eric.herron@streamrealty.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 14:56:51 +0000
To: C Michael Donoghue <cmd@maritechengineering.com>
Cc: Curtis Brown <inventit.cb@gmail.com>
Subject: RE: Littlefield Garage Barriers

Mike,

Let's do lunch Wednesday at 11:30. I have a 1:00 meeting here in my office, so if we

could. do it nearby, that would be best for me.

As you know, I need to push this solution ahead as quickly as possible. The intent is
not to bring this garage up to current code, but instead to make repairs to the existing
cable-railing to bring it back to the condition it was when new. The existing building
code allows for repair of building elememnts without being bound by current code

I requirements.

Thanks and let me know if Wednesday at 11:30 works for you.

block or two to get something to eat down here.
We can meet here and walk a

Eric

Eric A. Herron, AIA

VP - Construction & Development
e!'i ,~ . heri-on@s tream rea l ty . com

STREAM REALTY PARTNERS

515 Congress Avenue, Suite 1300
Austin, Texas 78701
T: 512.481.3040
M: 512.694.7528
www.streamrealty.com

125
 From: Michael Donoghue lmailto:cmd@maritechengineering.com)
Sent: Monday, June 16, 2014 9:47 AM
To: Eric Herron
Cc: Curtis Brown
Subject: Littlefield Garage Barriers

Mr. Herron,

I would like to briefly follow up on our telephone conversation of last week regarding the above. As you know, Curtis
. Brown and I made a quick, cursory visit to the above. Curtis subsequently sent me a link to your Dropbox with the
available drawings. As I believe you indicated the drawings are rather sparse and include no structural information.

Based on what we saw in a ten minute tour there are definitely numerous basic safety issues to be addressed
regarding the vehicle barriers. Looking at the current IBC code there are also potential pedestrian and guardrail
issues. The absence of structural documents only compounds the issues most likely. During our phone call I suggested
the best place to start in formulating some kind of approach is the conduct a survey of the existing conditions. After
looking at the plan and doing a basic code review I think probably best to visit with you first to assess your goals.

I'd like to suggest we meet either at the site or perhaps for lunch at some point later this week to sort through the
issues and your objectives and constraints. If you are amenable I'd like to propose we meet at a convenient time this
Wednesday or Thursday.

It was a pleasure meeting you if even just on the phone. If you'd like my office number is 512 326 3232 and cell is 512
632 0530.

cmd

C. Michael Donoghue, PE, LEED AP

Maritech Engineering, Inc.
Austin, Texas, USA

126
Exhibit I
From: Wade Smith [mailto:wsm ith@structura ltec.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 08, 201410:11 AM
To: Jessica Wright <jessica@premierparking.com >
Cc: bob@premierpmc.com; Don Sees <dsees@structuralte c.com>
Subject: RE : Barrier Cable Repair- Littlefield Garage- Au st in, TX

Jessica,

It was nice meeting you as well. As we discussed during our visit the current condition of the cable
system in your garage will not comply with today's standards. In order to repair only those cables that are
laying on the ground or missing all together modifications would need to be made . Unfortunately
modifications cannot be made to a system out of compliance without bringing the whole system up to
code .

Knowing the severity of the garages current condition VSL will not be able to perform your requested
modifications . Shou ld you and your team reconsider bringing the barrier cable system up to code , in turn
making your garage safe, please let us know.

Best Regards ,

Wade Smith
Business Development
Project Manager

_ ,.I
st rue ,:t u:ra
TECHNO!.OGIES
I OI
15600 Trinity Boulevard
Fort Worth, Texas 76155

Office: 817-545-4807
Direct: 817-545-2302
Mobile: 214-207-4329

wsm ith@structu ra ltec.com

www.vsl.net
www.structural.net
From: Jessica Wright [mai lto: jessica@premierparki nq.com ]
Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2014 12:55 PM
To: Wade Smith
Cc: bob@premierpmc.com
Subject: RE: Barrier Cable Repair- Littlefield Garage- Austin, TX

Wade,

It was very nice to meet with you last week. Have you had any progress on the quote?

PREM IER-00 147

Exhibit J
 Robert Chapman
January 09, 2019 1
Page 1
·1· · · · · · · · ·CAUSE NO. D-1-GN-17-004456

·2· ·CHRISTI J. BOWMER,· · · · · · · · )IN THE DISTRICT

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·)COURT OF
·3· · · · · · · · Plaintiff,· · · · · ·)
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·)TRAVIS COUNTY,
·4· ·vs.· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·)TEXAS
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·)
·5· ·GTT PARKING, LP, SHELDON DAVID· · )
· · ·KAHN, PREMIER PARKING OF· · · · · )353RD JUDICIAL
·6· ·TENNESSEE, LLC, and WEITZMAN· · · )DISTRICT
· · ·MANAGEMENT CORPORATION,· · · · · ·)
·7· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·)
· · · · · · · · · Defendants.· · · · · )
·8· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·)
· · ·_________________________________ )
·9

10

11

12
· · · · · · ·Videotaped Deposition of:
13

14
· · · · · · ·ROBERT CHAPMAN
15

16
· · · · · · ·Taken on behalf of the Plaintiff
17

18
· · · · · · ·January 9, 2019
19

20

21
· · -------------------------------------------------------
22

23

24

25

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

1-800-567-8757 YVer1f
 Robert Chapman
January 09, 2019 2 to 5
Page 2 Page 4
·1· APPEARANCES: ·1· · · · · · The videotaped deposition of ROBERT
·2· ·For the Plaintiff:· · SEAN BREEN, ESQ.
·2· ·CHAPMAN was taken by counsel for the Plaintiff, at
· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·Howry Breen & Herman
·3· · · · · · · · · · · · ·1900 Pearl Street ·3· ·the offices of Butler Snow, 150 3rd Avenue South,
· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·Austin, Texas 78705
·4· ·Suite 1600, Nashville, Tennessee, on
·4· · · · · · · · · · · · ·(512) 430-4844
·5· ·For the Defendant· · ·TASHA L. BARNES, ESQ. ·5· ·January 9, 2019 at 12:46 p.m. for all purposes
· · ·GTT Parking:· · · · · Thompson Coe Cousins & Irons,
·6· ·under the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure.
·6· · · · · · · · · · · · ·LLP
· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·701 Brazos, Suite 1500 ·7· · · · · · The formalities as to notice, caption,
·7· · · · · · · · · · · · ·Austin, Texas 78701
·8· ·certificate, et cetera, are waived.· All
· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·(512) 703-5038
·8· · · · · · · · · · · · ·tbarnes@thompsoncoe.com ·9· ·objections, except as to the form of the question,
·9· ·For the Defendant· · ·CHRISTOPHER L. RHODES, ESQ.
· · ·Premier Parking:· · · Holstein & Associates 10· ·are reserved to the hearing.
10· · · · · · · · · · · · ·9601 McAllister Freeway 11· · · · · · It is agreed that Rhonda S. Nicholson,
· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·Suite 910
11· · · · · · · · · · · · ·San Antonio, Texas 78216 12· ·being a licensed court reporter and notary public
· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·(512) 423-2058 13· ·for the State of Tennessee, may swear the witness,
12· · · · · · · · · · · · ·Crhodes2@travelers.com
13· ·For the Defendant· · ·CURTIS J. KURHAJEC, ESQ. 14· ·and that the reading and signing of the completed
· · ·Weitzman· · · · · · · Naman, Howell, Smith & Lee, 15· ·deposition by the witness were not discussed.
14· ·Management:· · · · · ·PLLC
· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·Prominent Pointe One 16
15· · · · · · · · · · · · ·8310 N. Capital of Texas 17
· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·Highway, Suite 490
16· · · · · · · · · · · · ·Austin, Texas 78731 18· · · · · · · · · · · · ·* * *
· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·(512) 479-0300 19
17· · · · · · · · · · · · ·ckurhajec@namanhowell.com
18 20
19 21
20
· · ·Also Present:· · · · ·David Drumel, Videographer 22
21· · · · · · · · · · · · ·Hunter Kitchens, Esq. 23
22
23 24
24 25
25

Page 3 Page 5
·1· · · · · · · · · · · · ·I N D E X ·1· · · · · ·* * * P R O C E E D I N G S * * *
·2· Questions by Mr. Breen· · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·5 ·2· · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Good afternoon.
·3 ·3· ·We're on the record at 12:46 p.m.· This is the
·4 ·4· ·videotaped deposition of Robert Chapman in the
·5· · · · · · · · · · · ·E X H I B I T S ·5· ·matter of Bowmer versus GTT Parking.· Cause number
·6· No. 53:· · LinkedIn Profile· · · · · · · · · · · · ·28 ·6· ·D-1-GN-17-004456.· This deposition is being held
·7· No. 54:· · Consulting Brochure· · · · · · · · · · · 29 ·7· ·at Butler Snow, 150 3rd Avenue South, in
·8· No. 55:· · June 2014 E-mail· · · · · · · · · · · · ·47 ·8· ·Nashville, Tennessee.
·9· No. 56:· · E-mail Chain· · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·52 ·9· · · · · · · · Counsel, please state your
10· No. 57:· · Dimensions of Parking book· · · · · · · ·73 10· ·appearances for the record.
11· No. 58:· · April 25th, 2014 E-mail· · · · · · · · · 90 11· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· Sean Breen for the
12· No. 59:· · E-mail Chain· · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·94 12· ·plaintiff, Ms. Bowmer.
13· No. 60:· · E-mail Chain· · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·96 13· · · · · · · · MR. RHODES:· Christopher L. Rhodes
14· No. 61· · ·E-mail Chain· · · · · · · · · · · · · · 100 14· ·for Premier Parking of Tennessee.
15· No. 62· · ·E-mail Chain· · · · · · · · · · · · · · 103 15· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Tasha Barnes for GTT
16 16· ·Parking.
17 17· · · · · · · · MR. KURHAJEC:· Curt Kurhajec for
18 18· ·Weitzman Management Corp.
19 19· · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Thank you.· Will
20 20· ·the reporter please swear in the witness.
21 21· · · · · · · · THE COURT REPORTER:· Could you raise
22 22· ·your right hand?· Do you swear that the testimony
23 23· ·you're about to give shall be the truth, the whole
24 24· ·truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
25 25· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· I do.

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

1-800-567-8757 YVer1f
 Robert Chapman
January 09, 2019
Page 6
·1· · · · · · · · · · ·ROBERT CHAPMAN
·2· ·was called as a witness, and after having been
·3· ·first duly sworn, testified as follows:
·4· · · · · · · · · · · EXAMINATION
·5· ·BY MR. BREEN:
·6· ·Q.· · · Would you introduce yourself for the
·7· ·record, please, sir?
·8· ·A.· · · Robert Allen Chapman.
·9· ·Q.· · · Mr. Chapman, my name is Sean Breen. I
10· ·represent Ms. Christi Bowmer.· Ms. Bowmer was
11· ·injured on July 13th of 2017 when her car went
12· ·through the vehicle restraint at Littlefield
13· ·garage.· Do you understand who I am and who I
14· ·represent?
15· ·A.· · · I do.
16· ·Q.· · · Have you ever given a deposition before?
17· ·A.· · · No.
18· ·Q.· · · A few ground rules.· You understand you're
19· ·under oath?
20· ·A.· · · Yes.
21· ·Q.· · · If you don't understand one of my
22· ·questions, will you let me know at the time?
23· ·A.· · · I will.
24· ·Q.· · · I'll rephrase it, and we can get it
25· ·handled in that period.· If you need a break at
Page 7
·1· ·any time, let me know.· Okay?
·2· ·A.· · · I will.
·3· ·Q.· · · If you would please answer with a yes or a
·4· ·no or some verbal word response as opposed to an
·5· ·uh-huh or shake of the head or an huh-uh, that
·6· ·helps us have a clean record.· Okay?
·7· ·A.· · · Yes.
·8· ·Q.· · · If you --
·9· ·A.· · · I understand.
10· ·Q.· · · If you let me finish my question before
11· ·you start answering, I'll do my very best to wait
12· ·until you're complete before I ask another
13· ·question.· Okay?
14· ·A.· · · Yes.· Yes.
15· ·Q.· · · That way, we end up having a clean record.
16· ·All right?
17· ·A.· · · Okay.
18· ·Q.· · · If for some reason I'm discourteous to you
19· ·or through my demeanor I cause you to answer a
20· ·question other than you want to, will you let me
21· ·know at the time?
22· ·A.· · · I will.
23· ·Q.· · · I don't intend to be.· I intend to be
24· ·courteous to you, and I want you to let me know so
25· ·I can fix it at the time.
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
6 to 9
Page 8
·1· ·A.· · · Yeah.· Yeah.· And likewise.
·2· ·Q.· · · Okay.· Thank you very much, Mr. Chapman.
·3· ·Will you tell me a little bit about your personal
·4· ·background, where you grew up and went to school?
·5· ·A.· · · I was born in Akron, Ohio.· I grew up
·6· ·in -- between Ohio and Florida.· I went to high
·7· ·school in Illinois.· I went to college in Illinois
·8· ·at the -- Illinois State University.· Studied
·9· ·construction management.· That's the extent of my
10· ·schooling.
11· ·Q.· · · Okay.· After getting out of college, what
12· ·did you do then?
13· ·A.· · · I went right to work.
14· ·Q.· · · For whom?
15· ·A.· · · I went to work for Baldwin Associates
16· ·building a nuclear power plant in Clinton,
17· ·Illinois.· I went to work in their drafting
18· ·department.· I was promoted into their engineering
19· ·department and took a position as an engineering
20· ·tech for Georgia Power building a nuclear power
21· ·plant in -- near Augusta, Georgia.
22· · · · · · And then in 1988 when we quit building
23· ·nuclear power plants in the U.S., I went to work
24· ·for a company called Central Parking System that
25· ·owned and managed parking garages.· And I learned
Page 9
·1· ·how to be a parking consultant.
·2· ·Q.· · · What is a parking consultant?
·3· ·A.· · · Parking -- we provided advisory services
·4· ·on pretty much everything parking from financial
·5· ·to planning to studies to functional design to
·6· ·technology to operations.
·7· ·Q.· · · And how long were you with Central Parking
·8· ·System?
·9· ·A.· · · I was with them for 15 years.
10· ·Q.· · · And that would take you up to about what
11· ·time?
12· ·A.· · · 2003.
13· ·Q.· · · And were you a parking consultant the
14· ·whole time for Central Parking System?
15· ·A.· · · Yes, I was.
16· ·Q.· · · And I'm sorry.· You told me.· What year
17· ·that was again?
18· ·A.· · · 2003, I left.
19· ·Q.· · · Thank you, sir.· And then where did you
20· ·go?
21· ·A.· · · I went to work for Walter P. Moore
22· ·Engineers in Orlando, Florida.
23· ·Q.· · · Doing what?
24· ·A.· · · As a parking consultant.
25· ·Q.· · · For how long?
YVer1f
 Robert Chapman
January 09, 2019
Page 10
·1· ·A.· · · I was with them for, let's see, 2003 to --
·2· ·six years.
·3· ·Q.· · · So that was about 2009?
·4· ·A.· · · 2009, I went and did an independent
·5· ·consulting project in Abu Dhabi, United Arab
·6· ·Emirates, 'til 2012 when I joined Premier Parking
·7· ·in parking operations.· That brings us up to date.
·8· ·Q.· · · And --
·9· ·A.· · · Still employed with Premier Parking.
10· ·Q.· · · -- what has your -- have you been in
11· ·parking operations with Premier all that time?
12· ·A.· · · Yes.
13· ·Q.· · · And I see you have a title of vice
14· ·president/partner?
15· ·A.· · · Yes.
16· ·Q.· · · Has that always been your title?
17· ·A.· · · No.
18· ·Q.· · · Okay.· What -- take me through just
19· ·briefly, if you don't mind --
20· ·A.· · · My original title was regional manager,
21· ·and then I was promoted to vice president and then
22· ·became a partner last year with a small gift of
23· ·stock ownership.
24· ·Q.· · · Congratulations.
25· ·A.· · · Thank you.
Page 11
·1· ·Q.· · · As regional manager -- what region?
·2· ·A.· · · I was in the Houston region.
·3· ·Q.· · · Did that encompass Austin as well?
·4· ·A.· · · It did in 2013.
·5· ·Q.· · · And when did that change?
·6· ·A.· · · I left Austin in probably May of 2014 and
·7· ·moved back to Houston, and I was no longer
·8· ·involved in the Austin operations.
·9· ·Q.· · · How long were you in Austin?
10· ·A.· · · About 12 months.
11· ·Q.· · · So approximately May 2013 to May 2014?
12· ·A.· · · Correct.
13· ·Q.· · · Did you work on the Littlefield garage
14· ·account?
15· ·A.· · · Yes.
16· ·Q.· · · When did that begin?
17· ·A.· · · May 2013.· That was our -- one of our
18· ·original locations.
19· ·Q.· · · Are you a registered engineer?
20· ·A.· · · No.
21· ·Q.· · · Have you ever been?
22· ·A.· · · No.· I don't practice any engineering that
23· ·would require a license.· I don't stamp drawings.
24· ·Q.· · · In your -- one of the bios that's been
25· ·provided to me, it says that your primary focus is
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
10 to 13
Page 12
·1· ·on being a resource for clients of Premier on
·2· ·their parking needs and development and ongoing
·3· ·improvement of their parking assets.· What does
·4· ·that mean?
·5· ·A.· · · That can range -- vary.· If someone is
·6· ·planning a development that has parking, we'll do
·7· ·parking studies to determine how many parking
·8· ·spaces they need.
·9· · · · · · We'll look at what the financial results
10· ·would be for -- for paid parking.· We'll look at
11· ·the functional aspect of parking.· We'll look at
12· ·the signage.· We'll look at the technology being
13· ·the gate arms and, you know -- and even space
14· ·guidance systems.· It's really all advisory
15· ·services for -- for parking.
16· ·Q.· · · I think in Mr. Hunt's deposition, he
17· ·described it as from soup to nuts.· Does that
18· ·sound right?
19· ·A.· · · That might be fairly accurate, but there's
20· ·certain areas of design that, you know, require
21· ·someone with a -- to be a state-certified
22· ·structural PE that we don't get involved in, and
23· ·we don't like to get involved in security either
24· ·for the -- from that aspect either.· So let -- let
25· ·experts be experts in what their -- their field of
Page 13
·1· ·study is, so...
·2· ·Q.· · · And what areas of design does Premier try
·3· ·to not be involved in?
·4· ·A.· · · We don't do architectural drawings.· We
·5· ·don't -- we don't stamp drawings.· We provide
·6· ·recommended -- we do space layouts of sign
·7· ·layouts.· We'll do equipment placement, equipment
·8· ·configurations.
·9· ·Q.· · · Okay.· What about vehicle restraint
10· ·systems?
11· ·A.· · · No.· Nothing to do with that.· Yeah.
12· ·Q.· · · And when you say "nothing to do with
13· ·that," you mean what?· No design participation in
14· ·that?
15· ·A.· · · Correct.
16· ·Q.· · · I mean, clearly as a parking garage
17· ·management group, Premier does have something to
18· ·do with vehicle restraint systems, right?
19· ·A.· · · No.· Not -- no.
20· ·Q.· · · Okay.· So, for instance, you -- at
21· ·Premier, you wouldn't have any problem as an
22· ·engineer having a multilevel open-air garage that
23· ·had no vehicle restraint system?
24· ·A.· · · Well, understanding -- if the garage got a
25· ·certificate of occupancy, it would have been
YVer1f
 Robert Chapman
January 09, 2019
Page 14
·1· ·designed per building code, and so that -- that
·2· ·circumstance couldn't occur.
·3· ·Q.· · · So regardless of whether in practice that
·4· ·has occurred -- my question to you was:· If there
·5· ·was a multilevel open-air parking garage that had
·6· ·no vehicle restraint system, that's something that
·7· ·you would recognize at Premier, would you not?
·8· ·A.· · · Yes.
·9· ·Q.· · · And what would be the problem with that?
10· ·A.· · · It -- but there -- I don't know how I
11· ·could speculate because it couldn't occur.
12· ·Q.· · · Well, certainly as an engineer trained
13· ·through college level and then with the experience
14· ·you have -- you understand hypotheticals, right?
15· ·A.· · · I do.
16· ·Q.· · · Okay.
17· ·A.· · · Yeah.· And I -- I could understand when
18· ·it's proper for me to -- you know, to speculate on
19· ·something, but the -- the -- the circumstance you
20· ·described could not occur.
21· ·Q.· · · And it couldn't occur why?
22· ·A.· · · Because the garage has to be designed for
23· ·building codes adopted by the State, and those
24· ·require a vehicle restraint system.
25· ·Q.· · · What -- what if the garage was designed at
Page 15
·1· ·a time when perhaps there wasn't as rigorous of a
·2· ·building code and a system was put in place and
·3· ·then 35 years later through neglect, dilapidation
·4· ·and rotting, the system was, in effect, not there?
·5· ·Have you ever seen something like that?
·6· ·A.· · · No.· Not to my knowledge.
·7· ·Q.· · · You ever seen a system that's so --
·8· ·parking vehicle restraint system that's so
·9· ·dilapidated or rundown that it is, in effect,
10· ·dangerous?
11· ·A.· · · No, I haven't.
12· ·Q.· · · You ever been told in any garage that
13· ·you've been affiliated with with Premier that the
14· ·vehicle restraint system in that garage was
15· ·dilapidated, dangerous and in need of repair?
16· ·A.· · · No.
17· ·Q.· · · What if somebody did tell you that?· What
18· ·would you do?
19· ·A.· · · I would ask for their qualifications, if
20· ·they were a qualified structural engineer.
21· ·Q.· · · And if they provided them to you?
22· ·A.· · · I don't -- I guess -- yeah.· I don't know
23· ·what you're -- what you're asking me.
24· ·Q.· · · What I'm asking you is when a registered
25· ·qualified engineer informs you hypothetically at
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
14 to 17
Page 16
·1· ·Premier that a vehicle restraint system is
·2· ·dangerous because it's dilapidated, out of code
·3· ·and doesn't meet the standard of care, what do you
·4· ·do?
·5· ·A.· · · I would refer him to the owner.
·6· ·Q.· · · And then what?
·7· ·A.· · · And hope that the owner got it repaired.
·8· ·Q.· · · Just hope?· Nothing else?
·9· ·A.· · · Well, if I'm not the owner, I can't make
10· ·the decision to spend the money to repair the
11· ·cables.
12· ·Q.· · · Is there any incentive you can get the
13· ·owner to do that?
14· ·A.· · · No.· It's not in -- not in our capacity as
15· ·a -- as a third-party manager of the garage.
16· ·We're just there to run the daily operations.
17· ·We're, you know -- more like a -- you know,
18· ·someone working in a retail store.
19· ·Q.· · · In what context --
20· ·A.· · · We're not responsible for the fire
21· ·sprinklers, but, you know, we serve the customers.
22· ·Q.· · · Well, who are you analogizing your
23· ·position to in a retail store?· The person who
24· ·pulls the clothes off the rack and has somebody
25· ·try them on?
Page 17
·1· ·A.· · · Sure.
·2· ·Q.· · · You don't think you have more expertise
·3· ·than that?
·4· ·A.· · · I don't have expertise in vehicle barrier
·5· ·systems to be qualified to make an assessment. I
·6· ·would rely on --
·7· ·Q.· · · Right.
·8· ·A.· · · -- a qualified structural engineer to do
·9· ·that.
10· ·Q.· · · Well, I mean, you have eyes and ears.· And
11· ·when somebody reports to you that a vehicle
12· ·restraint system is dilapidated and dangerous,
13· ·then --
14· ·A.· · · I've never had anybody report that to me.
15· ·Q.· · · Back to my hypothetical.
16· ·A.· · · Sure.
17· ·Q.· · · If somebody did, you would also have the
18· ·option, in addition to trying to give the owner
19· ·the proper incentive to make the necessary
20· ·repairs, to disassociate from the garage, would
21· ·you not?
22· ·A.· · · It's not a business decision for us to
23· ·make.
24· ·Q.· · · Why not?
25· ·A.· · · Why not?
YVer1f
 Robert Chapman
January 09, 2019
Page 18
·1· ·Q.· · · Why isn't there an ethical standard at
·2· ·Premier where you as an engineer would say, You
·3· ·know what, Owner?· If you're not going to make
·4· ·this garage safe --
·5· ·A.· · · Yeah.· It's hard for me --
·6· ·Q.· · · Hold on a second.· You need to let me
·7· ·finish, please.· Why isn't there an ethical
·8· ·standard at Premier where you say, Owner, you need
·9· ·to make this garage safe.· And if you don't, we're
10· ·not going to be associated with it?
11· ·A.· · · I'm not understanding your question.
12· ·Q.· · · Okay.· Which part don't you understand?
13· ·A.· · · All of it.
14· ·Q.· · · Okay.· You know what an ethical standard
15· ·is?
16· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.· I do.
17· ·Q.· · · You know what an owner is?
18· ·A.· · · I'm very well aware.
19· ·Q.· · · You know a hypothetical of a scenario
20· ·where you have been told by an engineer --
21· ·A.· · · Yeah.· In -- in -- in my experience -- I'm
22· ·not an engineer.· But my experience in engineering
23· ·backgrounds, it's not -- it's not a common
24· ·practice to participate in hypotheticals.
25· ·Q.· · · It's not a common practice with whom?
Page 19
·1· ·A.· · · Of anyone in the engineering field to --
·2· ·Q.· · · Okay.· Well, let's go real life then.· In
·3· ·2014, did any human being indicate to you that
·4· ·there were issues with the vehicle restraint
·5· ·system at the Littlefield garage?
·6· ·A.· · · No.
·7· ·Q.· · · Did you participate with any inspections
·8· ·by any engineers of the vehicle restraint --
·9· ·A.· · · I did not.
10· ·Q.· · · -- system?· Did you know if Premier was?
11· ·A.· · · I had seen an e-mail that there was
12· ·something scheduled.· Yes.· But I did not
13· ·participate in it.
14· ·Q.· · · Who participated in it?
15· ·A.· · · I'm assuming it was Jessica Wright.
16· ·Q.· · · So let's go back then.· What was --
17· ·A.· · · That's -- this is four and a half years
18· ·ago.· So I don't remember every circumstance,
19· ·but --
20· ·Q.· · · I understand.· Just do your best if you
21· ·can.
22· ·A.· · · Yeah.· That's -- that's what I'm doing.
23· ·Q.· · · Sounds good.
24· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· You guys are talking
25· ·over each other a lot.
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
18 to 21
Page 20
·1· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· Well, I'm having a hard
·2· ·time because I'm getting interrupted.· So I'll try
·3· ·to slow down a little bit, and then we'll go from
·4· ·there.· Okay?
·5· · · · · · · · MR. RHODES:· And let him get his full
·6· ·question out before you answer, Bob.
·7· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· It's all right.· It's a
·8· ·natural thing at the beginning.
·9· ·BY MR. BREEN:
10· ·Q.· · · So I guess you said you're not an
11· ·engineer; is that right?
12· ·A.· · · No.
13· ·Q.· · · What I said is correct or you're not?
14· ·A.· · · I'm not an engineer.· No.
15· ·Q.· · · Do you represent yourself to have
16· ·engineering capacity?
17· ·A.· · · No.· I do not.
18· ·Q.· · · Have you ever?
19· ·A.· · · No.· I do not.
20· ·Q.· · · Do you represent yourself to have
21· ·specialized expertise in the parking industry?
22· ·A.· · · In the -- yes.
23· ·Q.· · · What areas?
24· ·A.· · · Studies, parking demand, zoning
25· ·requirements for parking demand, technology,
Page 21
·1· ·financial, functional design.
·2· ·Q.· · · Do you consider yourself to be one of the
·3· ·world's leading parking experts?
·4· ·A.· · · I do.· In those areas I just described.
·5· ·Q.· · · And do you consider yourself to be giving
·6· ·expert opinions in this case?
·7· ·A.· · · Not when it relates to the vehicle barrier
·8· ·system.· I'm not an expert in those.· No.
·9· ·Q.· · · Okay.· So any issue related to the vehicle
10· ·barrier system, you don't consider yourself to be
11· ·an expert in?
12· ·A.· · · No.· I do not.
13· ·Q.· · · The -- for instance, the dynamics of the
14· ·accident with Ms. Bowmer?
15· ·A.· · · I have no knowledge of any of the
16· ·circumstances of the accident.
17· ·Q.· · · For instance, as a principal and vice
18· ·president at Premier, do you have any -- even a
19· ·rough understanding of what a vehicle restraint
20· ·system is supposed to do?
21· ·A.· · · Yes.· It's supposed to restrain a vehicle
22· ·to a certain extent.
23· ·Q.· · · Do you know the extent?
24· ·A.· · · I -- it's recent IBC, but you would have
25· ·to research the International Building Code that
YVer1f
 Robert Chapman
January 09, 2019
Page 22
·1· ·is adopted for parking garages.· But, you know,
·2· ·it's -- and just as a layperson, it's 10,000
·3· ·pounds at a vehicle bumper height.· It's -- it's
·4· ·probably equivalent to a 10-mile-an-hour impact.
·5· ·They're not --
·6· ·Q.· · · Okay.· They're not what?
·7· ·A.· · · They're not -- I don't want to comment
·8· ·because I'm not an expert in that design.
·9· ·Q.· · · Right.· But I think you said from a common
10· ·sense perspective.
11· ·A.· · · Well, common sense would tell you that you
12· ·don't comment on structural design when you're not
13· ·an expert.
14· ·Q.· · · Now, back to just the common sense
15· ·perspective of what a vehicle restraint system is
16· ·for.· It's to keep vehicles from plunging off a
17· ·building in case of an accident, right?
18· ·A.· · · You'd have to ask an expert for the
19· ·design.
20· ·Q.· · · All right.· So in terms of your ability
21· ·for the jury to even talk about from a common
22· ·sense perspective what a vehicle restraint system
23· ·is for on a building, you can't even tell the jury
24· ·it's to keep a vehicle from plunging off the
25· ·building?
Page 23
·1· ·A.· · · I would say it's to keep a vehicle or a
·2· ·person from falling off the building --
·3· ·Q.· · · All right.· And the --
·4· ·A.· · · -- to a certain extent.
·5· ·Q.· · · Fair enough.· And the reason that you want
·6· ·to do that is why?
·7· ·A.· · · Because it's not -- they're not designed
·8· ·to stop a speeding vehicle.
·9· ·Q.· · · Right.· But what is the reason that you
10· ·want to keep a vehicle or a person from falling
11· ·off a building?
12· ·A.· · · What is the reason I would want to keep a
13· ·person from -- I would want them to be safe.
14· ·Q.· · · Okay.· So you would agree with me that a
15· ·multistory parking garage that's open air needs to
16· ·have a vehicle restraint system?
17· ·A.· · · I would agree with that because that's --
18· ·that's International Building Code.· You cannot
19· ·build a garage without accommodate --
20· ·Q.· · · All right.
21· ·A.· · · -- accommodating those design criteria.
22· ·Q.· · · So then you would agree that it needs to
23· ·meet the International Building Code, whatever
24· ·that code may be?
25· ·A.· · · Yes.
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
22 to 25
Page 24
·1· ·Q.· · · And you understand what the standard of
·2· ·care is for an owner separate and apart from the
·3· ·building code, right?
·4· ·A.· · · Yes.· I understand the standard of care
·5· ·for an owner.· Yes.
·6· ·Q.· · · It's what a reasonably prudent owner would
·7· ·do with a parking garage like that?
·8· ·A.· · · They would -- they -- I'm not
·9· ·understanding --
10· ·Q.· · · The standard of care is what a reasonably
11· ·prudent owner would do in the same or similar
12· ·circumstances?
13· ·A.· · · If they're reasonably -- you know,
14· ·they're -- you have owners that have different
15· ·interests.
16· ·Q.· · · I understand that.· I'm asking you what
17· ·your understanding of generally the standard of
18· ·care is.· Is it true that that standard is what a
19· ·reasonably prudent owner would do in those same or
20· ·similar --
21· ·A.· · · I would --
22· ·Q.· · · -- circumstances?
23· ·A.· · · -- agree to that.
24· ·Q.· · · And a reasonably prudent owner would have
25· ·a safe vehicle restraint system, right?
Page 25
·1· ·A.· · · Yes.· Designed per code.
·2· ·Q.· · · And it would be important to meet both the
·3· ·standard of care and the code?
·4· ·A.· · · It has to be to code.
·5· ·Q.· · · So it, therefore, would be important to
·6· ·meet both the standard of care and the code,
·7· ·right?
·8· ·A.· · · For the owner.· Yes.
·9· ·Q.· · · For the owner.· And in a scenario where it
10· ·was brought to your attention that the vehicle
11· ·restraint system met neither the code or the
12· ·standard of care, is it your testimony that that's
13· ·simply the owner's problem?· There's nothing
14· ·Premier could do about that?
15· ·A.· · · We can bring it to their attention.
16· ·Q.· · · And if the owner does nothing about it,
17· ·then what?
18· ·A.· · · I haven't had that circumstance.· So I
19· ·can't speculate.
20· ·Q.· · · And what's the proper way to bring that to
21· ·their attention?
22· ·A.· · · Through written correspondence.
23· ·Q.· · · And why would it be important to bring
24· ·those characteristics to the attention of the
25· ·owner?
YVer1f
 Robert Chapman
January 09, 2019
Page 26
·1· ·A.· · · It's -- we want to operate a safe garage.
·2· ·Q.· · · Those things are necessary for the
·3· ·operation of a safe garage?· That is, meet the
·4· ·building code, meet the standard of care?
·5· ·A.· · · Correct.
·6· ·Q.· · · Prior to the incident where Mr. O'Connor's
·7· ·4Runner went off of the Littlefield garage in
·8· ·September of 2016, had you been involved in any
·9· ·way with the garage where the car had left the
10· ·building through the vehicle restraint system?
11· ·A.· · · Had I been involved?
12· ·Q.· · · Yes, sir.
13· ·A.· · · No.
14· ·Q.· · · That's the first time you personally had
15· ·ever been affiliated or worked with a garage where
16· ·that occurred?
17· ·A.· · · Right.· I wasn't actively involved with
18· ·the garage at that time.
19· ·Q.· · · By that time, I -- I understand from
20· ·Mr. Hunt that you probably had moved on to
21· ·different things, right?
22· ·A.· · · Yes, I had.
23· ·Q.· · · The period of window that you were with
24· ·Littlefield would have been the one-year period
25· ·you told me about?
Page 27
·1· ·A.· · · Yes.
·2· ·Q.· · · Tell me when -- the -- the circumstances
·3· ·of you beginning then in May of 2013, with whom
·4· ·and what your role was, sir.
·5· ·A.· · · My job was vice president, in charge of
·6· ·operations, overseeing the general manager of that
·7· ·facility.
·8· ·Q.· · · Which -- who -- was whom?
·9· ·A.· · · Jessica Wright.
10· ·Q.· · · Okay.
11· ·A.· · · I wasn't involved in the day-to-day
12· ·operations of the Littlefield garage.
13· ·Q.· · · And how often were you over there?
14· ·A.· · · Probably once a day.
15· ·Q.· · · What was -- what were Ms. Wright's duties
16· ·for -- at that time would have been Stream, right,
17· ·the owner, with Stream?
18· ·A.· · · Yes.· At that time.· Yes.
19· ·Q.· · · And her duties for Stream would have been
20· ·what?
21· ·A.· · · She was the garage manager.· She was
22· ·responsible for collecting the cash, making sure
23· ·the garage was clean.
24· ·Q.· · · Day-to-day operation?
25· ·A.· · · Yes.· Yes.
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
26 to 29
Page 28
·1· ·Q.· · · And if she saw things that were unsafe, to
·2· ·report those to the owner?
·3· ·A.· · · Yes.
·4· ·Q.· · · Did she have the discretion to make things
·5· ·safe on her own?
·6· ·A.· · · Typically in a contract, we have a limit
·7· ·on what -- we -- we have a budget for operating
·8· ·expense.· Capital expenses, no -- to that nature,
·9· ·we cannot approve.· It's the -- it's the owner's
10· ·responsibility per the contract.
11· · · · · ·(Document marked Exhibit No. 53.)
12· ·BY MR. BREEN:
13· ·Q.· · · Let me show you Exhibit 53.· See if you
14· ·can tell me what that is.
15· ·A.· · · That is my LinkedIn profile.
16· ·Q.· · · And is that accurate?
17· ·A.· · · To the best of my knowledge.
18· ·Q.· · · I take it you're active on LinkedIn?
19· ·A.· · · I don't go as often as I used to.· Kind of
20· ·gotten away from social media.
21· ·Q.· · · Have you been on it recently?
22· ·A.· · · Probably last couple days.
23· ·Q.· · · Checking out maybe, for instance, who was
24· ·coming to ask you questions?
25· ·A.· · · No.· I didn't -- no.· I didn't look at
Page 29
·1· ·that, so...
·2· · · · · ·(Document marked Exhibit No. 54.)
·3· ·BY MR. BREEN:
·4· ·Q.· · · Okay.· Let me show you Exhibit 54.· Can
·5· ·you tell me what 54 is?
·6· ·A.· · · That is our consulting brochure.
·7· ·Q.· · · And do you run the consulting services?
·8· ·A.· · · Yes.· I'm our in-house consultant.
·9· ·Q.· · · All right.· And does 54 accurately define
10· ·the game-changing consulting capabilities that
11· ·Premier has?
12· ·A.· · · Yes, it does.
13· ·Q.· · · And do you agree that understanding the
14· ·dynamics of the local market parking operations,
15· ·as well as planning and design, are essential to
16· ·the success of an owner's parking project?
17· ·A.· · · Yes.· I would agree to that.
18· ·Q.· · · And do you agree that Premier has a broad
19· ·range of expertise and experience, technical
20· ·capacity and effective project management skills?
21· ·A.· · · Yes.
22· ·Q.· · · Do you agree that Premier has experience
23· ·in both operation and design of high-end projects?
24· ·A.· · · Yes.· Design, to a certain extent.· Not
25· ·structural, life safety --
YVer1f
 Robert Chapman
January 09, 2019
Page 30
·1· ·Q.· · · In the --
·2· ·A.· · · -- other functional design.
·3· ·Q.· · · Gotcha.· In the parking management
·4· ·redefined brochure, does it have limitations on
·5· ·the unmatched experience you have in design?
·6· ·A.· · · No.· Typically you don't put limitations
·7· ·in your consulting brochure.
·8· ·Q.· · · I take it that would be the same as when
·9· ·you're meeting with somebody like for -- an owner
10· ·interviewing Premier for capabilities, you don't
11· ·put the limitations in that either, do you?
12· ·A.· · · No.· But if the circumstance came up where
13· ·there was a question out of my area of expertise,
14· ·I learned very early on in the engineering field
15· ·that you don't try to be an expert in something
16· ·that you're not qualified in, especially when it
17· ·comes to structural design.
18· ·Q.· · · In Exhibit 54 and other material of your
19· ·bio, I've seen that you indicate you've served as
20· ·a principal for several large engineering firms?
21· ·A.· · · Yes.
22· ·Q.· · · And by representing that you were a
23· ·principal in large engineering firms, what is it
24· ·you intend to convey?
25· ·A.· · · That I was a principal in a large
Page 31
·1· ·engineering firm.
·2· ·Q.· · · And --
·3· ·A.· · · I was a -- I was a part owner, principal,
·4· ·and it was an engineering firm.
·5· ·Q.· · · In 2013, did you have interface with the
·6· ·owners of the Littlefield garage in any basis or
·7· ·was it primarily Jessica Wright?
·8· ·A.· · · No.· I had interface with the -- with the
·9· ·owners.
10· ·Q.· · · With whom?
11· ·A.· · · With -- let's see.· I'm going to try to
12· ·remember some names.· Lance Sallis.· And then
13· ·there was a young lady that I can't remember the
14· ·name --
15· ·Q.· · · Fair enough.
16· ·A.· · · -- right offhand.
17· ·Q.· · · When is the first time you recall there
18· ·being an issue with the cable barrier system that
19· ·was up at the Littlefield garage?
20· ·A.· · · I don't remember that there was ever an
21· ·issue.
22· ·Q.· · · In terms of --
23· ·A.· · · Not in the terms of being deemed unsafe.
24· ·Q.· · · I'm not limiting it currently to somebody
25· ·deeming it unsafe.· I'm talking about any issue
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
30 to 33
Page 32
·1· ·that you recall being involved with.
·2· ·A.· · · Yeah.· There were no issues.
·3· ·Q.· · · So from your best recollection, you were
·4· ·never made aware of or involved with any issues
·5· ·regarding the vehicle restraint system at the
·6· ·Littlefield garage?
·7· ·A.· · · No.
·8· ·Q.· · · What I said is correct?
·9· ·A.· · · Yes.
10· ·Q.· · · So that would be directly or indirectly?
11· ·Like, for instance, Ms. Wright --
12· ·A.· · · There was discussions with Stream on
13· ·cosmetic improvements.· There was, you know, some
14· ·of the cables that had -- that had rusted.· But if
15· ·you were going to get the garage ready for sale,
16· ·there were certain things we recommended they --
17· ·that they do to --
18· ·Q.· · · What were those?
19· ·A.· · · -- to make it -- painting the elevator
20· ·lobbies, new equipment, new gate arms.
21· ·Q.· · · Was sprucing up the cables part of getting
22· ·it ready to sell?
23· ·A.· · · It's -- best of my recollection -- that
24· ·was four and a half years ago, so...
25· ·Q.· · · Yes or no?
Page 33
·1· ·A.· · · Yes.
·2· ·Q.· · · What do you recall about any advice or
·3· ·recommendations that you gave to Stream about
·4· ·sprucing up the cables to get it ready to sell?
·5· ·A.· · · We put a complete list of capital
·6· ·improvements.· I'm sure that was part of it.
·7· ·Q.· · · And do you recall what was on the list?
·8· ·A.· · · Painting the elevator lobbies, new
·9· ·equipment, new tile.· Better wayfinding.
10· ·Q.· · · The cables?
11· ·A.· · · No.
12· ·Q.· · · Was that just oral?
13· ·A.· · · Well, it may have been on the capital
14· ·improvements list that we put together.· Yeah.
15· ·Q.· · · And how was it you constructed the capital
16· ·improvements?
17· ·A.· · · It was just an Excel spreadsheet.
18· ·Q.· · · And where would typically that be kept?
19· ·In a folder that's labeled "capital improvements"?
20· ·A.· · · Yeah.· Yes, sir.
21· ·Q.· · · Have you seen that?
22· ·A.· · · No.
23· ·Q.· · · You reviewed it recently, this list?
24· ·A.· · · No.· I have not.· No.· I haven't seen it
25· ·since 2014, 2013.
YVer1f
 Robert Chapman
January 09, 2019
Page 34
·1· ·Q.· · · And that was done for Stream because
·2· ·Stream was getting ready to sell the --
·3· ·A.· · · Well, I'm -- I'm speculating, but they
·4· ·were doing a -- they -- they were doing a number
·5· ·of capital improvements of the entire portfolio.
·6· ·They built a new building.· They built a new
·7· ·parking garage.· They -- well, they put a new
·8· ·exterior on the Littlefield garage.
·9· ·Q.· · · Were you --
10· ·A.· · · But that was after I left, so...
11· ·Q.· · · Were you made aware in that year time
12· ·frame that you were there that they were -- Stream
13· ·was contemplating sale of the building?
14· ·A.· · · I can't say for sure on that.· No.
15· ·Q.· · · Then why were you-all putting together the
16· ·list of capital improvements?
17· ·A.· · · Well, we began operations with the garage,
18· ·and they asked for ways to improve the appearance.
19· ·Q.· · · So sprucing up --
20· ·A.· · · Typically -- typically what we do when we
21· ·come into an operation is we look to where we can
22· ·make improvements.
23· ·Q.· · · So who was it then that looked at the
24· ·cables even from an aesthetic standpoint from
25· ·Premier when you-all came on-site in 2013?· Was
Page 35
·1· ·that you?
·2· ·A.· · · Yes.
·3· ·Q.· · · Anybody else?
·4· ·A.· · · Probably not.· No.
·5· ·Q.· · · And what do you recall the general
·6· ·condition of those cables being in 2013?
·7· ·A.· · · They weren't perfect, but they didn't
·8· ·appear to be unsafe.
·9· ·Q.· · · Nothing that gave you cause for alarm?
10· ·A.· · · No.
11· ·Q.· · · All intact?
12· ·A.· · · I can't say for sure.
13· ·Q.· · · Well, I mean, if a cable wasn't intact,
14· ·that would be unsafe?
15· ·A.· · · Well, it could be -- you know, it could
16· ·be -- the -- the -- the tightening nut could have
17· ·been loose or -- I -- but I don't think that there
18· ·were any areas that were open with no cables.· No.
19· ·Q.· · · Okay.· No missing cables?
20· ·A.· · · No.
21· ·Q.· · · How about rotten or corroded cables?
22· ·A.· · · They probably -- you know, they'd been
23· ·galvanized, but I'm sure they had some rust. I
24· ·don't know if rotten would be a term to describe
25· ·galvanized steel.
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
34 to 37
Page 36
·1· ·Q.· · · Did you walk from floor to floor looking
·2· ·at the cables?
·3· ·A.· · · Yes.
·4· ·Q.· · · You take any pictures?
·5· ·A.· · · No.
·6· ·Q.· · · Is that not standard operating procedures?
·7· ·A.· · · No.
·8· ·Q.· · · How about notes?
·9· ·A.· · · No.
10· ·Q.· · · Was there anything about what you saw in
11· ·the restraint system in that 2013 time frame that
12· ·gave you pause for concern?
13· ·A.· · · No.
14· ·Q.· · · Is there anything about what you saw that
15· ·caused you to report to the owner, Hey, you know,
16· ·these cables don't exactly look great.· You ought
17· ·to have somebody come in and check them out?
18· ·A.· · · No.
19· ·Q.· · · If you had seen something like missing
20· ·cables or heavily rusted cables, sagging cables,
21· ·would you report that?
22· ·A.· · · I would have reported that to the owner.
23· ·Yes.
24· ·Q.· · · And do you recall, other than this
25· ·walk-through in 2013, any other time you
Page 37
·1· ·participated in any issues relating to the cables?
·2· ·A.· · · No.
·3· ·Q.· · · And were you then involved in any way in
·4· ·any type of renovations to the garage in 2014 that
·5· ·involved work on the cables?
·6· ·A.· · · No.· I made a recommendation if there was
·7· ·work to be done, that it should be a qualified --
·8· ·assessed by a qualified structural engineer and
·9· ·then the work performed by a qualified
10· ·construction company with experience in cables.
11· ·Q.· · · To whom?
12· ·A.· · · To Lance.
13· ·Q.· · · If the cables looked good from your
14· ·inspection, why were you recommending that they be
15· ·assessed by a qualified structural engineer?
16· ·A.· · · Well, I'm saying if they were going to
17· ·replace them, that that's the route they should
18· ·go.· I didn't recommend that they -- I just said
19· ·if that's -- if you're going to do that, then you
20· ·need to have someone -- anybody that touches those
21· ·cables should be qualified to do so.
22· ·Q.· · · Why is that?
23· ·A.· · · Because you should have -- you should
24· ·practice standard of care and have someone doing
25· ·it that is qualified.
YVer1f
 Robert Chapman
January 09, 2019
Page 38
·1· ·Q.· · · And to -- in terms of -- from your
·2· ·perspective and experience at the time, qualified
·3· ·meant assessment by a qualified structural
·4· ·engineer and any work performed by a qualified
·5· ·construction company with experience in that kind
·6· ·of cables?
·7· ·A.· · · Yes.
·8· ·Q.· · · And qualified construction company would
·9· ·be what?
10· ·A.· · · Somebody that has experience,
11· ·certifications, in working with that type of
12· ·cable.
13· ·Q.· · · What type of --
14· ·A.· · · I don't know what the type -- exact
15· ·certifications would be, but that's what I would
16· ·ask of the company.· What -- what insurance
17· ·requirements they have, what -- what
18· ·qualifications they have.
19· · · · · · But when you hire the qualified
20· ·structural engineer, they'll be able to
21· ·recommend -- they'll have a list of preapproved
22· ·contractors to do the work.
23· ·Q.· · · Those -- qualified structural engineer,
24· ·when they assess a project like that, they have
25· ·ethical guidelines that they must follow, right?
Page 39
·1· ·A.· · · Yeah.· Or they'll lose their license.
·2· ·Q.· · · There's certain things that are imposed by
·3· ·law, certain standards, that an engineer can't
·4· ·deviate from just to allow an owner to save money,
·5· ·right?
·6· ·A.· · · Yes.
·7· ·Q.· · · So if an engineer that's licensed and
·8· ·competent sees something and makes a
·9· ·recommendation that's a minimum but then is
10· ·informed by the owner the owner is going to go
11· ·below the minimum, that engineer won't be, if he
12· ·or she is ethical, involved in that; isn't that
13· ·true?
14· ·A.· · · That's true.
15· ·Q.· · · Did you know that's exactly what occurred
16· ·in the Littlefield garage?
17· ·A.· · · No.· I did not.
18· ·Q.· · · As you sit here now, are you now aware of
19· ·that?
20· ·A.· · · No, I'm not.· I had no involvement in the
21· ·Littlefield garage after I left in 2014.
22· ·Q.· · · Did you ever walk the Littlefield garage
23· ·with any engineers at all?
24· ·A.· · · No.
25· ·Q.· · · Is there any reason why it would be
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
38 to 41
Page 40
·1· ·reported to Stream Realty that you and Ms. Wright
·2· ·had walked the garage with, for instance, an
·3· ·engineering company from Dallas, VSL?
·4· ·A.· · · Yeah.
·5· ·Q.· · · Yes?
·6· ·A.· · · No.
·7· ·Q.· · · You don't know?
·8· ·A.· · · No.· That didn't occur.· To my
·9· ·recollection, that did not occur.
10· ·Q.· · · You've been made aware that there's
11· ·documents in our case that show that?
12· ·A.· · · If you'll show them to me.
13· ·Q.· · · Sure.· I'm going to take it
14· ·chronologically.· Can you look with me -- I have
15· ·some exhibits for you.· They have --
16· ·A.· · · Sure.
17· ·Q.· · · -- stickers on them.· Let's start with 46.
18· ·Do you see Exhibit 46?
19· ·A.· · · Yes.
20· ·Q.· · · Okay.· If you'll turn to 46 with me.· You
21· ·see that Exhibit 46 is in May of 2014?· Do you see
22· ·that?
23· ·A.· · · Am I looking at this one?
24· ·Q.· · · Yes, sir.
25· ·A.· · · Okay.
Page 41
·1· ·Q.· · · Do you see the date on the e-mail, May of
·2· ·2014 up there?
·3· ·A.· · · I see May of -- May 29, 2014.· Yes.
·4· ·Q.· · · Okay.· So you understand that this context
·5· ·of what we are talking about is an e-mail from May
·6· ·of 2014?
·7· ·A.· · · Yes.
·8· ·Q.· · · Do you see in the back of the e-mail,
·9· ·there are pictures from May of 2014?
10· ·A.· · · Yes.
11· ·Q.· · · Do you see the pictures that show missing
12· ·cables or cables laying on the ground?
13· ·A.· · · Yes.
14· ·Q.· · · Did you ever see these conditions in the
15· ·Littlefield garage?
16· ·A.· · · Not to that extent.
17· ·Q.· · · The --
18· ·A.· · · Cables may have been slacking, but not --
19· ·not laying on the ground.
20· ·Q.· · · The pictures that we're looking at in
21· ·Exhibit 46, as a parking consultant, those are red
22· ·flags to you, are they not?
23· ·A.· · · I'm not qualified to make an assessment of
24· ·what -- if that is a satisfactory vehicle barrier
25· ·per the building code or not.· No.
YVer1f
 Robert Chapman
January 09, 2019
Page 42
·1· ·Q.· · · I understand.· But just from a common
·2· ·sense perspective, that if you see cables that are
·3· ·supposed to be vehicle restraint cables that are
·4· ·broken and laying on the ground, that's a red
·5· ·flag, isn't it?
·6· ·A.· · · Again, I'm not qualified -- there -- there
·7· ·are four other cables that are still there out of
·8· ·five.
·9· ·Q.· · · So from your perspective, four out of five
10· ·is okay?
11· ·A.· · · I don't know the structural integrity of
12· ·those cables.· No.· I can't -- I can't make an
13· ·assessment on what's okay and what's not okay.
14· ·Q.· · · Right.
15· ·A.· · · Nor would I ever attempt to.
16· ·Q.· · · Right.· Thus, the term --
17· ·A.· · · But I would alert the owner that we have
18· ·loose cables and they should be repaired.
19· ·Q.· · · Okay.· Fair enough.· So it is a red flag
20· ·to go alert the owner that there's a problem,
21· ·right?
22· ·A.· · · I'm not sure of the definition of a red
23· ·flag in your -- what you're saying, is it dire
24· ·circumstances or --
25· ·Q.· · · Well, something that calls attention.
Page 43
·1· ·Have you not ever heard the term "red flag"?
·2· ·A.· · · Yes, I have.
·3· ·Q.· · · What's your --
·4· ·A.· · · So yeah.
·5· ·Q.· · · -- definition of red flag?
·6· ·A.· · · My definition would be something that's --
·7· ·a red flag when you go in the ocean means don't go
·8· ·in the ocean.· It's a dire -- it's a pretty
·9· ·serious circumstance.
10· ·Q.· · · Okay.· Well --
11· ·A.· · · So in this case, it's not -- it's
12· ·something I would call the attention of the owner
13· ·and recommend that they call a qualified
14· ·structural engineer to assess the situation and
15· ·get it repaired.
16· ·Q.· · · Would you agree with me that not meeting
17· ·code or being under the standard of care when it
18· ·comes to the standard of a vehicle restraint
19· ·system, that would be a red flag?· In other words,
20· ·that would be a dire circumstance?
21· ·A.· · · If it's not per code.
22· ·Q.· · · Right?
23· ·A.· · · Right.
24· ·Q.· · · Okay.
25· ·A.· · · I can't make a determination whether the
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
42 to 45
Page 44
·1· ·cables in that picture are per code or not.
·2· ·Q.· · · You think that the cables disconnected and
·3· ·laying on the ground would satisfy code?
·4· ·A.· · · Well, there's -- there's also a height
·5· ·requirement for cables, and those cables even per
·6· ·building code could not be deemed necessary.
·7· ·Q.· · · Isn't it safe to say, sir, as a person who
·8· ·has the kind of experience you do in the industry,
·9· ·if you see a picture of a vehicle restraint system
10· ·like we're looking at where the cables are sagging
11· ·and one is broken, you know that doesn't meet
12· ·code?
13· · · · · · · · MR. RHODES:· Objection.· Form.
14· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· I can't make that
15· ·determination.
16· ·BY MR. BREEN:
17· ·Q.· · · You think there's a code --
18· ·A.· · · There is -- there is a lot of requirements
19· ·in the code to make that determination, and I'm
20· ·not an expert in those requirements.· I would
21· ·recommend, though, that if I saw that laying
22· ·cable, to the owner to have it repaired.
23· ·Q.· · · How about this?· Is it fair to say that
24· ·given your level of expertise, that more likely
25· ·than not, if you had broken or missing cables on a
Page 45
·1· ·five-cable restraint system, it doesn't meet code?
·2· ·A.· · · I can't --
·3· · · · · · · · MR. RHODES:· Objection.· Form.
·4· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· -- make that
·5· ·determination.
·6· ·BY MR. BREEN:
·7· ·Q.· · · Would you look at Exhibit 47 with me?· It
·8· ·will have a yellow sticker --
·9· ·A.· · · Okay.
10· ·Q.· · · -- on the front.· You've got it there?
11· ·A.· · · Yes.
12· ·Q.· · · You see this e-mail from June 16th of
13· ·2014?
14· ·A.· · · Yes.
15· ·Q.· · · Did you know that in June of 2014, an
16· ·engineer from Maritech Engineering was out at the
17· ·site making an inspection of the --
18· ·A.· · · I did not.
19· ·Q.· · · -- vehicle barrier system?
20· ·A.· · · I did not.
21· ·Q.· · · Ms. Wright never told you that?
22· ·A.· · · No.· I was not her direct supervisor. I
23· ·was not involved at the Littlefield garage at that
24· ·time.
25· ·Q.· · · So by June of 2014, you were out of the
YVer1f
 Robert Chapman
January 09, 2019
Page 46
·1· ·picture?
·2· ·A.· · · I was back in Houston.
·3· ·Q.· · · Okay.· And in this e-mail, 47, do you see
·4· ·where Mr. Donoghue says based on what he saw in a
·5· ·ten-minute tour, there are definitely numerous
·6· ·basic safety issues to be addressed regarding the
·7· ·vehicle barriers?· Do you see that?
·8· ·A.· · · Yes, I do.
·9· ·Q.· · · Your -- your testimony to the jury is you
10· ·never noticed that?
11· ·A.· · · No.
12· ·Q.· · · What I said is --
13· ·A.· · · But I'm not qualified to -- to make that
14· ·determination.
15· ·Q.· · · Were you aware at any time prior to June
16· ·that Stream was looking to do any type of repairs
17· ·or modifications to the vehicle restraint system?
18· ·A.· · · I believe it was discussed.
19· ·Q.· · · And what do you recall about those
20· ·discussions, with whom and when?
21· ·A.· · · You know, it's -- I -- I don't -- I can't
22· ·recall specific details about those discussions.
23· ·It was four and a half years ago.
24· ·Q.· · · You just tell me the best you can
25· ·remember.
Page 47
·1· ·A.· · · I don't -- I can't remember the specifics
·2· ·of it.
·3· ·Q.· · · Okay.· Do you recall who you discussed it
·4· ·with?
·5· ·A.· · · I would say it would be Lance Sallis, but
·6· ·I can't be certain of that.
·7· ·Q.· · · Do you recall even generally what you
·8· ·might have discussed with him?
·9· ·A.· · · Generally, we discussed several capital
10· ·improvements to improve the appearance of the
11· ·garage.
12· · · · · ·(Document marked Exhibit No. 55.)
13· ·BY MR. BREEN:
14· ·Q.· · · Let me show you Exhibit 55.· You mentioned
15· ·Mr. Sallis?
16· ·A.· · · Yes.
17· ·Q.· · · He was with Stream?
18· ·A.· · · Yes, he was.
19· ·Q.· · · This is an e-mail from June of 2014.· You
20· ·see Mr. Donoghue.· That's the engineer from
21· ·Maritech you and I were just visiting about?
22· ·A.· · · Yes.
23· ·Q.· · · In the note from Mr. Donoghue on the
24· ·bottom, the last sentence of the first paragraph
25· ·says, "Those things specifically addressed by
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
46 to 49
Page 48
·1· ·current codes and best practice procedures and
·2· ·standard of care are difficult to overlook given
·3· ·the potential consequences."· Do you see that?
·4· ·A.· · · Yes, I do.
·5· ·Q.· · · And that would be, would it not, sir, what
·6· ·you and I were talking about before, which is an
·7· ·ethical engineer would not be able to overlook
·8· ·standard of care and code when implementing things
·9· ·like a vehicle restraint system, true?
10· ·A.· · · That's true.
11· ·Q.· · · Have you read the Maritech Engineering
12· ·report of June 23rd, 2014?
13· ·A.· · · I have not.
14· ·Q.· · · On the page -- the second page, there's a
15· ·letter -- do you see that -- of Exhibit 55?
16· ·A.· · · Yes.
17· ·Q.· · · Do you see on the last paragraph on the
18· ·bottom, he says, "Some nominal barriers in the
19· ·form of stressed wire strand spaces at
20· ·approximately 12 inches do exist but have fallen
21· ·into disrepair to the extent that they offer
22· ·little, if any, hope of vehicle restraint and in
23· ·several cases virtually no pedestrian safety"?· Do
24· ·you see that?
25· ·A.· · · Yes, I do.
Page 49
·1· ·Q.· · · Did you ever notice that in the garage?
·2· ·A.· · · I noticed loose cables.· But, no, not in
·3· ·my opinion, that they were to this extent.
·4· ·Q.· · · Okay.· And you'll recall that this
·5· ·engineer from Maritech indicated that he
·6· ·recognized that in a 10-minute inspection.· Do you
·7· ·remember us seeing that?
·8· ·A.· · · Yes.
·9· ·Q.· · · Do you have any reason to dispute that
10· ·that was the condition?
11· ·A.· · · No.· I don't know this engineer or their
12· ·work, their references or -- I -- I couldn't
13· ·comment on without -- this limited knowledge of
14· ·one paragraph in an e-mail.· I do know with my
15· ·experience with engineers, they're very -- very
16· ·cautious in nature, which is a good thing.
17· ·Q.· · · Why is that good?
18· ·A.· · · Because it keeps us safe.
19· ·Q.· · · It's not good to disregard engineering
20· ·advice, is it?
21· ·A.· · · Not if you're the owner, it's not.· No.
22· ·Q.· · · Well, not if you're anybody affiliated
23· ·with the garage, right?· I mean, Premier doesn't
24· ·want to be affiliated with a garage owner that
25· ·disregards basic safety principles --
YVer1f
 Robert Chapman
January 09, 2019
Page 50
·1· ·A.· · · But --
·2· ·Q.· · · -- do they?
·3· ·A.· · · No.· We would bring it to their attention
·4· ·that it needed repair.· It is our due diligence as
·5· ·the operator --
·6· ·Q.· · · Now, from --
·7· ·A.· · · -- which we did.
·8· ·Q.· · · Thank you.· From -- well, when did you
·9· ·bring that to the attention of the owner, that it
10· ·needed to be repaired?
11· ·A.· · · In these -- this information here.
12· ·Q.· · · No, sir.· I don't see any information
13· ·from --
14· ·A.· · · No.· I never --
15· ·Q.· · · -- any --
16· ·A.· · · -- brought it to -- I never brought it --
17· ·to my understanding and visual observation of the
18· ·cables, they were -- I did not have the technical
19· ·capability to make an assumption.
20· ·Q.· · · Did you see any --
21· ·A.· · · But if I did, I would bring it to the
22· ·attention of the owner, and that's really the only
23· ·recourse we have as a garage operator.
24· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· I'll just object as
25· ·nonresponsive.· Thank you.
Page 51
·1· ·BY MR. BREEN:
·2· ·Q.· · · Why is it important to have a -- work done
·3· ·like cable repairs on a vehicle restraint
·4· ·system -- why is it important to have it performed
·5· ·by a qualified construction company with
·6· ·experience in that area?
·7· ·A.· · · Why is it important?
·8· ·Q.· · · Yes, sir.
·9· ·A.· · · Because it should be done right.
10· ·Q.· · · Why?
11· ·A.· · · To meet building code, the original
12· ·intention of the design.
13· ·Q.· · · Were you ever made aware that Maritech
14· ·Engineering wouldn't do work on the Littlefield
15· ·garage unless the owner brought it up to code and
16· ·the standard of care?
17· ·A.· · · I've never heard of Maritech Engineering
18· ·until you presented this piece of paper to me.
19· ·Q.· · · So I guess the answer to my question is
20· ·no?
21· ·A.· · · No.· No.
22· ·Q.· · · Thank you.· Do you know Mr. Curtis Brown?
23· ·A.· · · No.
24· ·Q.· · · You ever meet Mr. Curtis Brown?
25· ·A.· · · Not to my recollection.
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
50 to 53
Page 52
·1· ·Q.· · · Do you know anything about him at all?
·2· ·A.· · · No.
·3· ·Q.· · · Do you know whether he's a qualified
·4· ·construction company person?
·5· ·A.· · · No.
·6· ·Q.· · · Do you know if he has any experience in
·7· ·cables?
·8· ·A.· · · No.· No.· I don't know the firm, the
·9· ·company.
10· ·Q.· · · Do you know anything about what type of
11· ·interaction anybody from Premier had with
12· ·Mr. Brown on the Littlefield facility?
13· ·A.· · · No.· I do not.
14· ·Q.· · · In the capital improvement list that you
15· ·performed for Stream, did you give Stream any
16· ·indications of areas of the parking garage that
17· ·needed work due to safety concerns?
18· ·A.· · · No.
19· · · · · · (Document marked Exhibit No. 56.)
20· ·BY MR. BREEN:
21· ·Q.· · · Show you Exhibit 56.· Do you know
22· ·Mr. Herron?
23· ·A.· · · I've met him a couple times.· I have met
24· ·him.
25· ·Q.· · · In what context?
Page 53
·1· ·A.· · · He was the architect for the garage that
·2· ·sat next door to Littlefield.· It was in the
·3· ·context of the garage design for the garage next
·4· ·door.
·5· ·Q.· · · In June of 2014, Mr. Herron, in this
·6· ·Exhibit 56 e-mail, indicates that the owner of the
·7· ·Littlefield garage was having trouble finding
·8· ·someone to bid the recabling of the vehicular
·9· ·barrier cables at Littlefield garage.· Were you
10· ·ever made aware of that?
11· ·A.· · · No.
12· ·Q.· · · In the notebook that's there, would you
13· ·look with me at an exhibit?· Let me get you the
14· ·number.· Exhibit 1 -- excuse me.· Exhibit 29.
15· ·A.· · · That's in this book?
16· ·Q.· · · It's in that black book in front of you.
17· ·Yes, sir.· There's a tab.
18· ·A.· · · Okay.
19· ·Q.· · · Okay.· In July of 2014, on Exhibit 29,
20· ·Mr. Herron is indicating that they had several
21· ·subs reject to bid on repairs based on the fact
22· ·that the garage is not up to current codes.· Do
23· ·you see that?
24· ·A.· · · Yes.
25· ·Q.· · · And he attaches the Maritech due diligence
YVer1f
 Robert Chapman
January 09, 2019
Page 54
·1· ·survey to the e-mail?
·2· ·A.· · · Okay.· Yes.
·3· ·Q.· · · And -- thank you.· And also indicates that
·4· ·the cables present a safety concern.· Do you see
·5· ·that?
·6· ·A.· · · Yes.
·7· ·Q.· · · Were you or anybody you know of at Premier
·8· ·made aware that that was going on at the time?
·9· ·A.· · · I was not made aware, and I don't know of
10· ·anybody at Premier -- I couldn't speak to anybody
11· ·else.
12· ·Q.· · · Okay.· Would you look at Exhibit 30 with
13· ·me?
14· ·A.· · · Okay.· I'm there.
15· ·Q.· · · Exhibit 30, if you turn to the second
16· ·page --
17· ·A.· · · Okay.
18· ·Q.· · · The owner up at the top of the page is
19· ·indicating that it's been difficult for them to
20· ·find someone willing to do the work who would do
21· ·it as a repair cable replacement and not a
22· ·complete redesign to current code.· Do you see
23· ·that?
24· ·A.· · · Yes, I do.
25· ·Q.· · · And then it indicates that VSL, which is
Page 55
·1· ·an engineering group from Fort Worth -- he refers
·2· ·to them as big boys -- previously looked at this
·3· ·with Jessica and Nate and wouldn't do the work
·4· ·unless it's a fully engineered barrier system.· Do
·5· ·you see that?
·6· ·A.· · · Yes.
·7· ·Q.· · · Were you aware at any time of VSL looking
·8· ·at it with Jessica?
·9· ·A.· · · No, I wasn't.
10· ·Q.· · · By that time in July, you would have been
11· ·not involved with the garage --
12· ·A.· · · Right.
13· ·Q.· · · -- is that right?
14· ·A.· · · That's correct.
15· ·Q.· · · After the 20 -- strike that.
16· · · · · · After the first year period you were
17· ·involved with the garage, when, sir, is the next
18· ·time that you had any involvement with the garage?
19· ·A.· · · I had no involvement with the garage.
20· ·Q.· · · So after you having that initial one-year
21· ·period, then you had nothing after, say, May 2014
22· ·in which you were involved in any way with the
23· ·garage?
24· ·A.· · · They may have asked me a question about
25· ·the parking equipment.· I know they had issues
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
54 to 57
Page 56
·1· ·with the operation, but that would have been my
·2· ·only involvement.
·3· ·Q.· · · In September of 2016, did you hear about
·4· ·an incident where Mr. O'Connor's vehicle left the
·5· ·building at the garage?
·6· ·A.· · · I did hear about it from -- on the news.
·7· ·Q.· · · Did -- nobody from Premier alerted you?
·8· ·A.· · · No.
·9· ·Q.· · · Do you find that as odd?
10· ·A.· · · No.· That wasn't -- not my responsibility.
11· ·Q.· · · And you were --
12· ·A.· · · Not my area of --
13· ·Q.· · · Were you a vice president and a partner at
14· ·the time?
15· ·A.· · · No.· I was vice president, but not a
16· ·partner.
17· ·Q.· · · No, you weren't involved in any kind of
18· ·discussions within the company about that at all?
19· ·A.· · · No, I wasn't.
20· ·Q.· · · Do you know anything about the incident?
21· ·A.· · · I know that it was -- no.· I think --
22· ·only thing I know, that he climbed -- backed out
23· ·of his car, which was amazing.
24· ·Q.· · · That he was lucky it wasn't quite worse?
25· ·A.· · · Yes.
Page 57
·1· ·Q.· · · Do you know what, if anything, Premier did
·2· ·after that incident to try to make sure another
·3· ·incident like that didn't occur?
·4· ·A.· · · No.· I wasn't involved in any -- at that
·5· ·point.
·6· ·Q.· · · If Ms. Wright or some other person had
·7· ·been under your supervision in the garage at that
·8· ·time, what would you have indicated to her she
·9· ·should do?
10· ·A.· · · To -- there are probably a number of
11· ·issues that, you know -- would the garage be
12· ·closed completely?· You know, you would look at
13· ·that or to barricade it off, but --
14· ·Q.· · · And why would you look at closing the
15· ·garage completely?
16· ·A.· · · I would -- that would be determined by a
17· ·structural engineer with the City, but that could
18· ·be a possibility of what happened.
19· ·Q.· · · So the City should be consulted on that?
20· ·A.· · · I'm sure they were.· I don't know.· But I
21· ·would assume.
22· ·Q.· · · I'm asking you if they should be.
23· ·A.· · · I believe they should.· Yes.
24· ·Q.· · · And why is that?
25· ·A.· · · Because they have involvement with codes
YVer1f
 Robert Chapman
January 09, 2019
Page 58
·1· ·and regulations.
·2· ·Q.· · · And if repairs were going to be done to
·3· ·the system after the car went off the top in
·4· ·September of 2016, you would expect the garage
·5· ·would coordinate that with the City, right?
·6· ·A.· · · I would assume that this structural
·7· ·engineer that was hired would know of all the
·8· ·regulations, and you would hire them for that,
·9· ·determining that purpose.
10· ·Q.· · · All right.· So that means you would defer
11· ·to the structural engineer?
12· ·A.· · · Yes, I would.
13· ·Q.· · · Okay.· For instance, if the structural
14· ·engineer indicated the owner should do a complete
15· ·inspection of all the cables in the building,
16· ·would you expect that to occur?
17· ·A.· · · I would expect the owner to do that.· Yes.
18· ·Q.· · · And what would you do if that didn't occur
19· ·and you were Premier?
20· ·A.· · · I would send e-mails to the owner saying
21· ·that it should be done.
22· ·Q.· · · Why is that?
23· ·A.· · · To remind them that it needed to be --
24· ·needed to be done.
25· ·Q.· · · Why would something like having an
Page 59
·1· ·engineer or a specialist in cables inspecting the
·2· ·system after an incident like the O'Connor
·3· ·incident in the whole building be important?
·4· ·A.· · · Because it needs to be redesigned or
·5· ·reinstalled per code.
·6· ·Q.· · · If --
·7· ·A.· · · That's just my layperson opinion.
·8· ·Q.· · · Fair enough.· If after the O'Connor
·9· ·incident -- strike that.
10· · · · · · Would you mind looking at Exhibit 48 with
11· ·me?· It's not in the notebook.· It's in the
12· ·loose-leaf --
13· ·A.· · · Okay.
14· ·Q.· · · -- documents.· Thank you very much.· Now,
15· ·just to give you a little context, after
16· ·Mr. O'Connor's vehicle went off of the ninth
17· ·floor, among other things, there was a
18· ·recommendation by an engineer to the owner that
19· ·they have the cables in the entire facility
20· ·inspected.· Okay?
21· ·A.· · · Okay.
22· ·Q.· · · I'm assuming you don't know about that.
23· ·A.· · · No, I don't.
24· ·Q.· · · It doesn't surprise you, though, does it?
25· ·A.· · · No.
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
58 to 61
Page 60
·1· ·Q.· · · That would be what you would expect to
·2· ·hear from an engineer after you had an incident --
·3· ·A.· · · Yes.
·4· ·Q.· · · -- like that?· Now, following that -- and
·5· ·by the way, that was never done.· Does that
·6· ·surprise you?
·7· ·A.· · · Yes.
·8· ·Q.· · · The owner never had an engineer come out
·9· ·and inspect the cables as indicated after the
10· ·O'Connor incident.· Do you think that meets the
11· ·standard of care for an owner?
12· ·A.· · · No.
13· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection.· Form.
14· ·BY MR. BREEN:
15· ·Q.· · · Why not?
16· ·A.· · · Because they should have followed the
17· ·engineer's recommendations.
18· ·Q.· · · Now, following that but before
19· ·Ms. Bowmer's incident -- okay?· In March of 2017,
20· ·this e-mail, Exhibit 48, shows that, amongst other
21· ·places, Level 7 where Ms. Bowmer went off --
22· ·A.· · · That's the second page?
23· ·Q.· · · Yes, sir.· Do you see Christina Murray's
24· ·entry there?· It says, "Level 7 also has wide
25· ·cabling out."· Okay?· What would you expect the
Page 61
·1· ·owner to do if after an incident like the O'Connor
·2· ·incident, they got a report that there was still
·3· ·multiple levels with cable out?
·4· ·A.· · · They should have had them repaired.
·5· ·Q.· · · And is there some policy or procedure at
·6· ·Premier for what Premier should do when you've had
·7· ·an incident as serious as the O'Connor incident?
·8· ·You've had an engineer that indicates these things
·9· ·should be inspected.· They're not inspected.
10· ·Additional cables are failing, and the owner is
11· ·not doing something about it.· Is there some
12· ·policy at Premier to handle that?
13· ·A.· · · No.
14· ·Q.· · · What should Premier do?· If I'm your
15· ·direct report like Jessica, although you weren't
16· ·there, but -- or Christina, what would you tell me
17· ·to do in that scenario?
18· ·A.· · · I would tell you to send e-mail after
19· ·e-mail to the owner.· I would tell you to secure
20· ·the area as best as you could and continue to
21· ·operate the garage.
22· ·Q.· · · Would you look at Exhibit 49 with me?· In
23· ·Exhibit 49, do you see that Ms. Christina Murray
24· ·from Premier is continuing to note that there are
25· ·two levels with wire cables out of the walls?· Do
YVer1f
 Robert Chapman
January 09, 2019
Page 62
·1· ·you see it on the very top?
·2· ·A.· · · Yes.
·3· ·Q.· · · Did you know that this is approximately a
·4· ·month and a half before Ms. Bowmer had her
·5· ·incident?
·6· ·A.· · · I'm not sure of the exact date of
·7· ·Ms. Bowmer's incident.
·8· ·Q.· · · It is July the 13th.· So it's almost a
·9· ·month.
10· ·A.· · · Yes.
11· ·Q.· · · Okay.· So now you've seen March of 2017
12· ·where there's cables out.· You see now reports in
13· ·June of 2017.· If I'm Christina Murray and I come
14· ·to you and say, We're still having these issues,
15· ·what do I do?· What do you tell her?
16· ·A.· · · Continue to notify the owner and secure
17· ·the area as best you can.
18· ·Q.· · · Now, do you know if anybody from Premier
19· ·ever notified Mr. Kahn or Mr. O'Brien about Curtis
20· ·Brown and the repairs Curtis Brown had done?
21· ·A.· · · I don't know either of those people.
22· ·Q.· · · Curtis Brown --
23· ·A.· · · So I would say no.
24· ·Q.· · · All right.· Curtis Brown, I'll represent
25· ·to you, is a construction person from Austin that
Page 63
·1· ·Stream brought in in the summer of 2014 to do
·2· ·cable work on the garage.· Okay?
·3· ·A.· · · Okay.
·4· ·Q.· · · If somebody at Premier knew about the
·5· ·engineers that had inspected the facility in 2014
·6· ·and knew about the repairs that Curtis Brown had
·7· ·done in 2014, then you have the O'Connor incident
·8· ·where a car goes off and now you see months of
·9· ·additional cables failing, what should that person
10· ·at Premier do with the knowledge it has about that
11· ·history?
12· ·A.· · · They should continue to notify the owner
13· ·and secure the area as best you can.
14· ·Q.· · · Anything else?
15· ·A.· · · No.
16· ·Q.· · · Where were you when you heard about
17· ·Ms. Bowmer going off the parking garage?
18· ·A.· · · I -- I can't recall that.
19· ·Q.· · · Other than Mr. O'Connor and Ms. Bowmer,
20· ·are you personally aware of any other instances
21· ·where cars have gone through a failed vehicle
22· ·barrier system?
23· ·A.· · · I don't know that's a failed barrier,
24· ·so -- but I know that there's -- yeah.· There
25· ·was -- when I was in Houston, there was a car that
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
62 to 65
Page 64
·1· ·went off the roof of the garage there in Post Oak
·2· ·and went down through the roof of Restoration
·3· ·Hardware and set the sprinkler system off for --
·4· ·Q.· · · Did that gentleman die?
·5· ·A.· · · No.· It was a young kid.· No.· He
·6· ·survived.· Yeah.· Very lucky.
·7· ·Q.· · · And what was -- what -- how did you learn
·8· ·about that?
·9· ·A.· · · It was on the evening news in Houston --
10· ·Q.· · · And that --
11· ·A.· · · -- where I lived.
12· ·Q.· · · -- how long before Mr. O'Connor's
13· ·incident?
14· ·A.· · · I don't remember the exact date of it, but
15· ·there's a lot -- you know, a lot of circumstances
16· ·of cars going off garages and --
17· ·Q.· · · You had heard of that before
18· ·Mr. O'Connor's incident?
19· ·A.· · · Probably not.· No.· It was, I would say,
20· ·in between the two.
21· ·Q.· · · I thought you just --
22· ·A.· · · But I can't recall the exact dates.· No.
23· ·Q.· · · Well -- well, I thought you just indicated
24· ·to me there's a lot of instances of cars going
25· ·off --
Page 65
·1· ·A.· · · There are.· There are.· Throughout the
·2· ·history of parking garages.· Yeah.· You can Google
·3· ·it or find pictures or --
·4· ·Q.· · · But you didn't hear about that until
·5· ·Mr. O'Connor's incident?· Is that what you're
·6· ·saying?
·7· ·A.· · · No.· I've heard of other circumstances
·8· ·before, before Mr. O'Connor's incident.
·9· ·Q.· · · One would be the Houston incident you told
10· ·me about?
11· ·A.· · · That was after his.
12· ·Q.· · · Okay.· Do you know of a Houston incident
13· ·where a young person or a person was killed
14· ·falling two stories before Mr. O'Connor's
15· ·incident?
16· ·A.· · · No.· I didn't hear about that one.
17· ·Q.· · · So who notified you that Ms. Bowmer -- the
18· ·second vehicle had gone off of the garage?
19· ·A.· · · I don't remember.
20· ·Q.· · · How were you notified?
21· ·A.· · · It could have been a text from a girl I
22· ·used to date that knew I was involved in the
23· ·Littlefield garage.
24· ·Q.· · · Who's that?
25· ·A.· · · I -- you're going to ask me to remember
YVer1f
 Robert Chapman
January 09, 2019
Page 66
·1· ·her name?· Kelly Walker.
·2· ·Q.· · · But nobody from Premier called you?
·3· ·A.· · · No.
·4· ·Q.· · · Did you bring it up with anybody?
·5· ·A.· · · No.
·6· ·Q.· · · Why not?
·7· ·A.· · · It's not my area of responsibility or --
·8· ·it was just -- I was in Houston at the time, and
·9· ·we -- you know, we'd -- we have regular business
10· ·development calls, but, you know, we all have our
11· ·areas of responsibility, and that was not -- it
12· ·didn't involve me.
13· ·Q.· · · And isn't garage patron safety a joint
14· ·responsibility of everybody at Premier?
15· ·A.· · · It is.· And we take great lengths to --
16· ·for that to happen where we can -- where we can.
17· ·Q.· · · What great lengths did Premier take in the
18· ·Littlefield garage --
19· ·A.· · · All these e-mails from Christina Murray to
20· ·the owner that these were the -- and it's not --
21· ·you know, operators don't often do that.· You
22· ·know, I've worked in the parking industry for
23· ·three year -- for 30 years, and many operators
24· ·don't -- don't bring that up to the owner.
25· ·Q.· · · Your testimony is you're aware of other
Page 67
·1· ·operators who've seen --
·2· ·A.· · · No.· I'm not specific --
·3· ·Q.· · · Hold on a second.
·4· ·A.· · · Yeah.
·5· ·Q.· · · If you'd please just let me finish.· Okay?
·6· ·Because the record won't be clear if you don't --
·7· ·A.· · · Sure.
·8· ·Q.· · · -- let me finish.
·9· ·A.· · · I'm sorry.
10· ·Q.· · · It's all right.
11· ·A.· · · I apologize.
12· ·Q.· · · Is it your testimony that you've seen
13· ·other instances in parking garages where operators
14· ·have failed to report any type of failed barrier
15· ·system?
16· ·A.· · · No.· Not a failed barrier system.
17· ·Q.· · · When is the first time anybody from
18· ·Premier ever discussed with you the fact that two
19· ·vehicles had gone through the barrier system at
20· ·Littlefield garage?
21· ·A.· · · I don't recall.
22· ·Q.· · · Do you not find it odd that your
23· ·ex-girlfriend would text you about it, but as a
24· ·principal in the company, nobody in the company
25· ·would have asked you about it?
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
66 to 69
Page 68
·1· ·A.· · · No.· I don't find that odd.
·2· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· Let's take a break.
·3· · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Okay.· Off the
·4· ·record at 1:54 p.m.
·5· · · · · · · (Recess, 1:54 to 2:06 p.m.)
·6· · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Okay.· Back on the
·7· ·record at 2:06 p.m.
·8· ·BY MR. BREEN:
·9· ·Q.· · · Would you mind, sir, looking with me at
10· ·that exhibit notebook that's there in front of
11· ·you?· And I'll tell you which tab to turn to.
12· ·Turn to Tab 9 with me, will you?· Do you see the
13· ·pictures in Tab 9?
14· ·A.· · · Yes.
15· ·Q.· · · The first picture shows the exterior of
16· ·the garage on the alley side.· Based on your and
17· ·my conversation before, I take it those would be a
18· ·red flag that the owner needs to be notified?
19· ·A.· · · We would notify, yes, of loose cables.
20· ·Q.· · · Okay.· The second picture with the red
21· ·arrows, I take it those would be a red flag and
22· ·should notify the owner?
23· ·A.· · · Exhibit 9.
24· ·Q.· · · Second page.
25· ·A.· · · I've got a "Walker."
Page 69
·1· · · · · · · · MR. RHODES:· I don't think there's a
·2· ·second page on this one.
·3· ·BY MR. BREEN:
·4· ·Q.· · · Well, I'll share mine with you real quick.
·5· ·Condition that should be notified to --
·6· ·A.· · · Yes.
·7· ·Q.· · · -- owner?
·8· ·A.· · · Yeah.
·9· ·Q.· · · Third page of 9, the missing cable, that
10· ·should be a condition that the owner is notified,
11· ·correct?
12· ·A.· · · Owner is notified.
13· ·Q.· · · Correct?
14· ·A.· · · Yes.
15· ·Q.· · · Okay.· The fifth page with the sagging
16· ·cable --
17· ·A.· · · Uh-huh.
18· ·Q.· · · -- that's a condition where the owner
19· ·should be notified, right?
20· ·A.· · · Yes.· Yes.
21· ·Q.· · · That's something that you would expect the
22· ·Premier employee who was on duty at the garage to
23· ·notify the owner of, would you not?
24· ·A.· · · They -- they would make a recommendation.
25· ·Yes.
YVer1f
 Robert Chapman
January 09, 2019
Page 70
·1· ·Q.· · · Have you seen the video of the accident
·2· ·involving Ms. Bowmer?
·3· ·A.· · · No.· I have not.· Just a still picture.
·4· ·Q.· · · Would you look at Exhibit 16, Tab 16, with
·5· ·me there?· Do you have 16?
·6· ·A.· · · Yes, I do.
·7· ·Q.· · · All right.· You see the numbers on the
·8· ·bottom?· It should be numbered -- it says like
·9· ·"Bowmer" and then has a number on there?
10· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
11· ·Q.· · · Would you go to Number 1500?
12· ·A.· · · 1600?
13· ·Q.· · · 1500.
14· ·A.· · · Oh.· 1500.· Sorry.
15· ·Q.· · · That's all right.· Should be a City of
16· ·Austin Code Notice of Violation.· Do you see that?
17· ·A.· · · Yes, I do.
18· ·Q.· · · And have you ever worked with Premier at a
19· ·garage where the owner was given a Code Notice of
20· ·Violation by the City?
21· ·A.· · · Yes.· We just had recently the City of
22· ·Detroit garage.
23· ·Q.· · · What circumstance?
24· ·A.· · · We just took ownership with a partnership
25· ·group from a garage that the City of Detroit
Page 71
·1· ·operated for 50 years, and so we're planning to do
·2· ·a complete restoration.· So it's been -- it's a
·3· ·moot issue with the -- with the City.
·4· ·Q.· · · Was there some type of issue the City had
·5· ·with code compliance?
·6· ·A.· · · Yes.· But they've all been resolved
·7· ·because we're doing a complete restoration of the
·8· ·garage.
·9· ·Q.· · · So as opposed to doing some type of
10· ·temporary fix or patching it up, Premier is doing
11· ·a complete restoration, and that's resolving the
12· ·City's concerns?
13· ·A.· · · Yes, it is.· It's a $15 million
14· ·restoration.
15· ·Q.· · · And I take it that Premier is bringing it
16· ·up to code and the standard of care as opposed to
17· ·trying to do some type of repair that won't
18· ·satisfy that; is that right?
19· ·A.· · · Yes.· As -- in this case, we're in an
20· ·ownership position.
21· ·Q.· · · Now, if you don't mind going to 1507 with
22· ·me there.
23· ·A.· · · Yes.
24· ·Q.· · · In the middle of the page under 71917,
25· ·there's an entry that talks about the cable system
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
70 to 73
Page 72
·1· ·being repaired after the O'Connor incident without
·2· ·a permit being obtained.· Do you see that?
·3· ·A.· · · Yes, I do.
·4· ·Q.· · · As a property manager, what is the policy
·5· ·at Premier when it knows that an owner is
·6· ·proceeding with repairs to a facility without
·7· ·getting a needed permit?· What should happen?
·8· ·A.· · · As a parking manager, that wouldn't fall
·9· ·under our daily operating procedure, and the
10· ·problem -- and typically, the parking manager
11· ·on-site is someone that is not familiar with City
12· ·codes and permitting and that type of process,
13· ·so...
14· ·Q.· · · If the person at Premier does know that a
15· ·permit was required but the owner is doing it
16· ·anyway, what should the Premier person do?
17· ·A.· · · They should alert the owner, notify the
18· ·owner, that they're not in compliance.
19· ·Q.· · · Does it surprise you that the City would
20· ·have gone floor by floor with the owner and
21· ·determined that because of the condition of the
22· ·vehicle barrier system, the garage was dangerous
23· ·and that immediate measures needed to be taken to
24· ·prevent another accident?
25· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection.· Form.
Page 73
·1· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· When was this done?
·2· ·BY MR. BREEN:
·3· ·Q.· · · Right after the Bowmer incident.
·4· ·A.· · · Well, I --
·5· ·Q.· · · Does that surprise you?
·6· ·A.· · · I couldn't -- no.· I couldn't comment
·7· ·because I don't know the condition at that time.
·8· ·Q.· · · Is there some type of committee, safety
·9· ·committee, ethics committee, within Premier
10· ·Parking that has roundtable or review of issues
11· ·that come up for Premier?
12· ·A.· · · We have operating procedures for safety,
13· ·to deal with safety issues.
14· ·Q.· · · What are those?
15· ·A.· · · That deal with hurricane or fire or flood
16· ·or --
17· ·Q.· · · Anything that deals with the kind of
18· ·scenario we're talking about here?
19· ·A.· · · No.· Not to my knowledge?
20· · · · · ·(Document marked Exhibit No. 57.)
21· ·BY MR. BREEN:
22· ·Q.· · · Show you Exhibit 57 and ask you if you can
23· ·identify for me what 57 is.
24· ·A.· · · This is the "Dimensions of Parking" book.
25· ·It's a publication.· It's a joint publication by
YVer1f
 Robert Chapman
January 09, 2019
Page 74
·1· ·the Urban Land Institute and the Parking
·2· ·Consultants Council.· It's kind of a handbook for
·3· ·parking, if you will.
·4· ·Q.· · · And it looks to me like this particular
·5· ·version is the fifth edition that was put out in
·6· ·2010; is that right?
·7· ·A.· · · That's correct.
·8· ·Q.· · · Is it the most recent version of it?
·9· ·A.· · · Yes, it is.
10· ·Q.· · · So this would be a version of the book
11· ·that was out at the time you were working over at
12· ·Littlefield?
13· ·A.· · · Yes, it would be.
14· ·Q.· · · And are you involved with the project
15· ·staff at all?
16· ·A.· · · No.· I was just a contributing author.
17· ·Q.· · · Okay.· What -- what chapters did you
18· ·contribute to --
19· ·A.· · · Remind me.· I think it was Chapters -- it
20· ·dealt with parking studies, parking demand --
21· ·Q.· · · Okay.· And the Craig Chapman --
22· ·A.· · · -- chapter.
23· ·Q.· · · -- that's director of publishing
24· ·operations, is that any relation?
25· ·A.· · · No.· It is not.
Page 75
·1· ·Q.· · · Do you consider this book to be
·2· ·authoritative?
·3· ·A.· · · Yes, I do.
·4· ·Q.· · · Do you agree that regardless of how
·5· ·responsibilities are allocated, the intricacies of
·6· ·parking warrant careful analysis and coordinated
·7· ·decision making?
·8· ·A.· · · In what respect?
·9· ·Q.· · · In respect to operating and owning a
10· ·parking garage.
11· ·A.· · · Being the operator or being the owner or
12· ·being both?
13· ·Q.· · · Well, I would assume that if
14· ·responsibilities are allocated, it's going to be
15· ·both, right?
16· ·A.· · · Okay.· Could you repeat the question?
17· ·Q.· · · Sure.· Will you agree that regardless of
18· ·how responsibilities are allocated, the
19· ·intricacies of parking warrant careful analysis
20· ·and coordinated decision making?
21· ·A.· · · I couldn't argue with that statement.· No.
22· ·Q.· · · So --
23· ·A.· · · I would agree.
24· ·Q.· · · -- for instance, the owner and the
25· ·property manager should be both performing careful
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
74 to 77
Page 76
·1· ·analysis and coordinated decision making, right?
·2· ·A.· · · That's somebody else's authoring, but --
·3· ·Q.· · · Well, you just told me it was
·4· ·authoritative.· So do you not --
·5· ·A.· · · Yeah.
·6· ·Q.· · · -- think so?
·7· ·A.· · · Okay.· No.· I agree with that --
·8· ·Q.· · · All right.
·9· ·A.· · · -- statement, sir.
10· ·Q.· · · And then it says, "As a result, parking
11· ·consultants" -- and that's Premier, is it not --
12· ·A.· · · Yes.
13· ·Q.· · · -- a parking consultant?
14· ·A.· · · Yes.
15· ·Q.· · · -- "are now typically involved in all
16· ·aspects of the development and operation of
17· ·parking facilities."· Do you agree with that?
18· ·A.· · · That's quite a general statement.
19· ·Q.· · · So you don't agree with that?
20· ·A.· · · I couldn't -- I think there should be more
21· ·specifics to it.
22· ·Q.· · · It says, "The parking consultant's role is
23· ·to provide technical assistance to those who are
24· ·in decision-making positions."· Do you agree with
25· ·that?
Page 77
·1· ·A.· · · To a certain extent.
·2· ·Q.· · · "Parking consultants are familiar with the
·3· ·parking characteristics associated with most land
·4· ·uses and understand the proper data collection,
·5· ·careful analysis of site-specific circumstances
·6· ·and experienced judgment crucial to the successful
·7· ·development of parking facilities."· Do you agree
·8· ·with that?
·9· ·A.· · · I would agree with that.
10· ·Q.· · · Do you agree that Stream was relying upon
11· ·Premier Parking for a certain level of expertise
12· ·in the operation of the garage?
13· ·A.· · · A certain level of the operation of the
14· ·garage, not the structural condition of the
15· ·garage.
16· ·Q.· · · And would you agree that GTT was relying
17· ·upon Premier for its -- Premier's expertise in the
18· ·operation of the --
19· ·A.· · · In the operation --
20· ·Q.· · · -- garage?
21· ·A.· · · -- of the garage, not the structural
22· ·condition of the garage.
23· ·Q.· · · Well, when you say "not the structural
24· ·condition," what does that mean?
25· ·A.· · · The concrete, the -- how it was built to
YVer1f
 Robert Chapman
January 09, 2019
Page 78
·1· ·building code.· We're not qualified and -- nor do
·2· ·we ever represent ourselves to be qualified -- we
·3· ·always recommend and we always do hire a
·4· ·structural engineer that's licensed in that state
·5· ·to make that assessment.
·6· ·Q.· · · Did you ever tell that to Mr. Kahn?
·7· ·A.· · · I never met Mr. Kahn.
·8· ·Q.· · · Did you ever tell that to Mr. O'Brien?
·9· ·A.· · · I've never met Mr. O'Brien.
10· ·Q.· · · Do you know what --
11· ·A.· · · No.· I did not.
12· ·Q.· · · Do you know what was told to Mr. Kahn or
13· ·Mr. O'Brien?
14· ·A.· · · No.· I do not.
15· ·Q.· · · Do you have any reason to dispute what
16· ·Mr. Kahn or what Mr. O'Brien said was told to them
17· ·at the time Premier was recruiting them to hire
18· ·Premier?
19· ·A.· · · I wasn't a part of those conversations.
20· ·So I couldn't speak to those specifics.· No.
21· ·Q.· · · Would it surprise you that Premier was
22· ·marketing itself as an expert that could run the
23· ·garage on a day-to-day basis?
24· ·A.· · · Yes.· That -- I would say that's a factual
25· ·statement.
Page 79
·1· ·Q.· · · Would it surprise you that Premier was
·2· ·marketing itself as a company that could be the
·3· ·eyes and ears of the owner?
·4· ·A.· · · That's a factual statement.
·5· ·Q.· · · Would you agree that parking garage safety
·6· ·is largely a matter of maintenance?
·7· ·A.· · · No.· The user of the garage has also
·8· ·responsibility in the safety of the garage.
·9· ·Q.· · · In what sense?
10· ·A.· · · That they need to drive through the garage
11· ·and obey the speed limit and drive in a safe
12· ·manner --
13· ·Q.· · · And --
14· ·A.· · · -- and keep control of their automobile.
15· ·Q.· · · Right.· And part of the very important
16· ·reason of having vehicle restraint systems is that
17· ·it is a certainty, a moral and statistical
18· ·certainty, that accidents will happen in a garage;
19· ·isn't that true?
20· ·A.· · · But the --
21· ·Q.· · · Is that true or not?
22· ·A.· · · -- design -- no.· It's not true because
23· ·the cables are not designed per building code to
24· ·withstand --
25· ·Q.· · · I didn't ask you about cables.· I asked
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
78 to 81
Page 80
·1· ·you about accidents.· Isn't it true, sir, in your
·2· ·experience that in every single parking garage
·3· ·you've ever been involved in, there's been an
·4· ·accident?
·5· ·A.· · · Yes.
·6· ·Q.· · · That is a moral and statistical certainty?
·7· ·A.· · · Yes.
·8· ·Q.· · · And that is why you have vehicle restraint
·9· ·systems, right?
10· ·A.· · · To a certain extent.
11· ·Q.· · · It's like having a seat belt in a car,
12· ·right?
13· ·A.· · · Yeah.
14· ·Q.· · · You have a car, don't you?
15· ·A.· · · Yes, I do.
16· ·Q.· · · You drive it the best you can?
17· ·A.· · · Yes, I do.
18· ·Q.· · · Have you ever made a mistake driving?
19· ·A.· · · Yes, I have.
20· · · · · · · · MR. RHODES:· Objection.
21· ·BY MR. BREEN:
22· ·Q.· · · Have you ever been --
23· · · · · · · · MR. RHODES:· Form.
24· ·BY MR. BREEN:
25· ·Q.· · · -- in an accident?
Page 81
·1· · · · · · · · MR. RHODES:· Objection.· Form.
·2· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Yes, I have.
·3· ·BY MR. BREEN:
·4· ·Q.· · · Did you expect your airbag and your seat
·5· ·belt to work properly?
·6· · · · · · · · MR. RHODES:· Objection.· Form.
·7· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· I haven't had an
·8· ·experience yet to -- where they -- I've had an
·9· ·airbag or seat -- they were all minor fender
10· ·benders.
11· ·BY MR. BREEN:
12· ·Q.· · · Minor fender benders where what?· The
13· ·speed was low enough that you weren't hurt?
14· ·A.· · · Yes.
15· ·Q.· · · How fast?
16· ·A.· · · Probably 5 miles an hour.
17· ·Q.· · · Okay.· Now, do you expect -- and did you
18· ·buy your vehicle with the expectation that the
19· ·passenger restraint system was going to work?
20· ·A.· · · Yes.
21· ·Q.· · · That if you're in an accident, even if
22· ·it's your own fault, that hopefully the restraint
23· ·system will work and keep you from being injured?
24· ·A.· · · I would say that's an accurate statement.
25· ·Q.· · · And that's one of the reasons you bought
YVer1f
 Robert Chapman
January 09, 2019
Page 82
·1· ·your car, right?
·2· ·A.· · · Right.
·3· ·Q.· · · What car is it?
·4· ·A.· · · I've got an Infiniti QX70.
·5· ·Q.· · · Does it have the most up-to-date vehicle
·6· ·safety in it?
·7· ·A.· · · No, it doesn't.
·8· ·Q.· · · Does it have airbags?
·9· ·A.· · · It has airbags.
10· ·Q.· · · Seat belts?
11· ·A.· · · Seat belts.
12· ·Q.· · · Would you be upset if you got into a
13· ·low-speed, say, 10-mile-per-hour collision and
14· ·your seat belt didn't work?
15· ·A.· · · No.
16· ·Q.· · · It would be okay with you?
17· ·A.· · · Yeah.
18· ·Q.· · · And why is that?
19· ·A.· · · Because I don't expect at 10 miles an hour
20· ·that I'm going to get hurt.
21· ·Q.· · · Did you know that Ms. Bowmer was going
22· ·about 10 miles an hour?
23· ·A.· · · No.· I don't know the circumstances of
24· ·that accident.
25· ·Q.· · · Do you think she should have the ability
Page 83
·1· ·to have the same expectation as you, that if she's
·2· ·in an accident at 10, she's not going to be hurt?
·3· ·A.· · · I -- I think we're talking apples and
·4· ·oranges, so...
·5· ·Q.· · · I don't think so, sir.· You just got
·6· ·through telling me that your expectation was if
·7· ·you're in an accident going 10, you don't even
·8· ·think you need a seat belt that works because
·9· ·you're not going to be hurt.
10· ·A.· · · Yeah.· I don't know the circumstances of
11· ·that accident.· So I'm not going to comment on it,
12· ·so --
13· ·Q.· · · Well, I'm not asking --
14· ·A.· · · I'm not going to comment --
15· ·Q.· · · -- you to.
16· ·A.· · · -- on that hypothetical.
17· ·Q.· · · I'm not asking you to.· I'm asking you to
18· ·comment on what you just testified to the jury.
19· ·That you said if you were in an accident at 10
20· ·miles per hour, you wouldn't even need a seat
21· ·belt, you don't think, because you wouldn't expect
22· ·that you would be hurt; isn't that right?
23· ·A.· · · That's correct.
24· ·Q.· · · Do you have any reason to believe
25· ·Ms. Bowmer had a different expectation than you
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
82 to 85
Page 84
·1· ·do?
·2· ·A.· · · I don't know Ms. Bowmer, and I -- I'm not
·3· ·going to speculate on what -- her expectations or
·4· ·what was in her mind at the time of the accident.
·5· ·Q.· · · Do you know, even generally after 30-plus
·6· ·years in the industry, what the building code sets
·7· ·as the parameters for a vehicle restraint system?
·8· ·A.· · · It's in the building code.· I'm not going
·9· ·to interpret it because I'm not a structural
10· ·engineer.
11· ·Q.· · · And so the answer to my question is you
12· ·don't know?
13· ·A.· · · No.
14· ·Q.· · · So you have no idea --
15· ·A.· · · I know in general terms, but I don't know
16· ·specifics.
17· ·Q.· · · What --
18· ·A.· · · It's changed --
19· ·Q.· · · What general terms do you know about?
20· ·A.· · · That it's withstand to -- built to
21· ·withstand a minimal impact.
22· ·Q.· · · Anything more specific than that?
23· ·A.· · · No, I don't.
24· ·Q.· · · How would you characterize the management
25· ·option between Premier and GTT in terms of the
Page 85
·1· ·operation of the garage?
·2· ·A.· · · What was our terms of our contract or
·3· ·what?
·4· ·Q.· · · Yeah.· Just generally.· Is it a percentage
·5· ·management agreement?
·6· ·A.· · · I believe it was based on -- yes.· It was
·7· ·based on a fee incentive.
·8· ·Q.· · · Okay.· So there's an incentive --
·9· ·A.· · · I don't know -- but I don't -- that was
10· ·with Stream.· So I can't comment to the --
11· ·Q.· · · Okay.· Let's talk about Stream then.
12· ·Stream's was incentive based?
13· ·A.· · · Yes.
14· ·Q.· · · So the more parking revenue, the less
15· ·expenses, the more Premier made?
16· ·A.· · · Correct.
17· ·Q.· · · Same for the owner?
18· ·A.· · · Right.
19· ·Q.· · · So if, for instance, the owner was doing
20· ·less maintenance, that would be less expenses.
21· ·Therefore, more profits, right?
22· ·A.· · · No.· That's not correct because the owner
23· ·would be responsible for capital expenses.· We're
24· ·only responsible for pure operating expenses.
25· ·Q.· · · I'm sorry.· Did I say capital expenses or
YVer1f
 Robert Chapman
January 09, 2019
Page 86
·1· ·did I say maintenance?
·2· ·A.· · · Well, you have to -- if you define
·3· ·maintenance, whether it be repair -- maintenance
·4· ·to us means sweeping the floors, cleaning the
·5· ·light bulbs, dusting the cobwebs.
·6· ·Q.· · · Patrolling the premises, that kind of --
·7· ·A.· · · Yeah.
·8· ·Q.· · · -- stuff?
·9· ·A.· · · Yeah.
10· ·Q.· · · Yeah.· The less expenses involved in that,
11· ·the more Premier makes?
12· ·A.· · · Not necessarily.
13· ·Q.· · · Okay.· Does "not necessarily" mean no?
14· ·A.· · · No.· No.
15· ·Q.· · · What does it --
16· ·A.· · · I'm not going to want to come and park in
17· ·a dirty garage, so -- no.· So --
18· ·Q.· · · Right.
19· ·A.· · · -- we have to keep it clean to make sure
20· ·that it's attractive to people coming to downtown
21· ·Austin.
22· ·Q.· · · Is making it safe important to generating
23· ·revenue?
24· ·A.· · · Maintenance and cleaning or maintenance
25· ·and --
Page 87
·1· ·Q.· · · I said, Is making it safe important?
·2· ·A.· · · Oh, I'm sorry.· I thought you said
·3· ·maintenance.· I apologize.
·4· ·Q.· · · That's all right.
·5· ·A.· · · Is making it safe --
·6· ·Q.· · · Right.
·7· ·A.· · · Yes.
·8· ·Q.· · · Why?
·9· ·A.· · · People want to park where they feel safe.
10· ·Safety goes to lighting, goes to cleanliness, goes
11· ·to monitoring.· There's a lot of different
12· ·elements of safety in a parking garage.
13· ·Q.· · · Would you agree that structural
14· ·maintenance is an important part of the safety?
15· ·A.· · · Depends on the condition of the structure.
16· ·Q.· · · Do you agree that structural maintenance
17· ·generally warrants the highest priority and makes
18· ·up the greatest part of maintenance costs?
19· ·A.· · · It, again, depends on the structural
20· ·condition of the -- of the garage.
21· ·Q.· · · Do you agree that despite its critical
22· ·importance, structural system maintenance is
23· ·frequently neglected?
24· ·A.· · · I would agree in -- as an industry, that's
25· ·probably a general rule.
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
86 to 89
Page 88
·1· ·Q.· · · And do you agree that although the results
·2· ·of neglect may not show up for many years, they
·3· ·can be serious?
·4· ·A.· · · Yeah.· If you have a structural failure of
·5· ·a garage, certainly.
·6· ·Q.· · · Like, for instance, if the vehicle
·7· ·restraint system fails, right?· That would be a
·8· ·structural failure?
·9· ·A.· · · No.
10· ·Q.· · · Oh, you don't consider --
11· ·A.· · · No.· I'm considering structural failure to
12· ·be concrete or steel failure with a collapse or
13· ·something like that, so --
14· ·Q.· · · You don't -- you don't consider a vehicle
15· ·restraint system to be a structural issue?
16· ·A.· · · Yes, I do.
17· ·Q.· · · All right.· So then if it failed, it would
18· ·be a structural failure, would it not?
19· ·A.· · · Yeah.· You could classify it that way.
20· ·Q.· · · Would you agree that where parking
21· ·facilities are operated by a different party from
22· ·the owner, it is in the interest of both the owner
23· ·and the operator to clearly define the maintenance
24· ·responsibilities of each party and to assign
25· ·appropriate amounts in the operating and capital
Page 89
·1· ·budgets?
·2· ·A.· · · I would say that that's -- that's true,
·3· ·but there's a difference between daily cleaning
·4· ·maintenance and structural maintenance, and -- and
·5· ·parking operators are not involved in structural
·6· ·maintenance.
·7· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· I'm going to object to
·8· ·the responsiveness after "that's true."
·9· ·BY MR. BREEN:
10· ·Q.· · · Do you have any knowledge of what the
11· ·allocation of responsibilities were from the
12· ·perspective of GTT between Premier and GTT?
13· ·A.· · · I have no knowledge of any of those.
14· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· Let's take just about a
15· ·five-minute break.· I'm just about done.· I just
16· ·need to look through my notes.
17· · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Okay.· Off the
18· ·record at 2:27 p.m.
19· · · · · · · (Recess, 2:27 to 2:44 p.m.)
20· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· All right.· Back on the
21· ·record at 2:44 p.m.
22· ·BY MR. BREEN:
23· ·Q.· · · All right, Mr. Chapman.· We're back on the
24· ·record.· Are you ready to proceed?
25· ·A.· · · I am, sir.
YVer1f
 Robert Chapman
January 09, 2019
Page 90
·1· ·Q.· · · Just to reorient you, you and I were
·2· ·previously discussing the 2014 time frame, and I
·3· ·had asked you about whether you were familiar with
·4· ·any engineers that had gone out and inspected the
·5· ·premises.· Do you remember that?
·6· ·A.· · · Yes.
·7· ·Q.· · · My recollection was you told me that
·8· ·you -- you don't remember that; is that true?
·9· ·A.· · · No.· No.
10· ·Q.· · · Is that something that you would remember
11· ·if that had happened?
12· ·A.· · · I -- I would think.· But, no, not
13· ·confident.
14· · · · · ·(Document marked Exhibit No. 58.)
15· ·BY MR. BREEN:
16· ·Q.· · · Gotcha.· Let me show you a couple things
17· ·here.· Let me show you Exhibit 58.· Exhibit 58 is
18· ·an April 25th, 2014 e-mail to Wade Smith from
19· ·Jessica Wright, and you're copied on there.· Do
20· ·you see that?
21· ·A.· · · Yes.
22· ·Q.· · · And so is Ryan Hunt.· And it says, "Thank
23· ·you very much for taking time to speak with me
24· ·today.· Per our conversation, we have a garage
25· ·here in Austin, Texas that is in need of repairs
Page 91
·1· ·and/or replacement of the existing barrier
·2· ·cables."· Do you see that?
·3· ·A.· · · Yes, I do.
·4· ·Q.· · · "The cables that are presently in place
·5· ·are broken, corroded and loose throughout the nine
·6· ·levels of this parking facility."· Do you see
·7· ·that?
·8· ·A.· · · Yes, I do.
·9· ·Q.· · · Does that sound like an acceptable
10· ·condition?
11· ·A.· · · No.
12· ·Q.· · · Sound like a safe condition?
13· ·A.· · · No.· Not the way it's described in this
14· ·e-mail.
15· ·Q.· · · And do you have anything to dispute that
16· ·Ms. Wright was accurately describing it?
17· ·A.· · · Yeah.· I don't think it's an accurate
18· ·assessment.
19· ·Q.· · · You don't think it's accurate?
20· ·A.· · · No.
21· ·Q.· · · What -- what is it now that, as you're
22· ·sitting here, you recall somehow makes that
23· ·inaccurate?
24· ·A.· · · "The" -- "the cables that are presently in
25· ·place are broken, corroded and loose throughout
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
90 to 93
Page 92
·1· ·the nine" -- the cables that were present were
·2· ·not -- there -- there were cables that were loose
·3· ·when I last observed it, but not every cable was
·4· ·damaged throughout the garage as she's described
·5· ·it.
·6· ·Q.· · · Okay.· So you think Ms. Wright -- as you
·7· ·sit here now, you're telling the jury you think
·8· ·that her description on April 25th of 2014, that
·9· ·the cables that are presently in place are broken,
10· ·corroded and loose, is inaccurate?
11· ·A.· · · It's an overstatement.· Yes.
12· ·Q.· · · And I take it then you sent her an e-mail
13· ·that said, Jessica, what are you talking about?
14· ·This is an overstatement.
15· ·A.· · · No.· Because I wasn't involved in Austin
16· ·operations at that time.· I'm not sure why she
17· ·copied me, but I wasn't involved.
18· ·Q.· · · So this would have just gone into Bob's
19· ·outbox without any action?
20· ·A.· · · Correct.
21· ·Q.· · · Is that just something that was of no
22· ·moment to you?
23· ·A.· · · No.· I was relocating back to Houston.
24· ·Very busy at that time.
25· ·Q.· · · Too busy to worry about a nine-level
Page 93
·1· ·garage that had -- pardon me.
·2· ·A.· · · I'm sorry.
·3· ·Q.· · · Yeah.· Too busy to worry about a
·4· ·nine-level garage that had broken, corroded and
·5· ·loose vehicle restraint cables?· Is that what
·6· ·you're telling the jury?
·7· ·A.· · · I'm telling you, first, that I don't think
·8· ·her statement is accurate.· And second, yes. I
·9· ·wasn't involved in the direct operations of
10· ·Austin.· It was some -- it fell under somebody
11· ·else's responsibility.
12· ·Q.· · · Mr. Hunt?
13· ·A.· · · I would assume it's Mr. Hunt or -- or
14· ·Ms. -- Ms. Wright, but I wasn't involved.· So I
15· ·can't speak to that.
16· ·Q.· · · Okay.· Now, broken, corroded and loose
17· ·cables throughout nine levels, that would clearly
18· ·be outside of the code and in violation of the
19· ·standard of care, right?
20· ·A.· · · If that was an accurate statement.
21· ·Q.· · · Is that true?
22· ·A.· · · If that was an -- yes.· It would be.· That
23· ·was -- I -- I would assume -- I'm not an expert on
24· ·the building code.· So I can't --
25· ·Q.· · · It doesn't take an expert --
YVer1f
 Robert Chapman
January 09, 2019
Page 94
·1· ·A.· · · Get my structural engineer to --
·2· ·Q.· · · Sure.· But it doesn't take an expert, sir,
·3· ·to know that broken, corroded and loose cables
·4· ·throughout nine levels of a parking facility are
·5· ·dangerous, right?
·6· ·A.· · · If that was the actual condition.
·7· · · · · ·(Document marked Exhibit No. 59.)
·8· ·BY MR. BREEN:
·9· ·Q.· · · Show you Exhibit 59.· Exhibit 59 is an
10· ·e-mail from Jessica Wright on May 1st to the owner
11· ·group, and you're copied on that.· Do you see
12· ·that?
13· ·A.· · · Yes, I am.
14· ·Q.· · · It says, "Bob and I are meeting with VSL
15· ·Structural today at 1:30 to walk Littlefield and
16· ·have them assess the barrier cables to provide a
17· ·quote for repair."· Do you see that?
18· ·A.· · · Yes, I do.
19· ·Q.· · · Is Jessica just making that up?
20· ·A.· · · She is making that up.
21· ·Q.· · · She total, whole cloth, is misrepresenting
22· ·to the ownership group that somehow you're engaged
23· ·and you're going to be meeting with this VSL
24· ·structural engineer?
25· ·A.· · · That's correct.
Page 95
·1· ·Q.· · · So I assume then that you being a
·2· ·responsible executive would have copied somebody
·3· ·and said, You know what?· I actually am not
·4· ·attending this meeting?
·5· · · · · · · · MR. RHODES:· Objection.· Form.· You
·6· ·can answer.
·7· ·BY MR. BREEN:
·8· ·Q.· · · Did you copy anybody and tell them this is
·9· ·totally made up?
10· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Are we objecting to
11· ·this?
12· · · · · · · · MR. RHODES:· No.· You can --
13· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· I'll --
14· · · · · · · · MR. RHODES:· You can go ahead and
15· ·answer.· Objection is noted.
16· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· As I explained earlier,
17· ·I was not responsible for the operation of this
18· ·garage any longer.· I was relocating -- I may even
19· ·have been in Houston at the time.· So it would
20· ·have been impossible for me to meet with Jessica
21· ·Wright.
22· · · · · · · · And, you know, in the process of
23· ·moving and -- and relocating and -- you know,
24· ·there was a lot -- taking a new position -- there
25· ·was a lot going on.· So it might have been that
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
94 to 97
Page 96
·1· ·this got lost in my inbox.· So I can't speak to
·2· ·it --
·3· ·BY MR. BREEN:
·4· ·Q.· · · Okay.· Was --
·5· ·A.· · · -- accurately.
·6· ·Q.· · · Was there a lot going on that was more
·7· ·important than the safety of the vehicle restraint
·8· ·system at the Littlefield garage?
·9· ·A.· · · I wasn't aware that there was an issue
10· ·with the restraint system at the Littlefield
11· ·garage.· So I can't --
12· ·Q.· · · All right.· Did anybody ever make you
13· ·aware of that or were you just totally out of the
14· ·loop?
15· ·A.· · · I don't really understand the question.
16· ·Q.· · · Yeah.· Did anybody ever make you aware of
17· ·the issue that Ms. Wright was talking about in
18· ·Exhibit 58 --
19· ·A.· · · Well --
20· ·Q.· · · -- of there being broken, corroded and
21· ·loose cables?
22· ·A.· · · You know, first, I'm saying that she's not
23· ·accurate in that description.· That -- that was an
24· ·inaccurate description.· So, no, nobody brought it
25· ·to my attention that they were unsafe.
Page 97
·1· · · · · · (Document marked Exhibit No. 60.)
·2· ·BY MR. BREEN:
·3· ·Q.· · · Okay.· Show you Exhibit 60.· Do you see
·4· ·Exhibit 60 is an e-mail from Jessica Wright to
·5· ·Wade Smith telling him at the bottom, "It was very
·6· ·nice to meet with you last week.· Have you had any
·7· ·progress on the quote?"· Do you see that?
·8· ·A.· · · Yes.
·9· ·Q.· · · She copies you, doesn't she?
10· ·A.· · · Yeah.
11· ·Q.· · · And then you respond, don't you?
12· ·A.· · · I do.
13· ·Q.· · · And you say, "Further to Jessica's
14· ·response, we only want to replace the loose and
15· ·missing cables per the owner's direction."
16· ·A.· · · "Per the owner's direction."
17· ·Q.· · · Do you see that?
18· ·A.· · · Yes.
19· ·Q.· · · Now, that didn't hit your trash or outbox
20· ·without a response, did it?
21· ·A.· · · No.
22· ·Q.· · · You actually were engaged and knew that
23· ·there had been an engineer out on the premises,
24· ·right?
25· ·A.· · · No, I didn't.
YVer1f
 Robert Chapman
January 09, 2019
Page 98
·1· ·Q.· · · Well, how was it that you knew to tell the
·2· ·engineer by e-mail that you only --
·3· ·A.· · · I, you know --
·4· ·Q.· · · Pardon me.
·5· ·A.· · · I don't -- this is four and a half
·6· ·years --
·7· ·Q.· · · You need to let me finish --
·8· ·A.· · · -- ago, and I don't recollect --
·9· ·Q.· · · Hold on a second.· Let me finish my
10· ·question.
11· ·A.· · · Okay.
12· ·Q.· · · If you weren't engaged, sir, how is it you
13· ·say, "Further to Jessica's response, we only want
14· ·to replace the loose and missing cables"?
15· ·A.· · · It's four and a half years ago, and I
16· ·don't recollect.
17· ·Q.· · · You told me earlier that only replacing
18· ·loose and missing cables and doing work on a
19· ·vehicle restraint system when it doesn't bring it
20· ·up to code or meet the standard of care is
21· ·dangerous.· Do you remember that?
22· ·A.· · · Yes, I did.
23· ·Q.· · · And that's exactly what you were
24· ·authorizing --
25· ·A.· · · Yeah.· But --
Page 99
·1· ·Q.· · · -- here, isn't it?
·2· ·A.· · · Well, but what I'm conveying in this
·3· ·message is I'm -- per the owner's direction.
·4· ·Q.· · · So per the owner's direction, let's do
·5· ·substandard, dangerous work --
·6· ·A.· · · I --
·7· ·Q.· · · -- is that right?
·8· ·A.· · · I'm conveying what the owner's direction
·9· ·was to -- to his consultant.
10· ·Q.· · · Right.· As me -- as a person with 35 years
11· ·of parking experience, I want to tell you we only
12· ·want to replace the loose and missing cables
13· ·because that's what the owner wants to do?
14· ·A.· · · Yes.
15· ·Q.· · · Right?
16· ·A.· · · Yes.
17· ·Q.· · · Even though you knew, like you told me
18· ·under oath, that that was dangerous?· Isn't that
19· ·true?
20· ·A.· · · To replace the loose or missing cables?
21· ·Q.· · · Yeah.· As opposed to bringing it up to
22· ·code and the standard of care.· Isn't that what
23· ·you told me earlier?
24· ·A.· · · No.· I think that's a step in the right
25· ·direction, to repair the loose and missing cables.
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
98 to 101
Page 100
·1· ·Q.· · · Well, how about we go to the destination
·2· ·and bring it to up to code or actually --
·3· ·A.· · · If I was the owner --
·4· ·Q.· · · -- standard of care --
·5· ·A.· · · -- that would be what I would have done,
·6· ·but I can't write a check for -- for doing that,
·7· ·so...
·8· · · · · · (Document marked Exhibit No. 61.)
·9· ·BY MR. BREEN:
10· ·Q.· · · Okay.· Show you Exhibit 61.· 61 is
11· ·Mr. Smith's response, and you're copied on that,
12· ·are you not?
13· ·A.· · · I am.
14· ·Q.· · · Nobody else besides Jessica Wright and
15· ·you, true?
16· ·A.· · · That's correct.
17· ·Q.· · · So as we sit here now, you do remember
18· ·that you were engaged on this issue in May of
19· ·2014?
20· ·A.· · · No.· I don't remember I was engaged on
21· ·this issue.
22· ·Q.· · · So do you not consider giving direction of
23· ·"we only want to replace the loose and missing
24· ·cables" as being engaged?
25· ·A.· · · I was conveying the owners, but I don't
Page 101
·1· ·remember writing this e-mail.
·2· ·Q.· · · Let's look at 61.· Is that the one in your
·3· ·hand?· Exhibit 61?· Is that what's in your hand?
·4· ·A.· · · Yes.
·5· ·Q.· · · Thank you.· "Jessica, it was nice meeting
·6· ·you as well.· As we discussed during our visit,
·7· ·the current condition of the cable system in your
·8· ·garage will not comply with today's standards.· In
·9· ·order to repair only those cables that are laying
10· ·on the ground or missing altogether, modifications
11· ·would need to be made.· Unfortunately,
12· ·modifications cannot be made to a system out of
13· ·compliance without bringing the whole system up to
14· ·code.· Knowing the severity of the garage's
15· ·condition, VSL will not be able to perform your
16· ·requested modifications.· Should you and your team
17· ·reconsider bringing the barrier cable system up to
18· ·code, in turn, making your garage safe, please let
19· ·us know."
20· · · · · · You got that e-mail didn't you, Bob?
21· ·A.· · · I did.
22· ·Q.· · · And you understood what this Structural
23· ·Technologies' VSL person was saying, didn't you?
24· ·A.· · · I did understand it.
25· ·Q.· · · And you see that he has the same
YVer1f
 Robert Chapman
January 09, 2019
Page 102
·1· ·conclusions that Jessica did, that, in fact, the
·2· ·system was seriously out of compliance and the
·3· ·current condition of the cable will not comply
·4· ·with today's standards.· Do you see that?
·5· ·A.· · · I do.
·6· ·Q.· · · He also notes that there are cables that
·7· ·are laying on the ground and missing altogether.
·8· ·Do you see that?
·9· ·A.· · · I do see that.
10· ·Q.· · · Does that then make you want to rethink
11· ·your criticism of Jessica's e-mail where she
12· ·described the system?
13· ·A.· · · No, it doesn't.
14· ·Q.· · · Do you think maybe Mr. Smith missed it in
15· ·his inspection, too?
16· ·A.· · · No.· Ms. Wright described it as all the
17· ·cables.· That's not correct.
18· ·Q.· · · Now, he says, "Should you and your team
19· ·reconsider bringing the barrier system up to code,
20· ·in turn, making your garage safe, please let us
21· ·know."· Did you disagree with that?
22· ·A.· · · I was not involved in the decision making
23· ·at this point on this garage.· It didn't -- my
24· ·opinion didn't matter.
25· ·Q.· · · Well, how do you know if you didn't offer
Page 103
·1· ·it?
·2· ·A.· · · Because it wasn't my responsibility. I
·3· ·was relieved of Austin.· I was no longer involved
·4· ·in any of the Austin operations, decisions or
·5· ·anything else at that point.
·6· ·Q.· · · Well, can you explain to the jury why, if
·7· ·you weren't involved, we see you indicating things
·8· ·the engineer should consider and being copied on
·9· ·the engineer's conclusion?
10· ·A.· · · I wrote an e-mail from Houston.
11· ·Q.· · · That's the extent of your involvement?
12· ·A.· · · Yes.
13· · · · · ·(Document marked Exhibit No. 62.)
14· ·BY MR. BREEN:
15· ·Q.· · · Show you Exhibit 62.· After receiving the
16· ·VSL Structural Technologies' indication that given
17· ·the severity of the garage's current condition,
18· ·they would not be able to perform what you-all
19· ·were requesting, Jessica Wright looked to whom at
20· ·Premier for what to do?· She looked to you, didn't
21· ·she?
22· ·A.· · · You'd have to ask Ms. Wright that.
23· ·Q.· · · Well, I don't because I see it right here.
24· ·She says, "Bob, what should I say to this?"
25· ·That's you, isn't it?
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
102 to 105
Page 104
·1· ·A.· · · Yeah.· That's me.
·2· ·Q.· · · She asked, "Should I forward it on to
·3· ·Lance?"· That would be the owner, right?
·4· ·A.· · · What was my response to her?· Yes.
·5· ·Q.· · · Did you tell her, Jessica, I'm concerned
·6· ·that if the garage is in the condition that you
·7· ·and Mr. Smith indicate it's in, it's not safe for
·8· ·people to be in there?
·9· ·A.· · · I -- my direction to her was to give the
10· ·information from the engineer to Lance to let the
11· ·owner make the decision on what he wanted to spend
12· ·his money on the garage for.
13· ·Q.· · · And is it -- you understand, sir, that
14· ·what the owner did was exactly what the VSL
15· ·Structural Technologies Engineering Group said
16· ·would not make the system safe?
17· ·A.· · · Yeah.· That was his decision.
18· ·Q.· · · And did Premier ever tell that to Mr. Kahn
19· ·or GTT when they were doing their due diligence or
20· ·interviewing Premier or even after Mr. O'Connor
21· ·went off that, Hey, you know what?· In 2014, we
22· ·were part of conversations with an engineer where
23· ·he recommended against doing what the owner did
24· ·and they did it anyway?
25· ·A.· · · I have no knowledge of any conversation
Page 105
·1· ·with those gentlemen you mentioned.
·2· ·Q.· · · That should be information that Premier
·3· ·should have given Mr. Kahn, isn't it?· True?
·4· ·A.· · · I don't know the circumstances.
·5· ·Q.· · · Well, if somebody went off of the garage
·6· ·like Mr. O'Connor did and people were trying to
·7· ·consider what the problem was, don't you agree
·8· ·with me that this series of events in 2014 are
·9· ·material?· That is, a decision to not bring it up
10· ·to code, not bring it to the standard of care, and
11· ·instead, do what you knew was insufficient?
12· ·A.· · · I don't know that we were involved in -- I
13· ·would say that it was Stream's responsibility to
14· ·give that information as the owner.
15· ·Q.· · · Well, did you not know that Mr. Hunt
16· ·volunteered to GTT that he would reach out to
17· ·Stream to find out the information of what went on
18· ·in 2014?
19· ·A.· · · I have no knowledge of that.· No. I
20· ·wasn't involved.
21· ·Q.· · · If Mr. --
22· ·A.· · · I can't speak to that.
23· ·Q.· · · Okay.· If Mr. Hunt told GTT he was going
24· ·to do that, he should have done it, right, after
25· ·somebody --
YVer1f
 Robert Chapman
January 09, 2019 106 to 109
Page 106 Page 108
·1· ·A.· · · I don't -- ·1· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· I'll reserve my
·2· ·Q.· · · -- went off the garage? ·2· ·questions for trial.
·3· ·A.· · · Yeah.· I don't understand the ·3· · · · · · · · MR. KURHAJEC:· I don't have any.
·4· ·circumstances.· So I can't speak to that. ·4· · · · · · · · MR. RHODES:· Reserve questions until
·5· ·Q.· · · Okay.· Here's the circumstance.· Premier ·5· ·trial.
·6· ·is a property manager of a garage.· Premier has ·6· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· Great.· That concludes
·7· ·been involved with the previous owner of doing ·7· ·our depo.
·8· ·substandard repairs to the garage that Premier ·8· · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Okay.· That
·9· ·knows are dangerous.· Somebody then with a new ·9· ·concludes the video deposition of Robert Chapman.
10· ·owner goes off the garage.· Premier should tell 10· ·We're off the record at 3:01 p.m.
11· ·the new owner what happened with the old owner, 11· · · · ·(Proceedings adjourned at 3:01 p.m.)
12· ·isn't that true? 12
13· · · · · · · · MR. RHODES:· Objection.· Form.· You 13
14· ·can go ahead and answer. 14
15· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Mr. Hunt -- and I don't 15
16· ·know the circumstances.· He may or may have not 16
17· ·known that Stream -- he relied that that owner 17
18· ·was -- when you sell a house, you're supposed to 18
19· ·acknowledge the defects, right? 19
20· ·BY MR. BREEN: 20
21· ·Q.· · · Right. 21
22· ·A.· · · So I'm assuming that Mr. Hunt knew that 22
23· ·that information was given to the new owner. I 23
24· ·don't -- I can't speak to that. 24
25· ·Q.· · · Let me take your example.· Let's say I own 25

Page 107 Page 109

·1· ·a house and you're my property manager and I do ·1· · · · · · · · ·C E R T I F I C A T E

·2· ·some things that are substandard and the house is ·2

·3· ·dangerous and you know I did that.· And I sell it ·3· · · · · · I, Rhonda Nicholson, Registered Court

·4· ·to a new owner and that new owner doesn't know ·4· ·Reporter and Notary Public, State of Tennessee at

·5· ·that, but you do, and you're still the property ·5· ·Large, do hereby certify that I recorded to the

·6· ·manager, you ought to tell that new owner,

·6· ·best of my skill and ability by machine shorthand
·7· ·the proceedings contained herein, that same was
·7· ·shouldn't you?
·8· ·reduced to computer transcription by myself, and
·8· ·A.· · · Yes, you should.
·9· ·that the foregoing is a true, accurate, and
·9· ·Q.· · · Final question.
10· ·complete transcript of the proceedings heard in
10· ·A.· · · But I think as a property manager, you
11· ·this cause.
11· ·would assume that the owner -- the previous owner
12· · · · · · I further certify that I am not an
12· ·told the new owner. 13· ·attorney or counsel of any of the parties, nor a
13· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· Object to the 14· ·relative or employee of any attorney or counsel
14· ·nonresponsive portion. 15· ·connected with the action, nor financially
15· ·BY MR. BREEN: 16· ·interested in the action
16· ·Q.· · · My final couple questions to you are 17· · · · · · This 21st day of January, 2019.
17· ·because we have a booklet form.· Have I been 18
18· ·courteous here to you today? 19
19· ·A.· · · Yes, you have. 20
20· ·Q.· · · In my demeanor, have I caused you to 21· · · · · · · · · · ·___________________________
21· ·answer questions in some way other than you wanted · · · · · · · · · · · ·Rhonda Nicholson
22· ·to answer? 22· · · · · · · · · · ·LCR No. 160, Exp:· 6/30/20
23· ·A.· · · No. 23· ·My Commission Expires:

24· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· Thank you.· I'll reserve 24· ·5/2/2022

25· ·the rest of my questions. 25

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

1-800-567-8757
Exhibit K
From: Jessica Wright [mailto:jessica@premierparking.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2014 10:03 AM
To: 'Wade Smith' <wsmith@structuraltec.com>
Cc: 'Bob Chapman' <bob@premierpmc.com>
Subject: RE: Barrier Cable Repair- Littlefield Garage- Austin, TX

Wade,

As a follow up, have you had a chance to compile the quote?

Sincerely,

Jessica ·

Jessica Wright/ General Manager/ 615-339-4937 / jessica@prernierparking.com

Premier Parking Office: 512-536-1145
508 Brazos Street/ Austin, TX 78701 / www.prernierparking.corn

From: Bob Chapman [mailto:bob@premierpmc.com]

Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2014 1:40 PM
To: Jessica Wright; 'Wade Smith'
Subject: RE: Barrier Cable Repair- Littlefield Garage- Austin, TX

Further to Jessica's response . We only want to replace the loose and missing cables per the owner's
direction.

Bob Chapman
Vice President

-------- Original message --------

From: Jessica Wright
Date:05/06/2014 12:54 PM (GMT-06 :00)
To: 'Wade Smith'
Cc: bob@premierpmc.com
Subject: RE: Barrier Cable Repair- Littlefield Garage- Austin, TX

Wade,

It was very nice to meet with you last week. Have you had any progress on
the quote?

PREMIER-00140
Exhibit L
From: Eric Herron <eric.herron@streamrealty.com >
Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2014 2:00 PM
To: Suzanne Pfeiffer
Cc: Diana Marmolejo; Lance Sallis
Subject: RE: Cabling Contract
Attachments: Littlefield Garage 27 June DD Report.pdf

Suzanne,

I have discussed several times with Lance and David. We have had several subs reject to
bid on repairs, based upon the fact that the garage is not up to current codes. I had an
engineer do a due diligence study and have attached it for your information . He also
found several other things that we will address later , but the cables present a safety
concern and the request put to me was to find someone who could take care of it quickly
so I did. I am happy to solicit other bids if deemed necessary, although the bidder I
have prepared to start on this has an opening in his schedule that I did not want to
miss. Otherwise - we may have to wait until he has another opening in his schedule .

Eric

Eric A . Herron, AIA

VP - Construction & Development
eric . herron@streamrealty . com

STREAM REALTY PARTNERS EXHIBIT N<:0_9_

515 Congress Avenue, Suite 1300
Austin, Texas 78701
T: 512.481.3040 Kim Seibert
M: 512 . 694 . 7528
www . streamrealty . com

From: Suzanne Pfeiffer

Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2014 1:43 PM
To: Eric Herron
Cc: Diana Marmolejo
Subject: RE : Cabling Contract

I want to be sure Lance is ok with just one bid since our management contract requires 3
at that$$ level.

Suzanne C . Pfeiffer CPA, CPM, RPA, FMA

Partner, Property Management
spfeiffer@streamrealty . com

STREAM REALTY PARTNERS

515 Congress Avenue, Suite 1300
Austin, Texas 78701

T 512 . 481.3014
F 512.481.3001

106
www.streamrdlty.com

From: Eric Herron

Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2014 1:30 PM
To: Suzanne Pfeiffer
Cc: Diana Marmolejo
Subject: RE: cabling Contract

<$70K Vehicular barrier cabling

Eric A. Herron , AIA

VP - Construction & Development
eric.herron@streamrealty.com

STREAM REALTY PARTNERS

515 Congress Avenue , Suite 1 300
Austin, Texas 78701
T : 512.481.3040
M: 512 . 694 . 7528
www . streamrealty.com

From: Suzanne Pfeiffer

Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2014 1:29 PM
To: Eric Herron
Cc: Diana Marmolejo
Subject: Cabling Contract

Eric-

The contract you were referring to is the cabling issue at LF? What is the value of the
proposed work?

thanks

Suzanne C . Pfeiffer CPA, CPM, RPA, FMA

Partner , Property Management
spfeitfer@streamrealty.com

STREAM REALTY PARTNERS

515 Congress Avenue , Suite 1300
Austin , Texas 78701

T 512 . 481.3014
F 512.481.3001
~streamrealty.com

107
MARITEC H ENGINEERING, Inc.
CONSUL TING ENGINEERS

27 June 2014
Mr. Eric Herron, AIA
Stream Realty
515 Congress Ave
Suite 1300
Austin, Texas,
78701

Re. Littlefield Parking Garage Review

Dear Mr. Herron,

Maritech Engineering would like to follow up on our 23 June 2014 proposal regarding a due diligence
survey of the above structure. We visited the structure on 26 June. Our goal with this letter report is to
discover potential means of increasing the marginal safety of the facility for the Owner to consider in
current or future planning. To be succinct we will present our observations in an outline format with
recommendations added at the end of the paragraph. We have added photographs where it seemed
helpful in Illustrating a point.

Limitations
As we stated in our proposal, we will not address matters relating to Fire and Life safety code nor
attempt an assessment of ADA and TAB compliance issues. We believe these matters are outside our
area of professional competence. To the extent that we did see something of note, we will mention it.
Consistent with our proposal we cannot directly address the design or capacity of the vehicle barriers.
Our comments are based solely on visual observations made during at floor and street level tour of the
facility. The construction documents available are very limited and include no structural documents.

Observations and Comments

I. Vehicle Hazards
A. Roof top end of aisle visibility - At the roof level the Southwest deck traffic aisle ends with
no visible marker other than the barrier cables. The lighting in the area is probably rather
poor. It is not unreasonable to think a driver may not perceive the presence of the edge of
the structure and inadvertently collide with the barrier cables and find the edge of the slab
before being restrained in some sense by the cables. There is evidence that some marker
posts were In place at some point but have been removed, Figure 1.
• Recommendation: Provide a high visibility reflective marker indicating the edge hazard.
• Recommendation: Provide one or more rows of wheel stops or other physical barriers
along the entire edge.
• Recommendation: Provide additional lighting for the area

File: Littlefield Garage, 27 June Due Diligence Page 1

1519 ALAMEDA DRIVE • AUSTIN. TEXAS 78704 (5121 326-3232

108
 B. Exposed electrical conduit - At the roof level two runs of evidently main power conduit are
placed mounted to a knee wall directly in front of parking spaces, Figure 2. There appears to
be some risk that if a vehicle collides with the wheel stops the bumper could impact the
conduits and damage the wiring with an unknown set of consequences.

Figurel
Roof top end of aisle

Figure 2
Roof top to Power conduit

File: Littlefield Garage, 27 June Due Diligence Page2

109
 • Recommendation: Provide standoff dock bumpers parallel to the conduits and/or raise
the conduit at or above vehicle hood level.
C. Striping of spaces -the marking of the parking spaces appears ill considered or unplanned in
many cases. Some spaces are left ridiculously narrow, Figure 3, and generally left unused
and unusable. In the worst cases patrons are forced or choose to park in an obviously
inappropriate and probably hazardous manner, Figure 4. We counted at least six such
instances.
• Recommendation: Consider restriping some runs of spaces to eliminate the unused
spaces and re-center the cars to improve safety and functionality.
D. Absence of wheel stops - We conducted no detailed count but perhaps 60% of or more of
the parking spaces do not have wheel stop to prevent or at least impede a vehicle from
either colliding with an adjacent wall or the barrier cabling. The absence of wheel stops only
increases the likelihood of vehicles impacting a wall or barrier cabling to either the
aggravation of the patron or the wear and tear on the building.
• Recommendation: Consider the addition of wheel stops at every space where they are
not currently provided.
E. Presence of a masonry barrier wall immediately behind barrier cabling - At the west side of
the third floor or level there is a half height unit masonry wall provided along almost the
entire length, Figure 5. The existing barrier cabling is placed approximately two inches in
front of the wall. The barrier cables are design to perform their function only when
deflected several inches beyond their static position. The degree of deflection is a function
of the size and speed of a vehicle on impact as well as the number and unrestrained length
of the cables. Deflection of a foot or more should be expected. In this case a vehicle would
impact the wall long before a vehicle is restrained in some sense by the cabling. Given the
length and height of the wall and the thinness of the slab it rests on, the capacity of the wall
to sustain a vehicle impact is very likely negligible. Worst yet, a vehicle impact would very
likely simply push the wall or its shards off the building and into the ally some twenty feet
down with disastrous consequence for anything or person below.
• Recommendation: Consider removing the wall
• Recommendation: Add wheel stops

II. Pedestrian Hazards

A. Steep slopes adjacent to parking spaces - The layout and dimensions of the garage plan left
the designers with some very steep cross gradients or slopes at the end parking spaces. In
most cases the slope are painted a bright glossy yellow in an attempt to alert the user to the
presence of a hazard, Figure 6. The problem is however in several instance the passenger
side of a parked vehicle ends up being immediately proximate to a precipitous edge.

The hazard scenario is a passenger is not paying attention to the hazards and can't actually
see the edge from the passenger seat in a dimly lit garage. On parking she opens the door

File: Littlefield Garage, 27 June Due Diligence Page 3

110
 and assumes sound footing. Instead find she' s stepping on to a steep slippery slope. Leather
soled shoes will find little traction on the glossy paint. A fall there would place the person on
the deck and in a traffic lane. This creates an intolerable, avoidable hazard to both the
patron and a liability to the garage Owner.
• Recommendation: Consider installing a code compliant guard rail along the unprotected
edges.
• Recommendation: Consider on parking aisles with unused or poorly striped spaces, as
noted above, consider re-striping to use the available space more effectively.

Figure 3
A Narrow Parking Space

Figure 4
Awkward Parking

File: Littlefield Garage, 27 June Due Diligence Page4

111
 Figure 5
Masonry Wall

File: Littlefield Garage, 27 June Due Diligence Pages

112
 Figure 6
A Fall Hazard

B. Parking on steep cross slope - Another consequence of the ineffective spacing or striping is
that some spaces seem to invite patron to park in a somewhat hazardous manner, see
Figure 4. There are at least four instance of this feature. In these instances the vehicles are
somewhat more exposed to traffic hazards, the awkward angle leaves entry and exit from
the vehicles more difficult, and the steep cross slope makes opening the car door without
hitting the adjacent vehicle and causing a "parking lot ding" more likely.
• Recommendation: Consider restriping the entire parking aisle to re-space or eliminate
the inappropriate end space. In most cases no spaces will be eliminated. In one case at
the roof level a re-striping would appear to add a space.

File: Littlefield Garage, 27 June Due Diligence Page6

113
Ill. Structural Issues
A. Unprotected post-tensioning stressing pockets - The physical condition of the structure is
sound and generally unremarkable with a few exceptions. Normal concrete cracking has
occurred in places and some spalling of concrete is evident in isolate instances. The
consequences of these items appear to be purely localized. There is however one
somewhat systematic error with broader consequences: As many as 24 post-tensioning live-
end stressing pockets were left unprotected from corrosion. This condition has most likely
existed since the structure was completed in approximately 1979. About six of the missing
stressing pocket protection can be found at the roof levels Northeast edge, Figure 7. The
remainder of the pockets we could see occur on the West face (ally side) at the fifth, sixth
and seventh levels, Figure 8.

Corrosion of a post-tensioning tendon and or its end anchor points is a serious problem. The
most serious and certain point at which the corrosion will be concentrated is the very point
where the tendon is gripped by its wedges . It is somewhat fortunate in this instance that, for
at least the visible cases, the tendons affected are what is known as the temperature and
distribution tendons. These are tendons placed with little or no drape and with the intent
on maintaining a nominal level of pre-stress in the slab orthogonal to the spanning or load
carrying direction. The purpose is to keep cracks closed and develop sufficient transverse
elastic behavior to distribute wheel loads. Loss of isolated temperature tendons is
sometimes tolerated given their secondary nature and the likely residual pre-stress in the
central part of the slab caused by the main girder pre-stress than runs parallel to the
temperature tendon. This pre-stress is, however likely ineffective near the edges of the
slabs. The problem here is several tendons in a single slab have been left in an unprotected
state. The repair and long-term corrosion protection of a tendon anchor point in an already
potentially advanced state of corrosion is a difficult matter that needs a separate study as an
incorrect repair will do more harm than good. Simply patching over the visible corroded
metals will not eliminate the problem. There are corrosion inhibiting grouts and admixtures
(Sika CNI for instance) that may slow the corrosion process on part they come in contact
with but will do nothing for the oxidation already underway. Moisture and oxygen already in
the strand, chocks, and duct will continue their work for some time to come.
• Recommendation: Commission a separate study to develop a repair plan for the pre-
stress.

IV. Other Observations

A. Visibility of Southeast exit stairwell. Depending on how you count floor on the sixth and
fourth floor the entrance to the South East Stairwell and its signage is not visible until you
are directly in front of the doorway, Figure 9. The IBC in section 1011.1 has it that the exit
should be clearly visible from any direction of egress travel.
a. Recommendation: Add appropriate signage to indicate the location of the exits at the
Southeast corner as needed.

File: Littlefield Garage, 27 June Due Diligence Page7

114
 Figure 7
Roof Top Stressing Pocket

Figure 8
West Side Stressing Pockets

File: Littlefield Garage, 27 June Due Diligence Page8

115
 Figure 9
Exit Visibility

B. Accessible parking. We noted three handicapped (HC) spaces on the sixth level of the garage
with one of them being marked as van accessible. We saw no signage from the garage entry
to the indicating clearly where the HC spaces were. The garage has, on rough count, about
470 spaces. The ADAAG has it that there should be about nine accessible spaces with two
van accessible spaces.
a. Recommendation: add signage clearly indicating where the HC spaces are and the
accessible route.
b. Recommendation: Consider adding HC spaces if at all possible.

The above summarizes our observations of items we feel should be brought to your attention in your
effort to maintain and improve the safety of the patrons of the Littlefield garage. Please call if you have
any questions or would like us to elaborate further on any of the above items.

Page9

116
Exhibit M
 EXHIBIT NO.

Kim Seibert

From: Eric Herron <eric.herron@streamrealty.com >

Sent: Monday, July 14, 2014 3:04 PM
To: Lance Sallis; David Blackbird
Subject: RE: Littlefield Mall Garage Barrier Cable Replacement

10-4 - thanks for your trust. I just wanted to make sure that everything was on the
s t raight and nar r ow since i t was a " soon to be" family member.

After some exhaustive research , I have complete faith that it ' s a g ood price and that
he ' ll do a great job on this work and we ' ll have no trouble down the road .

Eric

Eric A. Herron , AIA

VP - Construction & Development
eric.herron@streamrealty.com

STREAM REALTY PARTNERS

515 Congress Avenue, Suite 1 300
Austin , Texas 78701
T : 512.481.30 40
M: 512.694 . 7528
www.streamrealty.com

From: Lance Sallis

Sent: Monday, July 14, 2014 2:56 PM
To: Eric Herron; David Blackbird
Subject: RE: Littlefield Mall Garage Barrier Cable Replacement

Thanks for putting it all down in writing . We have loo ked hard for alternatives and found
none that are better than CB Construction . Given the importance of getting the work done
before we s t art the renovations , I think we move forward with CB as soon as possible .

Thanks ,

Lance

La nce Sallis
Partner
lsallis@streamrealty.com

STREAM REALTY PARTNERS

515 Congress Avenue , Suite 1300
Austin , Texas 78701
T 512.481.3034
C 512 . 589 . 1200
www . streamrealty . com

From: Eric Herron

Sent: Monday, July 14, 2014 1:16 PM

127
To: Lance Sallis; David Blackbird
Subject: Littlefield Mall Garage Barrier Cable Replacement

Guys,

I would like to recommend we move forward with CB Construction for the Barrier Cable
Replacement at LF Mall Garage:

As you know I have been working on this for some time to get a price for this work. This
has been a difficult task to find someone willing to do this work who can do it in a
reasonable timeframe, and who will do it as a repair cable replacement , and not a
complete redesign to current code.

Here are my results :

CB Construction (in the interest for full disclosure , this is my future father - in- law ' s
company)
Built Carlos and Charlies, built radio towers, boat lifts, dock elevators, and boat-docks
for most of his career. Can start immediately and meet all insurance requirements. He
does really good work - craftsman - that I trust completely. He ' s very interested in
forming a relationship for future Stream work.
$61,900 +tax= $67,006.75
Labor $33,000
Materials $29,000
Proposal attached
Can complete work in 4-6 weeks .
Current budget for this work is $70K+-

VSL (Ft Worth big-boys) - Wade Smith

They are doing the 501 Garage . Previously looked at this with Jessica/ Nate . Will not
do the work unless it is a fully engineered barrier system to meet current code . I
expect this will double the price and will likely cost at least $125K

Ron Bowling (Recommended by BWI)

Can get us a price in 1-2 weeks , cannot start for 1-2 months
Will charge materials cost plus min. $2/SF for labor
Est. Labor= $36K + tax (more expensive than CB)
Materials = ???

Wade Prew (recommended by BWI)

Previously priced for Stream - has an attitude. Needs a week or two to give a price,
cannot start for 1-2 months.
No price or indication of price as of yet.

Let me know how you wish to move forward. I am happy to put this off for a few weeks and
get one or two more numbers from the last two GC's if you would prefer, but I don ' t feel
we can get the price down significantly, and there will be a significant delay before we
get started.

Eric

Eric A. Herron, AIA

VP - Construction & Development
eric.herron@streamrealty . com

STREAM REALTY PARTNERS

515 Congress Avenue, Suite 1300
Austin, Texas 78701
T: 512.481.3040
M: 512.694 . 7528
www . streamrealty . com
2

128
Exhibit N
10/9/2018 Gmall - Littlefield Garage Barriers

M Gmaii Curtis Brown <lnventitcbQgmall.com>

Littlefield Garage Barriers

5messages

• - Do.,..- <cmdQmarflechengineeling.c:om> Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 9:48 AM

Reply-To: crnd@rnaritechering.com
To: ertc.herron@streamrealty.com
Cc: Curtis IIIOwn <lnventilcb@gmall.com>

Mr. Herron,

--ty-
I would like to briefly follow up on our telephone conversation of last -18g8R!ing lhe abova. Aa you know, Curtis Brown and I made a quick, ansory visit to 1he above. Curtis subsequenGy sent
mo a link lo your Dropbox with the avalable drawings. As I _,,,, you lndlcal8d Iha drawings 1119 ralher sparse end Include no B1nJdural Information.

Based on what we AW In a ten minute tour there 1119 d8flnltely llUITI8IUUS lo b a - regarding the Wlhlde barriers. looldng at the cum,nt IBC code thel8 ara also potential
pedestrian and gua,drall Issues. The -nee of struclural documenls only compounds the lllues most Dkaly. During our phone eel I eug~ the best place to start In formulating "°""'
kind of
approacll Is lhe c:onduct a aurvey of 1he .-,g condltlana. Altar looking at the plan and doing a bale code review I think probably - lo vtsll with you first to &BSella your goals.

I'd Ike lo suggest we mMt either at the - or " " " - for lunch at some point later this week to sort through the Issues and your olljecllvea and oonstrainls. If you are amenable I'd Ike to propose
we !MM al a c:on-.lent lime this Wed.-Y or Thunldey.

tt was a pleasure maellng you if"""" jusl on the phone. If )'OU'd like my office number is 512 326 3232 and call is 512 632 0530.

\ EitB1' ~
cmd
,~ '-17 a-'
C. Mlchael Donoghue, PE, LEED AP
Marilech Engineemg, Inc.
Austin, T._, USA
I \+u.1''T -
Mon. Jun 16, 2014at9:56 AM

Mike,

Let's do lunch Wednesday at 11 :30. I have 9 1: 00 meeting here in my office, so if we could do it nearby, that would be best for me.

As you know, I need to push this solution ahead as quickly as possible. The intent is not to bring this garage up to current code, but
instead to make repairs to the existing cable-railing to bring it back to the condition it was when new. The existing building code allows
for repair of b:Jilcling elememnts without being bound by current code requirements.

Thanks and let me know if Wednesday at 11: 30 works for you. Me can meet here and walk a block or two to get something to eat down here.

Eric

Eric A. Herron, AJA

VP - Construction , Development

en"c.hemJn@streamrealty.com

STREMI REALTY PARTNERS

515 Congress Avenue, Suite 1300

Austin, Texas 78701

T: 512.481.3040

M: 512. 694. 7528

www.streamreally.com

https://mall.google.com/mail/u/O?lk=cdd1dfd6ffi&View=pt&search=all&pennthid=thread-f%3A1471078751906493206&simpl=msg-fo/o3A147107875190... 1/3

CB 0030
10/9/2018 Gmail - LiWefield Garage Barriers

fn,m: MichMI Donoghue (mallo:cmd@maritechengineering.com]

sent: Monday, June 16, 2014 9:47 fi,JI,
To: Eric Herron
Cc:CooisllrcN/n
Subject: Litllefield Ga,- Barriers

C Mic- Donoghue <and@maritechenglneanng.com> Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 11;13 fi,JI,

To: Eric Herron <eric.herron@8lraamrealty.com>
Cc: Curtis Brown <lnvenlit.cb@gmalLcom>

Thank you for your reply. It's a rellef not dealing with CIJl19f1I requirements, not to mention the standard al care. They are onerous.

On Wednesday, 111 come to your office at 515 Congress et 11:30.

crnd
C Michael Donoghue, PE, LEED AP
Marttech Engineering, Inc
Austin, Texas, USA

Fl'Dm: Stream Realty <eric.herron@streamrealty.com>

Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 14:56:51 +0000
To: c Michael Donoghue <cmd@maritechengineering.com>
Cc: curtis Brown <inventit.cb@gmail.com>
SUbject: RE: Lltllefleld Garage Barriers
{Quotedtedt.::tden)

Eric Herron <mtc.herron@slreamn,alty.com> Mon, Jun 16. 2014 al 11:16 AM

To: c Michaal Donoghue <cmd@mariteche~com>
CC: Curlis Brown <inventit.cb@gmall.com>

See you then.

Eric A. He!'ron, AIA

VP Con~truction o Jevelop:ne:1t

cnc.hetron@stroamrcalty.com

STF.EAM REA.L:''i PART~ERS

515 Congress Ave~ue, Suite i. 30G

Austin, Texas ?~no-.

T: 512,481.3040

!:'I:: 51~.E,94.7528

wv,1w.streamreatty.com

From: C Michael Donoghue [malllo:cmd@marilechengineering.comJ

Sent: Monday, June 16, 201411:14{1,JJ,
To: Eric Herron
Cc: Curtis Brown
Subject Re: Ullleflekl Garage Ba!Tle,s

Eric Herron «<lc.herron@streamrealty.com> Wed, Jun 18, 2014 al 10:35 AM

To: C Michael Donoghue ~engineering.com>
Cc: CUrtls Brown <imlen11Lcb@gmaiLcom>

Mike,

My 10:30 meeting is starting a bit late, so I inight have to push beck to 11:45.

£cic

Eric A. Herror., J\IA

VP - Constructio!"l & Devclop:-iient

ef'Jc.herro11@streamreafty.com

STIU::AM tlF.ALTY PAR'l'NERS

https://mall.google.com/mall/u/0?ik=cdd1dfd6f5&view=pt&search=all&pennthid=thread-f%3A1471078751906493206&simpl=msg-f%3A147107875190... 2/3

CB 0031
.,

10/9/2018 Gmail - Littlefield Garage Barriers

515 Congress Avenue, Suite 1300

Austin, Texas 78701

T: 512.481.3040

M: 512. 694. ·1528

www.streamrealty.com

From: C Michael Donoghue (malto:cmd@maritechengineering.com)

Sent: Monday. June 16, 201411:14 AN
To: Eric Herron
Cc: Curtis Brown
SUbject: Re: Llllfetleld Garage Barriers

https://mail.google.com/maiVu/0?ik--cdd1dfd6f5&view=pt&search=all&permlhid=thread-fo/o3A1471078751906493206&simpl=msg-f%3A147107875190... 3/3

CB 0032
Exhibit O
MARITECH ENGINEERING, Inc.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
EXHIBIT NcOL
Kim Seibert

23 June 2014
Mr. Eric Herron, AIA
Stream Realty
515 Congress Ave.
Suite 1300
Austin. Texas,
78701

Re: LittJefield Garage Remediation. Austin, Texas

Dear Mr. Herron,

Background
Maritech Engineering, Inc, would like to offer this letter proposal in response to your request of 17
June 2014 for Structural Engineering consulting services related to the above. It is our understanding
that the intended focus and intent of the project is the remediation of the dilapidated vehicle barrier
components in the existing garage in Austin (hereinafter called the "Project"). The portion of the
project in which we are to be involved at this phase is limited to the further design development and
completion of contract documentation, and construction administration phases of the project based on
work performed to date.

To be clear on how to approach the Owner's intended vehicle barrier restoration initiative and what
the scope of the work may entail, we feel compelled to do a basic code review. The pwpose of the
review is to establish the regulatory constraints and ethical bounds of what we, as a design
professional, can and should do.

The Littlefield Garage structure was built in the 1979 era. Sparse and spotty documentation is
available for the building. No structwal documents are available. The Building code in effect at the
time is unclear but was likely the 1976 Unifonn Building Code. A review of building codes from that
era indicates there were little, if any, requirements for automobile barriers in parking garages in effect.
Some requirements for pedestrian barriers were in effect.

Some nominal barriers in the form of stressed wire stand spaces at approximately 12" do exist but
have fallen in to disrepair to the extent that that offer little if any hope of vehicle restrain and in several
cases virtually no pedestrian safety, In no case do the cwrent condition rise to the level of vehicle or
pedestrian protection required in current code and the current standard of care. To be clear we have not
conducted a review of the fire safety. life-safety, and egress conditions in the structure.

File: Llltleftela Garage Remediation Proposal.doc Page 1 of4

1 519 ALAMEDA DRIVE AUSTIN, TEXAS 78704 (512) 326-3232

The current City of Austin Building Code, the ICC's International Building Code 2012 has specific
provisions for the minimum criteria for the design of vehicle barriers in parking Garages. The criteria
are somewhat stringent and the standard of care practiced by many design professionals is even more
exacting based on the mechanics of realistic design scenarios.

The ICC's Existing Building Code (EBC) and by reference the International Property Management
Code (PMC) is a widely referenced and accepted document that address the common situation of
maintaining an aging, non-conforming structure. The EBC states it is applies to all existing premises
and its intent is to ensure public safety in circumstances where total rehabilitation would be cost-
prohibitive and go well beyond the value of the building. We understand the City of Austin accepts
work done under the EBC. The code states "under limited circumstances a building can be made to
comply with the laws under which the building was originally built as long as there has been no
substantial structural damage and there will be limited structural alteration".

In the case of the Littlefield garage there is little of what may be styled as basic "structural damage" as
intended by the EBC - namely the primary gravity and lateral load resisting systems. As we noted
above the code at the time the structure was built was essentially silent on vehicle barriers. You can
add to that the problem of having not structural documentation with which to assess the intents and
capacities of the structure. The EBC itself leaves the matter of design criteria at the level of an
abstraction, i.e. safety. Safety, however, is a relative term. This implies the exercise of judgment and
the involvement of the Owner in assessing risks in balance with cost.

The EBC posits three approaches to the manager in maintaining structures with less than "substantial
damage". All end up stating any repair shall not leave the facility "less safe" or "less conforming" than
it was pre-damage. In our opinion this allows the restoration of the vehicle barriers to their original
state. Without documents some judgment wilJ be required to estimate what that "original state"
actually was or might have been as it is not evident by cursory observations to date or the existing
documents - such as they are.

The EBC approach also allows the development of other initiative to "improve" the common sense
functional risks that have always existed in the garage structure without exposure to being required to
implement maximal restoration to current code compliance and full best practices renovation. This
may involve the addition of improved pedestrian barriers and, potentially, the removal of elements that
would appear to pose unintended and un-necessary risks. This is the Owner's way forward.

Assumptions
We assume that you will furnish us with full information relevant to the project requirements,
including any special or extraordinary considerations for the Project or special services needed, and
make available all pertinent or required site related data including competent geotecbnical information
and analysis as outlined on an attached sheets entitled, "General Terms and Conditions For Consulting
Services" and "Client's Responsibilities".

Fie: Littlefield Garage Remediation Proposal.doc Page 2of 4

'
In the development of this proposal we have assumed that your finn will participate in the review of
our reporting and the establishment of the criteria and definition of the ongoing risks and liabilities to
the Owner. Any work performed by Maritech Engineering does not include any site surveys or
geotechnical testing, sampling, or other subsurface exploration, design and observation phase
materials testing, or construction phase testing.

Importantly, any participation by Maritech Engineering does not include any review of Fire and life-
safety issues and conditions beyond those directly associated with the observation of the vehicle
barriers and related garage pedestrian safety.

Proposed Scope-of-Work
In our review of the structure, existing documents, and discussions with the Owner it is evident to us
that bringing the vehicle barrier system up to current standards and standard of care is not envisioned
or perhaps possible given the lack of documentation available if nothing else. It is evident that the
Owner is at some liberty to refurbish some of the existing conditions to improve safety as part of
routine facility maintenance.

It is not clear to us however that a structural engineering professional could, or should, contnbute to
that effort given the lack of documentation among other things. The task of recabling alone with.out
specific design criteria is pretty straightforward. It is apparent to us that some structural review of the
parking structure may be of benefit to the Owner in identifying any less than obvious conditions that
may have developing over the life of the building and perhaps identify other measures the Owner
might that to further his goals of improving safety in the parking garage and extending its useful life.

To that end, based on our current understanding the project then, Maritech Engineering, Inc. proposes
to provide the following consulting services:

• Project Assessment and Scope Development (PS) Phase: We work with the design team to define
the current state of the structure, Owner's intentions and budget for the project and the structural
implications. We understand the Owner intends to only restore the vehicle barrier system to a
tolerable state of safety and mitigate the perceived risk existing currently. As we have stated,
Maritech will not be of benefit to the Owner in that effort.

However, other opportunities to increase the marginal user safety and Owner's liabilities by some
definition may present themselves on a review of the structure and the condition currently
existing. If a constructor is available as a member of the design team at this point we will
collaborate with the team to develop alternates and constructability tactics. The work product of
the PS phase will include a written report of observations and recommendations.

• Remediation Documentation (RD) and Construction Administration (CA) Phases: Based on the
project background analysis above, Maritech Engineering will not be able to participate in any
design of remedial measures related to the vehicle barrier systems in the building or the

FIie: Littlefield Garage Remediation Proposal.doc Page 3 of4

 development of structural docmnentation for the project beyond incidental details that add to the
marginal safety in the structure on a case by case basis.

Fee Estimate
Maritech Engineering, Inc. proposes to perform the above services on an how-ly basis in two basic
phases· Scope defmition and execution phases. The Scope definition encompasses the above PS phase.
1bough we have proposed an hourly invoicing, based on what we know now, we can estimate the fees
and set a cap on the PS phase work as follows:

• Project Assessment and Scope (PS) phase: $2100.00

We believe the PS phase will take approximately one week.

Our invoices will be calculated on the productive time spent on the project over the billing period not
to exceed the above agreed design fee unless approved by the Owner at the cWTent rates identified in
the Schedule for Charges for Consulting Services (attached). Any additional work beyond the scope
outlined in the above services will be calculated on the same basis. Approved out-of-pocket expenses
on items including printing, other than occasional coordination sets, and travel costs will be invoiced
as a direct pass through without an additional surcharge.

The estimated professional fee to complete the Scope-of~Work identified in this proposal will remain
valid for ninety days from the date of this letter. Should the Scope-of•Worlc change before or during
the course of the project, we .rese.rve the right to change our fee proposal.

If you have read, understand, and are in agreement with the scope-of• services, costs proposal,
payment provisions, and other terms and conditions as described in this letter, please so indicate by
your signature below. As always we look forward to this opportunity to be of service to you.

C. Michael Donoghue. P.E.

President

Enclosures: Client's Responsibilities

edule of Charges for Consulting Services
~~-- at Terms and Conditions for Consulting Services

File: Littlefield Garage Remediation Proposal.doc Page 4 of .C

Exhibit P
J

From: Nathan Branson < nbranson@streamrealty.com >

Sent: Monday, June 30, 2014 4:32 PM
To: Eric Herron
S1,1bject: RE: AJA GC contract

Very true. Do a little copy and paste, and keep one on file for jobs like these.

From: Eric Herron

Sent: Monday, June 30, 2014 4:30 PM
To: Nathan Branson
Subject: RE: AIA GC contract

I guess my AIA membership could help in this case and I can get a cheaper blank AIA
contract ...

Eric

Eric A. Herron, AIA

VP - Construction & Development
eric . 11.e:rrQn@streamrealty . com
- ~ EXHIBIT ~
STREAM REALTY PARTNERS I SLQ I
515 Congress Avenue, Suite 1300
Austin, Texas 78701
T: 512.481.3040
l~r~:
M: 512.694.7528
www. streamre.a l t y . com

From: Nathan Branson

Sent: Monday, June 30, 2014 4:28 PM
To: Eric Herron
Subject: RE: AIA GC contract

Gotcha. I'll check the L drive, and call Dallas to see if they have something.

From: Eric Herron

Sent: Monday, June 30, 2014 4:27 PM
To: Nathan Branson
Subject: RE: AIA GC contract

I .t' s a guy I know - does mostly stuff around the lake. He built the floating porti.o n o.f
Carlos and Charlies. His name is Curtis Brown - CB Construction.

We were having trouble finding someone to bid the re-cabling of the vehicular barrier
cables at Littlefield Garage. It's a small $67K scope, and he is requiring no pre-
payment for materials, so I don't think there is much risk, but in any case - I can
probably just get an AIA contract and use it.

Eric

Eric A. Herron, AIA

VP - Construction & Development

101
,

eric.l1erron@streamrealty.com

STREAM REALTY PARTNERS

515 Congress Avenue, Suite 1300
Austin, Texas 76701
T: 512.481.3040
M: 512. 694. 7528
www . streamrealty.com

From: Nathan Branson

Sent: Monday, June 30, 2014 4:24 PM
To: Eric Herron
Subject: RE: AIA GC contract

Who is the sub?

From: Eric Herron

Sent: Monday, June 30, 2014 4:16 PM
To: Nathan Branson
Subject: AJ.A GC contract

Do you have a typical construction contra c t you use? I am trying to go to contract with
a GC to do improvements for the LF Garage, and don't know if you have access to a typical
agreement, or if you just have GC's prepare these every time. This is a subcontractor
that I have worked with before I am trying to get going, and I just need somewhere to
start.

I can always go to the AIA and get a blank, but thought you might have something ...

Eric A. Herron, AIA

VP - Construction & Development
eric . herron@s.trea.mreal ty . com

STREAM REALTY PARTNERS

515 Congress Avenue, Suite 1300
Austin, Texas 7870 1
T: 512.481.3040
M: 512.694.7528
www . str--eamreal ty. c orn

102
Exhibit Q
 CONFIDENTIAL

AGREEMENTOFPURCHASEANDSALE

BY AND BETWEEN

6th & CONGRESS PROPERTIES, LLC

AND

GTT PARKING LP

Date: July 27, 2015

Property: Littlefield Retail/Residential

Austin, Texas

GTT 001000
 CONFIDENTIAL

AGREEMENTOFPURCHASEANDSALE

THIS AGREEMENT OF PURCHASE AND SALE (the "Agreement") is made

and entered into as of Effective Date (as defined in Section 17.4), by and between 6th &
CONGRESS PROPERTIES, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (hereinafter
referred to as "Seller''), and GTT PARKING LP, a Texas limited partnership (hereinafter
referred to as "Purchaser").

In consideration of the mutual promises, covenants and agreements hereinafter set

forth and of other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are
hereby acknowledged, Seller and Purchaser agree as follows:

ARTICLE I

Sale of Property.

1.1. Sale of .Property. Seller hereby agrees to sell, assign and convey to Purchaser
and Purchaser agrees to purchase from Seller, all of Seller's right, title and interest in and to,
the following:

1.1.1. Land and Improvements. Those certain parcels of real property,

more particularly described, on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by
reference thereto (the "Land"), together with all improvements located thereon (the
"Improvements").

1.1.2. Leases. All leases, subleases, licenses, parking agreements, and other
occupancy agreements, together with any and all amendments, modifications or supplements
thereto, are hereafter referred to collectively as the "Leases" being more particularly
described on Exhibit E attached hereto, and all prepaid rent attributable to the period
following the Closing, and subject to Section 4.2.4 below, the security deposits under such
Leases (collectively, the "Leasehold Property").

1.1.3. Real Property. All rights, privileges and easements appurtenant to

Seller's interest in the Land and the Improvements, if any, including, without limitation, all
of Seller's right, title and interest, if any, in and to all water rights and all easements,
licenses, covenants and other rights-of-way or other appurtenances used in connection with
the beneficial use and enjoyment of the Land and the Improvements (the Land, the
Improvements and all such easements and appurtenances are sometimes collectively referred
to herein as the "Real Property").

- 1-

GTT 001001
 CONFIDENTIAL

1.1.4. Personal Propnty. All personal property (including equipment), if

any, owned by Seller and located on the Real Property as of the date hereof, all inventory
located on the Real Property on the date of Closing (hereinafter defined), and all fixtures (if
any) owned by Seller and located on the Real Property as of the date hereof (the "Personal
Property").

1.1.S. Intangible Property. All non-exclusive trademarks and trade names,

if any, used or useful in connection with the Real Property but only to the extent that the
same are not trademarks or trade names of Seller or any of Seller's affiliated companies
(co11ectively, the "Trade Names"), together with the Seller's interest, if any, in and to any
service, equipment, supply and maintenance contracts (the ''Contracts'') guarantees,
licenses, approvals, certificates, permits and warranties relating to the property, to the extent
assignable (collectively, the "Intangible Property"). The Real Property, the Leasehold
Property, the Personal Property, the Trade Names and the ·1ntangible Property are sometimes
collectively hereinafter referred to as the "Property".

1.2. Excluded Property. It is hereby acknowledged by the parties that Seller shall
not convey to Purchaser claims i·elating to any real property tax refunds or rebates for
periods accruing prior to the CJosiog, existing insurance claims and any existing claims
against tenants of the Property, which claims shall be reserved by Seller.

ARTICLE IL

Purchase Price

ARTICLE ID.

Deposit

•2

GTT 001002
 CONFIDENTIAL

3.2. Non-Refundable. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary,

Purchaser acknowledges and agrees that, following the Effective Date, the Deposit shall
be non-refundable to Purchaser and Purchaser has no right, express or implied, to the
return of the Deposit under any circumstances, other than the following (collectively,
the "Deposit Return Event"): (a) Sellel''s default resulting in the failure to close thls
transaction, (b) Purchaser's termination of this Agreemeut due to the failure of any
closing condition undeF Section 11.2 - Conditions to Obligations of Purchaser, (c)
Purchaser's termination of thb Agreement due to Material casualty or condemnation
pursuant to Section 13.1- Condemnation and Casualty, or (d) .Purchaser's tennination
of this Agreement due to a title defects pursuant to Section 6.3 - Title Defects. In
particular, Purchaser acknowledges that if the Closing does not occur for any reason,
other th Deposit Retut'D Event, Escrow Agent is hereby directed, without the need
for auy f ther approval of Purchaser or Seller, to deliver the Deposit to Seller,
without er it or reimbursement to Purchaser.

3.3. Application of Deposit. If the Closing occurs, the Deposit shall be paid to
Seller and credited against the Purchase Price at Closing. If the Closing does not occur in
accordance with the terms hereof, the Deposit shall be held and delivered as hereinafter
provided.

3.4. Interest Bearing. The Deposit shall (i) be held in an interest-bearing escrow
account by 'Escrow Agent in an institution as directed by Purchaser and reasonably
acceptable to Seller and (ii) include any interest earned thereon. To allow the interest
bearing account to be opened, Purchaser's and Seller's tax identification or social security
numbers will be provided to the Title Company.

. 3-

GTT 001003
 CONFIDENTIAL

3.6. Independent Consideration. FIFTY AND NO/100 DOLLARS ($50.00) of

the Depsoit shall be considered independent consideration for the execution of this
Agreement. Such independent consideration shall be nonrefundable and shall not be applied
against the Purchase Price.

ARTICLE IV.

Closing, Prorations and Closing Costs

4.1. Closing. The closing of the purchase and sale of the Property shall occur on
or before 2:00 p.m. CDT on or before Thursday, September 10, 2015 (i.e., the forty-fifth
(45 th) day after the Effective Date) ("Initial Closing Date") and shall be held through
escrow at the offices of the Escrow Agent, or at such other place agreed to by Seller and
Purchaser. "Closing" shall be deemed to have occurred when the Title Company has been
instructed by both parties to release escrow and to record the Deed. Time is hereby made of
the essence. The date of Closing is referred to in this Agreement as the "Closing Date."

4.2. Prorations. All matters involving prorations or adjustments to be made in

connection with Closing and not specifically provided for in some other provision of this
Agreement shall be adjusted in accordance with this Section 4.2. Except as otherwise set
forth herein, all items to be prorated pursuant to this Section 4.2 shall be prorated as of
midnight of the day immediately preceding the Closing Date, with Purchaser to be treated as
the owner of the Property, for purposes of prorations of income and expenses, on and after
the Closing Date.

4.2.1. Taxes. Except to the extent payable directly by the tenants under the
Leases, real estate and personal property taxes and special assessments, if any, shall be
prorated as of the Closing Date. The proration of such taxes shall be based upon the rate and
assessed values for the 2015 tax year. If the 2015 real estate tax bill has not been issued as
of the Closing Date by all applicable taxing authorities for the 2015 year, then the proration
of such taxes shall be based upon the rate and assessed values for the 2014 tax year and such
proration shall be adjusted in cash once the current tax year's tax amount becomes known,
within thirty (30) days thereafter, between Seller and Purchaser upon presentation of written
evidence that the actual taxes paid for the tax year in which the Closing occurs, differ from
the amounts used in the Closing, in accordance with Section 4.2.5 below. Seller shall pay
all real estate and personal property taxes and special assessments payable during the tax
year in which the Closing occurs and attributable to the Property to, but not including, the
Closing Date. All taxes imposed due to a change of use of the Property after the Closing
Date shall be paid by the Purchaser. If any taxes which have been apportioned shall
subsequently be reduced by abatement, the amount of such abatement, less the cost of
obtaining the same and after deduction of sums payable to tenants under Leases or expired
or terminated Leases, shall be equitably apportioned between the parties hereto.

- 4-

GTT 001004
 CONFIDENTIAL

4.2.2. Insurance. There shall be no proration of Seller's insurance premiums

or assignment of Seller's insurance policies. Purchaser shall be obligated (at its own
election) to obtain any insurance coverage deemed necessary or appropriate by Purchaser.

4.2.3 Utilities. Purchaser and Seller hereby acknowledge and agree that the
amounts of all telephone, electric, sewer, water and other utility bills, trash removal bills,
janitorial and maintenance service bills and all other operating expenses relating to the
Property and allocable to the period prior to the Closing Date shall be determined and paid
by Seller before Closing, if possible, or shall be paid thereafter by Seller immediately after
the same have been determined. Seller shall attempt to have all utility meters read as of the
Closing Date. Purchaser shall cause all utility services to be placed in Purchaser's name as
of the Closing Date. If permitted by the applicable utilities, all utility deposits in Seller's
name shall be assigned to Purchaser as of the Closing Date and Seller shall receive a credit
therefor at Closing.

4.2.4. Rents/Security Deposits. All rents and other income (which, for
purposes of this Agreement, shall include, without limitation, estimated pass-through
payments, payments for common area maintenance reconciliations, parking garage income,
percentage rents, and all additional charges payable by tenants under the Leases,
(collectively, "Rents")) collected by Seller prior to Closing shall be prorated as of the
Closing Date. Purchaser shall receive a credit at the Closing equal to all Rents actually
collected by Seller with respect to the period on or after the Closing Date. During the period
after Closing, Purchaser shall, within five (5) business days following receipt, deliver to
Seller any and all Rents accrued but uncollected as of the Closing Date to the extent
subsequently collected by Purchaser; provided, however, Purchaser shall apply Rents
received after Closing first to payment of Rent due for the month of the Closing, next to
current Rent then due, and thereafter to delinquent Rents in inverse order of maturity (other
than "true up" payments received from tenants attributable to a year-end reconciliation of
actual and budgeted pass-through payments which shall be allocated among Seller and
Purchaser pro rata in accordance with their respective period of ownership as set forth in
Section 4.2.5 below). Purchaser agrees that for a period of ninety (90) days it shall use
commercially reasonable efforts to collect all pass-through rents payable by tenants and any
delinquent Rents (provided, however, that Purchaser shall have no obligation to incur any
costs or institute legal proceedings, including an action for unlawful detainer, against a
tenant owing delinquent Rents). Seller retains the right after the Closing to collect any
amount due to Seller from any tenant (including litigation, if deemed by Seller to be
necessary or desirable), except that, in seeking to collect any such amounts due from any
tenant, Seller may not commence any action to dispossess any tenant, including, without
limitation, any action for eviction. The amount of any unapplied security deposits under the
Leases held by Seller in cash at the time of Closing shall be credited against the Purchase
Price; accordingly, Seller shall retain the actual cash deposits. If any security deposits are in
the form of a letter of credit, Seller shall, at Seller's cost, assign its interest in the letter of
credit to Pm-chaser and deliver the original letter of credit to Purchaser at Closing, together
with such transfer documentation as may be required by the issuer. If the issuer has not

-5•

GTT 001005
 CONFIDENTIAL

acknowledged such assignment on or before the Closing then, if the tenant covered by such
letter of credit defaults under its Lease prior to such acknowledgment, Seller will execute
such notices as Purchaser may reasonably request (including draw requests) with respect to
the applicable letter of credit, without, however, any cost or liability to Seller and, in such
event, Purchaser shall indemnify, protect, defend and hold Seller harmless from and against
any claims asserted by the applicable tenant.

4.2.5. Calculations. For purposes of calculating prorations, Purchaser shall

be deemed to be in title to the Property, and, therefore entitled to the income therefrom and
responsible for the expenses thereof for the entire day upon which the Closing occurs. All
such prorations shall be made on the basis of the actual number of days of the month which
shall have elapsed as of the day of the Closing and based upon the actual number of days in
the month and a three hundred sixty five (365) day year. The amount of such prorations
shall be initially performed at Closing but shall be subject to adjustment in cash after the
Closing as and when complete and accurate information becomes available, if such
information is not available at the Closing. Seller and Purchaser agree to cooperate and use
their commercially reasonable efforts to make such adjustments no later than sixty (60) days
after the Closing (or as soon thereafter as may be practicable, with respect to common area
maintenance and other additional rent charges (including pass-throughs for real estate and
personal property taxes and special assessments) payable by tenants under leases). Within a
reasonable period of time following the Closing (but in no event later than March 15, 2016),
Seller shall deliver to Purchaser a statement reconciling actual operating, common area
maintenance and similar expenses, including, without limitation, real estate taxes relating to
the Property, for the period from January 1, 2015 through Closing ("Pre-Closing Operating
Expenses"). On or before the date required under the Leases for reconciliation of actual
operating expenses for calendar year 2015 with estimated payments by tenants, Purchaser
shall deliver to tenants statements of reconciliation for calendar year 2015 operating
expenses incorporating Seller's reconciliation statement. To the extent that any tenant has
overpaid Seller, Seller promptly shall deliver the amount of any such overpayment to
Purchaser for credit or payment to such tenant. To the extent any tenant has underpaid
Seller, Purchaser shall pay such amount to Seller to the extent collected from the applicable
tenant. In seeking to collect any such amount due from any tenant, Seller may take all
appropriate collection measures (including litigation, if deemed by Seller to be necessary or
desirable), except that, in seeking to collect any such additional amounts due from any
tenant, Seller may not commence any action to dispossess any tenant, including, without
limitation, any action for eviction. Except as set forth in this Section 4.2, all items of
income and expense which accrue for the period prior to the Closing will be for the account
of Seller and all items of income and expense which accrue for the period on and after the
Closing will be for the account of Purchaser. The provisions of Section 4.2 shall survive the
Closing.

4.2.6. Leasing Commissions and Leasing Costs. Seller shall only be

responsible for the leasing commissions and other leasing costs, if any, set forth on
Schedule 4.2.6. Except for the leasing commissions and leasing costs reflected on Schedule

-6-

GTT 001006
 CONFIDENTIAL

4.2.6, Purchaser shall be responsible for all other leasing commissions and leasing costs. lf
Seller has, prior -to the Closing, paid any leasing commissions or other leasing costs which
are Purchaser' s responsibility hereunder, Seller will receive a credit for same from Purchaser
at the Closing. If Seller has failed to pay any leasing cotnmissions or other leasjng costs
which are Seller's responsibility hereunder, Seller will provide Purchaser with a credit for
the unpaid portion thereof and, in such event. Purchaser shall assume Seller's obligation to
pay same when due and Purchaser shall also ind~nify, protect, defend and hold Seller from
any and against any loss, costs, expense or liability incurred by, or asserted against, Seller as
a resu]t of Purchaser' s failure to pay same when due.

The provisions of this Seotion 4.2 shall survive the Closing,

4.3. Closing Costs. Purchaser shall pay (a) the cost of any endorsements to the
Owner' s Policy, and (b) the cost of any update or other changes requested by Purchaser to
the Survey, including the cost of any updates or changes to the ALTA Table A i tems or other
certifications.Purchaser shall also pay all costs associated with Purchaser's due diligence,
except as otherwise set forth herein. Each party shall be responsible for its own attorney 's
fees. Seller shall pay the basic title insurance premium for the Owner's Policy.

ARTICLE V.

Purchaset's Right of Inspection

5.1 . Right to Evaluate. Prior to the Effective Date, Purchaser successfully

compJeted Purchaser's engineering, environmental, financial and other investigations
of the Property and, as a result, Purchaser has no right to terminate this Agreement (or
receive the return of the Deposit) due to Purchaser's non-approval of such matters.
Purchaser has no further right to conduct any physical testing, drilling, boring, sampling or
removal of, on or through the surface of the Property (or any part or portion thereof)
including, without limitation, any ground borings or invasive tei,ting of the Improvements
(collectively, "Physical Testing"), without Seller's prior written consent, which consent may
be given or withheld in Seller's sole and absolute discretion. After making such tests and
inspections, Purchaser agrees to promptly restore the hnprovements and surface of the Real
Property to its condition prior to such tests and inspections (which obligation shall survive
the Closing or any termination of this Agreement) , Prior to Purchaser entering the Property
to conduct the inspections and tests described above, Purchaser shall obtain and maintain, at
Purchaser's sole cost and e:x.pense1 and shall deliver to Seller evidence of, the following
insurance coverage, and shall cause each of its agents and contractors to obtain and
maintain, and, upon request of Seller, shall deliver to Seller evidence of, the following

- 7-

GTT 001007
 CONFIDENTIAL

Seller shall have the right, in its discretion, to accompany Purchaser and/or
its agents during any inspection (including, but not limited to, tenant interviews) provided
Seller or its agents do not unreasonably interfere with Purchaser's inspection.

S.2. Inspection Obligations and Indemnity. Purchaser and its agents and
representatives shall: (a) not unreasonably disturb the tenants of the Improvements or
interfere with their use of the Real Property pursuant to their respective Leases; (b) not
interfere with the operation and maintenance of the Rea1 Property; (c) not damage any part
of the Property or any personal property owned or held by any tenant; (d) not injure or
otherwise cause bodi1y harm to Seller, its a,gents, contractors and employees or any tenant;
(e) promptly pay when due the costs of all tests, investigations and examinations done with
regard to the Property; (f) not permit any liens to attach to the Property by reason of the
exCfcise of its rights hereunder; (g) restore the Improvements and the surface of the Real
Property to the condition in which the same was found before any such inspection or tests
were undertaken~ (h) not reveal or disclose any information concerning the Property to
anyone outside Purchase.r's organization other than its agents, consultants, representatives,
lenders, financial partners and their agents, consultants and representatives; (i) not contact or
otherwise interview any tenant except in the presence of Seller or one of Seller's
representatives; and (j) not contact any Federal, State or local governmental authority
concerning the Property, other than standard requests for zoning verification materials.
Purchaser shall, at its sole cost and expense, comply with all applicable federal, state and
local laws, statutes, rules, regulations, ordinances or policies in conducting its inspection of
the Property and Physical Testing. Purchaser shall, and does hereby agree to indemnify,
defend and hold the Seller, its partners, officers, directors, employees, agents, attorneys and
their respective successors and assigns, harmless from and against any and all claims,
demands, suits, obligations, payments, damages, losses, penalties, liabilities, costs and
expenses (including but not limited to attorneys' fees) arising out of Purchaser's or
Purchaser's agents' actions taken in, on or about the Property-in the exercise of the inspection
right granted pursuant to Section 5.1, including. without limitation, (i) claims made by any
tenant against Seller for Purchaser's entry into such tenant's premises or any interference
with any tenant's use or damage to its premises or property in connection with Purchaser's
review of the Property; and (ii) Purchaser's obligations pursuant to this Section 5.2, but
exclusive of any damages to the marketability of the Property resulting from any adverse
tests or inspections obtained by Purchaser. This Section 5.2 shall survive the Closing and/or
any termination of this Agreement.

5.3. Seller Deliveries, Seller has delivered and Purchaser acknowledges receipt
and approval of all of the items specified on Exhibit B attached hereto (the "Documents") to
the extent such items are in Seller's or Seller's managing agent's possession or under
Seller's reasonable control; provided, however, Seller bas no obligation to incur any cost to

. 8.

GTT 001008
 CONFIDENTIAL

obtain any Documents not in the possession of Seller or its managing agent and, except as
otherwise expressly set forth in Section 7.1 hereof, Seller makes no representations or
warranties of any kind regarding the accuracy, thoroughness or completeness of or
conclusions drawn in the information contained in such documents, if any, relating to the
Property. Except as otherwise expressly set forth herein, Purchaser hereby waives any and
all claims against Seller arising out of the accuracy, completeness, conclusions or statements
expressed in materials so furnished and any and all claims arising out of any duty of Seller
to acquire, seek or obtain such materials. Notwithstanding anything contained in the
preceding sentence, Seller shall not deliver or make available to Purchaser Seller's internal
memoranda, attorney-client privileged materials, roof or physical inspection reports, internal
appraisals and economic evaluations of the Property, and reports regarding the Property
prepared by Seller or its affiliates solely for internal use or for the information of the
investors in Seller. Purchaser acknowledges that any and all of the Documents that are not
otherwise known by or available to the public are proprietary and confidential in nature and
will be delivered to Purchaser solely to assist Purchaser in determining the feasibility of
purchasing the Property. Purchaser agrees not to disclose such non-public Documents, or
any of the provisions, terms or conditions thereof, to any party outside of Purchaser's
organization other than its agents, consultants, representatives, lenders and financial partners
and their agents, consultants and representatives. Purchaser shall return all of the
Documents, on or before three (3) business days after the first to occur of (a) such time as
Purchaser notifies Seller in writing that it shall not acquire the Property, or (b) such time as
this Agreement is terminated for any reason. This Section 5.3 shall survive any termination
of this Agreement without limitation.

5.4. Independent Examination. Purchaser hereby acknowledges that, prior to the

Effective Date, it has been a full, complete and adequate opportunity to make such legal,
factual and other determinations, analyses, inquiries and investigations as Purchaser deems
necessary or appropriate in connection with the acquisition of the Property. Purchaser is
relying upon its own independent examination of the Property and all matters relating
thereto and not upon any statements of Seller (excluding the limited matters expressly
represented by Seller in Article VII hereof) or of any officer, director, employee, agent or
attorney of Seller with respect to acquiring the Property. Except for such representations
and warranties expressly set forth herein, Seller shall not be deemed to have represented or
warranted the completeness or accuracy of any studies, investigations and reports heretofore
or hereafter furnished to Purchaser. The provisions of this Section 5.4 shall survive Closing
and/or termination of this Agreement.

5.5. Copies of Reports. As additional consideration for the transaction

contemplated herein, Purchaser agrees that it will provide to Seller, within five (5) days
following a written request therefor, copies of any and all third (3 rd) party reports, tests or
studies relating to the Property in Purchaser's possession, including but not limited to those
involving environmental matters. The terms and provisions of this Section 5.5 shall survive
any termination of this Agreement.

GTT 001009
 CONFIDENTIAL

ARTICLE VI.

Title and Survey Matters

6.1. Title. Seller has delivered to Purchaser a current title insurance commitment
(the "Commitment") for an Owner's Policy of Title Insurance from Heritage Title Company
of Austin, Inc. (the "Title Company"), covering the Real Property. Purchaser shall notify
Seller on or before 5:00 P.M., Austin, Texas time on Monday, August 3, 2015 (i.e., the fifth
(5 th ) business day following the Effective Date) (the "Title Deadline Date") in writing of
any title exceptions identified in the Commitment which Purchaser disapproves. Any
exception, exclusion from coverage or other matter shown in the Commitment and not
disapproved in writing within said time period shall be deemed approved by Purchaser and
shall constitute a "Permitted Exception" hereunder. Purchaser and Seller hereby agree that
(i) all non-delinquent property taxes and assessments payable during 2015 and subsequent
years, (ii) the rights of the tenants under the Leases and Approved New Leases (hereinafter
defined), (iii) all matters created by or on behalf of Purchaser, including, without limitation,
any documents or instruments to be recorded as part of any financing for the acquisition of
the Property by Purchaser, and (iv) the exceptions to title identified on Exhibit D attached
hereto shall constitute "Permitted Exceptions." Prior to Closing, without Seller's prior
written consent which shall not be unreasonably withheld, Purchaser shall not make any
application to any governmental agency for any permit, approval, license or other
entitlement for the Property or the use or development thereof. Seller must satisfy on or
before the Closing, all mortgages, deeds of trust, judgments or tax lien filed against the
Property as a result of Seller's acts or assumed by Seller in order to permit the Title
Company to issue the Owner' s Policy of Title Insurance free from any such matters. After
the date of this Agreement, Seller shall not subject the Property to any easements, liens or
other encumbrances that will continue to affect the Property after Closing other than the
Leases and the Approved New Leases or as may be required by any governmental authority
or by the terms of the Leases and Approved New Leases.

6.2. Survey. Purchaser acknowledges receipt of Seller's existing survey for the
Property (as the same may be updated at Purchaser's sole expense, the "Survey"). If the
Survey discloses any matters which are unacceptable to Purchaser, in Purchaser's sole
discretion, Purchaser shall notify Seller in writing on or before the Title Deadline Date. Any
survey matter not disapproved in writing within said time period shall be deemed approved
by Purchaser and shall constitute a "Permitted Exception" hereunder. Seller may, at its sole
election, on or before the Closing Date, have the survey matters to which Purchaser has
objected cured and removed; provided, however, in no event will Seller be obligated to incur
costs to do so.

6.3. Title Defects. If Seller receives any title or survey objections from Purchaser
prior to the Title Deadline Date (collectively and individually, a "Title Defect"), Seller may
elect (but shall not be obligated) to attempt to remove, or cause to be removed at its expense,
any such Title Defect prior to Closing. Seller shall give Purchaser notice on or before one

- 10 -

GTT 001010
 CONFIDENTIAL

(1) business day after the Title Deadline Date of its intention to cure any Title Defects and,
if Seller fails to provide any such notice, Seller will be deemed to have elected not to cure
any Title Defect. If Seller elects (or is deemed to have elected) not to attempt to cure any
Title Defect or elects to cure but is unsuccessful, Purchaser shall have the right to terminate
this Agreement and receive a refund of the Deposit or to waive such Title Defect and
proceed to the Closing. Purchaser must make such election on or before second (2) business
days after the Title Deadline Date or immediately prior to the time that Closing would
otherwise occur if Seller elects to cure but is unsuccessful. If Purchaser elects to proceed to
Closing, any Title Defects waived by Purchaser shall be deemed Permitted Exceptions. If
Purchaser elects to tenninate this Agreement, Purchaser shall promptly return the
Documents to Seller and, subject to the Surviving Termination Obligations, this Agreement
shall terminate, the Deposit shall be delivered to Purchaser and thereupon neither party shall
have any further rights or obligations to the other hereunder. Purchaser's failure to provide
written notice of its election to waive Title Defects or to terminate this Agreement on or
before two (2) business days after the Title Deadline Date (or immediately prior to Closing if
applicable) shall be deemed an election by Purchaser to waive such Title Defects and to
proceed to Closing, in which case such Title Defects shall be deemed Permitted Exceptions.

ARTICLE VII.

Representations and Warranties of the Seller

7.1. Seller's Representations. Seller represents and warrants that the following
matters are true and correct as of the Effective Date with respect to the Property and as a
condition of Closing these matters will be true and correct at Closing.

7.1.1. Authority. Seller is a limited liability company, duly organized,

validly existing and in good standing under the laws of the State of Delaware. This
Agreement has been duly authorized, executed and delivered by Seller, is the legal, valid and
binding obligation of Seller, and does not, to the best of Seller's knowledge, violate any
provision of any agreement or judicial order to which Seller is a party or to which Seller is
subject. All documents to be executed by Seller which are to be delivered at Closing will (i)
be duly authorized, executed and delivered by Seller, (ii) be legal, valid and binding
obligations of Seller, and (iii) not violate, to the best of Seller's knowledge, any provision of
any agreement or judicial order to which Seller is a party or to which Seller is subject.

7.1.2. Foreign Person. Seller is not a foreign person within the meaning of
Section 1445(f) of the Internal Revenue Code, and Seller agrees to execute any and all
documents necessary or required by the Internal Revenue Service or Purchaser in connection
with such declaration(s).

7.1.3. No Default. The execution and delivery of this Agreement, and

consummation of the transaction described in this Agreement, will not, to the best of Seller's

- 11 •

GTT 001011
 CONFIDENTIAL

knowledge, constitute a default under any contract, lease, or agreement to which Seller is a party
and relating to the Property.

7.1.4. No Suits. To the best of Seller's knowledge, there is no action, suit or

proceeding pending against Seller and relating to or arising out of the ownership, management or
operation of the Property, in any court or before or by and federal, state, or municipal department,
commission, board, bureau or agency or other governmental instrumentality.

7.1.5 Rent Roll. The rent roll attached to this Agreement as Exhibit Eis the
rent roll used in the ordinary course of Seller's ownership of the Property but Seller does not
represent the accuracy thereof; provided, however, Seller represents that, to the best of Seller's
knowledge, such rent roll lists all current leases relating to the Property, that none of such leases
are tenninated or expired (except as otherwise disclosed in the Documents), and that Seller has
provided copies of all such leases to Purchaser. Except as provided on Schedule 4.2.6, Seller
has paid all leasing commissions and tenant improvement costs applicable to the current term of
the Leases with Gold's Gym and Top Trip Rentals.

7.1.6 No Existing Options. Except for this Agreement, Seller has not entered
into any agreement granting any third party a right or option to sell the Property which remains in
effect as of the Effective Date.

7.2. Seller's Knowledge. For purposes of this Agreement and any document
delivered at Closing, whenever the phrases "to the best of Seller's knowledge", "to the
current, actual, conscious knowledge of Seller" or the "knowledge'' of Seller or words of
similar import are used, they shall be deemed to refer to the current, actual, conscious
knowledge only, and not any implied, imputed or constructive knowledge, without any
independent investigation having been made or any implied duty to investigate, of Lance
Sallis. Such individual has no personal liability under this Agreement or otherwise with
respect to the Property.

7.3. Change in Representation/Waiver. Notwithstanding anything to the

contrary contained herein, Purchaser acknowledges that Purchaser shall not be entitled to
rely on any representation made by Seller in Section 7.1 to the extent, prior to or at Closing,
Purchaser shall have or obtain actual knowledge of any information that was contradictory to
such representation or warranty. If after the Effective Date but prior to the Closing,
Purchaser determines that any of the representations or warranties made herein by Seller are
untrue, inaccurate or incorrect in any material respect, Purchaser shall give Seller written
notice thereof within five (5) business days of obtaining such knowledge (but, in any event,
prior to the Closing). Seller shall have the right to cure such misrepresentation or breach
and shall be entitled to a reasonable extension of the Closing Date (not to exceed thirty (30)
days) for purposes of such cure. The untruth, inaccuracy or incorrectness of any of Seller's
representations or warranties shall be deemed material for purposes of this Agreement only
if Purchaser's aggregate damages resulting from the untruth, inaccuracy or incorrectness of
Seller's representations or warranties are reasonably estimated to exceed one percent (1 %) of
the Purchase Price. If any of Seller's representations or warranties are untrue, inaccurate or

GTT 001012
 CONFIDENTIAL

incorrect but are not, in the aggregate, untrue, inaccurate or incorrect in any material respect
as set forth herein, Purchaser shall have no right to terminate this Agreement due to such
misrepresentation or breach of warranty, and Purchaser shall be required to proceed to
Closing without any reduction of or credit against the Purchase Price. In the event Purchaser
terminates this Agreement due to the untruth, inaccuracy or incorrectness of any of Seller's
representations or warranties in any material respect, the Deposit shall be immediately
delivered to Purchaser and neither Purchaser nor Seller shall thereafter have any other rights
or remedies hereunder other than under Section 17.12 hereof. Seller shall have no liability
with respect to any of the foregoing representations and warranties or any representations
and warranties made in any other document executed and delivered by Seller to Purchaser, to
the extent that, prior to the Closing, Purchaser discovers or learns of information (from
whatever source, including, without limitation the property manager, the tenant estoppel
certificates, as a result of Purchaser's due diligence tests, investigations and inspections of
the Property, or disclosure by Seller or Seller's agents and employees) that contradicts any
such representations and warranties, or renders any such representations and warranties
untrue or incorrect, and Purchaser nevertheless consummates the transaction contemplated
by this Agreement.

7 .4. Survival. All representations and warranties of Seller in this Agreement (a) shall
expire and be of no further force and effect as of December 31 , 2015 (the period between the
Closing and such date, the "Survival Period") except to the extent, and only to the extent, if any,
that Purchaser shall have given Seller written notice during the Survival Period which describes
in reasonable detail the breach or alleged breach of such representations and warranties and the
curative actions requested by Purchaser and provides Seller with a reasonable period of time in
which to resolve such matters to the reasonable satisfaction of Purchaser; and (b) shall expire and
be of no further force and effect on the first day following the second (2 nd) anniversary of the
Closing Date (the period between the Closing and such day, the "Claim Commencement
Period") with respect to any matters disclosed in a notice delivered by Purchaser to Seller during
the Survival Period except to the extent, and only to the extent, if any, that Purchaser shall have
instituted litigation during the Claim Commencement Period with respect to matters disclosed in
such notice which have not previously been resolved.

ARTICLE VIII.

Representations and Warranties of Purchaser

8.1 Purchaser represents and warrants to Seller that the following matters are true
and correct as of the Effective Date.

8.1.1 Authority. Purchaser is a Texas limited partnership duly organized,

validly existing and in good standing under the laws of the State of Texas. This Agreement
has been duly authorized, executed and delivered by Purchaser, is the legal, valid and

- 13 -

GTT 001013
 CONFIDENTIAL

binding obligation of Purchaser, and, to the best of Purchaser's knowledge, does not violate
any provision of any agreement or judicial order to which Purchaser is a party or to which
Purchaser is subject. All documents to be executed by Purchaser which are to be delivered at
Closing, at the time of Closing will be duly authorized, executed and delivered by Purchaser,
at the time of Closing will be legal, valid and binding obligations of Purchaser, and, to the
best of Purchaser's knowledge, at the time of Closing will not violate any provision of any
agreement or judicial order to which Purchaser is a party or to which Purchaser is subject.

8.1.2. Bankruptcy or Debt of Purchaser. Purchaser has not made a general

assignment for the benefit of creditors, filed any voluntary petition in bankruptcy or suffered
the filing of an involuntary petition by Purchaser's creditors, suffered the appointment of a
receiver to take possession of all, or substantially all, of Purchaser's assets, suffered the
attachment or other judicial seizure of all, or substantially all, of Purchaser's assets, admitted
in writing its inability to pay its debts as they come due or made an offer of settlement,
extension or composition to its creditors generally.

8.1.3. ERISA Compliance. Purchaser bas informed Seller and Purchaser

hereby represents and warrants to Seller that Purchaser is not a "plan" nor a plan "fiduciary"
nor an entity holding "plan assets" (as those terms are defined under the Employee
Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended, and its applicable regulations as
issued by the Department of Labor and the Internal Revenue Service, "ERISA") nor an
entity whose assets are deemed to be plan assets under ERISA and that Purchaser is
acquiring the Property for Purchaser's own personal account and that the Property shall not
constitute plan assets subject to ERISA upon conveyance of the Property by Seller and the
closing of this Agreement between Purchaser and Seller. Seller shall not have any
obligation to close the transaction contemplated by this Agreement if the transaction for any
reason constitutes a prohibited transaction under BRISA or if Purchaser's representation is
found to be false or misleading in any respect. The foregoing representation and warranty
shall survive the Closing.

8.1.4. No Financing Contingency. It is expressly acknowledged by

Purchaser that this transaction is not subject to any financing contingency, and no :financing
for this transaction shall be provided by Se1ler.

8.1.5. No Consents. No consent to the acquisition of the Property by

Purchaser is required to be obtained from any person or entity, including, without limitation,
any governmental agency or public administrative body.

8.1.6. Patriot Act. Neither Purchaser nor any person, group, entity or nation
that Purchaser is acting, directly or indirectly for, or on behalf of, is named by any Executive
Order (including the September 23, 2001, Executive Order Blocking Property and
Prohibiting Transactions With Persons Who Commit, Threaten to Commit, or Support
Terrorism) or the United States Treasury Department as a terrorist, "Specially Designated
National and Blocked Person," or is otherwise a banned or blocked person, group, entity, or

- 14 -

GTT 001014
 CONFIDENTIAL

nation pursuant to any applicable Federal, State or local law, rule or regulation (each a
"Law" and collectively, the "Laws") that is enforced or administered by the Office of
Foreign Assets Control, and Purchaser is not engaging in the transaction described in this
Agreement, directly or indirectly, on behalf of, or instigating or facilitating such transaction,
directly or indirectly, on behalf of, and is not controlled by (with ownership of 20% of more
Purchaser's voting securities being a presumptive control position) any such person, group,
entity or nation. Neither Purchaser, nor any person that controls Purchaser, has its principal
place of business or conducts the majority of its business operations (measured by revenue)
in any nation described in the preceding sentence. Purchaser is not engaging in this
transaction, directly or indirectly, in violation of any Laws relating to drug trafficking,
money laundering or predicate crimes to money laundering. None of the funds of Purchaser
have been or will be derived from any unlawful activity with the result that the investment of
direct or indirect equity owners in Purchaser is prohibited by Law or that the transaction or
this Agreement is or will be in violation of Law. Purchaser has and will continue to
implement procedures, and has consistently and will continue to consistently apply those
procedures, to ensure the foregoing representations and warranties remain true and correct at
all times prior to Closing.

8.2. Survival. All representations and warranties of Purchaser in this Agreement

(a) shall expire and be of no further force and effect as of the last day of the Survival Period
except to the extent, and only to the extent, if any, that Seller shall have given Purchaser
written notice during the Survival Period which describes in reasonable detail the breach or
alleged breach of such representations and warranties and the curative actions requested by
Seller and provides Purchaser with a reasonable period of time in which to resolve such
matters to the reasonable satisfaction of Seller; and (b) shall expire and be of no further
force and effect on the last day of the Claim Commencement Period with respect to any
matters disclosed in a notice delivered by Seller to Purchaser during the Survival Period
except to the extent, and only to the extent, if any, that Seller shall have instituted litigation
during the Claim Commencement Period with respect to matters disclosed in such notice
which have not previously been resolved.

ARTICLE IX.

AS-IS DISCLAIMER/RELEASE

9.1. AS-IS DISCLAIMER. EXCEPT AS EXPRESSLY SET FORTH IN

SECTION 7.1 OF THIS AGREEMENT, IT IS UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED THAT
SELLER IS NOT MA.KING AND HAS NOT AT ANY TIME MADE ANY WARRANTIES
OR REPRESENTATIONS OF ANY KIND OR CHARACTER, EXPRESSED OR
IMPLIED, WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPERTY, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED
TO, ANY WARRANTIES OR REPRESENTATIONS AS TO HABITABILITY,
MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, TITLE (OTHER
THAN SELLER'S SPECIAL WARRANTY OF TITLE TO BE SET FORTH IN THE
DEED), ZONING, TAX CONSEQUENCES, LATENT OR PATENT PHYSICAL OR

• 15 -

GTT 001015
 CONFIDENTIAL

ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITION, UTILITIES, SHORELINE RESTRICTIONS OR

BOUNDARIES, OPERATING HISTORY OR PROJECTIONS, VALUATION,
GOVERNMENTAL APPROVALS, THE COMPLIANCE OF THE PROPERTY WITH
GOVERNMENTAL LAWS (INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATJON, ACCESSIBILITY
FOR HANDICAPPED PERSONS), THE TRUTH, ACCURACY OR COMPLETENESS OF
THE PROPERTY DOCUMENTS OR ANY OTHER INFORMATION PROVIDED BY OR
ON BEHALF OF SELLER TO PURCHASER, OR ANY OTHER MATTER OR THING
REGARDING THE PROPERTY. PURCHASER ACKNOWLEDGES AND AGREES
THAT UPON CLOSING SELLER SHALL SELL AND CONVEY TO PURCHASER AND
PURCHASER SHALL ACCEPT THE PROPERTY ''AS IS, WHERE IS, WITH ALL
FAULTS", EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT EXPRESSLY PROVIDED OTHERWISE IN
SECTION 7.1 OF THIS AGREEMENT. PURCHASER HAS NOT RELIED AND WILL
NOT RELY ON, AND SELLER IS NOT LIABLE FOR OR BOUND BY, ANY
EXPRESSED OR _ IMPLIED WARRANTIES, GUARANTIES, STATEMENTS,
REPRESENTATIONS OR INFORMATION PERTAINING TO THE PROPERTY OR
RELATING THERETO (INCLUDING SPECIFICALLY, WlTHOUT LIMITATION,
PROPERTY INFORMATION PACKAGES DISTRIBUTED WITH RESPECT TO THE
PROPERTY) MADE OR FURNISHED BY SELLER, THE MANAGER OF THE
PROPERTY, OR ANY REAL ESTATE BROKER OR AGENT REPRESENTING OR
PURPORTING TO REPRESENT SELLER, TO WHOMEVER MADE OR GIVEN,
DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, ORALLY OR IN WRITING, UNLESS SPECIFICALLY
SET FORTH IN SECTION 7.1 OF THIS AGREEMENT. PURCHASER REPRESENTS TO
SELLER THAT PURCHASER HAS CONDUCTED, OR WILL CONDUCT PRIOR TO
CLOSING, SUCH INVESTIGATIONS OF THE PROPERTY, INCLUDING BUT NOT
LIMITED TO, THE PHYSICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS THEREOF, AS
PURCHASER DEEMS NECESSARY TO SATISFY ITSELF AS TO THE CONDITION OF
THE PROPERTY AND THE EXISTENCE OR NONEXISTENCE OR CURATIVE
ACTION TO BE TAKEN WITH 'RESPECT TO ANY HAZARDOUS OR TOXIC
SUBSTANCES ON OR DISCHARGED FROM THE PROPERTY, AND WILL RELY
SOLELY UPON SAME AND NOT UPON ANY INFORMATION PROVIDED BY OR ON
BEHALF OF SELLER OR ITS AGENTS OR EMPLOYEES WITH RESPECT THERETO,
OTHER THAN SUCH REPRESENTATIONS, WARRANTIES AND COVENANTS OF
SELLER AS ARE EXPRESSLY SET FORTH IN SECTION 7.1 OF THIS AGREEMENT.
UPON CLOSING, PURCHASER SHALL ASSUME THE RISK THAT ADVERSE
MATTERS, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, CONSTRUCTION DEFECTS,
PRESENCE OF MOLD, PRIOR OR CURRENT WATER INTRUSION AND ADVERSE
PHYSICAL AND ENVIRONMENT AL CONDITIONS, MAY NOT HA VE BEEN
REVEALED BY PURCHASER'S INVESTlGATIO NS. Purchaser has initialed this Section
9.1 t further indicate Purchaser's awareness and acceptance of each and every provision
her o The provisions of this Section 9.1 shall survive Closing and/or termination of this
,.. ......,rc..,,...ent.

- 16 ·

GTT 001016
 CONFIDENTIAL

9.2. Purchaser's Release. Purchaser on behalf of itself and its successors and
assigns waives its right to recover from, and forever releases and discharges, Seller, Seller's
affiliates, Seller's investment manager, property manager, the partners, trustees,
shareholders, beneficiaries, directors, officers, employees, attorneys and agents of each of
them, and their respective heirs, successors, personal representatives and assigns from any
and all demands, claims, legal or administrative proceedings, losses, liabilities, damages,
penalties, fines, liens, judgments, costs or expenses known or unknown, foreseen or
unforeseen, that may arise on account of or in any way be connected with (i) the physical
condition of the Property, (ii) the condition of title to the Property, (iii) the presence on,
under or about the Property of any hazardous or regulated substance, (iv) the Property's
compliance with any applicable federal, state or local law, rule or regulation, or (v) any other
aspect of the Property; provided, however, this release does not apply to Seller's breach of
any of the representations and warranties of Seller set forth in Article VII which breach,
however, shall be subject to the other limitations set forth in this Agreement including
Section 9.3 below. The terms and provisions of this Section 9.2 shall survive Closing and/or
termination of this Agreement.

9.3. Limitation on Seller's Liability. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary

contained in this Agreement or any documents executed in connection herewith, if the
Closing of this transaction shall have occurred, (i) the aggregate liability of Seller arising
pursuant to or in connection with the representations, warranties, indemnifications,
covenants or other obligations (whether express or implied) of Seller under this Agreement
or any document or certificate executed or delivered in connection herewith shall not exceed
Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000) (the "Liability Ceiling"), and (ii) in no event
shall Seller have any liability to Purchaser unless and until the aggregate liability of Seller
arising pursuant to or in connection with the representations, warranties, indemnifications,
covenants or other obligations (whether express or implied) of Seller wider this Agreement
or any document or certificate executed or delivered in connection herewith shall exceed
Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000) (the "Liability Floor"). If Seller's aggregate liability to
Purchaser shall exceed the Liability Floor, Seller shall be liable for only that portion
exceeding the Liability Floor, up to but not exceeding the Liability Ceiling. The terms and
provisions of this Section 9.3 shall survive Closing and/or termination of this Agreement.

9.4. No Reliance on Documents . Except as expressly stated in Section 7.1, Seller

makes no representation or warranty as to the truth, accuracy or completeness of any
materials, data or information delivered by Seller to Purchaser in connection with the
transaction contemplated hereby. Purchaser acknowledges and agrees that all materials, data
and information delivered by Seller to Purchaser in connection with the transaction
contemplated hereby are provided to Purchaser as a convenience only and that any reliance
on or use of such materials, data or information by Purchaser shall be at the sole risk of
Purchaser, except as otherwise expressly stated herein. Without limiting the generality of
the foregoing provisions, Purchaser acknowledges and agrees that (a) any environmental or
other report with respect to the Property which is delivered by Seller to Purchaser shall be

- 17 -

GTT 001017
 CONFIDENTIAL

for general informational purposes only, (b) Purchaser shall not have any right to rely on any
such report delivered by Seller to Purchaser, but rather will rely on its own inspections and
investigations of the Property and any reports commissioned by Purchaser with respect
thereto, and {c) neither Seller, any affiliate of Seller nor the person or entity which prepared
any such report delivered by Seller to Purchaser shall have any liability to Purchaser for any
inaccuracy in or omission from any such report. The terms and provisions of this Section
9.4 shall survive Closing and/or termination of this Agreement.

9.5. Disclaimer Consideration. Purchaser acknowledges that Seller would not have
entered into this Agreement in the absence of, and S er has given Purchaser material
concessions regarding this transaction in exchange for, c aser agreeing to the provisions of
this Article IX. Seller and Purchaser have each initial s ection 9.5 to further indicate their
=--" cepta.!:!ce of each and every provisi

s LS

ARTICLEX.

Seller's Interim Operating Covenants.

l0.1. Operations. Seller agrees to continue to operate, manage and maintain the
Improvements through the Closing Date in the ordinary course of Seller's business and
substantially in accordance with Seller's present practice, subject to ordinary wear and tear
and further subject to Article XIII of this Agreement; provided. however. Seller shall not be
obligated to perform any capital improvements or to make any deferred maintenance or other
repairs except as specified in Section 10.7 below. Purchaser hereby agrees that, except for
breaches of this Section 10.1. Purchaser, shall accept the Property subject to, and Seller shall
have no obligation to cure, (a) any violations of Laws, or (b) any physical conditions which
would give rise to violations of Laws, whether the same now exist or arise prior to Closing.
Between the Effective Date and the Closing, Seller will advise Purchaser of any written
notice Seller receives after the Effective Date from any governmental authority of the
violation of any Laws regulating the condition or use of the Property.

10.2. Maintain Insurance, Seller agrees to maintain until the Closing Date fire
and extended coverage insurance on the Property which is at least equivalent in all material
respects to the insurance policies covering the Real Property and the Improvements as of the
Effective Date.

10.3. Personal Pr-operty. Seller agrees not to transfer or remove any Personal
Property from the Improvements after the Effective Date except for repair or replacement
thereof. Any items of Personal Property replaced after the Effective Date shall be promptly

- 18 ·

GTT 001018
 CONFIDENTIAL

installed prior to Closing and shall be of substantially similar quality to the item of Personal
Property being replaced.

10.4. No Sales. Except for the execution of tenant Leases pursuant to Section 10.5,
Seller agrees that it shall not convey any interest in the Property to any third party.

10.5. Tenant Leases. Seller shall not, from and after the Effective Date, (i) grant
any consent or waive any material rights under the Leases, (ii) terminate any Lease, or (iii)
enter into a new lease, modify an existing Lease or renew, extend or expand an existing
Lease in each case without the prior written approval of Purchaser (an "Approved New
Lease"), which in each case shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed, and
which shall be deemed granted if Purchaser fails to respond to a request for approval within
five (5) business days after receipt of the request therefor together with a summary of lease
terms and credit information of the proposed tenant.

10.6 Contracts. Seller shall deliver a termination notice at the Closing as to all
Contracts and Seller will be responsible for any charges due under such Contracts until the
effective date of termination. Purchaser shall not assume any obligations under any of the
Contracts.

ARTICLE XI.

Closing Conditions.

11.1. Conditions to Obligations of Seller. The obligations of Seller under this

Agreement to sell the Property and consummate the other transactions contemplated hereby
shall be subject to the satisfaction of the following conditions on or before the Closing Date
except to the extent that any of such conditions may be waived by Seller in writing at
Closing.

11.1.1.Representations, Warranties and Covenants of Purchaser. All

representations and warranties of Purchaser in this Agreement shall be true and correct in all
material respects as of the Closing Date, with the same force and effect as if such
representations and warranties were made anew as of the Closing Date and Purchaser shall
have performed and complied with all covenants and agreements required by this Agreement
to be performed or complied with by Purchaser prior to the Closing Date.

11.2. Conditions to Obligations of Purchaser. The obligations of Purchaser under

this Agreement to purchase the Property and consummate the other transactions
contemplated hereby shall be subject to the satisfaction of the following conditions on or
before the Closing Date, except to the extent that any of such conditions may be waived by
Purchaser in writing at Closing.

• 19 -

GTT 001019
 CONFIDENTIAL

11.2.1.Representations, Warranties and Covenants of Seller. All

representations and warranties of Seller in this Agreement shall be true and correct in all
material respects as of the Closing Date, with the same force and effect as if such
representations and warranties were made anew as of the Closing Date and Seller shall have
performed and complied in all material respects with all covenants and agreement required
by this Agreement to be performed or complied with by Seller prior to the Closing Date.
Notwithstanding the foregoing or any other provision of this Agreement and except as
provided in Section 11.2.2 below, it shall not be a failure of a condition precedent, a breach
of any representation or warranty, or a default by Seller if a tenant is in default of its Lease
or, through no fault of Seller, is not in occupancy of any portion of the Property; provided,
however, that Purchaser shall have no obligation to fulfill its Closing obligations unless
Purchaser receives the tenant estoppel certificates required to be delivered under Section
11.2.2 below.

11.2.2. Tenant Estoppels. Purchaser shall have received a Tenant estoppel

certificate substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit C (or, if different, the form
and content required under the applicable Lease) from Gold's Gym and Top Trip Rentals
("Required Estoppel Amount"). If either the Gold's Gym or Top Trip Rentals tenant
alleges a default under its lease in its tenant estoppel provided pursuant to this paragraph,
such estoppel shall not be in compliance with the requirements of this paragraph and
Purchaser shall not be required to close (but Purchaser may waive such non-compliance if it
so elects). Notwithstanding the foregoing, at Seller's sole option, Seller may extend the
Closing Date for up to an additional thirty (30) days in order to satisfy the foregoing
requirement in which event Seller shall deliver notice of such extension to Purchaser not less
than one (1) day prior to the then existing Closing Date. In no event shall Seller be
obligated to deliver updates to any of the tenant estoppel certificates. Seller will deliver
Purchaser copies of the signed tenant estoppels promptly following Seller's receipt and, if
Purchaser fails to deliver a written objection notice to Seller within one (1) business day
following the date of delivery, such signed tenant estoppels will be deemed approved by
Purchaser. Purchaser acknowledges that the tenants may use their own form of tenant
estoppel certificate or may modify the form attached hereto and Purchaser agrees to accept
such substitute or modified tenant estoppel certificate as long as same is consistent with the
applicable Lease. Seller shall not be in default for failure to deliver any required tenant
estoppel certificate, it being agreed that Purchaser's sole remedy for such failure shall be to
terminate this Agreement and, in such event, the Deposit shall be delivered to Purchaser.
Seller agrees to request its property manager to request the tenants to execute and deliver
any subordination, non-disturbance and attomment agreements (each a "SNDA") requested
by Purchaser's mortgage lender - it being agreed, however, that Seller or it property
manager shall not be required to incur any expense or liability nor shall Seller have any
obligation to declare a default or otherwise threaten or pursue any remedy for a tenant's
failure to deliver any such SNDA. If Purchaser's lender requires any SNDA, Purchaser shall
be responsible to provide Seller with the completed forms of SNDA for Seller's delivery to
each tenant. Any such SNDA shall be prepared to reflect Purchaser as the landlord
following the Closing and, as a result, Seller shall not be required to execute or otherwise

- 20 -

GTT 001020
 CONFIDENTIAL

join in any such SNDA. Purchaser acknowledges and agrees that, notwithstanding anything
herein to the contrary, the execution or delivery of any SNDA shall not be a condition to
Purchaser's obligation to proceed to the Closing nor shall the failure, for any or no reason, to
receive any SNDA entitle Purchaser to terminate this Agreement or receive back the
Deposit.

11.2.3.Fire Sprinkler Test. Seller has provided Purchaser with evidence that all of
the fire sprinklers located in the hnprovements have passed a recent inspection by the City
of Austin Fire Department.

11.2.4. Top Trip Lease Amendment. Seller has provided Purchaser with an
amendment to the Lease with Top Trip Rentals executed by Seller and Top Trip Rentals in
substantially the form attached hereto as Schedule 11.2.4.

ARTICLE XII.

Closing

12.l. Purchaser's Closing Obligations. Purchaser, at its sole cost and expense,
shall deliver or cause to be delivered to Seller at Closing the following:

12.1.1. The Purchase Price, after all adjustments are made at the Closing as
herein provided, by wire transfer or other immediately available federal funds, which
amount shall be received in escrow by the Title Company at or before 1:00 p.m. Pacific
Standard Time (3:00pm Central Standard Time).

12.1.2 A blanket conveyance and bill of sale, substantially in the form

attached hereto as Exhibit G (the "General Assignment"), duly executed by Purchaser,
conveying and assigning to Purchaser the Personal Property, the records and plans, and the
Intangible Property (excluding the Contracts).

12.1.3. Written notice executed by Purchaser and addressed to the tenants, (i)
acknowledging the sale of the Property to Purchaser, (ii) acknowledging that Purchaser has
received and is responsible for any security deposits identified in the rent roll, and (iii)
indicating that rent should thereafter be paid to Purchaser and giving instructions therefore,
substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit H.

12.1.4. Evidence reasonably satisfactory to Seller and the Title Company that
the person executing the Closing documents on behalf of Purchaser has full right, power and
authority to do so.

12.1.5. A closing statement duly executed by Purchaser setting forth the

Purchase Price and any adjustments thereto.

- 21 -

GTT 001021
 CONFIDENTIAL

12.1.6. Such other documents as may be reasonably necessary or appropriate

to effect the consummation of the transactions which are the subject of this Agreement.

12.2. Seller's Closing Obligations. Seller, at its sole cost and expense, shall
deliver or cause to be delivered to Purchaser the following;

12.2.1. A special warranty deed (the "Deed") in recordable form duly

executed and acknowledged by Seller conveying to Purchaser the Land and Improvements
described on Exhibit A in fee simple, subject only to the Permitted Exceptions and the other
exclusions and limitations set forth therein, substantially in the form attached hereto as
ExhibitF.

12.2.2. Toe General Assignment, duly executed by Seller, conveying and

assigning to Purchaser the Personal Property, the records and plans, and the Intangible
Property (excluding the Contracts).

12.2.3. Written notice executed by Seller (i) acknowledging the sale of the
Property to Purchaser, (ii) acknowledging that Purchaser has received and is responsible for
any security deposits identified in the rent roll, and (iii) indicating that rent should thereafter
be paid to Purchaser, substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit H.

12.2.4. Evidence reasonably satisfactory to Purchaser and the Title Company

that the person executing the Closing documents on behalf of Seller has full right, power and
authority to do so.

12.2.S. A certificate duly executed by Seller substantiaUy in the form

attached hereto as Exhibit I ("Non-foreign Entity Certification") certifying that Seller is
not a "foreign person" as defined in Section 1445 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as
amended.

12.2.6. The following items, to the extent in Seller's possession; (i) all keys
for all entrance door and spaces which may be locked (whether occupied or not) in the
Improvements; and (ii) all original (to the extent available, otherwise copies of) Leases,
Contracts, permits, books, records, tenant files, tenant database, operating reports, plains and
specifications and other materials reasonably necessary to the continuity of operation of the
Property- the foregoing items may be delivered at the Property and not at the Closing.

12.2.7. A closing statement duly executed by Seller setting forth the

Purchase Price and any adjustments thereto.

12.2.8. Such other documents as may be reasonably necessary or appropriate

to effect the consummation of the transactions which are the subject of this Agreement.

- 22 -

GTT 001022
 CONFIDENTIAL

ARTICLE XIII.

Risk of Loss.

13.1. Condemnation and Casualty. If, prior to the Closing Date, all or any portion
of the Property is taken by condemnation or eminent domain, or is the subject of a pending
taking which has not been consummated, or is destroyed or damaged by fire or other
casualty, Seller shall notify Purchaser of such fact promptly after Seller obtains knowledge
thereof. If such condemnation or casualty is "Material" (as hereinafter defined), Purchaser
shall have the option to terminate this Agreement upon notice to Seller given not later than
fifteen (15) days after receipt of Seller's notice, or the Closing Date, whichever is earlier. If
this Agreement is terminated, the Deposit shall be delivered to Purchaser and thereafter
neither Seller nor Purchaser shall have any further rights or obligations to the other
hereunder except with respect to the Surviving Termination Obligations. If this Agreement
is not terminated, Seller shall not be obligated to repair any damage or destruction but (x)
Seller shall assign, without recourse, and turn over to Purchaser all of the insurance proceeds
or condemnation proceeds, as applicable, net of any costs of repairs incurred by Seller and
net of reasonable collection costs incurred by Sel1er (or, if such have not been awarded, all
of its right, title and interest therein) payable with respect to such fire or other casualty or
condemnation including any rent abatement insurance for such casualty or condemnation and
(y) the parties shall proceed to Closing pursuant to the terms hereof without abatement of the
Purchase Price.

13.2. Condemnation Not Material. If the condemnation is not Material, then the
Closing shall occur without abatement of the Purchase Price and, after deducting Seller's
reasonable costs and expenses incurred in collecting any award, Seller shall assign, without
recourse, all remaining awards or any rights to collect awards to Purchaser on the Closing
Date.

13.3. Casualty Not Material. If the Casualty is not Material, then the Closing shall
occur without abatement of the Purchase Price, and Seller shall not be obligated to repair
such damage or destruction, and Seller shall assign, without recourse, and turn over to
Purchaser all of the insurance proceeds net of any costs of repairs and net of reasonable
collection costs (or, if such have not been awarded, all of its right, title and interest therein)
payable with respect to such fire or such casualty including any rent abatement insurance for
such casualty.

13.4. Materiality. For purposes of this Article XTII (i) with respect to a taking by
eminent domain, the term "Material" shall mean any taking whatsoever, regardless of the
amount of the award or the amount of the Property taken, excluding, however, any taking
solely of (x) subsurface rights or takings for utility easements or right of way easements, if
the surface of the Property, after such taking, may be used in the same manner, as reasonably
determined by Purchaser, as though such rights had not been taken, or (y) one lease of less

• 23 -

GTT 001023
 CONFIDENTIAL

than 5% of the rentable square feet for a term of less than two years, and (ii) with respect to
a casualty, the term "Material" shall mean any casualty (a) such that the cost of repairs are
greater than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) of the Purchase Price or (b) for which Seller' s
insurance company refuses to consent to the assignment of insurance proceeds to Purchaser
and for which Seller does not provide to Purchaser a credit against the Purchase Price at
Closing in the amount of such non-consented to insurance proceeds.

ARTICLE XIV.

Default

14.1. Default by Seller. In the event the Closing and the transactions contemplated
hereby do not occur as provided herein by reason of the default of Seller which remains
uncured five (5) days after written notice from Purchaser specifying same, Purchaser may
elect, as the sole and exclusive remedy of Purchaser, to (i) terminate this Agreement and
receive the Deposit from the Escrow Agent, and in such event Seller shall not have any
liability whatsoever to Purchaser hereunder other than with respect to the Surviving
Termination Obligations or (ii) enforce specific performance of Seller's obligation to convey
the Property, without adjustment to, or credit against, the Purchase Price. Purchaser shall be
deemed to have elected to terminate this Agreement (as provided in subsection (i) above) if
Purchaser fails to deliver to Seller written notice of its intent to file a cause of action for
specific performance against Seller on or before ten (10) days after written notice of
termination from Seller or ten (10) days after the originally scheduled Closing Date,
whichever shall occur first, or having given Seller notice, fails to file a lawsuit asserting
such cause of action within thirty (30) days after the originally scheduled Closing Date.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing contained herein shall limit Purchaser's remedies at
law or in equity, as to the Surviving Termination Obligations.

14.2. Default by Purchaser. IN THE EVENT THE CLOSING AND THE

TRANSACTIONS CONTEMPLATED HEREBY DO NOT OCCUR AS PROVIDED
HEREIN BY REASON OF ANY DEFAULT OF PURCHASER WHICH REMAINS
UNCURED FIVE (5) DAYS AFTER RECEIPT OF WRITTEN NOTICE FROM
SELLER SPECIFYING SAME (EXCEPT FOR PURCHASER'S FAILURE TO
DELIVER THE PURCHASE PRICE OR ANY OF THE CLOSING DOCUMENTS AT
THE CLOSING FOR WHICH PURCHASER SHALL BE ENTITLED TO NO NOTICE
OR OPPORTUNITY TO CURE), PURCHASER AND SELLER AGREE IT WOULD
BE IMPRACTICAL AND EXTREMELY DIFFICULT TO FIX THE DAMAGES
WlllCH SELLER MAY SUFFER. THEREFORE, PURCHASER AND SELLER
HEREBY AGREE A REASONABLE ESTIMATE OF THE TOTAL NET DETRIMENT
SELLER WOULD SUFFER IN THE EVENT PURCHASER DEFAULTS AND FAILS
TO COMPLETE THE PURCHASE OF THE PROPERTY IS AND SHALL BE, AS
SELLER'S SOLE AND EXCLUSIVE REMEDY {WHETHER AT LAW OR IN
EQUITY), A SUM EQUAL TO THE DEPOSIT. UPON SUCH UNCURED DEFAULT

- 24 -

GTT 001024
 CONFIDENTIAL

BY PURCHASER, SELLER SHALL HAVE THE RIGHT TO RECENE THE

DEPOSIT FROM THE ESCROW AGENT AS ITS SOLE AND EXCLUSIVE
REMEDY AND THEREUPON THIS AGREEMENT SHALL BE TERMINATED AND
NEITHER SELLER NOR PURCHASER SHALL HA VE ANY FURTHER RIGHTS OR
OBLIGATIONS HEREUNDER EXCEPT WITH RESPECT TO THE SURVJVING
TERMlNATION OBLIGATIONS. THE AMOUNT OF THE DEPOSIT SHALL BE
TIIB FULL, AGREED AND LIQUIDATED DAMAGES FOR PURCHASER'S
UNCURED DEFAULT AND FAILURE TO COMPLETE THE PURCHASE OF THE
PROPERTY, ALL OTHER CLAIMS TO DAMAGES OR OTHER REMEDIES BEING
HEREBY EXPRESSLY WAIVED BY SELLER. NOTWITHSTANDING THE
FOREGOING, NOTHING CONTAINED HEREIN SHALL LIMIT SELLER'S
REMEDIES AT LAW OR IN EQUITY AS TO THE SURVIVING TERMINATION
OBLlGATIONS. THE PARTIES HAVE SET FORTH IR INITIALS BEWW TO
INDICATE THEIR AGREEMENT WITH TIIE LIQU DAMAGES PROVISION
CONTAINED THIS SECTION.

TIALS ITIALS

ARTICLE XV.

Brokers

15.l. Brokers. Purchaser and Seller each represents and warrants to the other that
it has not dealt with any person or entity entitled to a brokerage commission, finder's fee or
other compensation with respect to the transaction contemplated hereby other than Eastdil
Secured and Stream Realty (collectively, "Broker"). Seller will be responsible for the
commission owed Broker. Broker shall be paid only upon the Closing of the purchase and
sale contemplated hereby pursuant to a separate agreement. Purchaser hereby agrees to
indemnify, defend, and hold Seller harmless from and against any1osses, damages, costs and
expenses (including, but not limited to, attorneys' fees and costs) incurred by Seller by
reason of any breach or inaccuracy of the Purchaser's (or its nominee's) r epresentations and
warranties contained in this Article XIV. Seller hereby agrees to indemnify, defend, and
bold Purchaser harmless from and against any losses, damages, costs and expenses
(including, but not limited to, attorneys' fees and costs) incurred by Purchaser by reason of
any breach or inaccuracy of Seller's representations and warranties contained in this Article
KY_. Seller and Purchaser agree that it is their specific intent that no broker shall be a party
to or a third party beneficiary of this Agreement or the Deposit, that no broker shall have any
rights or cause of action hereunder, and further that the consent of a broker shall not be
necessary to any agreement, amendment, or document with respect to the transaction

- 25 •

GTT 001025
 CONFIDENTIAL

contemplated by this Agreement. The provisions of this Article XV shall survive the
Closing and/or termination of this Agreement.

ARTICLE XVI.

Confidentiality

16.1. Confidentiality. Purchaser expressly acknowledges and agrees that the

transactions contemplated by this Agreement, the Documents that are not otherwise known
by or readily available to the public and the terms, conditions and negotiations concerning
the same shall be held in the strictest confidence by Purchaser and shall not be disclosed by
Purchaser except to its legal counsel, surveyor, title company, broker, accountants,
consultants, officers, partners, directors and shareholders and any prospective lenders,
financial partners and their agents, consultants and representatives (the "Authorized
Representatives"), and except and only to the extent that such disclosure may be necessary
for the performance by such Authorized Representative of its diligence obligations
hereunder, but not otherwise. Purchaser agrees that it shall instruct each of its Authorized
Representatives to maintain the confidentiality of such information and shall, prior to
disclosure to any such Authorized Represntative, provide Seller with the name and contact
information for each such Authorized Representative. Purchaser agrees to be responsible for
all damages, losses (including lost profits), costs, liabilities and expenses incurred by or
asserted against Seller due to the breach by Seller or any Authorized Representative of the
confidentiality provisions set forth in this Agreement. Purchaser further acknowledges and
agrees that, unless and until the Closing occurs, all information and materials obtained by
Purchaser in connection with the Property that are not otherwise known by or readily
available to the public will not be disclosed by Purchaser to any third persons (other than to
its Authorized Representatives) without the prior written consent of Seller, which may be
withheld in Seller's sole and absolute discretion. If the transaction contemplated by this
Agreement does not occur for any reason whatsoever, Purchaser shall promptly return to
Seller, and shall instruct its Authorized Representatives to return to Seller, all copies and
originals of all documents and information provided to Purchaser by Seller. Nothing
contained in this Section 16.1 shall preclude or limit either party from disclosing or
accessing any information otherwise deemed confidential under this Section 16.1 in
connection with the party's enforcement of its rights following a disagreement hereunder or
in response to lawful process or subpoena or other valid or enforceable order of a court of
competent jurisdiction or any filings with Authorities required by reason of the transactions
provided for herein. The provisions of this Section 16.1 shall survive any termination of this
Agreement.

16.2. Post Closing Publication. Notwithstanding the foregoing, each party shall
have the right to announce the acquisition (but not the Purchase Price) of the Property in
newspapers and real estate trade publications (including "tombstones") publicizing the
purchase (but not the Purchase Price), provided that any public announcement of the
transaction shall be made using only such information as is customarily found in public

- 26 -

GTT 001026
 CONFIDENTIAL

announcements of such transactions. The provisions of this Section 15.2 shall survive
Closing and/or any termination of this Agreement. Each party further acknowledges and
agrees that in no event will it publicize or disclose the Purchase Price in any manner before
or after the Closing, except to its Authorized Representatives or as otherwise required by
applicable law; this obligation shall survive the Closing.

16.3. Access to Books and Records. If the Closing occurs, Purchaser agrees to allow
Seller access to all books and records transferred from Seller to Purchaser at Closing for a period
of twelve (12) months after the Closing Date. Purchaser agrees that after the Closing, Seller, at
Seller's expense, may make copies of any and all books and records as Seller, in its discretion,
desires. The terms and provisions of this Section 16.3 shall survive Closing and/or termination of
this Agreement.

ARTICLE XVII.

Miscellaneous

17.1. Notices. Any and all notices, requests, demands or other communications
hereunder shall be deemed to have been duly given if in writing and if transmitted by hand
delivery with receipt therefor, by facsimile delivery (with confirmation by hard copy), by
overnight courier, or by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, first class
postage prepaid addressed as follows (or to such new address as the addressee of such a
communication may have notified the sender thereof) (the date of such notice shall be the
date of actual delivery to the recipient thereof):

To Purchaser c/o ColinaWest

804 Congress Suite #300
Austin, Texas 78701
Attn: David Kahn
Telephone No.: (512) 426-5136
Fax No.: (512) _ _ _ _ __
Email: davidkahn@colinwest.com

With copies to: Stahl, Bernal, Davies, Sewell & Chavarria

7320 N. MoPac, Suite 211
Austin, Texas 78731
Attn: Brent Stahl
Telephone No.: (512) 346-5558
Fax No.: (512) 346-2712
Email: bstahl@sbaustinlaw.com

To Seller c/o Stream Realty Partners

515 Congress Avenue, Suite 1300
Austin, Texas 78701

- 27 •

GTT 001027
 CONFIDENTIAL

Attn: Lance Sallis

Telephone: (512) 481-3034
Fax No.: (512) 481-3001
Email: lsallis@streamrealty.com

with copies to: c/o Stream Realty Partners

515 Congress Avenue, Suite 1300
Austin, Texas 78701
Attn: Derek Land
Telephone: (512) 481-3003
Fax No.: (512) 481-3001
Email; dland@streamrealty.com

and

Stutzman, Bromberg, Esserman & Plifka,

A Professional Corporation
2323 Bryan Street, Suite 2200
Dallas, Texas 75201
Attn: Kenneth F. Plitka
Phone: (214) 969-4900
Fax No.: (214) 969-4999
email: plifka@sbep-law.com

To Escrow Agent Heritage Title Company of Austin, Inc.

401 Congress Avenue, Suite 1500
Austin, Texas 78701
Attention: John Bruce
Telephone: (512) 505-5012
Telecopier: (512) 505-5024
Email: jbruce@heritage-title.com

17.2. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in

accordance with the internal, substantive laws of Texas, without regard to the conflict of
laws principles thereof.

17.3. Beadings. The captions and headings herein are for convenience and
reference only and in no way define or limit the scope or content of this Agreement or in any
way affect its provisions.

17.4. Effective Date. This Agreement shall be effective upon the date the Title
Company receipts the Agreement. Either party may request that the other party promptly
execute a memorandum specifying the Effective Date.

- 28 -

GTT 001028
 CONFIDENTIAL

17 .S. Business Days. If any date herein set forth for the performance of any
obligations of Seller or Purchaser or for the delivery of any instrument or notice as herein
provided should be on a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday, the compliance with such
obligations or delivery shall be deemed acceptable on the next business day following such
Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday. As used herein, the tenn "legal holiday" means any state
or Federal holiday for which financial institutions or post offices are generally closed in the
state where the Property is located.

17.6. Counterpart Copies. This Agreement may be executed in two or more

counterpart copies, all of which counterparts shall have the same force and effect as if all
parties hereto had executed a single copy of this Agreement.

17. 7. Binding Effect. This Agreement shall be binding upon, and inure to the
benefit of, the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns.

17.8. Assignment. Purchaser shall not have the right to assign the Agreement
without Seller's prior written consent, which consent may be given or withheld in Seller's
sole and absolute discretion; provided, however, Purchaser may assign this Agreement to
another entity without Seller's consent as long as (a) such assignee is managed and
controlled by, or is under common control with, Purchaser, and (b) Purchaser provides Seller
with the name and organizational documents for such assignee and all members thereof at
least ten ( I 0) days in advance of the Closing Date. Purchaser shall in no event be released
from any of its obligations or liabilities hereunder as a result of any assignment. Purchaser
shall have the right to assign this Agreement to a Section 1031 exchange intermediary
subject to the terms of Section 17.20 hereof. Whenever reference is made in this Agreement
to Seller or Purchaser, such reference shall include the successors and assigns of such party
under this Agreement. For the purposes of this definition, "control" means the possession,
direct or indirect, of the power to direct or cause the direction of the management and
policies of a person, whether through the ownership of voting securities, by contract or
otherwise, and the terms "controlling" and "controlled" have the meanings correlative to the
foregoing.

17.9. Interpretation. This Agreement shall not be construed more strictly against
one party than against the other merely by virtue of the fact that it may have been prepared
by counsel for one of the parties, it being recognized that both Seller and Purchaser have
contributed substantially and materially to the preparation of this Agreement.

17.10. Entire Agreement. This Agreement and the Exhibits attached hereto contain
the final and entire agreement between the parties hereto with respect to the sale and
purchase of the Property and are intended to be an integration of all prior negotiations and
understandings. Purchaser, Seller, and their agents shall not be bound by any terms,
conditions, statements, warranties or representations, oral or written, not contained herein.
No change or modifications to this Agreement shall be valid unless the same is in writing
and signed by the parties hereto. Each party reserves the right to waive any of the terms or

- 29 •

GTT 001029
 CONFIDENTIAL

conditions of this Agreement which are for their respective benefit and to consummate the
transaction contemplated by this Agreement in accordance with the terms and conditions of
this Agreement which have not been so waived. Any such waiver must be in writing signed
by the party for whose benefit the provision is being waived.

17 .11. Severability. If any one or more of the provisions hereof shall for any reason
be held to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable in any respect, such invalidity, illegality or
unenforceability shall not affect any other provision hereof, and this Agreement, shall be
construed as if such invalid, illegal or unenforceable provision had never been contained
herein.

17 .12. Survival. Except as otherwise specifically provided for in this Agreement or

in Sections 4.2, U, 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, 5.6, 7.3, 7.4, 8.2, Article IX, 15.1, Article XVL 17.15,
17.16, 17.19, and 17.20 (collectively, the "Surviving Termination Obligations"), the
provisions of this Agreement and the representations and warranties herein shall not survive
after the conveyance of title and payment of the Purchase Price but be merged therein.

17.13. Exhibits/Schedules. The exhibits and schedules attached hereto are

incorporated herein by reference.

17.14. Time. Time is of the essence in the performance of each of the parties'
respective obligations contained herein.

17.15. Limitation of Liability. The obligations of Seller are binding only on

Seller's interest in the Property and shall not be personally binding upon, nor shall any resort
be had to, any other assets of Seller nor the private properties of any of the partners, officers,
directors, shareholders or beneficiaries of Seller, or of any partners, officers, directors,
shareholders or beneficiaries of any partners of Seller, or of any of Seller's employees or
agents. All documents to be executed by Seller shall also contain the foregoing exculpation.
The provisions of this Section 17.15 shall survive Closing and/or any termination of this
Agreement.

17.16. Prevailing Party. Should either party employ an attorney to enforce any of
the provisions hereof, (whether before or after Closing and including any claims or actions
involving amounts held in escrow), the non-prevailing party in any final judgment agrees to
pay the other party's reasonable expenses, including reasonable attorneys' fees and expenses
in or out of litigation and, if in litigation, trial, appellate, bankruptcy or other proceedings,
expended or incurred in connection therewith, as determined by a court of competent
jurisdiction. The provisions of this Section 17.16 shall survive Closing and/or any
termination of this Agreement

17.17. Escrow Agreement.

- 30 -

GTT 001030
 CONFIDENTIAL

17.17.1. Instructions. Purchaser and Seller each shall promptly deposit

a copy of this Agreement executed by such party (or either of them shall deposit a copy
executed by both Purchaser and Seller) with Escrow Agent and, upon receipt of the Deposit
from Purchaser, Escrow Agent shall immediately execute this Agreement where provided
below. This Agreement, together with such further instructions, if any, as the parties shall
provide to Escrow Agent by written agreement, shall constitute the escrow instructions. If
any requirements relating to the duties or obligations of Escrow Agent hereunder are not
acceptable to Escrow Agent, or if Escrow Agent requires additional instructions, the parties
hereto agree to make such deletions, substitutions and additions hereto as counsel for
Purchaser and Seller shall mutually approve, which additional instructions shall not
substantially alter the terms of this Agreement unless otherwise expressly agreed to by Seller
and Purchaser.

17.17.2. Real Estate Reporting Person. Escrow Agent is hereby

designated the "real estate reporting person" for purposes of Section 6045 of Title 26 of the
United States Code and Treasury Regulation 1.6045-4 and any instructions or settlement
statement prepared by Escrow Agent shall so provide. Upon the consummation of the
transaction contemplated by this Agreement, Escrow Agent shall file Form 1099 information
return and send the statement to Seller as required under the aforementioned statute and
regulation. Seller and Purchaser shall promptly furnish their federal tax identification
numbers to Escrow Agent and shall otherwise reasonably cooperate with Escrow Agent in
connection with Escrow Agent's duties as real estate reporting person.

17.17.3. Liability of Escrow Agent. The parties acknowledge that the

Escrow Agent shall be conclusively entitled to rely, except as hereinafter set forth, upon a
certificate from Purchaser or Seller as to how the Deposit (which, for purposes of this
Section shall be deemed to also include any other escrowed funds held by the Escrow Agent
pursuant to this Agreement) should be disbursed. Any notice sent by Seller or Purchaser (the
"Notifying Party") to the Escrow Agent shall be sent simultaneously to the other noticed
parties pursuant to Section 17.1 herein (the "Notice Parties"). If the Notice Parties do not
object to the Notifying Party's notice to the Escrow Agent within ten (10) days after the
Notice Parties' receipt of the Notifying Party's certificate to the Escrow Agent, the Escrow
Agent shall be able to rely on the same. If the Notice Parties send, within such ten (I 0)
days, written notice to the Escrow Agent disputing the Notifying Party's certificate, a dispute
shall exist and the Escrow Agent shall hold the Deposit as hereinafter provided. The parties
hereto hereby acknowledge that Escrow Agent shall have no liability to any party on account
of Escrow Agent's failure to disburse the Deposit if a dispute shall have arisen with respect
to the propriety of such disbursement and, in the event of any dispute as to who is entitled to
receive the Deposit, disburse them in accordance with the final order of a court of competent
jurisdiction, or to deposit or interplead such funds into a court of competent jurisdiction
pending a final decision of such controversy. The parties hereto further agree that Escrow
Agent shall not be liable for failure to any depository and shall not be otherwise liable
except in the event of Escrow Agent's gross negligence or willful misconduct. The Escrow
Agent shall be reimbursed on an equal basis by Purchaser and Seller for any reasonable

- 31 -

GTT 001031
 CONFIDENTIAL

expenses incurred by the Escrow Agent arising from a dispute with respect to the Deposit.
The obligations of Seller with respect to the Escrow Agent are intended to be binding only
on Seller and Seller's assets and shall not be personally binding upon, nor shall any resort be
had to, the private properties of any of the partners, officers, directors, shareholders or
beneficiaries of Seller, or of any partners, officers, directors, shareholders or beneficiaries of
any partners of Seller, or of any of Seller's employees or agents.

17.18. No Recording. Neither th.is Agreement nor any memorandum or short form
hereof shall be recorded or filed in any public land or other public records of any
jurisdiction, by either party and any attempt to do so may be treated by the other party as a
breach of this Agreement.

17.19. Waiver of Trial by Jury. The respective parties hereto shall and hereby do
waive trial by jury in any action, proceeding or counterclaim brought by either of the parties
hereto against the other on any matters whatsoever arising out of or in any way connected
with this Agreement, or for the enforcement of any remedy under any statute, emergency or
otherwise. The provisions of this Section 17 .19 shall survive Closing and/or any termination
of this Agreement.

17.20. Section 1031 Exchange. Each party may, without the other party's consent,
assign this Agreement to a qualified intermediary in order to facilitate a like-kind exchange
transaction, which includes the Property pursuant to Section 1031 of the Internal Revenue
Code. The non-exchanging party further agrees to reasonably cooperate with the exchanging
party in effecting such transaction, provided that any such exchange transaction, and the
related documentation, shall: (i) not require the non-exchanging party to expend any
additional funds or execute any contract, make any commitment, or incur any obligations,
contingent or otherwise, to third parties which would expand the non-exchanging party's
obligations beyond this Agreement, (ii) not delay the Closing or the transaction
contemplated by this Agreement, (iii) not release the exchanging party or otherwise affect
the exchanging party's obligation to perform in accordance with the terms hereof or any
liability of the parties to one another under the terms of this Agreement, and (iv) not include
the non-exchanging party's acquiring title to any property which is not the subject of this
Agreement. Further, the exchanging party shall indemnity the non-exchanging party from
and against all liability arising out of such cooperation (including reasonable attorneys' fees)
which indemnity shall survive any closing hereunder or termination of this Agreement and it
shall be the exchanging party's responsibility to determine whether the exchange property
and the transaction qualifies as an exchange of property of "like kind' within the meaning of
the Internal Revenue Code, and the exchanging party shall be solely responsible for the tax
consequences to the exchanging party of the exchange, it being agreed that the non-
exchanging party shall have no obligation or liability to the exchanging party in connection
therewith. The respective obligations of Seller and Purchaser under this Section 17.20 shall
survive the Closing and shall not be merged therein.

- 32 -

GTT 001032
CONFIDENTIAL

PURCHASER:

GTT PARKING LP,

a Texas limited partnership

By: OUP Management, Inc.,

a Texas corporation
Its General ~ ' n e r

- 34 -

GTT 001033
 CONFIDENTIAL

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement under
seal on the date or dates set forth below.

SELLER:

6TH & CONGRESS PROPERTIES, LLC,

a Delaware limited Hability company

By: 6th & Congress Venture, LLC,

a Delaware limited liability company,
its sole member

By: Stream &11 & CongTess Investors, L.P.,

a Texas limited partnership,
its managing member

By: Stream Acquisition LI)(, L.L.C.,

a Texas limited liability company,
its general partner

By gg
N~
Title:
-
-=---'"""'---'----"-"--,__
-.-
,/Jt,,t;,'~
__

- 33 -

GTT 001034
CONFIDENTIAL

- 35 -

GTT 001035
 CONFIDENTIAL

LIST OF EXHIBITS/SCHEDULES

EXHIBITS

Exhibit A Legal Description

Exhibit B Due Diligence Documents to be Delivered by Seller
Exhibit C Form of Tenant Estoppel Certificate
Exhibit D Permitted Exceptions
Exhibit E Lease Schedule
Exhibit F Form of Special Warranty Deed
Exhibit G Form of General Assignment
ExhibitH Form of Notice Letter to Tenants
Exhibit I Form of Non-Foreign Entity Certificate
Exhibit J Intentionally Deleted

SCHEDULES

Schedule 4.2.6 Existing Leasing Costs

Schedule 11.2.4 Top Trip Rentals Lease Amendment

GTT 001036
 CONFIDENTIAL

EXHIBIT A

LEGAL DESCRIPTION

TRACT 1 (Littlefield Mall Land):

PARCEL A:

Being the east 103 feet of Lots 7 and 8, Block 56, of the Original City of Austin, Travis County,
Texas, according to the Plat on file at the General Land Office of the State of Texas, being more
particularly described by metes and bounds as follows:

DESCRIPTION OF 9,525 SQUARE FEET (0.218 acre), MORE OR LESS, OF LAND AREA,
BEING THE EAST 103 FEET OF LOTS 7 AND 8, BLOCK 56, OF THE ORIGINAL CITY OF
AUSTIN, TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT ON FILE AT THE
GENERAL LAND OFFICE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS, AND BEING THAT SAME TRACT OF
LAND DESCRIBED IN A DEED DATED DECEMBER 6, 2007 FROM LITTLEFIELD AUSTIN
PARTNERS, LP, TO WALTON STACY LF LAND PARTNERS IV, L.P., AS RECORDED IN
DOCUMENT NO. 2007220779, OFFICIAL PUBLIC RECORDS OF TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS,
AND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED BY METES AND BOUNDS AS FOLLOWS:

BEGINNING at the corner of a brick column at the intersection of the south line of East 6th Street,
and the west line of Brazos Street, for the northeast corner of the afore-referenced Lot 7, same
being the northeast corner of the afore-referenced Walton Stacy LF Land Partners IV, L.P. Tract
(2007220779), and being the northeast corner of the herein described tract of land;

Thence leaving the PLACE OF BEGINNING and the south line of East 6th Street, with the common
line of Brazos Street and Lots 7 and 8, same being the east line of the Walton Stacy LF Land
Partners IV, L.P. Tract (2007220779), S 19°02'30"W 92.46 feet to a point for the southeast comer
of Lot 8, same being the northeast comer of Lot 9, also being the southeast comer of the Walton
Stacy LF Land Partners IV, L.P . Tract (2007220779), same being the southerly northeast comer of
that tract of land described in a deed dated April 12, 2007 from Virginia Lockhart Houston, et al, to
Walton Stacy LP Land Partners IV, L.P., as recorded in Document No. 2007066131, Official Public
Records of Travis County, Texas, and being the southeast comer of the herein described tract of
land;

THENCE leaving Brazos Street, with the common line of Lots 7 and 8, same being the common line
of the Walton Stacy LF Land Partners IV, L.P. Tract (2007220779) and the Walton Stacy LF Land
Partners IV, L.P. Tract (2007066131), S 71 °06'00"W 102.98 feet to a point for the southwest comer
of the Walton Stacy LF Land Partners IV, L.P. Tract (2007220779), same being an interior comer
of the Walton Stacy LF Land Partners IV, L.P. Tract (2007066131), also being the southwest comer
of the herein described tract of land;

THENCE leaving Lot 9, and crossing Lot 8 and Lot 7, with the common line of the Walton Stacy
LF Land Partners IV, L.P. Tract (2007220779) and the Walton Stacy LF Land Partners IV, L.P .
Tract (2007066131 ), N l 9°01 '45"E 92.51 feet to a point in the north line of Lot 7 same being the
south line of the afore-referenced East 6th Street, for the northwest corner of the Walton Stacy LF
Land Partners IV, L.P. Tract (2007220779), same being the northerly northeast corner of the

EXHIBIT A- PAGE 1 OF 3

GTT 001037
 CONFIDENTIAL

Walton Stacy LF Land Partners IV, L.P . Tract (200706613 l), and being the northwest corner of the
herein described tract of lai1d;

THENCE leaving the Walton Stacy LF Land Partners IV, L.P . Tract (2007066131), with the
common line of Lot 7 and East 6th Street, same being the north line of the Walton Stacy LF Land
Partners IV, L.P. Tract (2007220779), S 71°04'15"E 103.00 feet to the PLACE OF BEGINNING.

There are contained within these metes and bounds, 9,525 square feet (0.218 acre), more or less, of
land area, as described from record information and measurements made on the ground as of
February 5, 2013 by McMinn Land Surveying Company of Austin, Texas.

PARCELB:

Being the west 57 feet of Lots 7 and 8 and all of Lots 9 and I 0, Block 56, of the Original City of
Austin, Travis County, Texas, according to the Plat on file at the General Land Office of the State
of Texas, being more particularly described by metes and bounds as follows:

DESCRIPTION OF 20,080 SQUARE FEET (0.461 ACRE), MORE OR LESS, OF LAND AREA,
BEING THE WEST 57 FEET OF LOTS 7 AND 8, BLOCK 56, OF THE ORIGINAL CITY OF
AUSTIN, TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT ON FILE AT THE
GENERAL LAND OFFICE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS, AND BEING THAT SAME TRACT OF
LAND DESCRIBED IN A DEED DATED APRIL 12, 2007 FROM VIRGINIA LOCK.HART
HOUSTON, ET AL, TO WALTON STACY LF LAND PARTNERS IV, L.P., AS RECORDED IN
DOCUMENT NO. 2007066131, OFFICIAL PUBLIC RECORDS OF TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS,
AND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED BY METES AND BOUNDS AS FOLLOWS:

BEGINNING at drilled hole found in concrete in the south line of East 6th Street, for the northwest
corner of the afore-referenced Lot 7, same being the northeast corner of that vacated alley described
in a Quitclaim Deed dated December 18, 2008 from the City of Austin, to Walton Stacy Office
Partners IV, LP and Walton Stacy LF Land Partners IV, LP, as recorded in Document No.
2008201290, Official Public Records of Travis County, Texas, and being the northwest comer of
the herein described tract of land;

THENCE leaving the PLACE OF BEGINNING and the afore-referenced vacated alley, with the
common line of East 6th Street and Lot 7, same being the north line of the Walton Stacy LF Land
Partners IV, L.P. Tract (200706613 l ), S 71 °04'15"E 57 .09 feet to a point for the northerly northeast
corner of the Walton Stacy LF Land Partners IV, L.P. Tract (2007066131), same being the
northwest corner of that tract of land known as the East 103 feet of Lots 7 and 8, as described in a
deed dated December 6, 2007 from Littlefield Austin Partners, LP, to Walton Stacy LF Land
Partners IV, L.P., as recorded in Document No. 2007220779, Official Public Records of Travis
County, Texas, and being the northerly northeast corner of the herein described tract of land;

THENCE leaving East 6th Street, and crossing Lot 7 and Lot 8 with the common line of the Walton
Stacy LF Land Partners IV, L.P. Tract (2007066131) and the Walton Stacy LF Land Partners IV,
L.P. Tract (2007220779), S 19°01 '45"W 92.51 to a point in the south line of Lot 8, same being the
north line of Lot 9, for an interior comer of the Walton Stacy LF Land Partners N, L.P. Tract
(2007066131 ), same being the southwest corner of the Walton Stacy LF Land Partners IV, L.P.
Tract (2007220779), and being and interior comer of the herein described tract of land;

EXHIBIT A - PAGE 2 OF 3

GTT 001038
 CONFIDENTIAL

THENCE with the common line of Lot 8 and Lot 9, same being the common line of the Walton
Stacy LF Land Partners IV, L.P. Tract (2007066131) and the Walton Stacy LF Land Partners IV,
L.P. Tract (2007220779), S 71 °06'00"E 102.98 feet to a point in the west line of Brazos Street for
the southeast comer of Lot 8, same being the northeast comer of Lot 9, also being the southeast
corner of the Walton Stacy LF Land Partners IV, L.P. Tract (2007220779), same being the
southerly northeast comer of the Walton Stacy LF Land Partners IV, L.P. Tract (2007066131), and
being the southerly northeast corner of the herein described tract of land·

THENCE leaving Lot 8 and the Walton Stacy LF Land Partners IV, L.P. Tract (2007220779), with
the common line of Brazos Street, and Lots 9 and 10, same being the east line of the Walton Stacy
LF Land Partners IV, L.P. Tract (2007066131), S 19°02'30"W 92.46 feet to the head ofa 60D nail
found at the northeast corner of the building located on Lots 11 and 12, for the southeast corner of
Lot I 0, same being the northeast comer of Lot 11, also being the southeast comer of the Walton
Stacy LF Land Partners IV, L.P. Tract (2007066131), and being the southeast comer of the herein
described tract of land;

THENCE leaving Brazos Street, with the common line of Lot 10 and Lot 11, same being the south
line of the Walton Stacy LF Land Partners IV, L.P. Tract (2007066131), S 71 °08'00"E 160.00 feet
to a nail head found at the face of the northwest corner of the building located on Lots 11 and 12, in
the east line of the afore-referenced vacated alley, for the southwest comer of Lot 10, same being
the northwest corner of Lot 11, and being the southwest comer of the Walton Stacy LF Land
Partners IV, L.P. Tract (200706613 l ), and being the southwest comer of the herein described tract
of land;

THENCE leaving Lot 11, with the common line of the vacated alley and Lots 10, 9, 8 and 7, N
19°01 '00"E 185.08 feet to the PLACE OF BEGINNING.

There are contained within these metes and bounds,20,080 square feet (0.461 acre), more or less, of
land area, as described from record information and measurements made on the ground as of
February 5, 2013 by McMinn Land Surveying Company of Austin, Texas.

TRACT 2 (Littlefield Alley Land):

The easterly one-half of the adjacent land vacated by City of Austin by Ordinance No. 20081211-
013, a certified copy of which is recorded under Document No. 2008201289 of the Official Public
Records of Travis County, Texas, adjacent to the west 57 feet of Lots 7 and 8 and all of Lots 9 and
10, Block 56, of the Original City of Austin, Travis County, Texas, according to the Plat on file at
the General Land Office of the State of Texas.

EXHIBIT A - PAGE 3 OF 3

GTT 001039
 CONFIDENTIAL

EXH1BJT 8

DUE DILIGENCE DOCUMENTS

TO BE DELIVERED BY SELLER

Tenant Information

1. Rent Roll in the form currently maintained by Seller.

2. All leases and amendments thereto, including subleases.

Operating Infonnation

1. Copies of all service and maintenance contracts.

2. Copies of real estate tax bills (including special assessments) for prior two (2) years.

1. Seller's most current title policy, report or commitment.

2. Seller's most recent survey.

3. [RESERVED].

4. Copies of all final environmental reports concerning the "'Property

Together with all documents included in the 6th and Congress On-Line Data Room

EXHIBIT B - PAGE 1 OF 1

GTT 001040
 CONFIDENTIAL

EXBIBITC

TENANT ESTOPPEL CERTIFICATE

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ (the "Tenant") hereby certifies to 6th

& CONGRESS PROPERTIES, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (the "Owner")
and GTT Parking LP, a Texas limited partnership, its successors or assigns ("Purchaser")
as follows:

The undersigned Tenant understands that Purchaser or its assigns intends to purchase
certain real property and improvements, which includes the Premises (the "Property"). In
connection with the purchase by Purchaser, Purchaser has requested that the Tenant complete this
tenant certificate (the "Tenant Certificate") with the appropriate information as it pertains to the
Tenant's lease and to agree to the requirements set forth herein.

The undersigned Tenant hereby certifies to and agrees with Owner and Purchaser as to the
following:

1. Pursuant to that certain Lease dated - - - - -~ 20_ _ (the "Lease"),

Tenant leases approximately _ _ _ _ _ _ _ square feet of space (the "Premises"). The
Lease, as amended, modified and supplemented, is in full force and effect, and represents the
entire agreement between Tenant and Owner for the Premises. There are no amendments,
modifications or supplements to the Lease, whether oral or written, except as follows
(include the date of each amendment, modification or supplement):
A
true and correct copy of the Lease, as amended, modified and supplemented, is attached
hereto as Exhibit A.

2. The term of the Lease began on _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___, andwill

end on 20
--------~
3. The Lease does/does not provide for an option to extend the term of the
Lease for _ _ _ _ _ _ _ years. Except as expressly provided in the Lease, Tenant does
not have any right or option to renew or extend the term of the Lease, to lease other space at
the Property, nor any preferential right to purchase all or any part of the Premises or the
Property.

4. Tenant has neither sent nor received any notice of default under the Lease
which remains uncured and to the best of Tenant's knowledge, neither Tenant nor Owner has
committed any breach under the Lease, which alone or with the passage of the, giving of
notice, or both would constitute a default thereunder, except as follows:

EXHIBIT C - PAGE 1 OF 2

GTT 001041
 CONFIDENTIAL

5. Tenant is currently paying [Base Monthly] Rent under the Lease in the
amount of $_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ and estimated monthly pass throughs in the amount of

6. Tenant has not prepaid any rent or other charge under the Lease to Owner
other than the following:

7. A cash security deposit in the amount of $_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ has been

paid to Owner under the Lease, and Tenant has not given Owner any other security or
similar deposit.

8. Tenant has accepted possession of and is in full occupancy of the Premises

and any improvements required to be made by Owner, if any, have been completed to the
full satisfaction of Tenant and any tenant improvement allowances required by the Lease, if
any, to be made by Owner have been paid in full satisfaction of Tenant, except for the
following: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

Dated this - - - day of - - - - - ~, 2015.

[NAME OF TENANT]

By: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Name: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Title: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

EXHIBIT C - PAGE 2 OF 2

GTT 001042
 CONFIDENTIAL

EXHIBITD

PERMITTED EXCEPTIONS

1. Real estate taxes for the year of Closing and subsequent years, a lien not yet due and
payable and all general and special assessments .

2. Rights of tenants pursuant to those unrecorded written leases identified on Exhibit E.

3. Local, state and federal laws, ordinances or governmental regulations, including, but
not limited to, building and zoning laws, ordinances and regulations, now or hereafter
in effect relating to the Property

4. Additional Permitted Exceptions added subject to, and in accordance with, Article VI
of the Agreement

EXHIBIT D - PAGE 1 OF 1

GTT 001043
 CONFIDENTIAL

EXHIBIT E

LIST OF LEASES

EXHIBIT E - PAGE l OF 2

GTT 001044
 CONFIDENTIAL

EXHIBIT E - PAGE 2 OP 2

GTT 001045
 CONFIDENTIAL

EXHIBIT E - PAGE 3 OF 2

GTT 001046
 CONFIDENTIAL

EXHIBIT E - PAGE 4 OF 2

GTT 001047
 CONFIDENTIAL

EXfllBITE - PAGES OF2

GTT 001048
 CONFIDENTIAL

EXHIBIT E - PAGE 6 OF 2

GTT 001049
 CONFIDENTIAL

EXHIBIT E - PAGE 7 OF 2

GTT 001050
 CONFIDENTIAL

EXHIBITF

FORM OF SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED

AFTER RECORDING RETURN TO:

Attention:
----------

SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED

THE STATE OF TEXAS §

§ KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:
COUNTY OF TRAVIS §

THAT, 6th & CONGRESS PROPERTIES, LLC, a Delaware limited liability

company ("Grantor"), for and in consideration of the sum of Ten and No/100 Dollars
($10.00) and other good and valuable consideration in hand paid to Grantor by
("Grantee"), whose mailing address is
Attention:
the receipt and sufficiency of such consideration being hereby
acknowledged, has GRANTED, SOLD AND CONVEYED, and by these presents does
GRANT, SELL AND CONVEY unto Grantee that certain real property being more
particularly described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof for all purposes,
together with all improvements, structures and fixtures situated thereon (collectively, the
"Property"); subject, however, to those matters more particularly described in Exhibit B
attached hereto and made a part hereof for all purposes (collectively, the
"Permitted Bxceptions").[Vendor 's Lien Language reasonably acceptable to Seller shall be
added upon request by Purchaser at Closing]

TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the Property, together with all and singular the rights,
and appurtenances thereto in anywise belonging, unto Grantee, its successors and assigns
forever, subject to the Permitted Exceptions; and Grantor does hereby bind itself and its
successors to WARRANT AND FOREVER DEFEND all and singular the Property, subject
to the Permitted Exceptions, unto Grantee, its successors and assigns, against every person
whomsoever lawfully claiming, or claim the same, or any part thereof, by, through, or under
Grantor, but not otherwise.

EXHIBIT F - PAGE 1 OF 4

GTT 001051
 CONFIDENTIAL

NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING HEREIN CONTAINED TO THE

CONTRARY, GRANTOR'S CONVEYANCE OF THAT CERTAIN PORTION OF
THE PROPERTY LABELED TRACT 2 {LITTLEFIELD ALLEY LAND) HAS BEEN
MADE BY GRANTOR WITHOUT WARRANTY OF TITLE OF ANY KIND,
WHETHER STATUTORY OR COMMON LAW, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED.

Grantee, by its acceptance hereof, hereby assumes payment of all standby charges, ad
valorem real estate taxes and assessments with respect to the 2015 calendar year and
subsequent calendar years not yet due and payable, each to the extent attributable to all or
any portion of the Property

[SEE SIGNATURE ON THE FOLLOWING PAGE]

EXHIBIT F - PAGE 2 OF 4

GTT 001052
 CONFIDENTIAL

1N WITNESS WHEREOF, this Deed has been executed by Grantor to be effective as

of the _ _ day of _ _ _ _____, 2015.

GRANTOR:

6TH & CONGRESS PROPERTIES, LLC,

a Delaware limited liability company

By: 6th & Congress Venture, LLC,

a Delaware limited liability company,
its sole member

By: Stream ~ & Congress Investors, L.P .,

a Texas limited partnership,
its managing member

By: Stream Acquisition LIX, L.L.C.,

a Texas limited liability company,
its general partner

By: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Name: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Title:
------------

EXHIBIT F - PAGE 3 OF 4

GTT 001053
 CONFIDENTIAL

THE STATE OF _ _ _ §

COUNTY OF _ _ _ _ §

This instrument was ACKNOWLEDGED before me o n - - - - ~ 201S, by

a _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ of Stream Acquisition
LIX, L.L.C., a Texas limited liability company, on behalf of said limited liability company,
acting in the capacity as the sole general partner of Stream 6th & Congress Investors, L.P ., a
Texas limited partnership, on behalf of said limited partnership, acting in the capacity as the
sole managing member of 6th & Congress Venture, LLC, a Delaware limited liability
company, on behalf of said limited liability company, acting in the capacity as the sole
member of 6fH & CONGRESS PROPERTIES, LLC, a Delaware limited liability
company, on behalf of said limited liability company.

WITNESS my hand and official seal.

(SEAL)
Notary Public in and for the said State

EXHIBIT F - PAGE 4 OF 4

GTT 001054
 CONFIDENTIAL

EXHIBITG

GENERAL ASSIGNMENT

THIS GENERAL ASSIGNMENT (the "Bill of Sale") is made as of the _ _ day

of _ _ _ _ _, 2015 by: (i) 6th & CONGRESS PROPERTIES, LLC, a Delaware
limited liability company ("Seller"), and (ii) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , a
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ("Purchaser").

KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:

Concurrently with the execution and delivery hereof, pursuant to a certain Agreement
of Purchase and Sale dated _ _ __,. 2015 (the "Agreement") between Seller and
Purchaser, Seller is conveying to Purchaser all of Seller's right, title and interest in and to the
real property described on Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof (the "Land")
and in and to the building, parking areas and other structures and improvements located on
the Land (collectively, the "Improvements") located i n - - - - -~ Texas. The Land
and the Improvements are hereinafter sometimes collectively referred to as the "Property."

It is the desire of Seller to hereby sell, assign, transfer, convey, set-over and deliver
to Purchaser all of Seller's right, title and interest in and to the Assigned Property (as
hereinafter defined).

1. Bill of Sale and Assignment.

Seller does hereby sell, assign, transfer, set-over and deliver unto Purchaser,
its successors and assigns, subject to the limitations contained in Section 8.2 of the
Agreement all right, title and interest of Seller in and to:

a. All personal property (including equipment), if any, owned by Seller

and located on the Property as of the date hereof, all inventory located on the Property on the
date hereof, and all fixtures (if any) owned by Seller and located on the Property as of the
date hereof (the "Personal Property"); and

b. All non-exclusive trademarks and trade names, if any, used in

connection with the Property, but only to the extent that the same are not trademarks or trade
names of Seller or any of Seller's affiliated companies (collectively, the "Trade N runes");

c. Seller's interest, if any, in and to any guarantees, licenses, approvals,

certificates, permits and warranties relating to the Property to the extent assignable
(collectively, the "Intangible Property");

EXHIBIT G - PAGE l OF 4

GTT 001055
 CONFIDENTIAL

d. All leases, subleases, parking agreements, licenses and other

occupancy agreements, together with any and all amendments, modifications or supplements
thereto (the "Leases") demising space in or otherwise similarly affecting or relating to the
Property and all prepaid rent attributable to the period after the date hereof, and unapplied
security deposits thereunder ( collectively, the "Leasehold Property"); subject, however to the
rights of Seller set forth in the Agreement to rents under the leases assigned hereby
attributable to the period prior to the date hereof; and

TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the Personal Property, the Trade Names, the Intangible
Property the Leases and the Leasehold Property (collectively, the "Assigned Property") unto
Purchaser its successors and assigns, forever.

2. Assumption.

Purchaser accepts the foregoing assignment and assumes and agrees to be

bound by and to perform and observe all of the obligations, covenants, terms and conditions
to be performed or observed under the Assigned Property arising on or after the date hereof.

3. Limitation of Liability.

The obligations of Seller are intended to be binding only on Seller and Seller's
assets and shall not be personally binding upon, nor shall any resort be had to, the private
properties of any of the partners, officers, directors, shareholders or beneficiaries of Seller,
or of any partners, officers, directors, shareholders or beneficiaries of any partners of Seller,
or of any of Seller's employees or agents.

4. Exclusions from Personal Property.

It is hereby acknowledged by the parties that the Assigned Property shall not
include claims relating to any real property tax refunds or rebates for periods accruing prior
to the date hereof, existing insurance claims (except as otherwise provided in the
Agreement) and any existing claims against tenants of the Property for periods prior to the
date hereof, which claims are hereby reserved by Se11er.

5. Counterpart Copies.

This Bill of Sale may be executed in two or more counterpart copies, all of
which counterparts shall have the same force and effect as if all parties hereto had executed
a single copy of this Bill of Sale.

EXHIBIT G - PAGE 2 OF 4

GTT 001056
 CONFIDENTIAL

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Bill of Sale to be executed as
of the date first written above.

SELLER:

6TH & CONGRESS PROPERTIES, LLC,

a Delaware limited liability company

By: 6th & Congress Venture, LLC,

a Delaware limited liability company,
its sole member

By: Stream 6 th & Congress Investors, L.P.,

a Texas limited partnership,
its managing member

By: Stream Acquisition LIX, L.L.C.,

a Texas limited liability company,
its general partner

By: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Name: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Title:
------------

EXHIBIT G - PAGE 3 OF 4

GTT 001057
 CONFIDENTIAL

PURCHASER:

a _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

B~----------------
Name:
Title:

EXHIBIT G - PAGE 4 OF 4

GTT 001058
 CONFIDENTIAL

EXHIBITH

NOTICE LETTER TO TENANTS

- - - - - - ' 2015

CERTIFIED MAIL,
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

Dear Tenant:

We are pleased to advise you that the building in which your premises are located at
has been sold by 6th & CONGRESS
PROPERTIES, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company to
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ (the "Purchaser") effective as of the date set forth
above. Your lease agreement has been assigned to and accepted by Purchaser, and Purchaser
has agreed to assume all responsibility for security deposits currently held under your lease,
such deposit being in the amount of$ _ _ __

All future correspondence relating to your tenancy, as well as rent checks and other
charges, should be made payable and mailed to _ _ _ _ _ c/o _ _ __

The Purchaser looks forward to working with you in the operation of this Property.

EXHIBIT H - PAGE 1 OF 3

GTT 001059
 CONFIDENTIAL

Very truly yours,

SELLER:

6TH & CONGRESS PROPERTIES, LLC,

a Delaware limited liability company

By: 6th & Congress Venture, LLC,

a Delaware limited liability company,
its sole member

By: Stream 6th & Congress Investors, L.P.,

a Texas limited partnership,
its managing member

By: Stream Acquisition LIX, L.L.C.,

a Texas limited liability company,
its general partner

By: - - - - - - - - - -
Name: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Title: - - - - - - - - - - - -

EXHIBIT H - PAGE 2 OF 3

GTT 001060
 CONFIDENTIAL

PURCHASER:

a _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

By: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Name:
Title:

EXHIBIT H - PAGE 3 OF 3

GTT 001061
 CONFIDENTIAL

EXHIBIT I

NON-FOREIGN ENTITY CERTIFICATE

Section 1445 of the Internal Revenue Code provides that a transferee of a U.S. real
property interest must withhold tax if the transferor is a foreign person. To inform the
transferee that withholding of tax is not required upon the disposition of a U.S . real property
interest by 6th & CONGRESS PROPERTIES~ LLC, a Delaware limited liability company
("Transferor"), the undersigned hereby certifies on behalf of Transferor:

1. Transferor is not a foreign corporation, foreign partnership, foreign

trust or foreign estate (as those terms are defined in the Internal
Revenue Code and Income Tax Regulations);

2. Transferor's U.S. employer identification number is _ _ _ _ _ ___

and

3. Transferor's office address is:

c/o Stream Realty Partners

515 Congress Avenue, Suite 13 00
Austin, Texas 78701.

4. The Transferor is not a "disregarded entity" (as that term is defined in

the Code and the Income Tax Regulations promulgated thereunder).

Transferor understands that this certification may be disclosed to the Internal

Revenue Service and that any false statement made within this certification could be
punished by fine, imprisonment, or both.

Under penalties of perjury the undersigned declares that he has examined this
certification and that to the best of his knowledge and belief it is true, correct and complete,
and the undersigned further declares that he has the authority to sign this document on
behalf of the Transferor.

EXHIBIT I - PAGE 1 OF 2

GTT 001062
 CONFIDENTIAL

Dated: - - - - - - - ~ 2015

TRANSFEROR:

6TH & CONGRESS PROPERTIES, LLC,

a Delaware limited liability company

By: 6th & Congress Venture, LLC,

a Delaware limited liability company,
its sole member

By: Stream 6 th & Congress Investors, L.P .,

a Texas limited partnership,
its managing member

By: Stream Acquisition LIX, L.L.C.,

a Texas limited liability company,
its general partner

By: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Name: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Title:

EXHIBIT I PAGE 2 OF 2

GTT 001063
 CONFIDENTIAL

EXHJBITJ

INTENTIONALL DELETED.

EX IBIT J-PAGE 1 0F2

GTT 001064
 CONFIDENTIAL

SCHEDULE 4.2.6

EXISTING LEASING COSTS

SCHEDULE 4.2.6 - PAGE l OF 1

GTT 001065
 CONFIDENTIAL

SCHEDULE 11.2.4 - P-\GE 1 OF 4

GTT 001066
 CONFIDENTIAL

SCHEDULE I J .2.4 - PAGE 2 OF 4

GTT 001067
 CONFIDENTIAL

SClIEDULE 11.2.4 - PAGE 3 OF 4

GTT 001068
 CONFIDENTIAL

SCHEDULE 11.2.4 - PAGE 4 OF 4

GTT 001069
Exhibit R
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 ·

·1· · · · · · · · · CAUSE NO. D-1-GN-17-004456

·2· CHRISTI J. BOWMER,· · · · · ) IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · )
·3· · · · · · Plaintiff,· · · · )
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · )
·4· VS.· · · · · · · · · · · · ·) TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · )
·5· GTT PARKING, LP, SHELDON· · )
· · DAVID KAHN, PREMIER· · · · ·)
·6· PARKING OF TENNESSEE,· · · ·) 353RD JUDICIAL DISTRICT
· · LLC, and WEITZMAN· · · · · ·)
·7· MANAGEMENT CORPORATION,· · ·)
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · )
·8· · · · · · Defendants.· · · ·)

·9

10

11

12· · · · · · · ORAL AND VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF

· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·SEAN O'BRIEN
13· · · · · · · · · · · · ·JUNE 19, 2018

14

15

16

17· · · · · · ORAL AND VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF SEAN O'BRIEN,

· · produced as a witness at the instance of the Plaintiff and
18· duly sworn, was taken in the above styled and numbered
· · cause on Tuesday, June 19, 2018, from 9:23 a.m. to
19· 4:03 p.m., before TAMARA CHAPMAN, CSR, RPR, CCR in and for
· · the State of Texas, reported by computerized stenotype
20· machine, at the offices of Thompson, Coe, Cousins & Irons,
· · LLP, 701 Brazos Street, Austin, Texas, pursuant to the
21· Texas Rules of Civil Procedure and the provisions stated
· · on the record herein.
22

23

24

25· Job No. 205436

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 2..5
Page 2 Page 4
·1· · · · · · · · · · ·A P P E A R A N C E S ·1· · · · · · · · · · · · E X H I B I T S
·2· FOR THE PLAINTIFF: · · · · · · · · · · · · · · (Continued)
·2
· · · · ·Sean Breen · · ·NO.· · · · · ·DESCRIPTION· · · · · · · · ·PAGE
·3· · · ·Chris Lavorato ·3· ·Exhibit 8· · ·9/10/16 letter from
· · · · ·HOWRY BREEN & HERMAN, LLP · · · · · · · · · ·Richard A. Martin to David
·4· · · ·1900 Pearl Street ·4· · · · · · · · ·Kahn, Subject "Preliminary
· · · · · · · · · ·Structural Damage
· · · · ·Austin, Texas 78705-5408 ·5· · · · · · · · ·Assessment at Littlefield
·5· · · ·sbreen@howrybreen.com · · · · · · · · · ·Garage"
· · · · ·clavorato@howrybreen.com ·6· · · · · · · · ·(No Bates - 2 pages)· · · · · · 98
·6 · · ·Exhibit 9· · ·Various photographs
·7· · · · · · · · ·(No Bates - 6 pages)· · · · · ·116
·7 · · ·Exhibit 10· · Littlefield Garage Service
· · FOR THE DEFENDANT GTT PARKING, LP AND SHELDON DAVID KAHN: ·8· · · · · · · · ·Contract
·8· · · ·Tasha L. Barnes · · · · · · · · · ·(No Bates - 17 pages)· · · · · 167
· · · · ·THOMPSON COE COUSINS & IRONS, LLP ·9· ·Exhibit 11· · Management Agreement
· · · · · · · · · ·(GTT 018 - GTT 029)· · · · · · 170
·9· · · ·701 Brazos Street, Suite 1500 10· ·Exhibit 12· · Manager/Lender Agreement -
· · · · ·Austin, Texas 78701 · · · · · · · · · ·Littlefield Parking
10· · · ·tbarnes@thompsoncoe.com 11· · · · · · · · ·(PREMIER-003 -
11 · · · · · · · · · ·PREMIER-0028)· · · · · · · · · 171
12· ·Exhibit 13· · Various 2018 e-mails
12· FOR THE DEFENDANT PREMIER PARKING OF TENNESSEE, LLC: · · · · · · · · · ·between Sean O'Brien and
· · · · ·Christopher L. Rhodes 13· · · · · · · · ·Tasha Barnes, Subject
13· · · ·AYIK & ASSOCIATES · · · · · · · · · ·"Fwd: Grabb-It tech sheet
· · · · ·9601 McAllister Freeway, Suite 910 14· · · · · · · · ·(Littlefield)
· · · · · · · · · ·(GTT 000177 - GTT 000184)· · · 171
14· · · ·San Antonio, Texas 78216 15· ·Exhibit 14· · Monthly Service Industry
· · · · ·crhodes2@travelers.com · · · · · · · · · ·Rate Parking Agreement
15 16· · · · · · · · ·(No Bates - 2 pages)· · · · · ·190
16 · · ·Exhibit 15· · Premier Parking Monthly
17· · · · · · · · ·Parking Agreement
· · FOR THE DEFENDANT WEITZMAN MANAGEMENT CORPORATION: · · · · · · · · · ·(No Bates - 4 pages)· · · · · ·191
17· · · ·Curtis J. Kurhajec 18· ·Exhibit 16· · Binder of City of Austin
· · · · ·NAMAN, HOWELL, SMITH & LEE, PLLC · · · · · · · · · ·documents
19· · · · · · · · ·(No Bates)· · · · · · · · · · ·198
18· · · ·8310 N. Capital of Texas Highway, Suite 490 · · ·Exhibit 17· · 9/21/16 e-mail from David
· · · · ·Austin, Texas 78731 20· · · · · · · · ·Kahn to various recipients,
19· · · ·ckurhajec@namanhowell.com · · · · · · · · · ·Subject "Re: Exclusive:
20 21· · · · · · · · ·Driver recalls car
· · · · · · · · · ·dangling off Austin garage
21· ALSO PRESENT: 22· · · · · · · · ·www.mystatesman.com"
· · · · ·Sheldon David Kahn, Defendant · · · · · · · · · ·(GTT 079)· · · · · · · · · · · 218
22· · · ·Brent Kirby, Videographer 23· ·Exhibit 18· · 9/15/16 e-mail from
23 · · · · · · · · · ·Christina Murray to various
24· · · · · · · · ·Recipients, Subject "Re:
24 · · · · · · · · · ·Littlefield cable work"
25 25· · · · · · · · ·(GTT 054)· · · · · · · · · · · 220

Page 3 Page 5
·1· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·I N D E X ·1· · · · · · · · · · · · E X H I B I T S
·2 · · · · · · · · · · · · · · (Continued)
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · PAGE ·2
·3 · · ·NO.· · · · · ·DESCRIPTION· · · · · · · · ·PAGE
·4· · · ·SEAN O'BRIEN ·3· ·Exhibit 19· · Defendant Premier Parking
·5· ·EXAMINATION · · · · · · · · · ·of Tennessee, LLC's
· · · · ·By Mr. Breen...........................· · 6 ·4· · · · · · · · ·Objections, Answers and
·6· · · ·By Mr. Rhodes:· .......................· 227
· · · · · · · · · ·Responses to Plaintiff
· · · · ·By Mr. Breen...........................· 242
·7 ·5· · · · · · · · ·Christi J. Bowmer's First
·8· ·CORRECTION PAGE............................· 252 · · · · · · · · · ·Set of Interrogatories and
· · ·SIGNATURE PAGE.............................· 253 ·6· · · · · · · · ·First Requests for
·9· ·REPORTER'S CERTIFICATION...................· 254 · · · · · · · · · ·Documents and Things
10 ·7· · · · · · · · ·(No Bates - 17 pages)· · · · · 222
11 · · ·Exhibit 20· · 7/20/17 e-mail from
· · · · · · · · · · · · · E X H I B I T S ·8· · · · · · · · ·Richard Martin to Sean
12 · · · · · · · · · ·O'Brien, Subject "Building
· · ·NO.· · · · · ·DESCRIPTION· · · · · · · · · ·PAGE ·9· · · · · · · · ·Code Requirements"
13· ·Exhibit 1· · ·Plaintiff's Notice of Oral · · · · · · · · · ·(GTT 031)· · · · · · · · · · · 242
· · · · · · · · · ·Deposition of GTT Parking, 10· ·Exhibit 21· · 10/19/17 letter and
14· · · · · · · · ·LP · · · · · · · · · ·attachment from Alfredo
· · · · · · · · · ·(No Bates - 6 pages)· · · · · · 12
11· · · · · · · · ·Bustamante to Sean
15· ·Exhibit 2· · ·Metro-State article
· · · · · · · · · ·entitled "35-year-old · · · · · · · · · ·O'Brien, Subject "Re:
16· · · · · · · · ·cables played key role in 12· · · · · · · · ·Vehicle Barrier System
· · · · · · · · · ·Austin's 'dangling car' · · · · · · · · · ·Evaluation"
17· · · · · · · · ·mishap" 13· · · · · · · · ·(GTT 155 - GTT 165)· · · · · · 243
· · · · · · · · · ·(No Bates - 5 pages)· · · · · · 74 · · ·Exhibit 22· · 7/13/17 statement on
18· ·Exhibit 3· · ·Metro-State article 14· · · · · · · · ·Bizjournals.com website
· · · · · · · · · ·entitled "Driver recalls · · · · · · · · · ·(No Bates - 1 page)· · · · · · 248
19· · · · · · · · ·'sheer terror' of hanging 15
· · · · · · · · · ·off 9-story Austin garage" 16
20· · · · · · · · ·(No Bates - 2 pages)· · · · · · 87 17
· · ·Exhibit 4· · ·O'Connor Video 18
21· · · · · · · · ·(No Bates)· · · · · · · · · · · 88 19
· · ·Exhibit 5· · ·2077 Excerpt
20
22· · · · · · · · ·(No Bates)· · · · · · · · · · ·146
· · ·Exhibit 6· · ·2077 Excerpt - slow motion 21
23· · · · · · · · ·(No Bates)· · · · · · · · · · ·147 22
· · ·Exhibit 7· · ·Stream Realty video 23
24· · · · · · · · ·(No Bates)· · · · · · · · · · ·156 24
25 25

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 6..9
Page 6 Page 8
·1· · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· This is the videotaped ·1· an orderly fashion like that.· All right?
·2· oral deposition of Sean O'Brien.· Today's date is ·2· · · ·A.· Sure.
·3· June 19th, 2018.· The approximate time is 9:23 a.m.· We're ·3· · · ·Q.· Because this is in a booklet form, it's important
·4· recording, and on the record. ·4· that you and I communicate appropriately.· So if through
·5· · · · · · · · · · · · ·SEAN O'BRIEN, ·5· my demeanor, or the way I'm phrasing questions, I confuse
·6· having been first duly sworn, testified as follows: ·6· you, or mislead you, or you feel like I'm treating you
·7· · · · · · · · · · · · · EXAMINATION ·7· rudely, will you let me know that at the time?
·8· BY MR. BREEN: ·8· · · ·A.· Okay.
·9· · · ·Q.· Good morning, sir.· Would you state your name for ·9· · · ·Q.· Then I can correct myself.· And what we can avoid
10· the record, please. 10· is getting to the very end of the deposition and trying to
11· · · ·A.· Sean O'Brien. 11· guess, after a few hours, which questions that may have
12· · · ·Q.· Mr. O'Brien, my name is Sean Breen, along with my 12· affected.· Okay?
13· law partner, Chris Lavorato.· We're representing Christi 13· · · ·A.· Okay.
14· Bowmer in regard to injuries and damages she suffered in 14· · · ·Q.· Can you and I have that agreement?
15· an occurrence on July 13th, 2017 at the Littlefield 15· · · ·A.· Yes.
16· Garage.· Do you understand who I am and who I represent? 16· · · ·Q.· It won't hurt my feelings.· You can just tell me
17· · · ·A.· Yes. 17· and I'll rephrase it however you want to do that.· Okay?
18· · · ·Q.· Do you understand I'm here to take your 18· · · ·A.· Okay.
19· deposition today? 19· · · ·Q.· Do you now understand sort of the ground rules
20· · · ·A.· Yes. 20· that we're operating under here today?
21· · · ·Q.· Do you know what a deposition is? 21· · · ·A.· Yes.
22· · · ·A.· I believe so. 22· · · ·Q.· You, I take it, are here on behalf of a company
23· · · ·Q.· Okay.· A few ground rules and explanations, just 23· today to offer testimony?
24· to try to make it go a little smoother for us today. 24· · · ·A.· Yes.
25· · · · · ·This is something that's taken under oath and can 25· · · ·Q.· Do you understand that?

Page 7 Page 9
·1· be played to the ladies and gentlemen of the jury as if we ·1· · · ·A.· Yes.
·2· were over there in front of them right now.· Do you ·2· · · ·Q.· What company is that?
·3· understand that? ·3· · · ·A.· I believe the owner of the garage, GTT Parking.
·4· · · ·A.· Yes. ·4· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And what garage?
·5· · · ·Q.· Do you understand the penalty of perjury applies? ·5· · · ·A.· Littlefield and Scarbrough Garage at 508 Brazos.
·6· · · ·A.· Yes. ·6· · · ·Q.· And are you employed by GTT Parking, LP?
·7· · · ·Q.· It comes out in a written booklet and we have a ·7· · · ·A.· No.
·8· video.· Because it's in a booklet form there is a few ·8· · · ·Q.· What is your relationship with GTT Parking, LP?
·9· idiosyncrasies that occur.· We can't converse like we ·9· · · ·A.· GTT Parking is an entity that is owned by --
10· normally do, where we talk at the same time. 10· owned by the group that I manage construction for.
11· · · ·A.· Okay. 11· · · ·Q.· All right.· So GTT Parking, LP is owned by a
12· · · ·Q.· So I need to let you finish your answer before I 12· group, meaning a group of people or entities?
13· ask a question.· If you'll let me finish the question 13· · · ·A.· Yeah, it's just an entity.· Every property has a
14· before you answer. 14· separate entity.· So it's one of the entities that we
15· · · ·A.· Okay. 15· manage.
16· · · ·Q.· If you can answer with a "yes," a "no," or an 16· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And "we" is who?
17· explanation.· That way we don't have an "uh-huh" or an 17· · · ·A.· I believe --
18· "huh-uh," because we don't have buttons for those on this 18· · · ·Q.· In other words --
19· machine. 19· · · ·A.· I don't -- I don't know -- I don't -- I don't
20· · · ·A.· Sure. 20· write those contracts.· I don't write those agreements.
21· · · ·Q.· If you need to take a break, this is a 21· So I don't know the list.
22· deposition, not an inquisition.· So as long as we're not 22· · · ·Q.· All right.· So that you and I are communicating
23· in the middle of a question, if you just let your fine 23· clearly, in terms of who the actual members of GTT
24· lawyer know, we'll take a break, take them as often as you 24· Parking, LP are, you don't know that.· Perhaps Mr. Kahn is
25· want.· It doesn't bother me.· We just need to proceed in 25· a better person to ask?

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 10..13
Page 10 Page 12
·1· · · ·A.· Correct. ·1· · · ·Q.· Is it okay if I refer to GTT Parking, LP as
·2· · · ·Q.· You said it's one entity that "we" manage.· Who ·2· "GTT"?
·3· is "we"? ·3· · · ·A.· Yes.
·4· · · ·A.· Myself and David. ·4· · · ·Q.· You'll understand?
·5· · · ·Q.· So "yourself" meaning Sean O'Brien and David Kahn ·5· · · ·A.· Uh-huh.
·6· manage different entities? ·6· · · ·Q.· Is that how you shorthand it?
·7· · · ·A.· Yes. ·7· · · ·A.· No.
·8· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And what entities do you guys manage ·8· · · ·Q.· How do y'all refer to GTT Parking, LP?
·9· besides GTT Parking, LP? ·9· · · ·A.· Just like that, GTT Parking, LP.· There are other
10· · · ·A.· It varies based on the year and based on which 10· entities that include the GTT, so it has to be -- when
11· buildings we're remodeling or building. 11· we're talking about the garage, it's GTT Parking.
12· · · ·Q.· And is the management done through some type of 12· · · ·Q.· "Other entities" being real estate developments
13· legal entity?· In other words, some entity other than GTT 13· or properties that are somehow affiliated with Colina West
14· Parking, LP manages GTT Parking, LP? 14· Real Estate?
15· · · ·A.· I believe so. 15· · · ·A.· Correct.
16· · · ·Q.· Do you know who that is? 16· · · ·Q.· What does GTT stand for?
17· · · ·A.· I don't know -- that's -- again, those documents 17· · · ·A.· Gone To Texas.
18· are written by somebody else.· I don't -- I don't write 18· · · · · · · · (Exhibit 1 was marked.)
19· those. 19· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Let me show you Exhibit 1 to your
20· · · ·Q.· Mr. Kahn would be a better person -- 20· deposition.· We'll have a few deposition exhibits today
21· · · ·A.· Yes. 21· and we'll mark those to keep track of them.· Okay?
22· · · ·Q.· -- to discuss that with? 22· · · ·A.· Okay.
23· · · ·A.· Yes. 23· · · ·Q.· Have you seen Exhibit 1 before?
24· · · ·Q.· And who do you work for?· Who is your employer? 24· · · ·A.· (Pause.)
25· · · ·A.· So my employer, I guess, is Colina West Real 25· · · · · ·Yes.

Page 11 Page 13
·1· Estate. ·1· · · ·Q.· Exhibit 1 is a notice of oral deposition for the
·2· · · ·Q.· Colina West?· Is that one word? ·2· entity of GTT Parking, LP that set out categories and
·3· · · ·A.· Two words.· C-O-L-I-N-A, W-E-S-T. ·3· asked for a representative or representatives to be
·4· · · ·Q.· And what is Colina West Real Estate? ·4· designated to discuss those.
·5· · · ·A.· Colina West Real Estate is, more or less, a name ·5· · · · · ·Do you understand that?
·6· for -- these are all better questions for David, honestly, ·6· · · ·A.· Yes.
·7· but the first building he bought was Colina West, and he ·7· · · ·Q.· And you have been designated by counsel for GTT
·8· kept the name, and it's just -- honestly, it's the name on ·8· to visit with the jury about certain topics that are
·9· our business card, I believe. ·9· requested under the topics.· Do you understand that?
10· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So is there an actual formed corporation 10· · · ·A.· Yes.
11· or partnership called -- 11· · · ·Q.· And what have you done as representative of GTT
12· · · ·A.· I don't know. 12· Parking to enable yourself to answer fully and truthfully
13· · · ·Q.· -- Colina West? 13· to the topics that have been requested that you're
14· · · ·A.· Sorry. 14· designated for?
15· · · ·Q.· You just have to practice here the first few 15· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
16· minutes of not talking when I do. 16· · · ·A.· Can you rephrase, please.
17· · · ·A.· Sure.· I understand. 17· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Sure.· What have you done to
18· · · ·Q.· All right.· So is there an actual business entity 18· prepare yourself to offer testimony to the jury as the
19· formed that is Colina West Real Estate? 19· corporate representative for GTT Parking on the topics
20· · · ·A.· I don't know. 20· that you've been designated for?
21· · · ·Q.· Are there any other parking garage facilities 21· · · ·A.· What have I done in preparation?
22· that are in the portfolio of Colina West Real Estate that 22· · · ·Q.· Correct.
23· you and Mr. Kahn are involved with, other than the 23· · · ·A.· I've reviewed old communications related to the
24· Littlefield Garage operated by GTT Parking, LP? 24· garage.
25· · · ·A.· No. 25· · · ·Q.· What old communications?

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 14..17
Page 14 Page 16
·1· · · ·A.· Communications with the City, communications with ·1· · · ·Q.· Did you search both of those repositories, if you
·2· Premier Parking, communications with engineers. ·2· have any, for any relevant e-mails to this lawsuit?
·3· · · ·Q.· Anything else that you did to enable yourself to ·3· · · ·A.· Yes.
·4· testify for the jury on these topics? ·4· · · ·Q.· And were those -- then the e-mails you found, did
·5· · · ·A.· I think that sums it up. ·5· you provide to the attorney to let the attorney do with it
·6· · · ·Q.· Did you review any pictures? ·6· what she felt appropriate?
·7· · · ·A.· Yes. ·7· · · ·A.· Yes.
·8· · · ·Q.· Did you review any video? ·8· · · ·Q.· All right.· How about the media?· Is the media
·9· · · ·A.· No. ·9· kept in your e-mail or somewhere else?· To Dropbox, or did
10· · · ·Q.· What pictures did you review? 10· you just Google and review some articles that had been
11· · · ·A.· The pictures that were produced by the City. 11· online, or how did you review the media?
12· · · ·Q.· Any other pictures that you reviewed? 12· · · ·A.· It was either provided to me by our attorney or I
13· · · ·A.· I guess anything that may have been in the media, 13· found it on Dropbox.
14· but as far as preparation, I was reading City documents 14· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And about how many media articles did you
15· and there were pictures in there. 15· review?
16· · · ·Q.· The old communications with the City that you 16· · · ·A.· I reviewed approximately two.
17· reviewed, where were those? 17· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And which ones were those?
18· · · ·A.· They were part of documentation provided by my 18· · · ·A.· I don't remember.
19· attorney. 19· · · ·Q.· Did they have to do with Ms. Bowmer or with
20· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Are those documents that GTT Parking keeps 20· Mr. O'Connor, or both?
21· somewhere, either digitally or in paper format? 21· · · ·A.· Mr. O'Connor.
22· · · ·A.· Most of them, yes. 22· · · ·Q.· All right.· By "Mr. O'Connor" I'm referring to an
23· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 23· incident when William O'Connor and his 4Runner was hanging
24· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Okay.· And where does GTT Parking 24· and dangling on the side of the Littlefield Garage in
25· keep its records? 25· September of 2016.· Do you recall that?

Page 15 Page 17
·1· · · ·A.· Digitally. ·1· · · ·A.· I do.
·2· · · ·Q.· Where? ·2· · · ·Q.· If I refer to that as the "O'Connor incident" or
·3· · · ·A.· On Dropbox. ·3· "O'Connor," do you know who I'm referring to?
·4· · · ·Q.· Where?· At some physical address? ·4· · · ·A.· Yes.
·5· · · ·A.· Not -- I don't know about -- I don't know. ·5· · · ·Q.· And have -- you reviewed two articles relating to
·6· · · ·Q.· A server? ·6· Mr. O'Connor?
·7· · · ·A.· I don't know. ·7· · · ·A.· Yes.· And to be fair, one was just a reproduction
·8· · · ·Q.· And who keeps those?· Who is the custodian of the ·8· of the first.· So they're virtually the same article.
·9· records for GTT Parking, LP? ·9· · · ·Q.· All right.· And was it the article that had the
10· · · ·A.· I don't know. 10· video of Mr. O'Connor embedded in it, or was it the
11· · · ·Q.· Where do you keep your GTT Parking, LP records? 11· article that's titled something to the effect of
12· · · ·A.· On Dropbox. 12· "35-year-old cables involved in the incident"?
13· · · ·Q.· And how does that work on Dropbox?· How do you 13· · · · · ·Do you remember?
14· keep records on Dropbox? 14· · · ·A.· I don't remember the title.· I just -- I don't
15· · · ·A.· You can, for instance, save a PDF off of an 15· believe that was the title, no.
16· e-mail, or you can create a -- you can create a PDF out of 16· · · ·Q.· Okay.· You understand today when I refer to
17· almost anything and you can save it on there. 17· "Bowmer," I refer to Plaintiff Christi Bowmer?
18· · · ·Q.· Do you have a specific e-mail address for the 18· · · ·A.· Yes.
19· business you conduct on behalf of GTT Parking, LP? 19· · · ·Q.· Do you understand that Ms. Bowmer was an invited
20· · · ·A.· No. 20· guest of the Littlefield Garage in July of 2017?
21· · · ·Q.· What e-mail address do you use? 21· · · ·A.· I understand that she was using somebody else's
22· · · ·A.· I have two e-mail addresses that I use. 22· parking card.
23· · · ·Q.· What are those? 23· · · ·Q.· Do you understand that that's a common occurrence
24· · · ·A.· seanobrien@colinawest.com and 24· at the Littlefield Garage, don't you.
25· sean.obrien.austin@gmail. 25· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 18..21
Page 18 Page 20
·1· · · · · · · · You can answer the question. ·1· · · ·A.· I've not inquired.
·2· · · ·A.· I don't -- I don't park there. ·2· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Is there some harm that you know
·3· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· You don't park there yourself? ·3· of to GTT if a person isn't going to use the space that he
·4· · · ·A.· No, sir. ·4· or she paid for, and that person allowing their guest to
·5· · · ·Q.· Why not? ·5· use that space?
·6· · · ·A.· I park closer to my office building. ·6· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
·7· · · ·Q.· All right.· Do you ever let anybody use your card ·7· · · ·A.· I don't have an opinion on that.
·8· if you're not using it? ·8· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Well, as somebody who is one of
·9· · · ·A.· No. ·9· the corporate representatives for GTT, do you think it
10· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 10· harms GTT somehow if -- if that person isn't going to use
11· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Do you -- have you visited with 11· his or her space, he lets somebody else use it?
12· anybody at Premier about what Premier's policy is about 12· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
13· people who purchase either monthly or other different type 13· · · ·A.· I don't have an opinion.
14· of leases for the Littlefield Parking Garage, and whether 14· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Well, does it use an extra space
15· they're instructed they're not entitled to loan their card 15· that otherwise would have been free?
16· to somebody else if they're not using their card? 16· · · ·A.· I don't know.
17· · · · · · · · MR. KURHAJEC:· Objection; form. 17· · · ·Q.· Have you ever had that instance?
18· · · ·A.· I have read the parking agreement, and it says 18· · · ·A.· Which instance?
19· that they're not to share their card. 19· · · ·Q.· Where somebody's come to you and said, "Hey,
20· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Which agreement? 20· somebody loaned a card to somebody else.· We need to put a
21· · · ·A.· The Premier parking agreement with the parkers. 21· stop to this"?
22· · · ·Q.· How many are there? 22· · · ·A.· Not -- no, no one's ever brought that to me.
23· · · ·A.· I'm sorry? 23· · · ·Q.· Have you ever heard of that?
24· · · ·Q.· How many agreements are there? 24· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
25· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 25· · · ·A.· Have I ever heard of -- can you repeat the

Page 19 Page 21
·1· · · ·A.· I don't know. ·1· question?
·2· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Did you know there's more than ·2· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Sure.· Have you heard ever of any
·3· one? ·3· complaint, either from Mr. Kahn, anybody at GTT, or
·4· · · ·A.· No. ·4· anybody at Premier, about a single instance where any of
·5· · · ·Q.· Do you know -- do you have any idea, as the ·5· those people, Kahn, GTT, or Premier complained or voiced
·6· corporate rep of one of the defendants in the case, GTT, ·6· to somebody that was a customer, "Hey, you shouldn't be
·7· how many different parking agreements Premier has for ·7· loaning your card out to somebody to use a space when
·8· people? ·8· you're not using it"?
·9· · · ·A.· I don't. ·9· · · · · · · · MR. KURHAJEC:· Objection; form.
10· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 10· · · ·A.· I cannot recall discussing this topic because --
11· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Do you, at GTT, keep a record of 11· I just -- I can't recall discussing it.
12· any of those? 12· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Because it's never been on the
13· · · ·A.· No. 13· radar at GTT?
14· · · ·Q.· Do you know whether or not the parking agreement 14· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
15· that covered, if there was one, the individual that loaned 15· · · ·A.· I don't know.
16· his car to Ms. Bowmer actually had a prohibition in it 16· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Is it some type of problem at
17· against loaning his car? 17· GTT, that there's people that are lending their cards out
18· · · ·A.· I don't -- 18· for other people to use at the garage?
19· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 19· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
20· · · ·A.· -- I don't know anything about that. 20· · · ·A.· Please repeat.
21· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· And have you inquired with 21· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Sure.· Is there some kind of
22· Premier about whether or not people are instructed, one 22· problem that you know of at GTT that y'all are having with
23· way or another, that they are not to loan their car to 23· people who are paying customers lending their card out for
24· somebody else to use the space if they're not using it? 24· somebody else to use their space if they're not using it?
25· · · · · · · · MR. KURHAJEC:· Objection; form. 25· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Same objection.

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 22..25
Page 22 Page 24
·1· · · ·A.· I don't know. ·1· years.
·2· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Does GTT have a specific policy ·2· · · ·Q.· The whole "Gone to Texas" entity structure, I'm
·3· against that? ·3· not really interested in a whole lot of that today unless
·4· · · ·A.· Not that I know of. ·4· I specifically talk about it.· So if I say "GTT," I'm
·5· · · ·Q.· Did GTT ever request Premier, "Premier, you need ·5· talking about the garage.
·6· to prohibit anybody from lending their card to have some ·6· · · ·A.· So the garage has not existed for five years. I
·7· friend or guest use their space if they're not using it"? ·7· have worked with David for five years, if that is what's
·8· · · · · · · · MR. KURHAJEC:· Objection; form. ·8· being asked.
·9· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. ·9· · · ·Q.· I was actually asking you how long you've been
10· · · ·A.· Not that I know of. 10· affiliated with the garage.
11· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Can we have the agreement that 11· · · ·A.· We've owned the garage since September of 2015.
12· one objection is good for all defendants? 12· · · ·Q.· Since September of 2015, have you heard of,
13· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· Yes, ma'am.· No problem. 13· either anecdotally, in writing, or in any way, of a single
14· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Does GTT -- 14· instance where there has been a complaint lodged that
15· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· I'm sorry, what was that? 15· somebody that used a customer's card, when that customer
16· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Just an agreement between us, 16· wasn't using it, is a trespasser?
17· the objection, form. 17· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
18· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· See, defense lawyers get to make 18· · · ·A.· Not in those specific terms, no.
19· objections to form, which is what you hear them doing. 19· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Have you ever alleged Ms. Bowmer
20· And when we have that agreement, when one makes an 20· was a trespasser?
21· objection, it means it's good for everybody so they all 21· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
22· three don't have to say it. 22· · · ·A.· I have not.· Me, personally?
23· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Okay. 23· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Yes, sir.
24· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· All right.· So is it GTT's 24· · · ·A.· No.
25· contention that Ms. Bowmer was trespassing at the 25· · · ·Q.· Has Mr. Kahn ever told you, you know that

Page 23 Page 25
·1· Littlefield Garage the day she was hurt? ·1· Ms. Bowmer was trespassing that day?
·2· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection to form. ·2· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
·3· · · ·A.· I don't have an opinion.· I -- ·3· · · ·A.· I can't remember.
·4· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Yeah.· Go ahead. ·4· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Has anybody from the Premier
·5· · · ·A.· I didn't sign the agreement with Premier so I ·5· Parking entities ever told you, you know what, Ms. Bowmer
·6· don't feel that I'm the right person to answer these ·6· was trespassing that day?
·7· questions. ·7· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
·8· · · ·Q.· Who would that be? ·8· · · ·A.· I don't remember.
·9· · · ·A.· David. ·9· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Has anybody from Premier or GTT
10· · · ·Q.· Have you, in your experience with GTT, ever seen 10· Parking ever indicated to you Ms. Bowmer was anything
11· or heard of a single instance where GTT or Premier 11· other than an invited guest?
12· characterized somebody as trespassing because they used a 12· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
13· friend's card? 13· · · ·A.· The document that I've seen that is a parking
14· · · ·A.· Have I ever heard that in conversation you're 14· agreement says that you're not to share the card.· That is
15· saying? 15· what I've seen.
16· · · ·Q.· Any time, any way. 16· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· That is not what I asked you. I
17· · · ·A.· Not that I can recall. 17· asked you if anybody from GTT Parking or Premier Parking
18· · · ·Q.· And how long have you been with GTT? 18· has ever indicated to you Ms. Bowmer was anything other
19· · · ·A.· Coming up on five years. 19· than an invited guest?
20· · · ·Q.· And -- 20· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
21· · · ·A.· Well, first -- 21· · · ·A.· "Anything other than an invited guest."· Can you
22· · · ·Q.· GTT Parking. 22· define "invited guest"?
23· · · ·A.· GTT Parking has not existed for five years. 23· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Sure.· Somebody that was invited
24· · · ·Q.· Right. 24· to be on the premises.
25· · · ·A.· But I have been working with David for five 25· · · ·A.· Invited by another parker or invited by one of

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 26..29
Page 26 Page 28
·1· the defendants? ·1· What part don't you appreciate about that?
·2· · · ·Q.· Either. ·2· · · ·A.· I thought we were talking about -- I thought you
·3· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. ·3· were leading into a question about how much it cost to
·4· · · ·A.· I would like to separate those. ·4· park in the garage and the direction of the -- the
·5· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Sure. ·5· question was certainly -- I'm not sure how to -- how to --
·6· · · ·A.· She was invited by somebody who had a parking ·6· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Argumentative.
·7· card. ·7· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Yeah.
·8· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So Ms. -- ·8· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Well, how would you determine
·9· · · ·A.· She was not invited by any of us. ·9· what to charge Ms. Bowmer?
10· · · ·Q.· Ms. Bowmer, in your opinion, was invited by 10· · · ·A.· Could you please --
11· somebody who had a valid parking card and the right to be 11· · · ·Q.· How would you determine what to charge Ms. Bowmer
12· on the premises.· Is that right? 12· for her stay in the garage that day?
13· · · ·A.· That person had a parking card, yes. 13· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
14· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So the person with the parking card had a 14· · · ·A.· I don't have an opinion on that.
15· right to be on the premise? 15· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Why not?
16· · · ·A.· Yes.· That is my understanding. 16· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
17· · · ·Q.· And is it your contention to the jury that 17· · · ·A.· Why not?
18· somehow Ms. Bowmer didn't have the right to be on the 18· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Right.· I mean, as the corporate
19· premises? 19· representative of GT Parking -- GTT Parking, don't you
20· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 20· know what's -- the rates that are -- patrons are charged?
21· · · ·A.· It's an open parking garage.· Anybody can pull a 21· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
22· ticket and enter the garage. 22· · · ·A.· Not off the top of my head.
23· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Okay.· Has GTT Parking ever tried 23· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Any ballpark at all?
24· to charge Ms. Bowmer for the fact that she parked the day 24· · · ·A.· I know that if you're short-term, there's
25· she was injured? 25· charges, I think, per hour and then there is a day rate if

Page 27 Page 29
·1· · · ·A.· I don't know. ·1· you surpass that hourly rate.
·2· · · ·Q.· Do you have any plans to? ·2· · · ·Q.· And, Mr. O'Brien, do you know the short-term
·3· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form to the last ·3· rate?
·4· question. ·4· · · ·A.· Not off the top of my head.
·5· · · · · · · · (Reporter admonishment.) ·5· · · ·Q.· How is the short-term measured?· Entrance and
·6· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Let me start over. ·6· exit to the garage?
·7· · · · · ·Has GTT Parking ever charged Ms. Bowmer for ·7· · · ·A.· You have ticket pull time and ticket pay time.
·8· parking on the premises the day she was injured? ·8· · · ·Q.· Any idea what the time Ms. Bowmer was in the
·9· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. ·9· garage would have been?
10· · · ·A.· I don't know. 10· · · ·A.· I don't know.· I have -- I don't have that
11· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Does GTT Parking have any plans 11· information.
12· to charge her? 12· · · ·Q.· Based on what you have seen or been told, was she
13· · · ·A.· I don't know. 13· not entering the garage and parking in a space at the time
14· · · ·Q.· How much would that cost Christi Bowmer to park 14· the accident happened?
15· on the premises the day she was injured? 15· · · ·A.· Yes.
16· · · ·A.· I don't know.· There's -- it depends on how long 16· · · ·Q.· And so would you have any idea what the charge
17· she would stay. 17· would be from GTT Parking for the use of the garage for
18· · · ·Q.· Well, she was pulling into the parking spot. 18· her that day?
19· Assume that leaving in an ambulance is leaving.· Her car 19· · · ·A.· Well, she didn't pull --
20· certainly wasn't still in the garage.· How much do you 20· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
21· think GTT Parking would charge her for that? 21· · · ·A.· -- a ticket.
22· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 22· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· That is not what I asked you. I
23· · · ·A.· Is this the part where I can say I don't really 23· asked you what the charge would be.
24· appreciate the approach? 24· · · ·A.· I don't know.
25· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Sure.· Any time you want to. 25· · · ·Q.· Now, is it in GTT Parking's mind that somehow

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 30..33
Page 30 Page 32
·1· there is a different level of safety that is owed to ·1· · · ·Q.· And at the time that Littlefield Garage, at the
·2· somebody like Ms. Bowmer who may be using the card of a ·2· time that GTT Parking is operating it, that has at least
·3· paying customer? ·3· nine stories with open-air levels.· True?
·4· · · ·A.· Can you repeat the question, please. ·4· · · ·A.· There -- I believe, yes, there is a ninth level.
·5· · · ·Q.· Sure.· Does GTT Parking contend that somehow it ·5· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And there may not be actually nine levels
·6· owes a different level of safety to Ms. Bowmer because she ·6· to park on, but the top level of the garage is the ninth
·7· was using a friend's card that he paid for and wasn't ·7· level?
·8· using instead of pulling the ticket? ·8· · · ·A.· It's defined as nine, yes.
·9· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. ·9· · · ·Q.· And Mr. O'Connor's vehicle left the ninth level?
10· · · ·A.· No. 10· · · ·A.· Yes.
11· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· So whatever level of safety GTT 11· · · ·Q.· It went off the side of the ninth level?
12· Parking, LP owed to the gentleman who had the pass, GTT is 12· · · ·A.· Yes.
13· certainly willing to admit it owed that to Ms. Bowmer? 13· · · ·Q.· It went through the cable barrier system on the
14· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 14· ninth level?
15· · · ·A.· Yes. 15· · · ·A.· Yes.
16· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· And that is, it needed to 16· · · ·Q.· And through simply luck, not design, it was
17· provide -- GTT Parking, LP needed to provide a safe 17· entangled in the barrier system which prevented it from
18· parking garage? 18· falling to the ground --
19· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 19· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
20· · · ·A.· Yes. 20· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· -- true?
21· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· A parking garage that was free 21· · · ·A.· That is the way I understand it, yes.
22· from unreasonable danger? 22· · · ·Q.· And certainly, at the time that GTT Parking,
23· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 23· Mr. O'Brien, opened up the Littlefield Garage, the company
24· · · ·A.· Okay. 24· knew that people who used the garage are not perfect
25· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Is that accurate? 25· drivers.· True?

Page 31 Page 33
·1· · · ·A.· I believe so. ·1· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
·2· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Certainly before the O'Connor incident, ·2· · · ·A.· Repeat the question, please.
·3· GTT Parking knew that it needed to provide a parking ·3· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Sure.· At the time GTT Parking
·4· garage for patrons that was free from unreasonable danger. ·4· opened the Littlefield Garage for business under GTT
·5· Right? ·5· Parking, it knew that people who use the garage are not
·6· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. ·6· perfect drivers?
·7· · · ·A.· Yeah. ·7· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
·8· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· And certainly -- ·8· · · ·A.· I don't know.
·9· · · ·A.· Yes. ·9· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· You don't know that?
10· · · ·Q.· Certainly, after Mr. O'Connor's incident, GTT 10· · · ·A.· I mean...
11· Parking understood especially that there was a risk that 11· · · ·Q.· Why do you have a barrier system?
12· cars could leave the upper floors because of a problem 12· · · ·A.· I guess, yes, drivers are imperfect.
13· with the barrier system, didn't they? 13· · · ·Q.· All right.· Certainly, that's not a new
14· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 14· revelation to GTT Parking at the time y'all opened up the
15· · · ·A.· Please repeat the question. 15· garage.· Right?
16· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Sure.· After Mr. O'Connor's 16· · · ·A.· I'm having trouble with the fact that you're
17· incident occurred and before Ms. Bowmer's incident, GTT 17· saying "opened up the garage."
18· Parking understood that there was an issue with at least 18· · · ·Q.· Okay.· At the time GTT Parking assumed ownership
19· one car not being contained by the barrier system to keep 19· of the garage --
20· it from leaving the parking garage off the side? 20· · · ·A.· Okay.
21· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 21· · · ·Q.· -- you knew at GTT Parking that accidents happen
22· · · ·A.· There was a problem with one car.· Is that what 22· in a garage.· True?
23· you're asking? 23· · · ·A.· Accidents happen everywhere, yes.
24· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Yes.· Uh-huh.· Exactly. 24· · · ·Q.· Well, I'm not talking about everywhere, sir.· I'm
25· · · ·A.· With one car, yes. 25· talking about in the garage that GTT Parking was

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 34..37
Page 34 Page 36
·1· operating, you knew at the time you opened, you began ·1· · · ·Q.· Would that include work to analyze whether
·2· operating it, that accidents could happen in the garage. ·2· repairs are necessary?· You have done that before, haven't
·3· Right? ·3· you?
·4· · · ·A.· Yes. ·4· · · ·A.· Yes.
·5· · · ·Q.· Did anybody at GTT Parking ever look at, for ·5· · · ·Q.· Would that include work to determine whether or
·6· instance, the number of accidents that occurred before you ·6· not the garage meets the building code?
·7· guys assumed ownership? ·7· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
·8· · · ·A.· I did not. ·8· · · ·A.· We hired an engineer to evaluate that, the code.
·9· · · ·Q.· Did anybody you know of? ·9· I'm not a code expert.
10· · · ·A.· No. 10· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· So GTT Parking is not a code
11· · · ·Q.· Were you ever part of a discussion about that? 11· expert but certainly knows that it can hire code experts
12· · · ·A.· Previous to our ownership? 12· to tell GTT Parking whether or not the building is within
13· · · ·Q.· Yes, sir. 13· code?
14· · · ·A.· No. 14· · · ·A.· Yes.· And we did that.
15· · · ·Q.· How about since you have owned it? 15· · · ·Q.· All right.· You did that after accidents
16· · · ·A.· Since we've owned it, we only know of these two 16· occurred.· Right?
17· incidences. 17· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
18· · · ·Q.· You don't know of any other instances in the 18· · · ·A.· I believe so.
19· garage where there's been an accident? 19· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Did you ever hire an expert,
20· · · ·A.· No. 20· "you" being GTT Parking, ever hire an expert before
21· · · ·Q.· Who keeps track of that? 21· Mr. O'Connor's accident to assess the safety and/or code
22· · · ·A.· I don't know. 22· compliance of the garage?
23· · · ·Q.· Does GTT Parking attempt in any way to keep track 23· · · ·A.· I don't remember.
24· of incidents that occur in its garage? 24· · · ·Q.· Who would remember that?· You or David?
25· · · ·A.· I would -- no, we're not the day-to-day managers 25· · · ·A.· Yeah.

Page 35 Page 37
·1· of the garage. ·1· · · ·Q.· Are there --
·2· · · ·Q.· Is that some duty, then, that you believe GTT ·2· · · ·A.· Yes.
·3· Parking asked somebody else to do? ·3· · · ·Q.· -- any other human beings besides you or David
·4· · · ·A.· I don't know. ·4· Kahn that we could visit with about the actions of GTT
·5· · · ·Q.· Who would know that? ·5· Parking, LP like -- are there any other people affiliated
·6· · · ·A.· I guess David. ·6· with GTT Parking, LP besides you two?
·7· · · ·Q.· Who -- who -- between you and Mr. Kahn, who ·7· · · ·A.· No.
·8· spends the most time involved with the operation of GTT ·8· · · ·Q.· So was, then, a code expert hired after
·9· Parking, just between the two of you all? ·9· Mr. O'Connor's incident, or an engineer?
10· · · ·A.· The operation of GTT Parking? 10· · · ·A.· Yes.
11· · · ·Q.· Right. 11· · · ·Q.· How about after Ms. Bowmer's?
12· · · ·A.· Probably David. 12· · · ·A.· Yes.
13· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And then what precisely is your duties 13· · · ·Q.· So both -- in both instances of buildings that --
14· with GTT Parking? 14· or, excuse me, cars that went through the barrier system
15· · · ·A.· I -- my duties with GTT Parking, I -- if needed, 15· at Littlefield Garage when GTT Parking owned it, it was
16· I help find contractors. 16· after the incidents that GTT Parking hired experts about
17· · · ·Q.· If needed, you help find contractors to do work 17· the code.· Is that right?
18· inside the garage? 18· · · ·A.· Yes.
19· · · ·A.· Uh-huh. 19· · · ·Q.· Now, before Mr. O'Connor's incident and while GTT
20· · · ·Q.· Yes? 20· Parking, LP owned the garage, is it true that GTT knew
21· · · ·A.· Yes. 21· each floor of the garage should have an adequate barrier
22· · · ·Q.· And by "contractors to do work inside the 22· to keep vehicles from falling off?
23· garage," I take it that would be work that includes 23· · · ·A.· This is before the O'Connor incident, you said?
24· repairs.· Is that right? 24· · · ·Q.· Yes, sir.
25· · · ·A.· Yes. 25· · · ·A.· Can you repeat the entire question, please.

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 38..41
Page 38 Page 40
·1· · · ·Q.· Certainly.· Isn't it true that before ·1· designed -- and I've learned about this recently.· It was
·2· Mr. O'Connor's incident, CTT Parking knew and understood ·2· designed for fall protection of human beings.
·3· that it needed to have adequate barriers on every floor to ·3· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So your testimony to the jury is that you
·4· prevent vehicles from falling off? ·4· have just recently learned that the cable system that was
·5· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. ·5· on the Littlefield Garage at the time GTT Parking bought
·6· · · ·A.· I don't know. ·6· it and began operating it was only designed to prevent
·7· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Well, before Mr. O'Connor's ·7· humans from falling, not vehicles?
·8· incident, sir, would it have been acceptable for GTT ·8· · · ·A.· That is what I've learned, yes.
·9· Parking to have, for instance, the ninth floor or the ·9· · · ·Q.· From who?
10· eighth floor or the seventh floor over on the west side 10· · · ·A.· Reports from expert engineers.
11· where the alleyway is where the O'Connor and Bowmer 11· · · ·Q.· Who?
12· vehicles went toward, would it have been acceptable for 12· · · ·A.· Actually, I think it may have been the City
13· there to be no barrier system over there? 13· report.· I can't remember -- I've read a lot of documents
14· · · ·A.· No. 14· lately.
15· · · ·Q.· And why not? 15· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Just tell me the best you can, tell the
16· · · ·A.· Well, fall protection. 16· jury the best you can who -- who it is you believe
17· · · ·Q.· Fall -- what do you mean "fall protection"? 17· indicated to you, either directly or indirectly, that the
18· · · ·A.· Fall protection is something you provide for -- 18· cable barrier system that was on the Littlefield Garage
19· for humans. 19· when GTT Parking began operated it -- operating it was
20· · · ·Q.· I see.· So GTT Parking, before the O'Connor 20· intended to prevent humans from falling but nothing else.
21· incident, knew that it needed fall protection to keep 21· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
22· humans from going off the edge -- 22· · · ·A.· I know for sure I read it in a City report.
23· · · ·A.· No. 23· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Does that make any sense to you?
24· · · ·Q.· So -- 24· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
25· · · ·A.· I apologize. 25· · · ·A.· It's a different time.· The codes are always

Page 39 Page 41
·1· · · ·Q.· Go ahead.· Tell me what you were going to correct ·1· changing.· So I don't -- I don't have an opinion on that.
·2· me on. ·2· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· You don't have an opinion on
·3· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Finish your question so that he ·3· whether a multistory parking facility should have fall
·4· can -- ·4· protection to keep vehicles from going off the edge?
·5· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· Certainly. ·5· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
·6· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· -- answer it, please. ·6· · · ·A.· As I said, I just recently learned about this
·7· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· No problem. ·7· code.· I believe it's a 1976 code that the garage was
·8· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· What did you mean by "fall ·8· built to.
·9· protection"? ·9· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· That wasn't my question to you,
10· · · ·A.· You just can't have an open edge. 10· though.· I appreciate it.· Thank you for telling me that.
11· · · ·Q.· Why not? 11· · · · · ·Does it make any sense to you that a parking
12· · · ·A.· It's a building code. 12· garage built in that time frame would have no fall
13· · · ·Q.· Well, what is the building code?· What do you 13· protection for vehicles?
14· mean? 14· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
15· · · ·A.· Well, fall protection is just a general term 15· · · ·A.· I guess I can agree with that.· Yeah.
16· that -- in construction where you just can't have a 16· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· That it doesn't make any sense.
17· leading edge open. 17· True?
18· · · ·Q.· Prevent what from falling? 18· · · ·A.· It was surprising to read that.
19· · · ·A.· Depends on the use of the building. 19· · · ·Q.· That's not what I'm asking you.· I'm not asking
20· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Say it's a parking garage like the 20· you about what you think the 1976 code says.
21· Littlefield Garage. 21· · · · · ·I'm asking you, as the corporate rep of GTT
22· · · ·A.· Okay. 22· Parking, whether it makes any sense to you as the
23· · · ·Q.· What is the fall protection protecting from? 23· owner/operator of the garage that there would be a
24· · · ·A.· Based on the age of this building and the -- and 24· multistory garage that has no fall protection for
25· the code when this building was designed, it was only 25· vehicles.

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 42..45
Page 42 Page 44
·1· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. ·1· barrier systems for cars that were parking on the upper
·2· · · · · · · · You're mixing different things and it's ·2· levels?
·3· getting confusing. ·3· · · ·A.· What -- what do we believe?
·4· · · · · · · · Objection; form. ·4· · · ·Q.· Right.
·5· · · ·A.· When I read that report and learned that piece of ·5· · · ·A.· Can you repeat the question one more time,
·6· information about that era of code, it was surprising. ·6· please.
·7· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· I'm not asking you about what ·7· · · ·Q.· Sure.
·8· your take was on the code.· Okay?· I want you to set that ·8· · · · · ·In the time period that GTT Parking, LP was
·9· out as a question.· I'll ask you about that in a bit. I ·9· operating the Littlefield garage, before Mr. O'Connor's
10· want to be able to communicate with you.· All right? 10· incident --
11· · · ·A.· Okay. 11· · · ·A.· Uh-huh.
12· · · ·Q.· You're part of GTT Parking.· Right?· You're here 12· · · ·Q.· -- what did GTT Parking believe or understand was
13· on behalf of them today.· Do you understand that? 13· the standard of care, what a reasonably prudent garage
14· · · ·A.· Yes. 14· operator should provide in terms of a barrier to keep cars
15· · · ·Q.· Do you understand that you're speaking for the 15· from going off the upper levels?
16· company today? 16· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
17· · · ·A.· Yes. 17· · · ·A.· The garage had a barrier system when we purchased
18· · · ·Q.· And as somebody speaking for the company, can you 18· it and believed that barrier system would stay in place
19· tell the jury, does it make any sense from the company's 19· and continue to serve its purpose.
20· perspective that you could run a multistory parking 20· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Okay.· And what did GTT Parking
21· facility and not have fall protection for vehicles? 21· do to analyze the barrier system on the upper floors at
22· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 22· the time that GTT Parking purchased the building?
23· · · ·A.· Does it make any sense?· I'm just struggling with 23· · · ·A.· I walked the garage to do a visual observation,
24· some of the phrasing of your questions. 24· noticed that it appeared some of the -- a lot of the
25· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Well, sure.· I'll rephrase it for 25· cables had been -- I guess you could say retrofitted with

Page 43 Page 45
·1· you. ·1· newer anchors.
·2· · · · · ·As an operator of a parking facility that has ·2· · · · · ·And that made me feel comfortable as far as -- I
·3· multiple stories, do you believe a prudent parking ·3· think someone was addressing the cables on a regular
·4· facility would operate without a barrier system adequately ·4· basis, but I didn't know the history of that.
·5· in place to prevent vehicles from going off the edge? ·5· · · ·Q.· All right.· So at that time frame that you walked
·6· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. ·6· the garage, was it before or after GTT Parking purchased
·7· · · ·A.· Yes.· I think the garage should have a barrier ·7· it?
·8· system. ·8· · · ·A.· I believe it was before.
·9· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· And you think it should be ·9· · · ·Q.· Who did you walk it with?
10· adequate? 10· · · ·A.· I don't remember.· I may have been by myself.
11· · · ·A.· Yes. 11· · · ·Q.· And, at that time, did you have any experience
12· · · ·Q.· And what is adequate to a prudent operator of a 12· with multilevel parking garages?
13· garage? 13· · · ·A.· No.· We didn't own a parking garage before that.
14· · · · · · · · (Discussion off the written record.) 14· · · ·Q.· And did you have any experience with evaluating
15· · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Off the record at 10:04. 15· or analyzing cable barrier systems?
16· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·(Break.) 16· · · ·A.· No.
17· · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· This is Segment No. 2. 17· · · ·Q.· Did you have any experience with retrofitting
18· We're back on the record.· 10:17. 18· cable barrier systems?
19· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· We're back on the record, 19· · · ·A.· No.
20· Mr. O'Brien.· Are you ready to proceed? 20· · · ·Q.· Did you have any experience with someone
21· · · ·A.· I am. 21· addressing the cables on a regular basis for a
22· · · ·Q.· At the time period that GTT Parking began 22· cable-oriented barrier system in a multistory garage?
23· operating the Littlefield garage before the O'Connor 23· · · ·A.· No.
24· incident, what did GTT Parking understand a reasonably 24· · · ·Q.· Did you have any experience with evaluating what
25· prudent garage operator should do in terms of providing 25· the parameters of the cable barrier system should be, that

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 46..49
Page 46 Page 48
·1· is, to what speed the cable barrier system needed to be ·1· barrier system?
·2· effective to prevent vehicles from plunging off of the ·2· · · ·A.· The cable barrier system of a parking garage I
·3· garage? ·3· would believe is there to protect the leading edge of the
·4· · · ·A.· At that time, no. ·4· garage.
·5· · · ·Q.· You do understand that there needs to be some ·5· · · ·Q.· From what?
·6· threshold for the cable barrier system that below which, ·6· · · ·A.· From a car going off or from a person going off.
·7· if a vehicle hits it, the system will prevent it from ·7· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So the cable barrier system is in place to
·8· going off the edge.· Right? ·8· protect a car or a person from leaving the garage and
·9· · · ·A.· Yes.· There is a threshold. ·9· going off.· Right?
10· · · ·Q.· You understood even from the inception of GTT 10· · · ·A.· Yes.· Within a certain miles per hour, I would
11· Parking operating the garage that the cable barrier system 11· assume.
12· needed to be able to protect moving vehicles that struck 12· · · ·Q.· And do you have an idea, as you sit here now,
13· it from leaving the building's edge.· Right? 13· what miles per hour on the average passenger car it should
14· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 14· be protective of?
15· · · ·A.· I don't know. 15· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
16· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Well, isn't the cable barrier 16· · · ·A.· The documents that I've read refer to, I believe,
17· like a seatbelt in a garage? 17· a weight or a force, not necessarily a miles per hour. I
18· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 18· think you can convert that, but I'm not an engineer.
19· · · ·A.· When I pull into a garage personally, I don't 19· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Have you ever asked -- "you"
20· expect the -- I don't -- I just -- I -- I saw that it had 20· being GTT Parking, LP, have y'all ever asked anybody to
21· a barrier system. 21· tell you what the barrier system is supposed to be rated
22· · · · · ·I didn't know what the threshold was, as you 22· to?
23· mentioned before.· However, I'm not sure that we -- I 23· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
24· don't -- I don't think I can agree with you that it's an 24· · · ·A.· The barrier system on this garage?
25· additional seatbelt. 25· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Right.

Page 47 Page 49
·1· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Okay.· I didn't say it's an ·1· · · ·A.· No.· I've only learned that recently.
·2· additional.· I said it's like a seatbelt. ·2· · · ·Q.· Only learned that from reviewing the City of
·3· · · · · ·Do you not agree that a barrier system like the ·3· Austin file?
·4· cable barrier system at the Littlefield Garage should ·4· · · ·A.· Uh-huh.
·5· operate like a seatbelt in a car? ·5· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
·6· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. ·6· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Yes?
·7· · · ·A.· I don't -- I don't think I can agree with the ·7· · · ·A.· Yes.
·8· analogy. ·8· · · ·Q.· So as you sit here now in the deposition, the
·9· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Okay.· Well, what analogy would ·9· only time that GTT Parking has learned what the barrier
10· you use?· What is -- what is a cable barrier system 10· system should be rated to is by reviewing the City of
11· analogous to, in your mind? 11· Austin file on the two accidents that occurred there.· Is
12· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 12· that accurate?
13· · · ·A.· I haven't thought about it. 13· · · ·A.· The only time I have.· I can't claim for all of
14· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· So you've operated this garage at 14· GTT Parking.
15· GTT Parking for several years, you've had two people go 15· · · ·Q.· You understand you're here on behalf of GTT
16· off the edge of the garage, and you haven't thought about 16· Parking today?
17· what the cable barrier system would be analogous to in 17· · · ·A.· Yes.· But you asked me to answer for all of G- --
18· terms of protection? 18· all I can tell you is what I have printed.
19· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 19· · · ·Q.· You're here on behalf of GTT Parking.· Right?
20· · · ·A.· I have not thought specifically about the 20· · · ·A.· Yes.
21· analogous form.· No. 21· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So in terms of your knowledge with one of
22· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Okay.· Well, let's talk about 22· the two humans that exist with GTT Parking, the only
23· that. 23· parameters you've seen is what's contained in the City of
24· · · · · ·What, to a reasonably prudent operator before the 24· Austin file.· Is that accurate?
25· O'Connor incident, would be the purpose of the cable 25· · · ·A.· I may have read it somewhere else in another

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 50..53
Page 50 Page 52
·1· report, but that's the one that I read most recently that ·1· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
·2· I know had it in there. ·2· · · ·A.· I can point to the agreement that we had a
·3· · · · · ·So that's -- that's the one I can tell you with ·3· day-to-day manager on-site.
·4· certainty I read that had those details in it. ·4· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· What agreement are you pointing
·5· · · ·Q.· Who at GTT Parking before the O'Connor incident ·5· to?
·6· was in charge or had the ultimate responsibility for the ·6· · · ·A.· The agreement -- I don't know the exact terms,
·7· safety of the garage?· You or Mr. Kahn? ·7· but it's an agreement between Premier and GTT.
·8· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. ·8· · · ·Q.· So if you don't know the exact terms, how do you
·9· · · ·A.· I'd say we were both interested in it. ·9· know the agreement calls for somebody else to do the
10· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· So you both were equally 10· safety?
11· responsible? 11· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
12· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 12· · · ·A.· Because I have seen it as a part of this case.
13· · · ·A.· I don't know how to answer. 13· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· You've seen what as a part of the
14· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Well, either a "yes" or a "no." 14· case?
15· · · ·A.· Equally responsible.· We were both -- yes. 15· · · ·A.· The agreement.
16· · · ·Q.· And tell me and the jury everything GTT Parking 16· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So tell the jury, what is it about the
17· did from the moment you bought the garage up until the 17· agreement that you believe transferred the obligation of
18· O'Connor incident to ensure that the cable barrier system 18· GTT Parking to ensure the parking garage was safe to
19· was safe. 19· Premier Parking?
20· · · ·A.· I was not -- I didn't -- I don't do -- so I don't 20· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
21· park there and I don't do regular physical inspections. 21· · · ·A.· The agreement, as I saw it, as a regular -- my
22· So we would just get those in our monthly operating 22· understanding was that we hired Premier Parking as our
23· reports if there was anything. 23· garage manager.
24· · · ·Q.· And so, in answer to my question, you said you 24· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Okay.· And what were the specific
25· don't park there, you didn't inspect it and anything that 25· duties that GTT Parking agreed upon with Premier that

Page 51 Page 53
·1· you did see would be contained in your monthly operating ·1· Premier would do as garage manager?
·2· reports.· Is that accurate? ·2· · · ·A.· My understanding was that they manage the
·3· · · ·A.· I believe so.· Yes. ·3· premises, but they're not responsible, for instance, for
·4· · · ·Q.· So in terms of pointing to any specific effort by ·4· the elevator.· And they're not responsible for Gold's Gym.
·5· GTT Parking from the point GTT Parking bought the ·5· They're not responsible for the apartments.
·6· building, the Littlefield Garage, to the time of the ·6· · · · · · · · MR. KURHAJEC:· Objection; responsiveness.
·7· O'Connor incident, is there anything you can point the ·7· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· My question to you was, what was
·8· jury to, to say, "Look, this is what we were doing to ·8· your understanding of the duties of Premier as the garage
·9· ensure the barrier system was safe? ·9· manager?
10· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 10· · · ·A.· The duties of the garage manager, in my
11· · · · · · · · And I'm going to point out I objected to 11· understanding, were to manage parking agreements, manage
12· this deposition topic for both of our witnesses because of 12· the ticketing system, for instance.
13· the management agreement with Premier Parking, which 13· · · · · ·I believe the cleaning service was under their
14· requires them to perform maintenance and those sorts of 14· scope.· Security, I believe, and walking the garage
15· things. 15· regularly.
16· · · · · · · · So I'm going to interject that at this 16· · · ·Q.· Is it your testimony to the jury, then, that GTT
17· point. 17· Parking was relying upon Premier for Premier to make sure
18· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· Okay.· Well, that's just a 18· the cable barrier systems were adequate and not dangerous?
19· speaking objection.· That's improper. 19· · · ·A.· Yes.
20· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· So you can answer the question. 20· · · ·Q.· How?· How were you relying upon Premier?
21· · · · · ·My question to you is, can you point the jury to 21· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
22· one single thing that GTT Parking, LP, did to ensure the 22· · · ·A.· How?· Well, they're our -- they were hired as our
23· safety of the cable barrier system before Mr. O'Connor 23· day-to-day manager.
24· went off the garage? 24· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· So --
25· · · ·A.· I can -- 25· · · ·A.· They're on-site every single day.· We're not

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 54..57
Page 54 Page 56
·1· on-site every single day.· We don't manage any other ·1· · · ·A.· I don't know.
·2· garages -- well, we don't manage the garage. ·2· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Somebody should have been
·3· · · · · ·We hired a manager for the garage.· They strictly ·3· responsible for that.· Right?· As between GTT Parking and
·4· manage garages, as I understand it.· And so, in my ·4· Premier, one of those two entities should have been
·5· understanding, we hired someone who knows more about ·5· inspecting the cables and inspecting the system to make
·6· garages than we do. ·6· sure it was adequate.· Don't you agree?
·7· · · · · · · · MR. KURHAJEC:· Objection; responsiveness. ·7· · · · · · · · MR. KURHAJEC:· Objection; form.
·8· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· How much did GTT Parking know ·8· · · ·A.· It -- the system -- the garage, in general,
·9· about operating or managing garages at the time it started ·9· should be maintained.
10· operating Littlefield? 10· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· My question isn't about
11· · · ·A.· We didn't own another garage. 11· maintaining the garage, sir.· Please listen to my
12· · · ·Q.· So nothing? 12· question.
13· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 13· · · · · ·Would you agree with me that, between GTT Parking
14· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Then, how much?· What's the 14· and Premier, one of those two entities should have been
15· answer? 15· inspecting the cable barrier system to make sure that it
16· · · ·A.· We didn't -- 16· was adequate and not dangerous?
17· · · ·Q.· Zero? 17· · · · · · · · MR. KURHAJEC:· Renew objection.
18· · · ·A.· We didn't own another garage, and we weren't 18· · · ·A.· Yes.
19· managing another garage.· So we didn't have any other 19· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· That is what a prudent operator
20· experience before purchasing this garage. 20· of a garage that relies on a cable barrier system would
21· · · ·Q.· So at the time GTT Parking began operating 21· do.· Right?
22· Littlefield, it had zero knowledge about the operation of 22· · · ·A.· Yes.
23· a parking garage.· Is that accurate? 23· · · · · · · · MR. KURHAJEC:· Objection; form.
24· · · ·A.· That's accurate to me specifically.· Yes. 24· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· And it's your testimony to the
25· · · ·Q.· And what did GTT Parking expect Premier would do, 25· jury that GTT Parking knew that, but relied upon Premier

Page 55 Page 57
·1· as a prudent operator of the garage, to ensure the cable ·1· to be the one to do the evaluations and inspections to
·2· barrier system was not dangerous? ·2· make sure the cable barrier system was adequate?
·3· · · · · · · · MR. KURHAJEC:· Objection; form. ·3· · · ·A.· Yes.
·4· · · ·A.· That, if there were any loose cables, that they'd ·4· · · · · · · · MR. KURHAJEC:· Objection; form.
·5· be tightened. ·5· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Was there a specific conversation
·6· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Anything else? ·6· that you can point to between anybody at GTT Parking and
·7· · · ·A.· Specifically to the cables or in general? ·7· Premier where evaluating and ensuring the safety of the
·8· · · ·Q.· Well, my question to you was, what did GTT ·8· cable barrier system was discussed?
·9· Parking, LP, expect Premier would do, as you've told me, ·9· · · ·A.· I can remember specifically I brought to
10· if Premier had responsibility for ensuring that the cable 10· Premier's attention that there were loose cables in two
11· barrier system was not dangerous?· What did you expect 11· separate situations and Premier replied that they were,
12· Premier to do? 12· quote-unquote, on it.
13· · · ·A.· I expect them to look at the cables and, if there 13· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So on two separate occasions, even though
14· were any loose tables, that they get tightened. 14· you weren't on any routine basis at the garage, you
15· · · ·Q.· How often should a prudent operator inspect the 15· noticed loose cables in the cable barrier system?
16· cables? 16· · · ·A.· One was brought to my attention by somebody else
17· · · ·A.· I don't know.· I'm not a garage operator. 17· who happened to know that I was involved with the garage,
18· · · ·Q.· How often did you expect Premier to inspect the 18· and I can't remember who that was.
19· cables? 19· · · ·Q.· When?
20· · · ·A.· I -- I don't know.· I did not have an expectation 20· · · ·A.· I don't remember the date.
21· of how often, but I know -- I don't manage the garage. 21· · · ·Q.· Was it before Mr. O'Connor's incident?
22· · · ·Q.· Did GTT Parking ever specifically ask Premier in 22· · · ·A.· I -- I don't remember.
23· any way to be responsible for the safety of the cable 23· · · ·Q.· And so on one occasion, even though you're not
24· barrier system? 24· routinely at the Littlefield garage, somebody -- you can't
25· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 25· remember who -- brought to your attention -- you can't

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 58..61
Page 58 Page 60
·1· remember when -- that there was loose cables in the cable ·1· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· And did you have some particular
·2· barrier system? ·2· policy set up at GTT Parking on how often you needed to
·3· · · ·A.· There was one loose cable. ·3· interface with Premier?
·4· · · ·Q.· One loose cable? ·4· · · ·A.· Not me personally.
·5· · · ·A.· Yes. ·5· · · ·Q.· How about Mr. Kahn?
·6· · · ·Q.· Where? ·6· · · ·A.· I know they had, at minimum, monthly
·7· · · ·A.· That -- these two particular incidents were ·7· communication.
·8· different locations.· I'd have to reflect on the ·8· · · ·Q.· Was there any routine safety discussions set up
·9· communication to give you the exact location. ·9· between Premier and GTT Parking?
10· · · ·Q.· Well, have you not reflected on that before now? 10· · · ·A.· Not between myself personally, no.
11· · · ·A.· I have.· I just don't -- I can't tell you with 11· · · ·Q.· How about with Mr. Kahn, that you know of?
12· certainty off the top of my head. 12· · · ·A.· I think that would be included in -- if there
13· · · ·Q.· Can you tell me more likely than not? 13· were any issues, I would speculate it'd be in the monthly
14· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 14· reports.
15· · · · · · · · We produced the communications this morning. 15· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And how were the monthly reports issued?
16· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· So the e-mails that you produced 16· By e-mail?
17· this morning are the two occasions that you recall? 17· · · ·A.· I believe by PDF.· Yes.
18· · · ·A.· Yes, sir. 18· · · ·Q.· And what do those look like?
19· · · ·Q.· All right.· And the second occasion, what was 19· · · ·A.· They have number of parkers, I believe.· They're
20· that? 20· not sent to me.· So...
21· · · ·A.· I believe it was my personal witness of a single 21· · · ·Q.· Who are they sent to?
22· cable that I brought to their attention. 22· · · ·A.· David.
23· · · ·Q.· Where was that? 23· · · ·Q.· Have you seen them?
24· · · ·A.· Again, I don't want to speculate. 24· · · ·A.· I've seen one.
25· · · ·Q.· And do you recall who it was that you discussed 25· · · ·Q.· These reports?

Page 59 Page 61
·1· either of these two cables with? ·1· · · ·A.· Yes.
·2· · · ·A.· Christina Murray. ·2· · · ·Q.· Where are they maintained?
·3· · · ·Q.· Who is Ms. Murray? ·3· · · ·A.· In the same Dropbox.
·4· · · ·A.· Garage manager. ·4· · · ·Q.· I haven't seen any of those.· Are there monthly
·5· · · ·Q.· Is Ms. Murray on the premises? ·5· reports from the months since the inception that the
·6· · · ·A.· She was at the beginning.· We -- we have a small ·6· garage opened up?
·7· office at the top of the drive as you come in.· I'm not ·7· · · ·A.· Yes.
·8· sure where she was at the time of these communications. ·8· · · ·Q.· And would they have safety discussions in there?
·9· Again, I... ·9· · · ·A.· The typical monthly reports that I've seen bring
10· · · ·Q.· Again?· I'm sorry.· I didn't catch the last part. 10· up -- I guess out of the -- they bring up issues that
11· · · ·A.· Since I wasn't there on a daily basis, I 11· month.· It could be anything.
12· didn't -- I don't know when she heard -- okay. 12· · · ·Q.· So you would think that any significant safety
13· · · · · ·So I don't know.· For a time, if I wanted -- for 13· issues would be included in the monthly reports?
14· a time, I felt like she was officing out of that office in 14· · · ·A.· I don't get the reports.· I don't read them on a
15· the garage. 15· regular basis so I'm not sure what they're supposed to --
16· · · ·Q.· Okay. 16· what -- what they would include on a regular -- what they
17· · · ·A.· And then I feel like she moved at a certain point 17· look like in their typical form and then what they look
18· to a different office location, but I don't know when that 18· like with additional information that is unique to that
19· happened. 19· month.· I don't know because I don't get them and I
20· · · ·Q.· And was Ms. Murray the primary contact you have 20· don't -- they're...
21· with Premier? 21· · · ·Q.· They go to Mr. Kahn?
22· · · ·A.· Yes. 22· · · ·A.· Yes.
23· · · ·Q.· How often? 23· · · ·Q.· And you don't ever review those?
24· · · ·A.· As needed. 24· · · ·A.· I wasn't reviewing them, no.
25· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 25· · · ·Q.· And you haven't reviewed them for purposes of

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 62..65
Page 62 Page 64
·1· this lawsuit? ·1· edge.
·2· · · ·A.· I reviewed one yesterday. ·2· · · ·Q.· And only through what some people would call
·3· · · ·Q.· And what did it say? ·3· extreme luck did the cable, one or more cables wrap around
·4· · · ·A.· Well, I -- I think I sent it on to Ms. Barnes, ·4· its vehicle axle and prevent it from going all the way to
·5· but I didn't -- I didn't read it front to back. ·5· the ground?
·6· · · ·Q.· Did it have some kind of safety discussion about ·6· · · ·A.· Yes, the cable wrapped around the front axle.
·7· the cable system? ·7· I'm not sure which wheel.
·8· · · ·A.· I didn't read it -- I did not read it front to ·8· · · ·Q.· You would agree with me that that was a very
·9· back. ·9· serious incident?
10· · · ·Q.· I didn't ask you that. 10· · · ·A.· Yes.
11· · · ·A.· Not that I saw. 11· · · ·Q.· You would agree with me that that incident had a
12· · · ·Q.· And was there anything germane to this lawsuit in 12· great deal of notoriety?
13· that monthly report? 13· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
14· · · ·A.· I was just asked to provide a monthly report and 14· · · ·A.· Yes.
15· I -- I found the document and sent it. 15· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· There was intense public interest
16· · · ·Q.· My question to you was in -- 16· and newspaper media coverage of that incident.· Right?
17· · · ·A.· I did not read it. 17· · · ·A.· Yes.
18· · · ·Q.· Any of it? 18· · · ·Q.· You certainly were aware at GTT Parking that the
19· · · ·A.· I made sure it was the correct month and year 19· incident had occurred?
20· that was requested. 20· · · ·A.· Yes.
21· · · ·Q.· So in terms of anything besides correct month and 21· · · ·Q.· And aware that the vehicle had penetrated the
22· year, you don't have any idea what was in that monthly 22· cable barrier system and it didn't prevent it from going
23· report? 23· over the edge?
24· · · ·A.· No. 24· · · ·A.· It did not prevent it, no.
25· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Sean, I believe he's referring 25· · · ·Q.· You were aware of that?

Page 63 Page 65
·1· to one of the attachments to the e-mails that you asked ·1· · · ·A.· I was aware.
·2· for yesterday.· So if -- if that's the case and I'm ·2· · · ·Q.· And at the time that that happened, did GTT
·3· correct, then you would have it. ·3· Parking make any efforts to evaluate the cable barrier
·4· · · · · · · · (Discussion off the written record.) ·4· system of the entire garage?
·5· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Other than the two instances that ·5· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
·6· you have told me about regarding the loose cables, do you ·6· · · ·A.· At that time, we hired an engineer and received
·7· know of any other conversations or interface between GTT ·7· guidance on how to repair Level 9.
·8· and Premier where GTT was relying upon Premier to be in ·8· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· So you -- GTT hired an engineer
·9· charge of the safety of cable barrier system? ·9· with regard to Level 9, but didn't do anything to inspect
10· · · ·A.· No. 10· the cable barrier system anywhere else in the garage at
11· · · ·Q.· And have you discussed that with Mr. Kahn?· In 11· that time?
12· other words, have you asked Mr. Kahn, "hey, do you 12· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
13· remember any interactions you had with Premier where you 13· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Is that accurate?
14· asked Premier make sure these cable barrier systems are 14· · · ·A.· Based on -- my best recollection is that all the
15· safe," anything like that? 15· rest of the cables were still tight.
16· · · ·A.· No. 16· · · ·Q.· And how did you determine that?
17· · · ·Q.· As between you and Mr. Kahn, who had more routine 17· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
18· contact with Ms. Murray, you, or Mr. Kahn? 18· · · ·A.· I walked the garage.
19· · · ·A.· I would say Mr. Kahn. 19· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· So after Mr. O'Connor's incident,
20· · · ·Q.· Now, after -- strike that. 20· you personally walked the garage and determined all the
21· · · · · ·Would you agree with me that in September 21· rest of the cables were tight?
22· of 2016, the cable barrier system did not prevent 22· · · ·A.· I was just curious for myself.· I went and looked
23· Mr. O'Connor's vehicle from going over the edge of the 23· at the garage, the rest of the garage, yes.
24· ninth floor of the garage? 24· · · ·Q.· So tell me, when did you do that?
25· · · ·A.· That's correct, because the vehicle went over the 25· · · ·A.· The same day.

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 66..69
Page 66 Page 68
·1· · · ·Q.· Same day.· And your purpose of doing that was ·1· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
·2· what? ·2· · · ·A.· No.
·3· · · ·A.· I was just curious. ·3· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Why not?· You haven't sat down
·4· · · ·Q.· Curious about what? ·4· with Mr. Kahn and said, wow, we've had two vehicles go off
·5· · · ·A.· To make sure that all of the cables were intact. ·5· the edge here?· Did you --
·6· · · ·Q.· And by "intact," what do you mean? ·6· · · ·A.· That's not --
·7· · · ·A.· Went from end to end. ·7· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Object --
·8· · · ·Q.· And did you determine any of the tension in the ·8· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Did you ever actually check any
·9· cables? ·9· of the cables yourself to see if they were there or if
10· · · ·A.· No. 10· they were working?
11· · · ·Q.· Did you make any efforts to determine whether the 11· · · ·A.· That's a different question.
12· cables were sagging or not? 12· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
13· · · ·A.· No. 13· · · · · · · · (Reporter admonishment.)
14· · · ·Q.· Did you make any effort to determine whether the 14· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· Sorry.
15· cables were actually safely attached? 15· · · · · · · · Just please let me finish.
16· · · ·A.· It was a visual inspection.· I was not -- 16· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· I understand.· I apologize.
17· · · ·Q.· So the answer is no? 17· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· I'm objecting to lot of his
18· · · ·A.· No. 18· questions so give me a second to get that in --
19· · · ·Q.· Do you understand -- you understood at that 19· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Okay.
20· point, didn't you, sir, that in order for a cable barrier 20· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· -- before you start your
21· system to be effective, those cables needed to be properly 21· answer.· Her problem is probably that we're talking at the
22· attached to something in the garage to be able to prevent 22· same time.
23· a vehicle from going over the edge.· Right? 23· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Okay.
24· · · ·A.· They looked properly attached. 24· · · ·A.· If I could attempt to answer the first question
25· · · ·Q.· I didn't ask you if they looked attached. 25· of those two.

Page 67 Page 69
·1· · · ·A.· Okay. ·1· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Yes, absolutely, Mr. O'Brien.· Go
·2· · · ·Q.· I said, you understood, as the representative of ·2· right ahead.
·3· GTT Parking, that in order for the cables to be effective, ·3· · · ·A.· Mr. Kahn and I did not have a discussion about
·4· they needed to be properly attached to the garage? ·4· the Level 9 cables previous to the O'Connor incident.
·5· · · ·A.· Yes. ·5· · · ·Q.· How about after the O'Connor incident?
·6· · · ·Q.· Did you do anything to determine they were ·6· · · ·A.· Simply to state that they had been replaced with
·7· properly attached? ·7· new cables and new anchors and that an engineer had
·8· · · ·A.· I don't believe so. ·8· inspected them.
·9· · · ·Q.· Now, did anybody at GTT or Premier notice that ·9· · · ·Q.· That was it?
10· the cables where Mr. O'Connor's vehicle went off, before 10· · · ·A.· Yes.
11· he went off, had any indication that they weren't properly 11· · · ·Q.· So back to your inspection after the O'Connor
12· attached? 12· incident, what exactly precisely did you do?· Tell the
13· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 13· jury what exactly you did.
14· · · ·A.· It -- it was not brought to my attention. 14· · · ·A.· After the O'Connor incident -- I'm sorry, please,
15· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· So does that mean no? 15· just to make sure I answer accurately.
16· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 16· · · ·Q.· No problem.· You indicated that after
17· · · ·A.· Please repeat the question. 17· Mr. O'Connor's accident, maybe even the same day, that you
18· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Sure.· At any time before 18· walked the garage to inspect the cables.· Is that
19· Mr. O'Connor's vehicle went off the edge, did GTT Parking 19· accurate?
20· make any type of inspection to make sure the cables where 20· · · ·A.· Yes.
21· he went off were properly attached? 21· · · ·Q.· And I would like you to describe fully what you
22· · · ·A.· I did not. 22· did -- for the jury, what you did when you walked the
23· · · ·Q.· Anybody -- did Mr. Kahn? 23· garage to inspect the cables.
24· · · ·A.· I don't know. 24· · · ·A.· I checked to make sure that all of the cables
25· · · ·Q.· Have you asked him? 25· were intact and that none were loose, none were sagging.

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 70..73
Page 70 Page 72
·1· · · ·Q.· Anything else? ·1· times that we have e-mails on.· Correct?
·2· · · ·A.· That's it. ·2· · · ·A.· Uh-huh.
·3· · · ·Q.· And how was it you determined whether they were ·3· · · ·Q.· Yes?
·4· sagging or not? ·4· · · ·A.· Yes, sir.
·5· · · ·A.· Visually. ·5· · · ·Q.· Any others that you recall?
·6· · · ·Q.· Did you make any record of that? ·6· · · ·A.· Not at this time, no.
·7· · · ·A.· No. ·7· · · ·Q.· After the O'Connor incident, did you contact
·8· · · ·Q.· Did you think that that was an important thing to ·8· anybody at Premier and say to them, "had you inspected the
·9· do for safety? ·9· ninth level, how could a car have gone through the cables
10· · · ·A.· To -- to walk the garage? 10· of the ninth level?"
11· · · ·Q.· Right. 11· · · ·A.· I don't recall communication like that, no.
12· · · ·A.· Yeah.· I thought it was important. 12· · · ·Q.· If it was Premier's responsibility in the mind of
13· · · ·Q.· Right.· And in terms of walking the garage and 13· GTT to do that to ensure that safety, why didn't GTT make
14· determining the cable barrier system was safe, you 14· any efforts to ensure Premier was doing its job?
15· understood as an owner that somebody should do that to 15· · · · · · · · MR. KURHAJEC:· Objection; form.
16· ensure the cable barrier system was safe.· Right? 16· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
17· · · ·A.· Sure. 17· · · ·A.· I'll attempt to answer.· I think the conversation
18· · · ·Q.· Because the risk of harm to somebody from a 18· immediately went to the incident.· It wasn't -- it wasn't
19· failed cable barrier system could be devastating.· Right? 19· an attempt to, I guess you would say, point fingers.· It
20· · · ·A.· Yes. 20· was just an -- we wanted to -- the -- the conversation
21· · · ·Q.· Certainly going off of ninth, eighth, seventh, 21· went directly to the incident, which was, based on
22· sixth, fifth, fourth, any of those levels could easily be 22· recollection, high rate of speed and the car penetrated
23· potentially fatal? 23· the barrier system that was in place at the time.· And so,
24· · · ·A.· Yes. 24· no, it wasn't -- that's where the conversation went.
25· · · ·Q.· And if not fatal, could cause life-impacting, 25· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Okay.· So the conversation went

Page 71 Page 73
·1· altering injuries forever.· Right? ·1· places other than asking Premier why it hadn't done any
·2· · · ·A.· Yes. ·2· type of proactive inspections on the ninth-level barrier
·3· · · ·Q.· Now, other than that one instance after ·3· system?
·4· Mr. O'Connor's incident, did you at any time or anybody ·4· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection --
·5· you know of for GTT do any other inspection of the ·5· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Is that accurate?
·6· premise's cable barrier system? ·6· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· -- form.
·7· · · ·A.· I did not. ·7· · · ·A.· I think we just -- my expectation was that those
·8· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. ·8· inspections were already happening.
·9· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Anybody else like Mr. Kahn that ·9· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· So you assumed that Premier was
10· you know of? 10· doing those inspections?
11· · · ·A.· Not that I know of. 11· · · ·A.· Yes.
12· · · ·Q.· And Mr. Kahn never told you, you know, I walked 12· · · ·Q.· But did not verify?
13· that garage and this is what I observed about the cables? 13· · · ·A.· No.
14· · · ·A.· Not that I remember. 14· · · ·Q.· What I said is correct, that GTT Parking assumed
15· · · ·Q.· Have you ever asked him if he did? 15· Premier was doing safety inspections but never verified
16· · · ·A.· No. 16· they were being done?
17· · · ·Q.· How about anybody from Premier, have you ever 17· · · ·A.· I did not personally.
18· talked to anybody from Premier where you asked them, "hey, 18· · · ·Q.· Do you know if Mr. Kahn did?
19· did you do any kind of inspection on the cable barrier 19· · · ·A.· I don't know.
20· system?" 20· · · ·Q.· Do you have any evidence to believe that he did?
21· · · · · · · · MR. KURHAJEC:· Objection; form. 21· · · ·A.· I don't -- I don't have --
22· · · ·A.· Going back to the previous answer, it was kind of 22· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
23· on an as-needed.· So if a cable was noticed to be sagging, 23· · · ·A.· -- any evidence.· That -- that goes along with my
24· that's when communication was initiated by me. 24· "I don't know" answer.
25· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· So you told me about the two 25· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· I understand you don't know, but

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 74..77
Page 74 Page 76
·1· my question was a little different, which is, have you ·1· · · ·A.· No, we did not.
·2· ever seen any evidence to indicate Mr. Kahn actually ·2· · · ·Q.· Did it ever make any attempts to determine that?
·3· verified Premier was doing the safety inspection -- ·3· · · ·A.· No.
·4· · · ·A.· No. ·4· · · ·Q.· Why not?
·5· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. ·5· · · ·A.· I don't know.
·6· · · ·A.· Because I would have answered that question ·6· · · ·Q.· Did GTT Parking have any record of having
·7· differently. ·7· inspected the cables on the ninth level of the garage
·8· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Show you Exhibit 2. ·8· since it had purchased the Littlefield Garage before
·9· · · · · · · · (Discussion off the written record.) ·9· Mr. O'Connor went off the edge?
10· · · · · · · · (Exhibit 2 was marked.) 10· · · ·A.· No.
11· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· I've handed you Exhibit 2.· Ask 11· · · ·Q.· You, in your testimony earlier, said that somehow
12· have you ever seen this before? 12· GTT Parking had determined Mr. O'Connor was traveling at a
13· · · ·A.· May I read it? 13· high rate of speed.· Is that accurate?
14· · · ·Q.· Of course. 14· · · ·A.· That's what someone had told me, yes.
15· · · ·A.· (Pause.) 15· · · ·Q.· Who told you that?
16· · · · · ·I don't believe I've read this one.· I'd like to 16· · · ·A.· I don't remember.
17· read it fully, if that's okay. 17· · · ·Q.· Was it somebody that would know what they're
18· · · ·Q.· Sure.· Of course. 18· talking about, or are you talking about just some friend
19· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Take your time. 19· or what?
20· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· Yeah, let's go off the record. 20· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
21· You can read it. 21· · · ·A.· That may have been an eyewitness account that I
22· · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Go off at 10:56. 22· read.
23· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·(Break.) 23· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· So maybe something that you saw
24· · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· This is Segment No. 3. 24· in an article that said Mr. O'Connor was traveling at a
25· We're back on the record, 11:06. 25· high rate of speed?

Page 75 Page 77
·1· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Mr. O'Brien, have you had a ·1· · · ·A.· I think it was he had actually said in an article
·2· chance to look at Exhibit 2? ·2· that he -- his car never -- whether it was -- I can't
·3· · · ·A.· Yes. ·3· remember what I read, but it was something along the lines
·4· · · ·Q.· Had you seen Exhibit 2 before? ·4· of his car didn't brake.· And so he had an amount of time
·5· · · ·A.· Some of it looks familiar, yes. ·5· to accelerate.
·6· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So Exhibit 2 is an article out of "The ·6· · · ·Q.· By "brake" you mean B-R-A-K-E, as in slow down?
·7· American Statesman" dated September 13 of 2016. ·7· · · ·A.· Yes.· Slow down, yes.
·8· · · · · ·Is that true? ·8· · · ·Q.· So did Mr. O'Connor ever say that you saw that he
·9· · · ·A.· Yes. ·9· was traveling at a high rate of speed?
10· · · ·Q.· That's a week after the O'Connor incident, which 10· · · ·A.· No.
11· occurred on September 6th of 2016? 11· · · ·Q.· When you said to the jury you determined -- being
12· · · ·A.· Yes. 12· GTT Parking -- that he was traveling at a high rate of
13· · · ·Q.· And in Exhibit 2, a few things.· Is it true that 13· speed, what rate of speed was that?
14· the cables that were involved on the ninth level of the 14· · · ·A.· I don't know.
15· O'Connor incident had been in place for approximately 35 15· · · ·Q.· What is "high" to GTT in the parking garage?
16· years before his SUV broke through them? 16· · · ·A.· Over five miles an hour.
17· · · ·A.· I don't know.· And I don't know how this article 17· · · ·Q.· And what is the basis for GTT to consider that
18· could have known. 18· high?
19· · · ·Q.· Well, did you ever determine how long the cables 19· · · ·A.· It's the speed limit in the garage.
20· had been in place in any investigation of the O'Connor 20· · · ·Q.· Have you ever seen any vehicle traveling greater
21· incident? 21· than five miles per hour in the garage?
22· · · ·A.· It was not -- I'm sorry.· Ask it again, please. 22· · · ·A.· Most likely.
23· · · ·Q.· Sure.· Did GTT Parking ever determine how long 23· · · ·Q.· Do you know that routinely people travel greater
24· the cables had been in place on the ninth level before the 24· than five miles per hour in the Littlefield Garage, don't
25· O'Connor incident? 25· you?

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 78..81
Page 78 Page 80
·1· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. ·1· · · ·Q.· So one of two things from your investigation at
·2· · · ·A.· Routinely? ·2· GTT occurred with Mr. O'Connor.· That was either he failed
·3· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Commonly, not unusual. ·3· to hit his brakes or somehow his car accelerated?
·4· · · ·A.· It's not unusual. ·4· · · ·A.· Yes.
·5· · · ·Q.· In fact, you yourself have traveled over five ·5· · · ·Q.· But in terms of the speed, GTT never determined
·6· miles per hour in the Littlefield Garage.· Isn't that ·6· what speed it was Mr. O'Connor was traveling when he went
·7· true, sir? ·7· through the cables?
·8· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. ·8· · · ·A.· No.
·9· · · ·A.· I can't agree to that. ·9· · · ·Q.· And did you ever ask any professional to
10· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· You don't think you ever have? 10· determine that?
11· · · ·A.· I don't think so. 11· · · ·A.· No.
12· · · ·Q.· You're very conscious about traveling only five 12· · · ·Q.· Did you ever ask any professional to determine
13· miles per hour or less in the garage? 13· whether, in fact, the cable barrier system operated as it
14· · · ·A.· I try to go as slow as I can, yes. 14· should have?
15· · · ·Q.· My question is different.· Six miles per hour is 15· · · ·A.· Operated as it should have?· No.
16· pretty slow, isn't it? 16· · · ·Q.· A 4Runner --
17· · · ·A.· Yes. 17· · · ·A.· We brought an engineer out after the incident to
18· · · ·Q.· Seven miles per hour is pretty slow, isn't it? 18· evaluate the -- the situation.
19· · · ·A.· Yes. 19· · · ·Q.· Why?
20· · · ·Q.· Eight miles per hour is pretty slow, isn't it? 20· · · ·A.· Because I'm not a structural engineer.
21· · · ·A.· All relative to the normal speed limits outside 21· · · ·Q.· Right.· In terms --
22· of a garage, yes. 22· · · ·A.· And we needed them to tell us how to repair the
23· · · ·Q.· Right.· So -- 23· garage.
24· · · ·A.· I've probably exceeded five miles an hour in the 24· · · ·Q.· In terms of an adequate inspection of the garage,
25· garage. 25· GTT, in September of 2016, certainly understood that

Page 79 Page 81
·1· · · ·Q.· You would be included in what you have seen ·1· nobody at GTT had the expertise needed to evaluate the
·2· normal people do in your garage in the times that you've ·2· safety of the barrier system.· True?
·3· been there, that is, exceed five miles per hour.· True? ·3· · · ·A.· Yes.· We're not experts.
·4· · · ·A.· Yes. ·4· · · ·Q.· You, at GTT, needed to rely on some other entity
·5· · · ·Q.· Now, in terms of the actual rate of speed of ·5· or person that was qualified in order to evaluate the
·6· Mr. O'Connor's vehicle, did GTT Parking ever make any ·6· safety of the barrier system at that time?
·7· determination to find out what the rate of speed was? ·7· · · ·A.· Yes.
·8· · · ·A.· No. ·8· · · ·Q.· And you brought an engineer out to consult with
·9· · · ·Q.· Why not? ·9· you about repairs to be done on the ninth floor.· True?
10· · · ·A.· I guess the way things went, the driver, at some 10· · · ·A.· True.
11· point, admitted that he accelerated.· And I think there 11· · · ·Q.· And how did you find that engineer?
12· was no investigation into it. 12· · · ·A.· He -- we worked with him in the past on other
13· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So at some point Mr. O'Connor admitted 13· projects.
14· that instead of braking, he accidently accelerated. 14· · · ·Q.· What was his name?
15· · · · · ·Is that right? 15· · · ·A.· Richard Martin.
16· · · ·A.· He couldn't explain it, but he said that his car 16· · · ·Q.· What other projects had you worked with
17· did not slow down.· He's not sure if the brakes failed or 17· Mr. Martin on?
18· if he hit the accelerator, but that's -- that's my 18· · · ·A.· Let's see.· He was designing a ground-up project
19· recollection of what his account was. 19· for us.· He was assisting us -- if we needed to, for
20· · · ·Q.· So Mr. O'Connor's account, from GTT's 20· instance, put a door into a wall, and the wall looked to
21· perspective, was that instead of hitting the brake, he 21· be structural, I would ask him for a design, things like
22· accelerated? 22· that.
23· · · ·A.· No.· It's one of two things.· Either his brakes 23· · · ·Q.· Had Mr. Martin ever been involved in parking
24· did not work and his car continued to accelerate on its 24· garage design?
25· own, or he hit the accelerator. 25· · · ·A.· Yes.

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 82..85
Page 82 Page 84
·1· · · ·Q.· Had Mr. Martin been involved with -- with cable ·1· · · ·A.· I don't remember seeing that.· I do remember
·2· barrier systems in a parking garage before? ·2· reading that in my engineer's report.
·3· · · ·A.· I cannot answer that definitively, but I would -- ·3· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Do you see in the article where
·4· I would presume yes. ·4· it says "O'Connor told authorities at the scene that he
·5· · · ·Q.· Why would you presume yes? ·5· was parking the vehicle and tried to stop, but that the
·6· · · ·A.· He -- based on the number of jobs that he's ·6· car kept going"?
·7· designed in his career, I would expect that he's worked on ·7· · · ·A.· Yes.
·8· a garage with cables.· Cables are very common. ·8· · · ·Q.· And as a parking garage operator, you certainly
·9· · · ·Q.· You found Mr. Martin to be qualified? ·9· understood that accidents happen in a parking garage.
10· · · ·A.· Yes. 10· · · · · ·Right?
11· · · ·Q.· Reliable? 11· · · ·A.· Yes.
12· · · ·A.· Yes. 12· · · ·Q.· That people can lose control of their vehicles in
13· · · ·Q.· Give you good advice? 13· a parking garage for a variety of reasons?
14· · · ·A.· Yes. 14· · · ·A.· Yes.
15· · · ·Q.· Give you important advice? 15· · · ·Q.· And that a cable barrier system, such as the one
16· · · ·A.· Yes. 16· GTT Parking had in place, was designed in order to prevent
17· · · ·Q.· Give you important advice that you should follow? 17· people from being seriously injured when they lost control
18· · · ·A.· Yes. 18· of their vehicle?
19· · · ·Q.· Important advice that you should follow because 19· · · ·A.· Yes.· That's what was -- what was --
20· the safety of people using the garage depended upon it. 20· · · ·Q.· Previously you and I talked about the purpose of
21· · · · · ·Right? 21· a seatbelt in a car.· Would you agree that one of the
22· · · ·A.· Yes. 22· purposes of a seatbelt in a car is to help prevent a
23· · · ·Q.· In the article, Exhibit 2, the fire department 23· person from being seriously injured in the event there's
24· chief notes that Mr. O'Connor's vehicle "flipped 'end over 24· an accident involving the car?
25· end' and would have dropped to the alley below but for a 25· · · ·A.· Yes.

Page 83 Page 85
·1· stroke of good fortune for O'Connor." ·1· · · ·Q.· That, in fact, the car certainly, if everything
·2· · · · · ·Is that your understanding also of the general ·2· is perfect and operated perfectly in this world, won't be
·3· dynamics of the accident? ·3· in an accident, but we know that accidents happen.· Right?
·4· · · ·A.· Yes, that's -- my only understanding of the ·4· · · ·A.· Yes.
·5· accident is what I can read in the police reports and in ·5· · · ·Q.· Same as in a parking garage.· The owner of the
·6· these articles. ·6· parking garage, GTT Parking, knew that accidents can
·7· · · ·Q.· And but for a stroke of good luck or fortune for ·7· happen.· Right?
·8· Mr. O'Connor, he would have died or been seriously ·8· · · ·A.· Yes, accidents can happen.
·9· injured.· Isn't that likely? ·9· · · ·Q.· And the system, the barrier system, was in place
10· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 10· to prevent serious injuries from people plummeting off the
11· · · ·A.· Yes. 11· edge of the building when an unfortunate accident
12· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Were you ever there and present 12· occurred.· True?
13· at the scene while the vehicle was still dangling? 13· · · ·A.· True.
14· · · ·A.· No. 14· · · ·Q.· And wouldn't you agree that, for instance,
15· · · ·Q.· When did you get to the scene? 15· Mr. O'Connor was simply lucky that although he plunged off
16· · · ·A.· At the -- towards the -- end of the -- like late 16· the building, he wasn't injured?
17· afternoon, I believe. 17· · · ·A.· Yes.
18· · · ·Q.· Did you ever actually see the vehicle? 18· · · ·Q.· That, in fact, the barrier system was intended to
19· · · ·A.· No. 19· protect Mr. O'Connor from plunging off the building, but
20· · · ·Q.· Did you make an inspection of the compromised 20· for whatever reason it didn't work?
21· cables on the ninth floor? 21· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
22· · · ·A.· Yes. 22· · · ·A.· I believe that the barrier system was there to
23· · · ·Q.· Did you see how the cables had not broken but had 23· prevent cars from going off, yes.
24· pulled out of the parking garage structure? 24· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· And did you believe that it had
25· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 25· worked as intended?

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 86..89
Page 86 Page 88
·1· · · ·A.· Yeah.· Yes. ·1· seventh, eighth, or ninth floor of that garage?
·2· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So your belief, as somebody with GTT ·2· · · ·A.· Can I imagine it?
·3· Parking at the time Mr. O'Connor's incident had occurred, ·3· · · ·Q.· Yes, sir.
·4· was that the parking barrier system worked? ·4· · · ·A.· It's hard to imagine.· I could try.
·5· · · ·A.· It didn't work.· I think it was -- I think its ·5· · · ·Q.· Have you?
·6· limitations were exceeded. ·6· · · ·A.· As I said, I think it's hard to imagine, but I've
·7· · · ·Q.· So either it worked or it didn't work.· Which is ·7· thought about it, yeah.
·8· it? ·8· · · ·Q.· Was there anything as one of the representatives
·9· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. ·9· of GTT Parking that you learned that you found to be
10· · · ·A.· I don't think the system could have withstood 10· significant from the article in Exhibit 3?
11· what forces were put onto it. 11· · · ·A.· Did I learn anything from this article?
12· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· And what determination did you 12· · · ·Q.· Yes, sir.
13· make at GTT Parking about what forces were put on it? 13· · · ·A.· (Pause.)
14· None.· Right? 14· · · · · ·I'm not sure -- no, I don't think I learned
15· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 15· anything about the incident from this.
16· · · ·A.· No, we didn't. 16· · · · · · · · (Exhibit 4 was marked.)
17· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Okay.· You had no idea what the 17· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Okay.· I've marked as Exhibit 4
18· vehicle weighed and didn't make any determination of that, 18· to the deposition and we'll attach a copy of the video
19· did you? 19· that is embedded in Exhibit 3.
20· · · ·A.· I did not know how much that vehicle weighed 20· · · · · ·I assume that you watched the video at the time
21· except for this article. 21· that you received the article?
22· · · ·Q.· And you have no idea what the speed the vehicle 22· · · ·A.· What is the video of?
23· was traveling was.· Is that accurate? 23· · · ·Q.· The video is of Mr. O'Connor.
24· · · ·A.· That's accurate. 24· · · ·A.· I don't think I've seen his interview.
25· · · ·Q.· So if you don't know the weight and you don't 25· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Let's take a look.· This is Exhibit 4.

Page 87 Page 89
·1· know the speed, you don't know the force.· Right? ·1· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· The court reporter doesn't need
·2· · · ·A.· Correct. ·2· to translate the actual dialog in the video and I'll
·3· · · ·Q.· So at the time this incident occurred with ·3· mark, -- as I said, I marked the placeholder Exhibit 4
·4· Mr. O'Connor, there was no attempt by GTT Parking made to ·4· sheet of paper and we'll put the thumbnail -- thumb drive
·5· determine what the forces were that caused the system to ·5· with it with the record.
·6· not hold the vehicle on the top of the building.· True? ·6· · · · · · · · (Video playing.)
·7· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. ·7· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Do you remember watching that,
·8· · · ·A.· Correct. ·8· sir, now that you have seen it?
·9· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· And GTT Parking may -- well, ·9· · · ·A.· No, I don't.
10· strike that. 10· · · ·Q.· What is your reaction to Mr. O'Connor and what he
11· · · · · · · · (Exhibit 3 was marked.) 11· went through?
12· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Let me show you Exhibit 3.· Have 12· · · ·A.· It sounds pretty scary.· I'm glad he's okay.
13· you seen Exhibit 3 before? 13· · · ·Q.· And what was GTT Parking's reaction to
14· · · ·A.· Yes. 14· Mr. O'Connor and his incident where he almost died at
15· · · ·Q.· Exhibit 3 actually was exchanged in a series of 15· y'all's premises?
16· e-mails between people that included you and 16· · · ·A.· Just shock that it occurred.
17· representatives at Premier Parking.· True? 17· · · ·Q.· As a matter of fact, in addition to shock that it
18· · · ·A.· I -- I don't remember.· I've seen this, but I 18· occurred, you guys at GT- -- GTT Parking actually made a
19· don't remember how I got it. 19· claim against Mr. O'Connor for damages to your garage,
20· · · ·Q.· Okay.· What was your reaction when you read this 20· didn't you?
21· article about the sheer terror Mr. O'Connor suffered as he 21· · · ·A.· Yes --
22· went off of the nine-story garage? 22· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
23· · · ·A.· It sounded very scary. 23· · · · · · · · Go ahead.
24· · · ·Q.· Could you imagine for a person the level of 24· · · ·A.· There was a claim, yes.
25· fright, anguish, terror there must be to go off of the 25· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· There was a claim made by GTT

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 90..93
Page 90 Page 92
·1· Parking against Mr. O'Connor.· True? ·1· involved with the garage.
·2· · · ·A.· Uh-huh. ·2· · · ·Q.· Well, who cashed the check from Mr. O'Connor?
·3· · · ·Q.· Yes? ·3· GTT Parking.· Right?
·4· · · ·A.· Yes. ·4· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
·5· · · ·Q.· You made a claim against Mr. O'Connor for the ·5· · · ·A.· I didn't see the check.
·6· damages to the very system that didn't hold his car up on ·6· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Well, would it surprise you that
·7· the premises.· Isn't that true? ·7· the check was made out to GTT Parking or people that GTT
·8· · · ·A.· That's an accurate statement. ·8· Parking had paid?
·9· · · ·Q.· You made a claim against Mr. O'Connor for damage ·9· · · ·A.· That wouldn't surprise me.
10· done to the garage by his car that was dangling and 10· · · ·Q.· So that would leave either you or Mr. Kahn at the
11· smashing against the garage before being lowered down to 11· helm of making the claim.· Right?
12· the ground.· Isn't that true? 12· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
13· · · ·A.· Is that different than the previous statement? 13· · · ·A.· I don't know.
14· · · ·Q.· Yes, it is.· The cable system is on the ninth 14· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Did you ever discuss with
15· floor.· The damage done to the other parts of the garage 15· Mr. Kahn, gee, why are we making a claim against a kid who
16· such as the facade was lower, was it not? 16· went off through our barrier system on the top of the
17· · · ·A.· Yes. 17· garage?
18· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So that claim was made against him, too, 18· · · ·A.· No.
19· wasn't it? 19· · · ·Q.· Does it surprise you that GTT Parking would
20· · · ·A.· I don't remember. 20· pursue a claim against him for that?
21· · · ·Q.· Do you remember that GTT Parking made a claim 21· · · ·A.· Does it surprise me that we made a claim?
22· against Mr. O'Connor for lost profits related to spaces 22· · · ·Q.· Yes, sir.
23· that couldn't be used on the ninth floor while the cable 23· · · ·A.· The understanding was the garage was -- I don't
24· system that didn't keep his car on the premises was 24· know how to answer that.
25· repaired? 25· · · ·Q.· What was your understanding?· Your understanding,

Page 91 Page 93
·1· · · ·A.· Yes, lost profits due to closure of spaces was ·1· the garage was what?
·2· part of the claim. ·2· · · ·A.· The garage was damaged when his car accelerated
·3· · · ·Q.· Did GTT Parking, besides making a claim against ·3· and the damages had to be repaired.
·4· Mr. O'Connor, ever reach out to Mr. O'Connor in any way? ·4· · · ·Q.· So when Ms. Bowmer's car went off of the garage,
·5· · · ·A.· I don't know. ·5· did it damage the cable system there?
·6· · · ·Q.· Did GTT Parking ever make any attempts to see if ·6· · · ·A.· Yes.
·7· he was okay or apologize for what had happened to him? ·7· · · ·Q.· Did GTT Parking make a claim against Ms. Bowmer?
·8· · · ·A.· Not that I know of. ·8· · · ·A.· I don't know.
·9· · · ·Q.· Was there any other monetary damage that GTT ·9· · · ·Q.· Will GTT Parking make a claim against Ms. Bowmer
10· Parking sought from Mr. O'Connor for going off of GTT 10· for damage done to the garage when her car went off?
11· Parking's building? 11· · · ·A.· I don't know.
12· · · ·A.· Not that I know of. 12· · · ·Q.· If it's consistent with Mr. O'Connor, it would.
13· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 13· Right?
14· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Who was it that made the specific 14· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
15· decision at GTT Parking to pursue a claim against 15· · · ·A.· I was not responsible for the claim that was
16· Mr. O'Connor? 16· placed so I don't know.· I don't know the judgment that
17· · · ·A.· I can't say with certainty. 17· was used to make the claim and I don't know the judgment
18· · · ·Q.· It was -- 18· that will be used on future claims.
19· · · ·A.· It was not me. 19· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Did you think that Mr. O'Connor
20· · · ·Q.· If it wasn't you, that leaves one guy.· Right? 20· was milking his 15 minutes of fame?
21· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 21· · · ·A.· I don't believe I ever said that.
22· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· There is only two people at GTT 22· · · ·Q.· Have you seen the e-mail exchange that you're
23· Parking, you and Mr. Kahn.· Right? 23· involved with, with Premier Parking where that's the
24· · · ·A.· Well, you're assuming that it had to come from 24· comment, Mr. O'Connor is milking his 15 minutes of fame?
25· GTT Parking.· It could have come from any of the parties 25· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 94..97
Page 94 Page 96
·1· · · · · · · · MR. RHODES:· Objection; form. ·1· Mr. O'Connor's incident?
·2· · · ·A.· It may have been in some documents, but I don't ·2· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
·3· remember reading it specifically. ·3· · · ·A.· I can only speak for myself.
·4· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Do you believe Mr. O'Connor was ·4· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· That would be zero, wouldn't it?
·5· milking his 15 minutes of fame? ·5· · · ·A.· For myself, yes.
·6· · · ·A.· Me, personally, no. ·6· · · ·Q.· And did Mr. Kahn ever disclose to you that
·7· · · ·Q.· You mentioned previously that after the O'Connor ·7· somehow he had cause to have a code inspection to --
·8· incident, you brought -- "you" being GTT Parking, brought ·8· · · ·A.· Not --
·9· an engineer out to examine the ninth floor.· Is that ·9· · · ·Q.· -- occur?
10· correct? 10· · · ·A.· -- to me.
11· · · ·A.· Correct. 11· · · ·Q.· So if you and Mr. Kahn didn't do it, would
12· · · ·Q.· And that was Richard Martin? 12· anybody else have done it for GTT Parking?
13· · · ·A.· Correct. 13· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
14· · · ·Q.· What were the instructions that GTT gave 14· · · ·A.· There could have been an inspection by Premier.
15· Mr. Martin about what you wanted him to include in the 15· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Was there one?
16· scope of his work? 16· · · ·A.· I don't know.
17· · · ·A.· We asked him to tell us how to repair -- not 17· · · ·Q.· Did you ask them to do one?
18· repair -- how to -- because, obviously, the cables were 18· · · ·A.· No.
19· damaged.· How to replace the barrier system so that the 19· · · ·Q.· Did Mr. Kahn?
20· garage would be brought back up to code. 20· · · ·A.· Not that I know of.
21· · · ·Q.· When you say "brought back up to code," what do 21· · · ·Q.· So as we sit here now, you know of no inspection
22· you mean by that? 22· for code compliance done by GTT Parking and no inspection
23· · · ·A.· Well, that's an interpretation for a code expert, 23· by Premier prior to Mr. O'Connor's incident.· True?
24· not for me.· So I -- it's a typical ask and/or request 24· · · ·A.· None that I know of.
25· when I hire a consultant or an engineer or an architect 25· · · ·Q.· And after Mr. O'Connor's incident but before

Page 95 Page 97
·1· and I know that it has to be code-related and ·1· Ms. Bowmer's incident, did GTT Parking cause for any type
·2· code-specific.· I just asked for -- for that. ·2· of code inspection and compliance to be done on the cable
·3· · · ·Q.· You asked that particular engineer or architect ·3· barrier system in the building?
·4· to make sure they do the project up to code? ·4· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
·5· · · ·A.· Uh-huh. ·5· · · ·A.· Yes, we hired our engineer.
·6· · · ·Q.· Yes? ·6· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· And did you follow the engineer's
·7· · · ·A.· Yes. ·7· advice?
·8· · · ·Q.· What did you do prior to Mr. O'Connor's incident ·8· · · ·A.· Yes.
·9· at GTT Parking to make sure the Littlefield garage was up ·9· · · ·Q.· Why was following the engineer's advice
10· to code? 10· important?
11· · · ·A.· Before that, I -- I hadn't done anything. 11· · · ·A.· Because he knows the code better than I do.
12· · · ·Q.· So before the O'Connor incident and after the 12· · · ·Q.· And was it important to follow his advice because
13· purchase of the building, GTT had done nothing to ensure 13· following his advice could prevent serious injuries?
14· that the building was up to code.· Is that accurate? 14· · · ·A.· Yes.
15· · · ·A.· There were no violations against the building and 15· · · ·Q.· And ignoring his advice could cause serious
16· that made me believe that the building was in code. 16· injuries?
17· · · ·Q.· Well, let's go over, on one hand, let's use your 17· · · ·A.· Could, yes.
18· right hand and determine how many code inspections 18· · · ·Q.· It could cause, for instance, an unobvious danger
19· occurred between the time GTT bought the building and 19· to be missed.· Right?
20· Mr. O'Connor's incident. 20· · · ·A.· I'm sorry.· Please restate.
21· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 21· · · ·Q.· Yeah.· Ignoring the engineer's advice could cause
22· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Zero? 22· GTT Parking to not address a danger that wasn't obvious to
23· · · ·A.· Please restate the question. 23· GTT Parking because of its lack of expertise?
24· · · ·Q.· Sure.· How many code inspections occurred between 24· · · ·A.· Yes.
25· the time GTT Parking bought the building and 25· · · ·Q.· For instance, the fitness and compliance of the

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 98..101
Page 98 Page 100
·1· cable barrier system, that certainly, in terms of GTT's ·1· · · ·Q.· He describes that the barrier system consists of
·2· knowledge and expertise, was something outside of the ·2· five horizontal half-inch steel cables anchored into
·3· comfort level of GTT Parking? ·3· concrete columns at the southwest and northwest corners of
·4· · · ·A.· That's correct. ·4· the building.· Right?
·5· · · ·Q.· But something that was very important for the ·5· · · ·A.· Yes.
·6· safety of the patrons? ·6· · · ·Q.· And although not an engineer, you certainly
·7· · · ·A.· I believe so. ·7· understood that, if the cables were anchored into the
·8· · · ·Q.· So let me show you Exhibit -- what I'm going to ·8· corners of the building in order to hold a vehicle, they
·9· mark as Exhibit 8 -- and the reason I'm going to 8 is ·9· needed to remain anchored?
10· because I have three other video excerpts, but I'm going 10· · · ·A.· Yes.
11· show you those in a second. 11· · · ·Q.· That's pretty simplistic, yet pretty important?
12· · · ·A.· Okay. 12· · · ·A.· Yes.
13· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So we're going to go to 8. 13· · · ·Q.· You -- you know the concept of, for instance,
14· · · · · · · · (Exhibit 8 was marked.) 14· like a Chinese finger trap.
15· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· And I'll ask you if you recognize 15· · · · · ·Do you have kids?
16· Exhibit 8? 16· · · ·A.· Yes.
17· · · ·A.· Yes. 17· · · ·Q.· Have you ever used a Chinese finger trap?
18· · · ·Q.· What is Exhibit 8? 18· · · ·A.· Yes.
19· · · ·A.· It's a report following the O'Connor incident. 19· · · ·Q.· Where you put your finger in and, if there's a
20· · · ·Q.· Now, this Exhibit 8, was this shared with the 20· certain amount of tension, it keeps you from being able to
21· City of Austin? 21· pull your finger out?
22· · · ·A.· I'm not sure. 22· · · ·A.· Yes.
23· · · ·Q.· If I represented to you that I've been through 23· · · ·Q.· But if you can pull your finger out, there's not
24· the City file and we have it and nowhere in the file is 24· much of a trap?
25· there a copy of this report, do you have any reason to 25· · · ·A.· Uh-huh.

Page 99 Page 101

·1· disagree with that? ·1· · · ·Q.· Right?
·2· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. ·2· · · ·A.· Correct.
·3· · · ·A.· I -- I guess I can't disagree with it if I don't ·3· · · ·Q.· Similar concept to the way the anchors you
·4· know. ·4· understood were put in with the cables in the parking
·5· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· All right.· Do you recall getting ·5· garage at the Littlefield.· That is, in order to work,
·6· Exhibit 8? ·6· they needed to have tension to hold them in there because,
·7· · · ·A.· Yes. ·7· if they popped out, they weren't going to restrain
·8· · · ·Q.· And Exhibit 8 would be an example of one of the ·8· anything from going over the edge.· Right?
·9· documents you told me that because it's advice from the ·9· · · ·A.· We're talking about the -- I hadn't thought about
10· engineer that you relied upon, valued, et cetera, this was 10· them that way.
11· something that was very important for GTT Parking to 11· · · ·Q.· How about now that you sit here?· Is there
12· follow and adhere to.· True? 12· anything wrong with that analogy?
13· · · ·A.· Yes. 13· · · ·A.· I don't know how those GRABB-IT anchors work.
14· · · ·Q.· Now, if we take a look at Exhibit 8, it starts 14· · · ·Q.· Well, they need to grab it in order to work.
15· off with Mr. Martin, who has stamped this as a 15· Right?
16· professional engineer, talking about what he refers to as 16· · · ·A.· The name would indicate.
17· "Yesterday afternoon, a Toyota 4Runner driven through the 17· · · ·Q.· Yeah.
18· barricade cables and over the edge of the 9th floor roof 18· · · · · ·They're not called slip-it or pop-it or
19· level of the parking garage." 19· release-it anchors.· They're called GRABB-IT anchors.
20· · · · · ·Do you see that? 20· Right?
21· · · ·A.· Yes, sir. 21· · · ·A.· I can't comment on the way that those are
22· · · ·Q.· This is clearly the O'Connor incident.· Correct? 22· supposed to -- I'd have to study it a little bit more.
23· · · ·A.· Uh-huh.· Uh-huh. 23· · · ·Q.· What would you need to study to know that they
24· · · ·Q.· Is that right? 24· need to grab the cable in order for it to work?
25· · · ·A.· Yes. 25· · · ·A.· I would believe that's correct.

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 102..105
Page 102 Page 104
·1· · · ·Q.· And if they don't grab the cable, they're not ·1· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Did you say, "I don't think so?
·2· going to work?· That is, if the cable comes out of either ·2· · · ·A.· I don't think so.
·3· the anchor or the wall, it's not going to work? ·3· · · ·Q.· Then, you didn't ask the engineer, Mr. Martin, to
·4· · · ·A.· Correct. ·4· actually check any of the other levels to determine
·5· · · ·Q.· Now, Mr. Martin in his Exhibit 8 report talks ·5· whether the cable barrier system was adequate or safe, did
·6· about the five half-inch steel cables going from top to ·6· you?
·7· bottom.· He says "the end of the top cable was pulled free ·7· · · ·A.· I don't think so.
·8· from the embedded anchor in the northwest column." ·8· · · ·Q.· Now, on the last full paragraph on the bottom of
·9· · · · · ·Do you see that? ·9· the page starting with, "On the underside" --
10· · · ·A.· Yes. 10· · · ·A.· Yes.
11· · · ·Q.· So that's 20 percent of the restraint system that 11· · · ·Q.· -- he's talking about a slab edge and the slab,
12· was pulled free.· Right? 12· and he notes, "This should be reviewed more closely for
13· · · ·A.· Yes. 13· long term performance and the spalls should be patched
14· · · ·Q.· It says the end of the second cable was pulled 14· with appropriate overhead repair mortar."
15· free. 15· · · · · ·Do you see that?
16· · · · · ·That's now 40 percent of the restraint, isn't it? 16· · · ·A.· Yes.
17· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 17· · · ·Q.· Who did GTT Parking engage to follow the
18· · · ·A.· From a -- out of five calculation, yes. 18· engineer's advice to review more closely the slab in that
19· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· The end of the third cable was 19· location?
20· pulled free from the anchor. 20· · · ·A.· To review closely.· In order to repair it?· In
21· · · · · ·That's 60 percent, isn't it? 21· order to prevent the corrosion he's mentioning?
22· · · ·A.· Based on simple mathematics, yes. 22· · · ·Q.· Says for "long term performance."· "This should
23· · · ·Q.· The external anchor on the fourth cable was 23· be reviewed more closely for long term performance."
24· pulled out of the column. 24· · · · · ·Who did GTT Parking hire or ask to review that
25· · · · · ·That's now four out of four going from top to 25· more closely for long-term performance?

Page 103 Page 105

·1· bottom, five, four, three, and two.· Right? ·1· · · ·A.· It was my understanding that we would just -- as
·2· · · ·A.· Yes. ·2· the project went on, we would continue to monitor that
·3· · · ·Q.· So that's 80 percent of the restraint system, ·3· hairline fracture.
·4· isn't it? ·4· · · ·Q.· So the answer is, GTT Parking didn't retain
·5· · · ·A.· Uh-huh. ·5· anybody to review more closely that aspect.· What it did
·6· · · ·Q.· Then it says the bottom cable remained intact -- ·6· was just employed a wait-and-see approach.· Is that
·7· intact and anchored at both ends. ·7· accurate?
·8· · · · · ·So from his easy visual observation, at least ·8· · · ·A.· No.· I think this is just an initial letter that
·9· 80 percent, or four out of the five cables, pulled out of ·9· was issued very quickly and it was just identifying that
10· the anchor, didn't they? 10· this needs to be addressed in the future.
11· · · ·A.· That's correct. 11· · · ·Q.· Right.
12· · · ·Q.· Did you ever ask him why that occurred? 12· · · · · ·It didn't take this engineer long to very quickly
13· · · ·A.· No. 13· come up with the conclusions that he did in Exhibit 8 for
14· · · ·Q.· Did you ever ask him, "Hey, could that be a 14· you to address in the future.· Isn't that accurate?
15· problem in other parts in the garage?" 15· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
16· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 16· · · ·A.· No.· It didn't take very long.
17· · · ·A.· I don't believe so. 17· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· He did it very quickly.· Right?
18· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Did you ever ask him to determine 18· · · ·A.· Well --
19· if it was a potential problem in other areas of the 19· · · ·Q.· That's what you just said to me, isn't it?
20· garage? 20· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
21· · · ·A.· I don't think -- 21· · · ·A.· This was a response to identify what the
22· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 22· conditions were on the site after the incident on that
23· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· So after the O'Connor incident -- 23· floor.
24· · · · · · · · THE REPORTER:· I didn't get an answer. 24· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· That's right.
25· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· Oh.· Sorry.· Go ahead. 25· · · · · ·You told me that it was very important advice

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 106..109
Page 106 Page 108
·1· from a reliable, qualified engineer that needed to be ·1· · · ·Q.· Next sentence says, "The barrier cables at all of
·2· followed for the safety of your patrons.· Isn't that ·2· the levels below where the vehicle was suspended appear to
·3· accurate? ·3· be intact and anchored.· These should be reviewed more
·4· · · ·A.· Yes. ·4· closely by a barrier cable installer and adjusted as
·5· · · ·Q.· Now, the truth of the matter is that his advice ·5· needed."
·6· of reviewing more closely the slab that we've looked at, ·6· · · · · ·Did I review -- read that correctly?
·7· at the bottom of Page 1 for long-term performance never ·7· · · ·A.· You did read that correctly.
·8· occurred, that is, GTT Parking never followed that advice. ·8· · · ·Q.· So this engineer was telling you that, at all
·9· Is that accurate? ·9· levels below where Mr. O'Connor's vehicle was suspended,
10· · · ·A.· That's possible.· Yes. 10· the cable -- barrier cables should be reviewed by a
11· · · ·Q.· It's not possible.· It's actually a fact and 11· barrier cable installer and adjusted as needed.· True?
12· happened, isn't it? 12· · · ·A.· Yes.
13· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 13· · · ·Q.· And is it accurate that at no time after the
14· · · ·A.· I'd have to go back and look.· I think that that 14· O'Connor incident and before Ms. Bowmer's incident did GTT
15· should have been patched. 15· Parking hire, retain, ask, or commission a barrier cable
16· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Who did GTT Parking hire to 16· installer to review the cables below the ninth floor?
17· review that more closely for long-term -- long-term 17· · · ·A.· No.
18· performance? 18· · · ·Q.· What I said is true?
19· · · ·A.· I don't know. 19· · · ·A.· Yes.
20· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Let's go to the second page, the top.· It 20· · · ·Q.· So despite being specifically advised on
21· says, "None of the columns or beams in the frame appear to 21· September 10th of 2016 that GTT Parking should have a
22· have any significant visible damage.· A closer review 22· cable installer -- barrier cable installer review more
23· should be performed to verify long term performance." 23· closely all the cables below the ninth floor, GTT Parking
24· · · · · ·So again this qualified, reliable engineer is 24· did not do so.· Isn't that accurate?
25· giving you what you considered to be important advice for 25· · · ·A.· I believe so.

Page 107 Page 109

·1· the safety of your patrons. ·1· · · ·Q.· Why did GTT Parking disregard the advice of
·2· · · · · ·And did GTT Parking do a closer review of the ·2· Mr. Martin in Exhibit 8 about getting a barrier cable
·3· columns or beams to verify long-term performance? ·3· installer to review more closely all the levels?
·4· · · ·A.· They were visually inspected, I guess. ·4· · · ·A.· I don't know.
·5· · · ·Q.· By whom? ·5· · · ·Q.· After Ms. Bowmer's incident, did GTT Parking hire
·6· · · ·A.· We didn't hire a particular person to inspect ·6· somebody they considered to be a barrier cable installer
·7· these columns. ·7· or expert to review the garage more closely?
·8· · · ·Q.· So a closer review was not performed.· Is that ·8· · · ·A.· Yes.· We hired Walker Engineering.
·9· accurate? ·9· · · ·Q.· And did Walker Engineer [sic] determine that the
10· · · ·A.· I don't know. 10· cable barrier system needed to be overhauled in order to
11· · · ·Q.· So you can't tell the jury that a closer review 11· make it safe?
12· was performed.· Is that accurate? 12· · · ·A.· They -- they were tasked with coming up with
13· · · ·A.· Not right here today.· I'd have to go back and 13· different solutions to bring the code -- or bring the
14· look. 14· barrier system up to 2012 code.
15· · · ·Q.· Where would you look to see? 15· · · ·Q.· So what happened after Ms. Bowmer's incident was
16· · · ·A.· So can I go back? 16· GTT Parking determined that the cable barrier system did
17· · · · · ·I believe that this was written as a -- as a plan 17· not meet the building code.· True?
18· to move forward with.· I don't -- I don't remember that 18· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
19· we -- we hired anybody to look specifically at those. 19· · · ·A.· No.
20· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Fair enough. 20· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· GTT Parking was informed that the
21· · · · · ·So as you sit here now, you don't remember and 21· barrier cable system did not meet the building code.
22· can't tell the jury that GTT Parking hired anybody to 22· Isn't that accurate?
23· inspect the columns or beams with a closer review as 23· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
24· advised by the engineer in Exhibit 8.· True? 24· · · ·A.· We were informed by the City that we had to bring
25· · · ·A.· True. 25· the entire building up to a different code level than it

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 110..113
Page 110 Page 112
·1· was previously permitted at. ·1· project.
·2· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· So GTT Parking was informed after ·2· · · ·Q.· What project?
·3· Ms. Bowmer's accident that the City of Austin required GTT ·3· · · ·A.· After the O'Connor incident.
·4· Parking to bring the cable barrier system up to what the ·4· · · ·Q.· When did that conversation occur?
·5· City to be -- believed to be the code requirements that ·5· · · ·A.· It's any conversations with -- I believe his name
·6· needed to be met. ·6· is Troy Collins.· They were communications between Troy
·7· · · ·A.· Correct. ·7· Collins and Premier.
·8· · · ·Q.· Is that accurate? ·8· · · ·Q.· And -- so -- so you're not a participant to any
·9· · · ·A.· They wanted us to bring it up to current-day ·9· conversations with Troy Collins?
10· code. 10· · · ·A.· No.
11· · · ·Q.· And if I understood what you were telling me 11· · · ·Q.· And did you get any e-mails from Troy Collins?
12· before, you think at GTT Parking that the code under which 12· · · ·A.· No.
13· the building was built didn't require there to be any type 13· · · ·Q.· So somebody from Premier has told you that Troy
14· of vehicle fall protection. 14· Collins said, "Hey, you just have to have the garage up to
15· · · ·A.· That -- 15· the 1976 code"?
16· · · ·Q.· Is that accurate? 16· · · ·A.· I don't think that he specifically --
17· · · ·A.· That's what I've learned. 17· · · · · · · · MR. KURHAJEC:· Objection; form.
18· · · ·Q.· So that's what GTT Parking believes, is -- is 18· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Sorry.
19· that it didn't need any vehicle restraint system in order 19· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Go ahead.
20· to be up to code as far as they considered code? 20· · · ·A.· I don't believe he specifically mentioned the
21· · · ·A.· That's all post incident.· I did not know that 21· code.· He didn't know at the time was my understanding.
22· before. 22· But he said you had to -- you have to repair it --
23· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form to the last 23· · · ·Q.· All right.· So --
24· question. 24· · · ·A.· -- back to its original condition, something
25· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· So as we sit here now, GTT 25· along those lines.

Page 111 Page 113

·1· Parking's position for the jury is that its understanding ·1· · · ·Q.· What precisely is it your contention that Troy
·2· and belief about code is that it could meet what it ·2· Collins said to Premier about the code, if anything?
·3· believes the applicable code is by having no vehicle ·3· · · ·A.· Troy Collins was assigned to the case and he was
·4· restraint system? ·4· the City official that was in contact with Premier,
·5· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. ·5· overseeing it from the time of the original, I guess -- I
·6· · · ·A.· What -- what I did not know is that the code the ·6· don't know what the term is for their paperwork.
·7· building was built under and permitted by in the '70s did ·7· · · · · ·But there was a -- a notice that the garage
·8· not require vehicle restraint. ·8· was -- there was an incident at the garage.· And until the
·9· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· That's not what I asked you. I ·9· cables were repaired, he was -- he was the contact at the
10· asked you a different question. 10· City.
11· · · · · ·Do you believe that -- is it GTT's contention 11· · · ·Q.· And Mr. Collins was focusing on the ninth floor?
12· that the code it was originally built by is the code it 12· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
13· should adhere to now and nothing else? 13· · · ·A.· Everything I've read, I guess -- I believe so.
14· · · ·A.· Not right now.· No. 14· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Mr. Collins never walked the rest
15· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 15· of the garage or made any representations about --
16· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· What code at the time of 16· · · ·A.· I don't -- I don't know.· I couldn't pick him out
17· Ms. Bowmer's incident does GTT Parking admit it should 17· of a lineup.
18· have adhered to? 18· · · ·Q.· You have to just let me finish, if you don't
19· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 19· mind, Mr. O'Brien.
20· · · ·A.· The code at the time of Ms. Bowmer's incident, 20· · · ·A.· Sorry.
21· according to what the City had told us to do, was 1976. 21· · · ·Q.· From GTT Parking's files or anything you've
22· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· When did the City tell you that 22· reviewed, did Mr. Collins walk the rest of the garage,
23· at -- at any time before Ms. Bowmer's incident you just 23· other than the ninth floor, and indicate anything about
24· had to adhere to the 1976 code? 24· what needed to be complied with or not complied with in
25· · · ·A.· The City code enforcer who was overseeing the 25· the rest of the garage?

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 114..117
Page 114 Page 116
·1· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. ·1· · · · · · · · MR. KURHAJEC:· Yeah.· Thank you.
·2· · · ·A.· I don't know. ·2· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· I'm not ready.
·3· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· What you do know is that, ·3· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Not ready?
·4· according to Exhibit 8, the trusted engineer that you ·4· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· No, not ready.
·5· hired advised GTT Parking that the entire barrier cable ·5· · · · · · · · (Exhibit 9 was marked.)
·6· system should be reviewed more closely by a barrier cable ·6· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Let me show you Exhibit 9.
·7· installer and adjusted as needed.· True? ·7· · · · · ·It's a packet of pictures.
·8· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. ·8· · · · · · · · MR. KURHAJEC:· 1 through 7?
·9· · · ·A.· Also, part of that letter says that we were -- ·9· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· Right.
10· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· I didn't ask you about else -- 10· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Each one is a separate picture in
11· anything else in the letter.· I asked you about that. 11· Exhibit 9.· They're labeled.
12· · · · · ·Do you want me to repeat that or did you 12· · · · · ·The first page of Exhibit 9 is a picture that was
13· understand it? 13· taken on August the 2nd of 2017.· Do you see that?
14· · · ·A.· Repeat it, please. 14· · · ·A.· August 2nd.· Yes.
15· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· Would you read it back, please, 15· · · ·Q.· Do you have any reason that you believe you can
16· ma'am. 16· tell the jury that that cable didn't look like that on
17· · · · · · · · (The requested material was read.) 17· August 1st of 2017?
18· · · ·A.· Yes.· That's what this letter says. 18· · · ·A.· Most likely it did.
19· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· And that did not happen.· Is that 19· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So most likely the day before this
20· accurate? 20· inspection and the picture was taken that cable looked
21· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 21· like that, didn't it?
22· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· At least not before Ms. Bowmer 22· · · ·A.· There's a high likelihood.
23· plummeted off the garage. 23· · · ·Q.· And does that look like an adequate barrier
24· · · ·A.· I don't believe it happened. 24· system cable functioning properly to you, Picture 1?
25· · · ·Q.· And you do know that, had a qualified barrier 25· · · ·A.· No.

Page 115 Page 117

·1· cable installer inspect the premises as advised by the ·1· · · ·Q.· Is there any reason why GTT Parking didn't notice
·2· engineer before Ms. Bowmer's incident, that qualified ·2· and fix that --
·3· person would have found the very issues that were found to ·3· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
·4· exist with the system right after Ms. Bowmer's accident. ·4· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· -- system?
·5· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection -- ·5· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
·6· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Isn't that accurate? ·6· · · ·A.· May I --
·7· · · ·A.· I don't know. ·7· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· You can answer the question.
·8· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. ·8· Sure.
·9· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Why wouldn't that be accurate? ·9· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· May I pick up the phone?
10· · · ·A.· I just -- I don't know.· I don't know the answer. 10· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· Pick up the phone?
11· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Well, explain for the jury why simple 11· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· No.
12· deductive logic wouldn't tell you that, had an inspection 12· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· I can't?· I'm not going to
13· occurred the day before Ms. Bowmer's accident, it would 13· answer it.· I need to look up something.· Am I allowed to
14· likely find what the inspection delivers the day after her 14· look up something?
15· accident absent the damage done by her own vehicle. 15· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· Sure.· Yeah, of course.· What do
16· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.· Assumes facts 16· you want to look up?
17· not in evidence and calls for speculation. 17· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· What do you want to look up?
18· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Could you tell the jury why 18· · · · · · · · Look, just answer the question, and we can
19· simple logic wouldn't tell you that more likely than not. 19· address it later, unless there is something specific.
20· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 20· · · ·A.· Well, this may be one of the ones that was
21· · · ·A.· We don't know -- I mean, it's all speculative 21· identified and brought to attention.
22· based on the condition that is no longer there. 22· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· You took a picture of one that
23· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Lunch is here whenever you're 23· you identified?· Is that what you're looking up on your
24· ready to take a break. 24· phone?
25· · · · · · · · MR. RHODES:· I'm ready. 25· · · ·A.· No, not a picture.· No.· I'm talking about the

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 118..121
Page 118 Page 120
·1· two e-mails I referenced earlier. ·1· where Ms. Bowmer's car ended up to see if any of them were
·2· · · ·Q.· Okay.· I have those marked.· We'll look and see ·2· sagging?
·3· and you'll be able to tell me. ·3· · · ·A.· Not from this perspective, no.
·4· · · ·A.· Okay. ·4· · · ·Q.· Who did you rely on at GTT Parking to do such an
·5· · · · · · · · MR. KURHAJEC:· Can we take a break? ·5· inspection, if anyone?
·6· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· No, we're not taking a break. ·6· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
·7· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· How soon?· Because he was -- ·7· · · ·A.· The garage managers.
·8· · · · · · · · MR. KURHAJEC:· My bladder was under the ·8· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· So what's depicted in Exhibit 1,
·9· impression we were going to take a break around noon ·9· is that an acceptable barrier system from your perspective
10· because there was some discussion before we went on this 10· as the owner of a parking garage?
11· most recent segment. 11· · · ·A.· No.
12· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· I'm right in the middle of five 12· · · ·Q.· Why is it not acceptable?
13· pictures.· It will take a couple of minutes.· I think you 13· · · ·A.· There is no tension in that line.
14· can -- I mean, I really just -- 14· · · ·Q.· Appears dangerous, doesn't it?
15· · · · · · · · MR. KURHAJEC:· I'm good for a couple 15· · · ·A.· Yes.
16· minutes, if that's what it's going to be. 16· · · ·Q.· It's obviously dangerous, isn't it?
17· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· That's all it is, Curtis.· I'm 17· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
18· not trying to be difficult.· I just want to finish this 18· · · ·A.· I'll agree that it appears dangerous.
19· while I'm on it. 19· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· It doesn't appear obviously
20· · · · · · · · MR. KURHAJEC:· That's fine. 20· dangerous, just dangerous?
21· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· Yeah, let's take a break. 21· · · ·A.· Obviously dangerous.
22· Sorry.· We'll go ahead and take a break. 22· · · ·Q.· Does it appear as if that's a reasonable danger
23· · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· We'll go off at 12:02. 23· from the perspective of an owner of the parking garage?
24· · · · · · · · (Break.) 24· · · ·A.· Can you rephrase?
25· · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· This is Segment No. 4. 25· · · ·Q.· Sure.· As an owner of a parking garage, does that

Page 119 Page 121

·1· Going on at 12:39. ·1· danger depicted in Exhibit 1, does that appear something
·2· · · · · · · · You're on, 12:39. ·2· that is reasonable and acceptable, or from the owner's
·3· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· Why, thank you. ·3· perspective, is it unreasonable and unacceptable?
·4· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Mr. O'Brien, we're back from the ·4· · · ·A.· I think it's unreasonable.
·5· break.· Are you ready to proceed? ·5· · · ·Q.· Picture 2 of Exhibit 9, you'll recognize that as
·6· · · ·A.· Yes. ·6· loose interior barrier cables, do you not?
·7· · · ·Q.· We were looking at Exhibit 9 when we broke.· Will ·7· · · ·A.· Yes.
·8· you mind looking at Exhibit 9 with me, please. ·8· · · ·Q.· Same question, as the owner of the parking
·9· · · ·A.· Uh-huh. ·9· garage, is that something that is reasonable to GTT
10· · · ·Q.· Exhibit 9 is a series of pictures.· Do you 10· Parking?
11· recognize, for instance, Picture 1?· Do you see that? 11· · · ·A.· No.
12· · · ·A.· Yes. 12· · · ·Q.· Something that could be potentially dangerous, is
13· · · ·Q.· It obviously depicts the Littlefield garage, does 13· it not?
14· it not? 14· · · ·A.· It could be.
15· · · ·A.· Yes. 15· · · ·Q.· And something that should have been found by
16· · · ·Q.· August 2nd of 2017 I'll represent to you is when 16· somebody who was performing a reasonable inspection?
17· the photo was taken.· Do you see the clearly sagging cable 17· · · ·A.· Yes.
18· two levels underneath the level Ms. Bowmer went off? 18· · · ·Q.· It's obvious?
19· · · ·A.· Correct. 19· · · ·A.· Yes.
20· · · ·Q.· Did you know that cable was sagging like that 20· · · ·Q.· Is there any reason you know of why that was not
21· before Ms. Bowmer's incident? 21· noticed and rectified before the picture was taken?
22· · · ·A.· I can't specifically say that I remember that 22· · · ·A.· No.
23· exact cable, no. 23· · · ·Q.· Exhibit -- same exhibit, 9, Picture 3.· Picture 3
24· · · ·Q.· Do you remember ever being in the alley back 24· shows an obviously dislodged and missing cable at an
25· there and inspecting the cables from the perspective of 25· anterior barrier, does it not?

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 122..125
Page 122 Page 124
·1· · · ·A.· It does. ·1· of the garage.· True?· You can see the obvious gap there
·2· · · ·Q.· Again, that's something that's dangerous, is it ·2· that's approximately two and a half on one side to
·3· not? ·3· potentially five-foot on the other?
·4· · · ·A.· Yes. ·4· · · ·A.· This barrier system would not perform as it was
·5· · · ·Q.· Obvious, is it not? ·5· designed.
·6· · · ·A.· Yes. ·6· · · ·Q.· And the series of five pictures that we've looked
·7· · · ·Q.· Something that is unacceptable from the ·7· at, they all depict different cables at different
·8· perspective of the owner/operator of the garage.· True? ·8· locations within the garage.· True?
·9· · · ·A.· Yes. ·9· · · ·A.· I believe so.
10· · · ·Q.· Something that is easily detectible had somebody 10· · · ·Q.· Yeah, the Exhibit 9 --
11· been looking? 11· · · ·A.· If you tell me they do.
12· · · ·A.· Yes. 12· · · ·Q.· Well, obviously, from looking at them, you can
13· · · ·Q.· Something that would indicate, for example, that 13· tell they are.· Right?
14· some type of repair, remedy or something to make it safe 14· · · ·A.· I can confirm that Pages 2 through 5 are interior
15· needed to be done.· Right? 15· and 1 is exterior so, yes, those are different.
16· · · ·A.· Yes. 16· · · ·Q.· The 2 through 5 show different locations, do they
17· · · ·Q.· Picture 4 of the exhibit, that depicts a loose 17· not?
18· cable on the sixth level as represented.· Do you see that? 18· · · ·A.· Let's see.· If these were all taken at the same
19· · · ·A.· Yes. 19· time, I could make that assumption, yes, because this one
20· · · ·Q.· Same series of questions, you would agree as the 20· has more cars in it than the next so I -- I would make
21· owner that that's dangerous and in need of repair 21· that assumption.
22· obviously? 22· · · ·Q.· And do you have any explanation for the jury why,
23· · · ·A.· Yes. 23· after Ms. Bowmer's accident, there are still dangerous,
24· · · ·Q.· Now, if a cable is like that, it indicates that 24· inadequate, sagging, or missing cables in the barrier
25· that protective barrier is not functioning as it should. 25· restraint system in the garage?

Page 123 Page 125

·1· Isn't that true? ·1· · · ·A.· No.
·2· · · ·A.· Most likely. ·2· · · ·Q.· Is that acceptable to GTT Parking?
·3· · · ·Q.· It needs to be actually rectified by somebody in ·3· · · ·A.· No.
·4· order for it to function appropriately and safely, true? ·4· · · ·Q.· Whose responsibility was it from GTT Parking's
·5· · · ·A.· Correct. ·5· perspective to make sure that the barrier system wasn't
·6· · · ·Q.· The last picture, 5, do you see the obvious ·6· dangerous?
·7· sagging cables in that picture? ·7· · · ·A.· The garage manager.
·8· · · ·A.· I do. ·8· · · ·Q.· In GTT's perspective, is it the garage manager's
·9· · · ·Q.· A number of them? ·9· ultimate responsibility to make sure the barrier system
10· · · ·A.· I see one. 10· was maintained properly?
11· · · ·Q.· See one that -- that spans -- 11· · · ·A.· I believe so.
12· · · ·A.· Second from the bottom on the top rung. 12· · · ·Q.· And would the pictures in Exhibit 9 that were
13· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And it goes between multiple concrete 13· after the O'Connor incident, after the Bowmer incident,
14· columns? 14· indicate to you that whoever's responsibility it was, it
15· · · ·A.· Yes.· The anchor points on this type of garage 15· was clear that as of August of 2017, there were still
16· are at the north and the south end of the columns. 16· dangerous problems with the barrier system in the garage?
17· · · ·Q.· Again, same series of questions, as the owner or 17· · · ·A.· There were.
18· operator of the garage, that is a dangerous condition, is 18· · · ·Q.· And regardless of whose responsibility GTT
19· it not? 19· Parking claims it was, it certainly indicates that someone
20· · · ·A.· Correct. 20· was not living up to their responsibility.· True?
21· · · ·Q.· That shows that that barrier system is not 21· · · ·A.· True.
22· performing correctly or as designed.· True? 22· · · ·Q.· Now, the location at which Ms. Bowmer's vehicle
23· · · ·A.· Yes, it will not perform as designed. 23· plummeted off the garage, do you have any knowledge of
24· · · ·Q.· And "as designed" means to keep a vehicle from, 24· what the conditions were of the cables at that location at
25· in that instance, going off the ledge that's in the middle 25· the time her car wasn't restrained?

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 126..129
Page 126 Page 128
·1· · · ·A.· I have no knowledge. ·1· in time that was built in this country would have a
·2· · · ·Q.· Do you know whether, similar to Mr. O'Connor's ·2· vehicle restraint system.
·3· incident, the cables were pulled from their anchor ·3· · · ·Q.· So it should have had one?
·4· positions in the wall? ·4· · · ·A.· I thought that we did, yes.
·5· · · ·A.· I don't know off the top of my head. ·5· · · ·Q.· So when you say you thought that you did, that
·6· · · ·Q.· If they were, that should not have occurred. ·6· means that GTT Parking thought that there was a vehicle
·7· True? ·7· restraint system because prudent operators have vehicle
·8· · · ·A.· I don't think that that's the way that the system ·8· restraint systems on a multistory garage?
·9· was designed. ·9· · · ·A.· Because I never knew that the code changed in a
10· · · ·Q.· In order for that system to function as designed, 10· way that actually changed it from human protection to
11· it would be for those cables to not pull out of the wall. 11· vehicle protection.
12· True? 12· · · ·Q.· I'm not asking you about that.· I understand
13· · · ·A.· I believe so. 13· that --
14· · · ·Q.· And if they did not pull out of the wall, then 14· · · ·A.· I'm sorry, but that's the answer.
15· they were designed to restrain a car from going off the 15· · · ·Q.· No, that isn't the answer.· I'd like you to
16· edge of the parking garage.· True? 16· listen to my question.· An answer is an answer to my
17· · · ·A.· Not based on what I've learned. 17· question.· I'm not asking you about the code.· Okay?
18· · · ·Q.· What do you mean not based on what you've 18· · · · · ·I'm asking you, as an owner of a garage, do you
19· learned? 19· think a prudent owner of a garage that's multistory where
20· · · ·A.· Well, going back to the difference in code. 20· cars park would have a vehicle restraint system?
21· · · ·Q.· Well, why don't you tell the jury, then, what you 21· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection to the sidebar.
22· learned or what you think you've learned as the purpose of 22· Objection; form.
23· the vehicle restraint system on the building? 23· · · ·A.· What I'm trying to explain is what I thought the
24· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 24· system -- I thought any garage built in this country had a
25· · · ·A.· What I've learned is it's actually not the 25· vehicle protective system.

Page 127 Page 129

·1· vehicle restraint system.· It was a leading edge fall ·1· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· So you thought that any prudent
·2· protection system for human beings. ·2· operator would have a vehicle restraint system because any
·3· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· And who told you that? ·3· garage built would surely have one.· Right?
·4· · · ·A.· I read it in an e-mail from -- or not an e-mail. ·4· · · ·A.· Yes.
·5· I read it in a report from the City diagnosing the ·5· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Well, what was your reaction when you
·6· differences between 2012 and 1976. ·6· found out that your garage didn't have a vehicle restraint
·7· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So from your -- from GTT Parking's ·7· system?
·8· perspective, then, there was no vehicle restraint system ·8· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
·9· on this building at the time of the O'Connor incident? ·9· · · ·A.· I was -- I just didn't -- I never would have
10· · · ·A.· That's what -- 10· expected that the code would have changed in such a way.
11· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 11· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· I didn't ask you about the code.
12· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Is that true? 12· I'm asking you about the system and what the company
13· · · ·A.· That is what I've learned post incident. 13· thought when it found out or figured out, as you're
14· · · ·Q.· Is that acceptable?· As an owner of a building 14· testifying, that there was no vehicle restraint system.
15· that's a parking garage that's multi levels, is it 15· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; sidebar.· Objection;
16· acceptable and reasonable and prudent that it not have a 16· form.
17· vehicle restraint system? 17· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Did you decide, wow, since we
18· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 18· don't have one, we better get one?
19· · · ·A.· I don't know how to -- I don't know. 19· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
20· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Well, as the owner or a person 20· · · ·A.· I don't -- I honestly don't remember my exact
21· that's affiliated with the owner, do you think that a 21· reaction, but, yes, I feel like getting one is a good
22· prudent, reasonable owner and operator of the garage would 22· idea.
23· have a vehicle restraint system when it's nine levels 23· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Like maybe we should shut the
24· high? 24· whole garage down until we actually have a vehicle
25· · · ·A.· I -- I thought -- I thought a garage at any point 25· restraint system that works to keep vehicles from going

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 130..133
Page 130 Page 132
·1· over? ·1· · · ·A.· There is nothing -- there was nothing preventing
·2· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. ·2· us.
·3· · · ·A.· What we did is hire more engineers.· We worked ·3· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· So everything that you did after
·4· with the City and came up with a system that would protect ·4· Ms. Bowmer's incident in terms of feasibility,
·5· the garage in the interim, protect its patrons in the ·5· technological availability, cost, putting it in place, all
·6· interim while we created the new plan to retrofit the ·6· that could have been done beforehand, before Ms. Bowmer's
·7· entire garage.· So that is what we did. ·7· incident, if NTT -- excuse me -- if GTT Parking had
·8· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· All right.· And that action ·8· decided to do that?
·9· was -- ·9· · · ·A.· If I knew what I knew after, yes.
10· · · ·A.· We were in the process of doing. 10· · · ·Q.· That's not what I asked you.
11· · · ·Q.· Thank you. 11· · · · · ·What I asked you was, if GTT Parking had decided,
12· · · · · ·That action was taken because GTT Parking 12· for whatever reason before Ms. Bowmer's incident, to put
13· determined it did not have a vehicle restraint system? 13· up a vehicle restraint system, it could have done so?
14· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 14· · · ·A.· Yes.
15· · · ·A.· Yes.· When it was found out, we decided to take 15· · · ·Q.· It had the money?
16· action. 16· · · ·A.· I don't know about that.
17· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· And you needed to have one. 17· · · ·Q.· You don't know if you had the money to put up a
18· Right? 18· vehicle restraint system?
19· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 19· · · ·A.· I can't answer that question.
20· · · ·A.· Yes. 20· · · ·Q.· How much does that garage make a year?
21· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· So that meant when Mr. O'Connor's 21· · · ·A.· I don't know.
22· vehicle went off, you didn't have one.· No vehicle 22· · · ·Q.· A million -- a million dollars?
23· restraint system there. 23· · · ·A.· I don't know.
24· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 24· · · ·Q.· Have you ever seen a budget?
25· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Right? 25· · · ·A.· I don't know.

Page 131 Page 133

·1· · · · · ·That was a pedestrian restraint system, according ·1· · · ·Q.· You don't know if you've ever seen a budget?
·2· to your testimony.· Is that accurate? ·2· · · ·A.· The budget is between Premier and David Kahn.
·3· · · ·A.· That's the way I've been -- it has been described ·3· · · ·Q.· And it's not shared with you?
·4· to me. ·4· · · ·A.· I suppose I have it available to me, but it is
·5· · · ·Q.· All right.· So at the time Mr. O'Connor's vehicle ·5· not sent to me and it's not something I participate in
·6· went off, GTT Parking didn't have a vehicle restraint ·6· writing every year.
·7· system there; it was a pedestrian restraint system.· True? ·7· · · ·Q.· So as one of only two people that works with GTT
·8· · · ·A.· That's my understanding. ·8· Parking, you have no idea what the budget is for that
·9· · · ·Q.· And at the time Ms. Bowmer's vehicle went off, ·9· parking garage.· Is that right?
10· GTT Parking didn't have a vehicle restraint system there; 10· · · ·A.· That's accurate.
11· it was a pedestrian restraint system.· True? 11· · · ·Q.· Has Mr. Kahn ever told you safety is something
12· · · ·A.· That is my understanding. 12· that can't be afforded at the parking garage?
13· · · ·Q.· But after the Bowmer incident, GTT Parking has 13· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
14· taken efforts to go ahead and put a vehicle restraint 14· · · ·A.· No.
15· system, initially temporary but now permanently, in place 15· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· The repairs that were done to
16· in the garage.· True? 16· implement a vehicle restraint system after Ms. Bowman --
17· · · ·A.· Yes, we're putting a -- a new barrier system up. 17· Ms. Bowmer's incident, who paid for those?
18· · · ·Q.· And before Ms. Bowmer's incident, isn't it 18· · · ·A.· I'm sorry, can you restate it?
19· accurate that there was nothing that prevented GTT Parking 19· · · ·Q.· Yeah.· The implementation of the vehicle
20· from actually putting up a vehicle restraint system had it 20· restraint system after Ms. Bowmer's incident, who paid for
21· felt the need or the desire to do so.· True? 21· that?
22· · · ·A.· There is nothing preventing us from putting up a 22· · · ·A.· We've been paying for it.
23· vehicle restraint system? 23· · · ·Q.· "We" being GTT Parking?
24· · · ·Q.· Before Ms. Bowmer's incident. 24· · · ·A.· Yes.
25· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 25· · · ·Q.· How much did that cost?

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 134..137
Page 134 Page 136
·1· · · ·A.· To date, we've spent money on temporary barriers ·1· restraint system, but it's being paid for by a third
·2· and new barrier system.· I believe, to date, we've spent, ·2· party?
·3· I believe, 300,000. ·3· · · ·A.· Right.
·4· · · ·Q.· 300,000.· And is the garage currently open and ·4· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
·5· running? ·5· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Is that accurate?
·6· · · ·A.· It is open. ·6· · · ·A.· That's not entirely accurate at --
·7· · · ·Q.· Does the garage currently have an adequate ·7· · · ·Q.· What part of that is inaccurate?
·8· vehicle restraint system in place? ·8· · · ·A.· -- at this date.
·9· · · ·A.· To the points that we've made the changes the ·9· · · ·Q.· Okay.
10· engineer has drawn up, yes. 10· · · ·A.· We are paying for it out of pocket and we're not
11· · · ·Q.· Are there aspects of the garage that don't 11· sure if we're going to be reimbursed.
12· currently have a safe vehicle restraint system in place? 12· · · ·Q.· Have you been reimbursed any at all?
13· · · ·A.· We have done the alley side and we had to do 13· · · ·A.· No.
14· some -- there was some unforeseen issues in the attachment 14· · · ·Q.· Who is handling the claim for Zurich for you or
15· details that had to be reengineered and then we are going 15· for Zurich?
16· to complete the modifications and code upgrade on the 16· · · ·A.· My contact has been with a third-party engineer
17· interior barricades, interior cables. 17· that they hired.· I have not talked with anybody direct at
18· · · ·Q.· Is there any areas, other than the interior or 18· Zurich.
19· the alley/west side of the garage, that needed to have the 19· · · · · ·They hired a third-party engineer to review our
20· vehicle restraint system upgraded or implemented? 20· drawings.· They've met with me on-site.· That's been my
21· · · ·A.· Say it one more time, please. 21· contact.
22· · · ·Q.· Sure.· Other than the west side of the garage, 22· · · ·Q.· And who did the drawings?
23· the alleyway where the O'Connor and the Bowmer vehicles 23· · · ·A.· Walker Engineering.
24· went out and the interior of the garage, some of the 24· · · ·Q.· How did you find Walker Engineering?
25· pictures that we just looked at in Exhibit 9, are there 25· · · ·A.· Walker Engineering -- Premier had recommended

Page 135 Page 137

·1· any other areas in which GTT Parking is implementing a ·1· them, and I asked around just because we haven't -- we
·2· vehicle restraint system? ·2· don't have another garage.· So I asked around to find out
·3· · · ·A.· No.· The east side is concrete and the north side ·3· recommendations.
·4· is concrete and the south side is, as well, concrete.· So ·4· · · · · ·I interviewed several engineers and we worked --
·5· that leaves the interior and the west. ·5· and chose Walker based on the fact that their title is
·6· · · ·Q.· The only areas in which there was this cable ·6· reconstruction engineers or something along those lines.
·7· system was the interior and the west side? ·7· · · ·Q.· Walker Engineering had a type and level of
·8· · · ·A.· Correct. ·8· expertise that Premier Parking doesn't have.· Right?
·9· · · ·Q.· Has GTT Parking sought payment or reimbursement ·9· · · ·A.· I don't know.· Well --
10· from any third party for the implementation of the vehicle 10· · · ·Q.· Was Premier --
11· restraint system on the west side or the interior? 11· · · ·A.· Well, being that Premier is not an engineering
12· · · ·A.· Yes. 12· firm, yes.
13· · · ·Q.· Who? 13· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So in terms of the original contract with
14· · · ·A.· Our insurance company. 14· Premier -- between GTT Parking and Premier, how was it
15· · · ·Q.· Who is that? 15· that GTT came to pick Premier to be the manager of the
16· · · ·A.· Zurich. 16· garage at Littlefield?
17· · · ·Q.· And what policy provides coverage for that? 17· · · ·A.· They were managing the garage previous to this.
18· · · ·A.· I can't -- I don't know. 18· · · ·Q.· For whom?
19· · · ·Q.· And did GTT Parking make a claim against its own 19· · · ·A.· Who was the previous owner?
20· policy to have those repairs covered? 20· · · ·Q.· Correct.
21· · · ·A.· I don't know the details of that, but -- I could 21· · · ·A.· Some entity that belonged, I believe, to Stream
22· speculate, but I don't know the answer. 22· Realty.
23· · · ·Q.· So in terms of payment for the implementation of 23· · · ·Q.· And who is Stream Realty?· Do you know?
24· a vehicle restraint system on the west side and the center 24· · · ·A.· Yes.
25· following the Bowmer incident, GTT Parking is putting in a 25· · · ·Q.· Who is it?

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 138..141
Page 138 Page 140
·1· · · ·A.· Well, I know of them.· They're another -- they're ·1· · · ·A.· I did not.
·2· a real estate developer and they have offices all over the ·2· · · ·Q.· Did anybody from Stream Reality make any type of
·3· country. ·3· representations to you at the purchase about the
·4· · · ·Q.· And were you involved in the purchase at all ·4· sufficiency, quality, or efficacy of the cable system?
·5· between Stream Realty and GTT Parking? ·5· · · ·A.· I don't remember.
·6· · · ·A.· Can -- ·6· · · ·Q.· Did they make any representations about the
·7· · · ·Q.· Yeah. ·7· safety of the cable system?
·8· · · · · ·Any discussions, contacts with Stream Realty, ·8· · · ·A.· I don't remember.
·9· interviews, facilitation, anything like that? ·9· · · ·Q.· Did they indicate to you when, if and why any
10· · · ·A.· Yes. 10· repairs had been done?
11· · · ·Q.· Okay.· What? 11· · · ·A.· Well, as I said, they couldn't produce anything
12· · · ·A.· I requested all and any documentation that they 12· about those -- those -- those particular, what, where,
13· had on file for the garage. 13· when type of questions.
14· · · ·Q.· And did they give it to you? 14· · · ·Q.· You asked for that information?
15· · · ·A.· They gave me as much as they had.· They weren't 15· · · ·A.· Yes.
16· able to produce everything that I asked for. 16· · · ·Q.· Is that what you're saying?
17· · · ·Q.· Describe for me what that documentation was. 17· · · ·A.· Yes, I did.
18· · · ·A.· I believe most of it was -- I'd have to go back 18· · · ·Q.· And when you didn't get that information, what
19· and look. 19· did you do to satisfy yourself about the answers you had
20· · · ·Q.· What's that file called?· Purchase file? 20· been looking for?
21· · · ·A.· Probably. 21· · · ·A.· I suppose I was satisfied with the fact that it
22· · · ·Q.· So you have a file somewhere that has the 22· appeared that new equipment had been installed and that
23· documents -- all and any documentation that Stream Realty 23· made me feel like the -- the system was recently checked.
24· gave to GTT Parking regarding the building? 24· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So you made an assumption that it had been
25· · · ·A.· Yes, sir.· We should. 25· recently installed and had been recently checked?

Page 139 Page 141

·1· · · ·Q.· Do you recall generally what that was? ·1· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
·2· · · ·A.· I don't recall. ·2· · · ·A.· Yes.
·3· · · ·Q.· Did that documentation have anything in it that ·3· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· But did not verify that.· True?
·4· had anything to do with the five-cable system that was on ·4· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
·5· the building on the west or the interior? ·5· · · ·A.· No.· I did not verify.
·6· · · ·A.· It didn't.· It was requested, but nothing was ·6· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Did you make an assumption that
·7· received. ·7· it was safe and that it would operate to actually be a
·8· · · ·Q.· What did you request? ·8· vehicle restraint system?
·9· · · ·A.· Any information on the cable system. ·9· · · ·A.· I suppose I did.
10· · · ·Q.· Why? 10· · · ·Q.· But you never verified that.· True?
11· · · ·A.· Because I could see that there were new anchors 11· · · ·A.· I did not.
12· on the building. 12· · · ·Q.· And after Mr. O'Connor's vehicle was not
13· · · ·Q.· What did that indicate to you? 13· restrained by the cable system and you were told, as we've
14· · · ·A.· That the system had been -- the cable system had 14· looked at in Exhibit 8, that the cables should be reviewed
15· been reviewed and addressed at some point in its previous 15· more closely by a barrier cable installer, did you at that
16· ownership to us. 16· time reach out to Stream Reality in any way, shape or form
17· · · ·Q.· Did you know when? 17· to determine anything about the system after the O'Connor
18· · · ·A.· I did not know when. 18· incident?
19· · · ·Q.· Did you know why? 19· · · ·A.· Did I reach back out to Stream?
20· · · ·A.· I did not know why. 20· · · ·Q.· Yes.
21· · · ·Q.· Did you know the condition of the cable system at 21· · · ·A.· No, sir.
22· the time of purchase? 22· · · ·Q.· Why not?
23· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 23· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
24· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Other than you walking it 24· · · ·A.· I don't know.
25· personally and looking at it? 25· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· On Exhibit 8, if we look at the

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 142..145
Page 142 Page 144
·1· end of the letter from the engineer to Stream -- excuse ·1· floor.· Isn't that true?
·2· me -- to GTT Parking, do you see where it say, "A more ·2· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
·3· thorough investigation should be performed to identify the ·3· · · ·A.· So this was written the day after and it told us
·4· full nature of damage and repairs required"? ·4· what we should do.· And we worked specifically to identify
·5· · · ·A.· Yes.· That was in reference to the ninth floor. ·5· what we were going to do on the ninth floor.
·6· · · ·Q.· Does -- ·6· · · · · ·And so his secondary letter was there to be sent
·7· · · ·A.· And he also recommends that we over time -- ·7· to the City because the City wanted to know that the ninth
·8· · · ·Q.· I'm sorry.· Where does it say that in that ·8· floor was repaired.
·9· sentence?· Do you see the "ninth floor" or "over time" ·9· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· The City was focused on the ninth
10· anywhere in that? 10· floor and the ninth floor alone.· True?
11· · · ·A.· In that sentence? 11· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
12· · · ·Q.· Correct. 12· · · ·A.· I don't know.
13· · · ·A.· It says, "A more thorough investigation should be 13· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Did you ever tell the City that
14· performed." 14· the professional --
15· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Did GTT Parking perform a more thorough 15· · · ·A.· I never -- I apologize.
16· investigation of the restraint system? 16· · · ·Q.· Did you ever tell the City that the professional
17· · · ·A.· Now that we're going back to this, I need to read 17· engineer had given you a report that included a
18· more than just one sentence, if I could, please. 18· recommendation that the barrier cables should be reviewed
19· · · ·Q.· Well, I'm asking you a question.· You can read as 19· more closely by a barrier cable installer?
20· much as you want. 20· · · ·A.· I don't believe that the City has this, and I
21· · · · · ·But my question to you is, did GTT Parking 21· don't believe that I told them that.· But I also did not
22· perform a more thorough investigation of the restraint 22· speak with that -- with the code-enforcement officer of
23· system? 23· that -- of the O'Connor incident.
24· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 24· · · ·Q.· Did you ever have Exhibit 9 -- or -- excuse me --
25· · · ·A.· Not at that time.· Not at that immediate moment. 25· Exhibit 8 sent to the City or cause anybody from Premier

Page 143 Page 145

·1· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Now, this report was issued after ·1· to send it to the City?
·2· a very quick visual-only inspection by Mr. Martin.· Isn't ·2· · · ·A.· I don't think so.
·3· that true? ·3· · · ·Q.· At the time that this was going on immediately
·4· · · ·A.· Yes.· This is putting in writing his account of ·4· following the O'Connor incident, there was, was there not,
·5· the day. ·5· sir, some level of urgency for GTT Parking to get the
·6· · · ·Q.· My question to you was, it was based on a quick ·6· ninth floor back up and open because ACL was coming and it
·7· visual inspection and observation and nothing more.· True? ·7· was important to have that revenue for GTT Parking?· Isn't
·8· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. ·8· that accurate?
·9· · · ·A.· It was -- at the beginning of his letter, he says ·9· · · ·A.· That is not accurate.· I had no -- I had no date
10· "yesterday afternoon."· So, yes, it was the next day. 10· in mind on when I wanted to get that back open.· I knew
11· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Okay.· And he actually says in 11· that those spaces were only protected by a chain-link
12· the last paragraph that it's based on his visual 12· fence and that chain-link fence was a parking lot -- a
13· observation from a visit to the building the day before. 13· parking space's distance from that edge, and that was my
14· Right? 14· motivation.
15· · · ·A.· Yes. 15· · · ·Q.· The motivation was what, again, sir?· The
16· · · ·Q.· And encourages a more thorough investigation. 16· chain-link fence had what to do with it?
17· And that's on top of specifically encouraging a barrier 17· · · ·A.· The chain-link fence that was provided by the
18· cable installer being consulted.· Right? 18· City to bar -- to protect -- to keep you from parking on
19· · · ·A.· Correct. 19· that ninth floor -- the entire stretch of the ninth floor,
20· · · ·Q.· Now, this report, Exhibit 8, it was not given to 20· in my -- when I saw that, it was the only barrier between
21· the City of Austin, was it? 21· patrons and that edge that had been destroyed.
22· · · ·A.· I didn't see it in the City of Austin records. 22· · · ·Q.· All right.· Was that dangerous?
23· · · ·Q.· In fact, instead of giving Exhibit 8 to the City 23· · · ·A.· Yes.
24· of Austin, GTT Parking had Mr. Martin do a separate report 24· · · ·Q.· So --
25· that focused exclusively on the repairs done on the ninth 25· · · ·A.· So my -- my motivation was to get the cables back

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 146..149
Page 146 Page 148
·1· up so that it wasn't just a chain-link fence in between ·1· what you're looking for?
·2· our patrons and that edge.· That was my motivation. ·2· · · ·Q.· Is Stream Reality in there?
·3· · · ·Q.· Was ACL coming to town? ·3· · · ·A.· Yes.
·4· · · ·A.· I can't remember. ·4· · · ·Q.· So Stream Reality from the time that you guys
·5· · · ·Q.· Do you remember engaging in e-mail correspondence ·5· purchased the building, the Littlefield garage, has
·6· with the property manager about ACL coming to town and ·6· literally been within feet of the Littlefield garage?
·7· needing to open the spaces back up? ·7· · · ·A.· I believe so.
·8· · · ·A.· I don't remember that specifically.· Did I say ·8· · · ·Q.· So if there was some issue about what they had
·9· that? ·9· done, when they had done, why they had done it, what they
10· · · ·Q.· I'm asking you. 10· believed about the restraint system, there was literally
11· · · ·A.· I don't remember. 11· 50 feet to go to figure that out by talking to them.
12· · · ·Q.· Have you seen the videos of Ms. Bowmer's vehicle 12· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
13· as it is involved with leaving the building there at 13· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Is that accurate?
14· Littlefield? 14· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· You can answer.
15· · · ·A.· The video I've seen is the one taken by 15· · · ·A.· Yeah.· They were in -- they were in that
16· surveillance camera of 515 Congress from the loading dock. 16· building.
17· · · · · · · · (Exhibit 5 was marked.) 17· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Okay.· And did you ever make any
18· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· I've marked as Exhibit 5 I 18· attempts to do that at all?
19· believe what's Bates'd as 2077, which is an excerpt; 19· · · ·A.· I don't think so.
20· Exhibit 6, which is the same excerpt in slow motion; and 20· · · ·Q.· Why not?
21· Exhibit 7, which is a video that Stream Reality had on 21· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.· Misstates his
22· their cameras. 22· prior testimony.
23· · · · · ·I've put placeholders in the record, which is a 23· · · ·A.· I don't know.
24· sheet of paper, and they're -- the videos are actually on 24· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· And just showing you here -- do
25· the disks or a thumb drive that we're going to attach to 25· you see at this point Ms. Bowmer's vehicle exiting the

Page 147 Page 149

·1· the record so it's part of the record. ·1· building?
·2· · · · · ·Let me show you Exhibit 5. ·2· · · ·A.· Yes.
·3· · · · · ·Do you recognize that as the Littlefield garage ·3· · · ·Q.· And do you know what floor?· Or how do you
·4· and Ms. Bowmer's vehicle leaving? ·4· characterize the floor from which she came off?
·5· · · ·A.· Yes.· Taken from The Driskill. ·5· · · ·A.· It's described as the seventh floor, the seventh
·6· · · ·Q.· And would you agree with me, sir, that that's an ·6· parking level.
·7· extremely dangerous situation? ·7· · · ·Q.· So if she took -- strike that.
·8· · · ·A.· Uh-huh. ·8· · · · · ·So if somebody took the elevator up and exited,
·9· · · ·Q.· Yes? ·9· it would be the floor that had the number 7 on it?
10· · · ·A.· Yes. 10· · · ·A.· That's tough because --
11· · · ·Q.· And that it involves an extreme risk of injury 11· · · ·Q.· Yeah.· That's a little confusing.
12· and death to Ms. Bowmer? 12· · · ·A.· -- because they go like this.
13· · · ·A.· Yes. 13· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So part of it goes -- part of it is ramped
14· · · ·Q.· And it involved an extreme risk of injury and 14· up and part of it is ramped down?
15· death to anybody that was in the alley underneath 15· · · ·A.· Yes.
16· Ms. Bowmer's vehicle? 16· · · ·Q.· But if you looked at it from the outside, the
17· · · ·A.· Yes. 17· very top of the garage would be the ninth level, the first
18· · · · · · · · (Exhibit 6 was marked.) 18· covered segment would be the -- from the top would be the
19· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Let me show you Exhibit 6. 19· eighth, the next covered segment basically is the seventh.
20· · · · · ·So that the jury is oriented to what we're 20· · · · · ·And that's the level you understand her vehicle
21· talking about, the building on the right side by the 21· came from?
22· Pollock truck there, what is that building? 22· · · ·A.· Yes.· There's a partial level which you could
23· · · ·A.· 515 Congress. 23· call 10.· 9 is the first full level.· It's partially
24· · · ·Q.· And who is housed in that building? 24· covered, partially uncovered.· Then there's 8 and then 7.
25· · · ·A.· Commonly referred to as Bank of America.· Is that 25· That's --

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 150..153
Page 150 Page 152
·1· · · ·Q.· So Mr. -- ·1· accidentally hit the gas instead of the brake?
·2· · · ·A.· That's what I understand 7 to -- we're talking ·2· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
·3· about the same thing. ·3· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· That's not uncommon in your
·4· · · ·Q.· All right.· And Mr. O'Connor's vehicle, which ·4· personal knowledge, is it?
·5· floor was that on? ·5· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
·6· · · ·A.· 9.· The first full level, partially covered. ·6· · · ·A.· I'm not knowledgeable about -- there -- there are
·7· · · ·Q.· Do you understand from the -- any aspect of this ·7· studies that are done about that.· I am not knowledgeable
·8· case that Ms. Bowmer was saved by the passenger restraint ·8· about them.
·9· systems in her car? ·9· · · ·Q.· Were you aware of the studies done about that?
10· · · ·A.· Do I understand that? 10· · · ·A.· No.
11· · · ·Q.· Yes. 11· · · ·Q.· Okay.· When did you become aware of the studies
12· · · ·A.· Yes. 12· done about how people accidentally hit the pedal -- the
13· · · ·Q.· You understand that, even though she was in a 13· gas pedal instead of the brake?
14· crash, the restraints went off and actually prevented her 14· · · ·A.· After this incident.
15· from being more injured and dying? 15· · · ·Q.· And what did you learn from those studies?
16· · · ·A.· Yes.· I believe the air bag and then she had a 16· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
17· rollover device. 17· · · ·A.· That the possibility exists.
18· · · ·Q.· You understand the concept of having a restraint 18· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Did you --
19· system that protects you from injury even though you've 19· · · ·A.· A larger majority of them actually existed in
20· been in an accident? 20· Toyota vehicles for some reason, Lexuses, and I don't
21· · · ·A.· I understand that concept. 21· remember why.· But there was a big study about those
22· · · ·Q.· It's analogous to a vehicle restraint system in a 22· particular vehicles.
23· parking garage; is it not? 23· · · ·Q.· Did you learn that confusion, vertigo or panic
24· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 24· can cause that to happen?
25· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· You could have an accident, say, 25· · · ·A.· I did not.

Page 151 Page 153

·1· at 10 miles an hour where you hit a restraint system and ·1· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
·2· there might be some damage, but it's not near the damage ·2· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Does that make sense to you just
·3· as if you plummet off of the garage like Ms. Bowmer did to ·3· commonly, in your own common sense?
·4· the ground below? ·4· · · ·A.· I haven't thought about it.
·5· · · ·A.· Those would be two different levels of damage. ·5· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Have you ever heard a report from anybody
·6· Yes. ·6· at the garage or anybody you know of who's told you that
·7· · · ·Q.· And that the vehicle restraint system is meant to ·7· because of the way the garage is set up on the west side,
·8· prevent further physical damage by leaving the premises? ·8· with only the five cables that were there at the time of
·9· · · ·A.· If you can prevent the car from leaving the ·9· Ms. Bowmer's accident, that it can be very frightening
10· premises, it's going to cause less damage. 10· when you're parking your car on the west side of that
11· · · ·Q.· And that's the intent of the restraint system. 11· garage?
12· Right? 12· · · ·A.· No one ever said that to me --
13· · · ·A.· Based on the forces that are designed into it, 13· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
14· yes. 14· · · ·A.· -- no one ever said that to me before the Bowmer
15· · · ·Q.· And it's there, based on the forces it's designed 15· incident.
16· for, to prevent accidents because accidents are going to 16· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· How about after the Bowmer
17· happen in a parking garage? 17· incident?
18· · · ·A.· Yes, they -- they can. 18· · · ·A.· It was mentioned.
19· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 19· · · ·Q.· By whom?
20· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· They can? 20· · · ·A.· I don't remember today.
21· · · ·A.· They can. 21· · · ·Q.· More than one person?
22· · · ·Q.· As an owner of a garage, you certainly know it's 22· · · ·A.· I think it was someone possibly relaying -- I
23· foreseeable that there will be accidents in a garage? 23· don't remember who.· Maybe two people, maybe three people.
24· · · ·A.· Yes.· There will be accidents everywhere. 24· I don't remember.· It wasn't everybody who knows me came
25· · · ·Q.· It's foreseeable, for instance, that somebody may 25· up and said, "You know, that garage has a -- whatever the

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 154..157
Page 154 Page 156
·1· illusion." ·1· · · ·A.· That vertical piece is for the sphere.
·2· · · ·Q.· What's the illusion that was reported to you by ·2· · · ·Q.· Right.· What did Walker tell you about the
·3· the two or three people? ·3· illusion and doing something to help the effect?
·4· · · ·A.· That there was that brick wall quite a ways away ·4· · · ·A.· Similar to me.· They said "I could see how that
·5· from the garage. ·5· could be a problem."· And so we -- we're going to put more
·6· · · ·Q.· Which creates what kind of effect that was ·6· than just that one vertical piece.· That vertical piece is
·7· reported to you? ·7· required by their engineering -- their engineering
·8· · · ·A.· It could make you believe that -- it could make ·8· calculations.
·9· you believe that the -- I mean, I don't really remember ·9· · · · · ·We're going to put more than that one piece.
10· what they said.· I never saw it that way.· So I'm trying 10· That's not required by code, but we're going to put it in,
11· to -- I'm regurgitating something that someone told me. I 11· just so there is more of them.· Because there is no --
12· don't see it that way.· So it's hard for me to say. 12· there is nobody that can tell us otherwise.
13· · · · · ·You're asking me to repeat some -- a casual 13· · · · · · · · (Exhibit 7 was marked.)
14· conversation about -- not casual, but you're asking me to 14· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Let me show you Exhibit 7, the
15· repeat something that someone shared with me.· They said, 15· Stream Realty video.· Have you seen Exhibit 7?
16· "You know, thinking about it, that garage -- you know, it 16· · · ·A.· Yes.· This is the one I was referring to that I
17· could be an optical illusion" or something along those 17· have seen.
18· lines. 18· · · ·Q.· You have seen this.· And you saw this where?
19· · · ·Q.· The fact that there is an open-air, no-wall, with 19· Like, did you get it from Stream or was it just part of
20· only five cables, then a space in the alley and a brick 20· the case?
21· wall on the other side, creates some type of optical 21· · · ·A.· I may have seen it online.
22· illusion, doesn't it? 22· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Y'all are talking over each
23· · · ·A.· Some people could see it that way, is what I was 23· other again.
24· told. 24· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Sorry.
25· · · ·Q.· By at least two or three people? 25· · · ·A.· I think I saw it online.

Page 155 Page 157

·1· · · ·A.· By two people.· One person. ·1· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· And what was your reaction when
·2· · · ·Q.· You don't remember who that was? ·2· you saw it?
·3· · · ·A.· I don't remember. ·3· · · ·A.· Shocked.
·4· · · ·Q.· And when you were acting with the engineering ·4· · · ·Q.· The Suburban-type vehicle that you see here
·5· group, did you say it was Walker? ·5· pulling in, have you made any attempts to contact this
·6· · · ·A.· Walker, yeah. ·6· driver at all?
·7· · · ·Q.· Walker.· To design an acceptable vehicle ·7· · · ·A.· I have not.
·8· restraint system.· Did Walker indicate that they were ·8· · · ·Q.· Do you know anything about the driver?
·9· going to take that perception or illusion or effect into ·9· · · ·A.· I know what's in the paper.· I think his name is
10· account and design something for that? 10· in the paper.
11· · · ·A.· The -- the cables have a vertical piece to 11· · · ·Q.· Do you know that essentially through luck this
12· help -- because now -- it used to be nine inches.· Now 12· driver escaped either serious injuries or death?
13· it's a four-inch square.· So there is a bar in between the 13· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
14· columns now on the new design that I think that serves two 14· · · ·A.· Yes.· He was lucky to have pulled up that far.
15· purposes. 15· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· And you acknowledge, as owner of
16· · · · · ·One is it's going to keep the sphere spacing 16· the garage, that in addition to providing protection for
17· correct, because it's a long span.· And it's also going 17· the people in the garage, the vehicle restraint system is
18· to -- I think that vertical piece will help with the 18· very important to protect people like the driver of that
19· situation you're alluding to. 19· Suburban, so that they're not hit by a falling vehicle?
20· · · ·Q.· The optical illusion situation? 20· · · ·A.· Yes.· They can serve multiple purposes.
21· · · ·A.· Yes. 21· · · ·Q.· Now, is it your belief in this case, sir, that
22· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 22· Ms. Christi Bowmer is responsible for what you see on the
23· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· And did Walker specifically 23· screen right there?
24· address with you, or anybody at GTT, that that was part of 24· · · ·A.· Do I believe she's responsible?· Is that the
25· the component for the vertical piece? 25· question?

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 158..161
Page 158 Page 160
·1· · · ·Q.· Yes, sir. ·1· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Well, you had an engineer that told you
·2· · · ·A.· There is testimony that she hit the accelerator. ·2· you actually needed to do more investigation and have
·3· · · ·Q.· Right. ·3· everything checked.· Right?
·4· · · ·A.· And that's what I know about what happened with ·4· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
·5· her. ·5· · · ·A.· Nobody told me that our system was not a vehicle
·6· · · ·Q.· Well, you know the restraint system failed. ·6· barrier system.
·7· Right? ·7· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Okay.· Did they tell you that it
·8· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. ·8· was adequate, that the whole thing was adequate and you
·9· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Or actually you know there wasn't ·9· didn't need to do anything at all?
10· even a restraint system there at the time, was there? 10· · · ·A.· No.
11· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection. 11· · · ·Q.· Now, as part of GTT Parking, do you accept
12· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· There was one for pedestrians, 12· responsibility for the fact that your facility didn't have
13· according to your testimony. 13· a vehicle restraint system, and what you see on the screen
14· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 14· happened to Ms. Bowmer?
15· · · ·A.· That's what I've learned after her incident, yes. 15· · · ·A.· I'm not --
16· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Okay.· So the restraint system 16· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
17· didn't fail, because there was no restraint system there? 17· · · · · ·Go ahead.
18· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection. 18· · · ·A.· -- I'm not an expert on code.· I'm not an
19· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Isn't that true? 19· engineer.· I'm not a City code enforcer.· I did what I was
20· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 20· asked to do, and I'm continuing to do what I'm asked to
21· · · ·A.· In technicality I guess you're right. 21· do.· I did not know that that was not a vehicle barrier
22· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Okay.· Well, in technicality 22· system.· No one told me that prior to Ms. Bowmer's
23· shouldn't there have been a restraint system for vehicles 23· incident.· I --
24· there? 24· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· Objection; nonresponsive.
25· · · ·A.· We weren't told to put a restraint system there. 25· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· My question to you is, as one of

Page 159 Page 161

·1· · · ·Q.· I didn't ask if you were told to put one there. ·1· the only two people affiliated with GTT Parking, knowing
·2· What I asked you was as a reasonably prudent owner, you ·2· now what you've told me under oath that there was no
·3· knew that on the seventh floor there needed to be a ·3· vehicle restraint system there, knowing Ms. Bowmer's car
·4· restraint system. ·4· went off the seventh floor, knowing Mr. O'Connor's car
·5· · · ·A.· I didn't know that. ·5· went off the ninth floor, knowing, as we've seen, that an
·6· · · ·Q.· You didn't know there needed to be one? ·6· engineer told you guys you needed to have a closer
·7· · · ·A.· I didn't know that. ·7· inspection of the system, do you accept responsibility for
·8· · · ·Q.· When was it -- is the first time that you ·8· what happened to Ms. Bowmer?
·9· discovered, as a reasonably prudent owner, you should have ·9· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
10· a vehicle restraint system on the seventh floor? 10· · · ·A.· I'm going to say it again.· I did what I was told
11· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 11· to do by the City and by our structural engineer, and
12· · · ·A.· After the Bowmer incident. 12· we've got the cables on the ninth floor replaced,
13· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· It wasn't after the O'Connor 13· brand-new, as opposed to what -- what else may have been
14· incident? 14· said.
15· · · ·A.· No. 15· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Well --
16· · · ·Q.· What was it about the O'Connor incident that 16· · · ·A.· I did what I was told.
17· didn't alert you to the fact that you needed to have a 17· · · ·Q.· -- your search --
18· vehicle restraint system? 18· · · ·A.· Please.
19· · · ·A.· Because I was never told about the code issues. 19· · · ·Q.· Yeah, sure.· Go ahead.
20· · · ·Q.· Well, did you know -- 20· · · ·A.· I did what I was told to do to -- by the City and
21· · · ·A.· The code upgrades and so on and so forth. 21· by our engineer.
22· · · ·Q.· Well, regardless of the code, did you know that 22· · · ·Q.· Okay.
23· it was a good idea to have a system to keep vehicles from 23· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· First of all, nonresponsive.
24· going off the edge? 24· I'm going to object.
25· · · ·A.· I thought that's what we had. 25· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· My question to you is, do you

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 162..165
Page 162 Page 164
·1· accept responsibility.· Not did you do what you were told ·1· garage, that you bring it up to code?
·2· or do you blame somebody else. ·2· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
·3· · · · · ·So I'm asking you, as one of the only two humans ·3· · · ·A.· I thought it was in code.· I thought it was.
·4· involved with GTT Parking, do you accept any ·4· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Okay.· Whether you thought it was
·5· responsibility for what happened to Ms. Bowmer? ·5· or not, don't you think it's a good idea to bring it up to
·6· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. ·6· code?
·7· · · ·A.· For any percentage of it? ·7· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
·8· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· That's right. ·8· · · ·A.· I was told that what we did was correct.
·9· · · ·A.· All I knew to do was to get an engineer involved, ·9· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· What you did on the ninth floor?
10· follow the written directions from code-enforcement -- 10· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
11· I -- I don't think so.· I think I did everything that was 11· · · ·A.· The City allowed us to reopen, and our engineer
12· asked of me. 12· allowed us to reopen.
13· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Did you follow the engineer's instruction 13· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Do you understand the City --
14· that you should review more closely the cables in the 14· · · ·A.· This was a part of this letter.· It says "Based
15· entire building by a barrier cable installer? 15· on my visual assessment yesterday the parking garage is
16· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 16· safe for continued use except for the area on the ninth
17· · · ·A.· That did not happen in the time frame that we did 17· floor."· I satisfied that sentence, and the -- and the
18· the repairs to the ninth floor.· That did not happen in 18· garage reopened.
19· that time frame. 19· · · ·Q.· Well, you know that sentence was wrong now, don't
20· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· It didn't happen until after 20· you?
21· Ms. Bowmer was hurt seriously, did it? 21· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
22· · · ·A.· I don't think so. 22· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· The parking garage wasn't safe
23· · · ·Q.· And at the time, after she was hurt seriously, 23· for use, was it?
24· when that was reviewed, it was determined that in your 24· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
25· mind there was no barrier system at all for vehicles and 25· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Does that look safe?

Page 163 Page 165

·1· there needed to be one? ·1· · · ·A.· I can't answer that.
·2· · · ·A.· I didn't determine that.· I was told that. ·2· · · ·Q.· Does that look safe to you?
·3· · · ·Q.· All right.· Do you have any reason to dispute ·3· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
·4· that? ·4· · · ·A.· You're asking me to go back in time.
·5· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.· What time ·5· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· No, I'm not.· I'm asking you,
·6· frame are you talking about? ·6· does that look safe?
·7· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· After Ms. Bowmer's incident. ·7· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
·8· · · ·A.· Can you repeat the question? ·8· · · ·A.· What was your question before that?
·9· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Sure.· In the time frame after ·9· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Does that look safe?
10· Ms. Bowmer's incident, you determined, after reviewing 10· · · ·A.· You asked me a question about this sentence,
11· more closely the barrier cable system, that you actually 11· before that one.
12· didn't have one and you needed to install one.· Right? 12· · · ·Q.· I don't know what I asked you.· I'm sure you
13· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 13· probably didn't answer it.· But I'm asking you now, does
14· · · ·A.· So part of the other -- if we go back to the 14· that look safe to you?
15· O'Connor incident, the only way -- my understanding is the 15· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Object to the sidebar and
16· only way you're going to -- when you have an entire 16· objection; form.· It's vague.· If you can answer it, go
17· building, and you have damage to a small -- to a section 17· ahead.
18· of an entire building, you replace that section.· You're 18· · · ·A.· Does this -- does this situation look safe?
19· not necessarily required to bring everything up to code. 19· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Yes, sir.
20· · · ·Q.· Says who? 20· · · ·A.· And specifically to this image right here on the
21· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.· And object to 21· screen, that is not a safe situation.
22· the nonresponsive part. 22· · · · · ·"Based on my visual assessment yesterday" --
23· · · ·A.· I don't know says who. 23· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· There is not a question on the
24· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Well, don't you think that would 24· table.
25· be a good idea, for the safety of the people using the 25· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Based on your visual assessment

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 166..169
Page 166 Page 168
·1· yesterday what? ·1· previously stated, we designated another corporate rep to
·2· · · ·A.· I'll wait for your next question. ·2· testify about this.
·3· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· He was reading from the letter. ·3· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· You may not be able to show me.
·4· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Were you aware, sir, that when ·4· I'm just asking you.
·5· the City inspected the repairs on the ninth floor, if it ·5· · · ·A.· I'd have to read it and show you.
·6· did, that the City had no duty or obligation to inspect ·6· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Have you, before sitting here today, ever
·7· anything else in the garage? ·7· made any attempt to determine whether the actual written
·8· · · ·A.· I was not -- ·8· agreement with Premier has any language in it that
·9· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. ·9· indicates Premier is somehow responsible for the vehicle
10· · · · · · · · Go ahead, if you know the answer. 10· barrier system?
11· · · ·A.· Can you repeat the question? 11· · · ·A.· Have I before today?
12· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Were you aware that when the City 12· · · ·Q.· Yes, sir.
13· inspected the ninth-floor repairs, if they did after the 13· · · ·A.· I've looked at sections of this.
14· O'Connor incident, that the City had no duty or obligation 14· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Did you ever find one that says Premier is
15· to inspect anything else in the building? 15· responsible for the vehicle barrier system?
16· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 16· · · ·A.· Not to that language.
17· · · ·A.· I did not know that. 17· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Did you find some section that you
18· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· At the time of the O'Connor 18· believed indicated Premier was responsible for safety?
19· incident, whose duty did you think it was to inspect the 19· · · ·A.· Not to that language.
20· building to make sure it was safe? 20· · · ·Q.· Pardon me?
21· · · ·A.· Based on our involvement of an engineer in the 21· · · ·A.· Not to that language, no.
22· City, and them telling us it was safe in multiple places 22· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And did you find some language that
23· to open the garage, multiple locations, and writing that 23· indicated that something in the contract would make
24· it was safe to open the garage, I was comfortable with it. 24· Premier responsible for that cable system we've been
25· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· I'll object as nonresponsive. 25· talking about?

Page 167 Page 169

·1· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· My question to you is that after ·1· · · ·A.· I can't speak to this whole entire document.
·2· the O'Connor incident, whose duty did you think it was to ·2· · · ·Q.· I'm not asking you if you can speak to the whole
·3· make sure the garage was safe to open, yours at GTT, ·3· thing.
·4· somebody else, or who? ·4· · · ·A.· So from --
·5· · · ·A.· We were relying on the experts involved.· The ·5· · · ·Q.· You said you reviewed it.
·6· City has code-enforcement experts, the engineer has a -- ·6· · · ·A.· -- from what I've -- the sections that I've read,
·7· has a stamp and knows all the calculations.· I was relying ·7· I have -- no.
·8· on them. ·8· · · ·Q.· Okay.
·9· · · ·Q.· You and I previously talked a little bit about ·9· · · ·A.· But I haven't reviewed --
10· the GTT agreement with Premier.· Do you recall that? 10· · · ·Q.· Okay.
11· · · ·A.· Yes.· Yes, sir. 11· · · ·A.· -- but it needs to be said that it's not the
12· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· Let me mark as Exhibit 10 -- 12· entire document.
13· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· I believe we designated 13· · · ·Q.· It needs to be said -- I think I understand you,
14· David Kahn to testify about that. 14· that you didn't review the entire document for that
15· · · ·A.· Yeah, I don't know.· I did not sign that and I 15· purpose?
16· did not review it. 16· · · ·A.· Correct.
17· · · · · · · · (Exhibit 10 was marked.) 17· · · ·Q.· What -- what purpose were you reviewing it for?
18· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Let me show you Exhibit 10.· I'll 18· · · ·A.· There is a separation between the retail tenants
19· keep it simple then.· You previously testified to me that 19· and Premier.
20· you believe that the agreement with Premier indicated that 20· · · ·Q.· So, for instance, the retail tenants -- describe
21· Premier was going to be responsible for safety in the 21· for the jury what that means in reference to the
22· garage.· Is that accurate? 22· Littlefield building there.
23· · · ·A.· Yes. 23· · · ·A.· There is a Gold's Gym, there is apartments, and
24· · · ·Q.· Can you show me in that agreement where that is? 24· there is the elevator.· And so we had to do some elevator
25· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Object to the form.· And as I 25· repair, and that was the responsibility of Weitzman.

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 170..173
Page 170 Page 172
·1· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And who is Weitzman? ·1· · · ·A.· I do.
·2· · · ·A.· Weitzman manages the apartments, Gold's Gym, ·2· · · ·Q.· What is Exhibit 13?· These are e-mails from you
·3· the -- I believe it says in here the sidewalk, and then ·3· or to you?
·4· elevators. ·4· · · ·A.· This is, I think, from yesterday?
·5· · · · · · · · (Exhibit 11 was marked.) ·5· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· What is this?
·6· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Okay.· And so does Weitzman -- ·6· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· It is what we produced this
·7· I've handed you Exhibit 11. ·7· morning, I believe.
·8· · · · · ·That's the GTT agreement with Weitzman. ·8· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· It is what you produced this
·9· · · ·A.· Uh-huh. ·9· morning.
10· · · ·Q.· Is that right? 10· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Okay.
11· · · ·A.· Yes. 11· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· E-mails.
12· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· And, forgive me, but is Mr. Kahn 12· · · ·A.· So I guess it was just the supplemental
13· designated on Weitzman as well, Tasha? 13· information that may have not been in the original --
14· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Yes, on the agreements. 14· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· All right.
15· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· Okay.· No problem. 15· · · ·A.· Yes.
16· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· So Weitzman, just for 16· · · ·Q.· Can you tell me a little bit about the way you
17· identification purposes, do you believe, from your 17· conducted the document search to find documents that were
18· personal dealings, that Weitzman had any responsibility to 18· responsive in this case.· Did you search through your
19· ensure the cable barrier systems were safe? 19· inbox or through Dropbox or how did that occur?
20· · · ·A.· No.· They were responsible for the aspects I've 20· · · ·A.· Both, inbox and -- so when asked any
21· already mentioned. 21· communications with engineer, I would search his name.
22· · · ·Q.· There was a manager/lender agreement that was 22· And so in doing these searches yesterday looking for a
23· done at the time the -- or close to the time the building 23· couple of documents, I -- it made me realize that I didn't
24· was purchased.· Are you aware of that? 24· search -- or I didn't find certain things.· Maybe it's
25· · · ·A.· I've heard it mentioned.· I'm not -- I haven't 25· because it got forwarded on and so it got logged as

Page 171 Page 173

·1· read it. ·1· something else.· So when I found some pertinent stuff, I
·2· · · ·Q.· Okay. ·2· wanted to get it out there.
·3· · · · · · · · (Exhibit 12 was marked.) ·3· · · ·Q.· Thank you.
·4· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· I'm going to mark it as ·4· · · · · ·The final page of the exhibit, Exhibit 13, it's
·5· Exhibit 12.· Would it be more appropriate for me to talk ·5· Bates 000187?
·6· to Mr. Kahn about that? ·6· · · · · ·Do you see that?
·7· · · ·A.· Yes, sir. ·7· · · ·A.· Yes.
·8· · · ·Q.· All right. ·8· · · ·Q.· This appears to be one page containing its own
·9· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· We need to change our tape. ·9· e-mail exchange between yourself and Ms. Murray?
10· Let's take a short break. 10· · · ·A.· Uh-huh.
11· · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Go off the record at 11· · · ·Q.· Is that right?
12· 1:38. 12· · · ·A.· Yes.
13· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·(Break.) 13· · · ·Q.· And the date of that is March 22nd of 2017?
14· · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· This is Segment No. 5. 14· · · ·A.· Yes.
15· We're back on the record, 1:56. 15· · · ·Q.· So that would -- go ahead.
16· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Mr. O'Brien, we're back on the 16· · · ·A.· Correct.
17· record after a short break. 17· · · ·Q.· That would be after the O'Connor incident but
18· · · · · ·Are you okay to proceed? 18· before the Bowmer incident?
19· · · ·A.· I am. 19· · · ·A.· Uh-huh.
20· · · · · · · · (Exhibit 13 was marked.) 20· · · ·Q.· Yes?
21· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Show you what we've marked as 21· · · ·A.· Correct.
22· Exhibit 13 which is a group of documents that you kindly 22· · · ·Q.· And at approximately 10:54, you e-mailed
23· brought with you here today.· It looks like it's Bates 23· Ms. Murray on March 22nd of 2017 about the subject of the
24· GTT 000177 through 000187. 24· Littlefield guardrail?
25· · · · · ·Do you see Exhibit 13? 25· · · ·A.· Uh-huh.

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 174..177
Page 174 Page 176
·1· · · ·Q.· Yes? ·1· · · ·A.· Yes.
·2· · · ·A.· Yes. ·2· · · ·Q.· And you then made Ms. Murray aware of that?
·3· · · ·Q.· What is the Littlefield guardrail? ·3· · · ·A.· Yes.
·4· · · ·A.· I was probably intending to say cables.· I'm ·4· · · ·Q.· And did you have any discussions with her at all?
·5· not -- ·5· · · ·A.· No.· This was the extent of that conversation.
·6· · · ·Q.· All right.· So the subject of the e-mail we're ·6· · · ·Q.· And she says, "I'm not aware of that either!· On
·7· looking at on 187 is the cable system at issue somewhere ·7· it now."
·8· in the garage? ·8· · · ·A.· Yes.
·9· · · ·A.· Yes.· When I reference the center of the garage, ·9· · · ·Q.· And how did you interpret that?
10· I assume that means the -- the middle barriers. 10· · · ·A.· That she was taking care of it.
11· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And it says, "From a garage tenants...you 11· · · ·Q.· And taking care of it would be what?
12· are probably already aware of this, but several guardrails 12· · · ·A.· Stretching the cable back out to the way it
13· are broken on Level 8 at the center of the garage, I don't 13· should be.
14· remember seeing them like that yesterday..." 14· · · ·Q.· And who at Premier would stretch the cable back
15· · · · · ·So I take it that some garage tenants had called 15· out to the way it should be?
16· or e-mailed or communicated with you somehow to report 16· · · ·A.· I don't -- I don't know.· The only staff I know
17· that several of the cables in the cable system on Level 8 17· over there are Christina, Liz and -- or Lizette is her
18· at the center of the garage were broken. 18· name.· And then I know their manager is Ryan Hunt, but
19· · · ·A.· Correct.· And more than likely, it's a single 19· he's not in town.· So those are the three people I've made
20· tenant because I don't know that many people that park 20· contact with.
21· there.· So it would be highly unlikely that the couple of 21· · · ·Q.· What is Lizette's last name?
22· people I know would park on one level together and let me 22· · · ·A.· Roman.
23· know.· So -- but, yes, that's essentially what happened. 23· · · ·Q.· R-O-M-A-N?
24· · · ·Q.· Any idea of who that tenant was? 24· · · ·A.· I believe so.
25· · · ·A.· No, I don't recall. 25· · · ·Q.· So in terms of who you understood or expected

Page 175 Page 177

·1· · · ·Q.· And it said that several listed as guardrails, ·1· that would stretch and reattach the cable or cables that
·2· but you believe that's cables? ·2· were broken, you believed it would be either Christina --
·3· · · ·A.· I believe so, yeah. ·3· · · ·A.· Oh --
·4· · · ·Q.· So several cables were broken on Level 8 at the ·4· · · ·Q.· -- or Lizette?
·5· center of the garage? ·5· · · ·A.· I apologize.· Go ahead.
·6· · · ·A.· Yes.· So this is -- if I could, just try to -- ·6· · · ·Q.· You believed it would be either Christina or
·7· · · ·Q.· Sure. ·7· Lizette?
·8· · · ·A.· -- recall why I sent this e-mail.· I was there ·8· · · ·A.· No.· I -- well, I would not assume it would be
·9· the day before and I did not remember seeing that and so I ·9· them, but I assume they would find someone to take care of
10· didn't probably go back to look at it again because when I 10· it.· I don't think they're going to go out there and do it
11· park in the garage, it's on occasion.· There is very few 11· themselves.
12· repeat days when I park in the garage.· And so I probably 12· · · ·Q.· And had you ever alerted Premier Parking of
13· didn't go back to check and maybe the tenant saw -- so if 13· broken or compromised cables prior to March 22nd of 2017?
14· I could refer back to Exhibit 9, this last image looks 14· · · ·A.· Yes.
15· like it might be more than one cable.· So it's entirely 15· · · ·Q.· When?
16· possible that the passerby said there is several cables, 16· · · ·A.· January 19th, 2017.
17· but it could have been just one.· So the number, I'm not 17· · · ·Q.· And is that contained in Exhibit 13?
18· sure.· And who said it, I don't exactly remember.· But I 18· · · ·A.· Yes, sir.· 185 and 186.
19· took them for their word and then I sent it on to 19· · · ·Q.· All right.· So the two pages just before 187.
20· Christina since they were on-site and could look at it 20· Let's look at that.· And it shows that on January 19th of
21· sooner than I could. 21· 2017, which would be after the O'Connor incident but
22· · · ·Q.· So regardless of the number of cables that were 22· before the Bowmer incident, you were e-mailing Ms. Murray
23· broken, a broken cable would be consistent with what we've 23· and a Carla Salas, S-A-L-A-S, at Cencor Realty?
24· already talked about, unacceptable, dangerous, and show 24· · · ·A.· Cencor is a division of Weitzman, I believe, if
25· you that the cable system was compromised.· Right? 25· I'm saying that correctly.

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 178..181
Page 178 Page 180
·1· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So why were you copying somebody from ·1· · · ·A.· This is the end of the communication.
·2· Weitzman about a broken cable? ·2· · · ·Q.· Well, it looks like there is a chain on Page 185.
·3· · · ·A.· Probably just I guess at a certain point, the ·3· · · ·A.· Well, I'm sorry, the -- the -- yeah, so she says,
·4· more people that know, the better so that it gets taken ·4· "I'll take a look now" was the end of the communication.
·5· care of. ·5· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Did you ever follow up with Ms. Murray to
·6· · · ·Q.· And in this one, I take it that 186 contains the ·6· ensure that after the O'Connor incident, when it was
·7· message you sent based on your observation? ·7· noticed there was a broken cable that was dangerous on the
·8· · · ·A.· Yes.· This looks like it's a personal eyewitness. ·8· alley side of Level 5, that it was fixed?
·9· · · · · ·Oh, no.· It says according to one of our users. ·9· · · ·A.· I don't know.· I don't recall.
10· Sorry. 10· · · ·Q.· So you can't tell the jury that you did or
11· · · ·Q.· Right.· So why don't you explain to the jury what 11· didn't, it's just that you don't recall?
12· the message on 186, your recollection of what prompted you 12· · · ·A.· I don't recall.
13· to write this and what it means? 13· · · ·Q.· Did you look for any other responses from
14· · · ·A.· Same situation as 187, it was brought to my 14· Ms. Murray where she indicated that it was taken care of
15· attention by somebody who knows that I am connected to the 15· or what the plan was to fix the broken dangerous cable on
16· garage and just wanted me to be aware so that it could be 16· Level 5?
17· taken care of. 17· · · ·A.· I didn't see that, no.
18· · · ·Q.· And who was it that alerted you there was a 18· · · ·Q.· Do you have any kind of personal knowledge or
19· broken cable on the alley side of Level 5? 19· proof that you can offer the jury to show that the broken
20· · · ·A.· I don't remember on this one, either. 20· cable on Level 5 that was noticed after O'Connor and
21· · · ·Q.· How do you know -- oh, it says, "according one of 21· before Bowmer was actually fixed?
22· our users"? 22· · · ·A.· I cannot say that with certainty.
23· · · ·A.· Yes, sir. 23· · · ·Q.· Can you say that even more likely than not?
24· · · ·Q.· "A broken cable on the alley side of Level 5." 24· · · ·A.· I'm sorry?
25· The alley side, which would be -- it would be where 25· · · ·Q.· Do you have any proof at all to say it more

Page 179 Page 181

·1· Mr. O'Connor and Ms. Bowmer went over the edge.· Right? ·1· likely than not?
·2· · · ·A.· Correct. ·2· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
·3· · · ·Q.· A broken cable on the alley side would indicate a ·3· · · ·A.· I cannot say.
·4· dangerous condition on the alley side of, in this ·4· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Then there -- it looks like there
·5· instance, Level 5? ·5· is another group of e-mails that are included in the
·6· · · ·A.· Correct. ·6· Exhibit 13 packet that was produced.· And what is the
·7· · · ·Q.· That needed to be fixed? ·7· significance or impact of these?
·8· · · ·A.· Yes. ·8· · · ·A.· I thought it was something that was requested.
·9· · · ·Q.· You -- you say in the e-mail, "My contractor that ·9· · · ·Q.· All right.· Let's take a quick look.· It looks
10· did the fix after the 4Runner incident" -- and I assume 10· like these are just communications about the --
11· that's Mr. O'Connor's incident? 11· · · ·A.· The ninth-floor repair.
12· · · ·A.· Uh-huh. 12· · · ·Q.· Okay.· The system that was being put up on the
13· · · ·Q.· Yes? 13· ninth floor --
14· · · ·A.· Yes. 14· · · ·A.· Uh-huh.
15· · · ·Q.· -- "is very busy so I am not sure if they can be 15· · · ·Q.· -- after the O'Connor incident?
16· of assistance right now." 16· · · ·A.· Yes.
17· · · · · ·Did you call your contractor, the one that did 17· · · ·Q.· The use of the various GRABB-IT anchors and how
18· the fix, after the 4Runner incident, about the broken 18· they were going to be secured?
19· cable on the alley side of Level 5? 19· · · ·A.· Yes, sir.
20· · · ·A.· I do not recall with 100 percent certainty. 20· · · ·Q.· Have you and I already discussed the extent of
21· · · ·Q.· And you asked for Ms. Murray to let you know the 21· your knowledge of what Stream Realty did in terms of
22· severity of the broken cable and what the best way forward 22· repairs, changes, or modifications to the cable system at
23· might be? 23· any time in the garage before your company purchased it?
24· · · ·A.· That's the last sentence, yes. 24· If not, I'd like to know that.
25· · · ·Q.· Did she do that? 25· · · ·A.· Can you re- -- restate the question.

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 182..185
Page 182 Page 184
·1· · · ·Q.· Sure.· Can you tell me everything you know about ·1· · · ·Q.· You saw those?
·2· what Stream Realty or anybody working with Stream Realty ·2· · · ·A.· I saw those.
·3· did in terms of repairs, changes, modifications, or work ·3· · · ·Q.· You knew that those existed?
·4· on the cable system in the Littlefield garage at any time. ·4· · · ·A.· I knew that they existed.
·5· · · ·A.· My knowledge is limited to what I can visually ·5· · · ·Q.· That wasn't somehow a surprise to you after the
·6· see.· I did not get anything from them. ·6· O'Connor incident?
·7· · · ·Q.· Okay.· How do you know from looking at the fact ·7· · · ·A.· It was not a surprise, no.
·8· that it was modified that Stream Realty did it? ·8· · · ·Q.· Did Stream Realty, to your knowledge, ever hide
·9· · · ·A.· It just -- well, I asked for information and ·9· anything about the changes or additions, if any, it had
10· Stream didn't have any. 10· done on the cable system on the Littlefield garage?
11· · · ·Q.· Who did you ask? 11· · · ·A.· I don't believe it was hidden.· I just wasn't
12· · · ·A.· I don't know.· I'd have to look back. 12· provided with any information that acknowledged -- or
13· · · ·Q.· When did you ask? 13· somebody acknowledged that it was done but it wasn't --
14· · · ·A.· Well, to be -- so thinking about it, I may have 14· there was nothing concrete given to me.
15· either asked Stream or Premier for information on the 15· · · ·Q.· Have any of the experts that you've hired in the
16· garage. 16· case indicated to you that somehow the GRABB-IT anchor
17· · · ·Q.· This was after the Bowmer incident? 17· system or the modifications to the original 1979-1980
18· · · ·A.· No, no, no.· This was before we purchased it. 18· system made it somehow more dangerous?
19· I'll ask for information about -- because very clearly the 19· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
20· GRABB-IT anchors didn't exist in 1967 -- or '76, I 20· · · ·A.· No.
21· apologize.· Or it wasn't built in '76.· It was built in 21· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Made it dangerous at all?
22· '79 to '80.· They didn't exist then so I was asking for 22· · · ·A.· No.· And, in fact, if I could, the fact that we
23· information because it was clearly a modification. 23· used them for the ninth-floor repair made me feel a little
24· · · ·Q.· And has anybody ever indicated to you or given 24· bit better about it because it made me believe that they
25· you proof that it was Stream Realty or anybody affiliated 25· were the right choice.

Page 183 Page 185

·1· with Stream Realty that put the GRABB-IT anchors in? ·1· · · ·Q.· Is that what still exists on the ninth floor?
·2· · · ·A.· I believe in phone call conversation. ·2· · · ·A.· No, ninth floor has been replaced.
·3· · · ·Q.· With whom? ·3· · · ·Q.· By whom?
·4· · · ·A.· One of the executives over there. ·4· · · ·A.· Our contractor under the Walker Engineering
·5· · · ·Q.· At Stream?· Is it at Stream? ·5· design.
·6· · · ·A.· I don't remember.· I'm sorry.· But I remember ·6· · · ·Q.· All right.· And who was it that recommended that
·7· somebody telling me that Stream made the modifications. ·7· the GRABB-IT anchors be used as the fix to the O'Connor
·8· It was through -- it was through Stream. ·8· incident on the ninth floor?
·9· · · ·Q.· And from any source, has it been indicated to you ·9· · · ·A.· I believe Richard Martin.
10· that the modifications that were made, that is, the 10· · · ·Q.· Did Mr. Martin indicate he had ever used that
11· implementation of the GRABB-IT anchors, those were done 11· type of cable system as a vehicle restraint system in a
12· incorrectly? 12· multilevel parking garage before?
13· · · ·A.· That was never presented to me, no. 13· · · ·A.· I don't recall.
14· · · ·Q.· Anything to indicate the modifications and the 14· · · ·Q.· Did you ask him?
15· addition of the GRABB-IT anchors were done in an unsafe 15· · · ·A.· I asked him what our choices were and he said
16· manner? 16· that the GRABB-IT anchors are -- is his recommendation.
17· · · ·A.· That was never presented to me. 17· · · ·Q.· Did you ask him why?
18· · · ·Q.· That the modifications and inclusion of the 18· · · ·A.· I don't recall.
19· GRABB-IT anchors made the system more dangerous in some 19· · · ·Q.· As it turns out, the GRABB-IT anchors that were
20· way? 20· installed after the O'Connor incident weren't permitted.
21· · · ·A.· No. 21· Is that true?
22· · · ·Q.· When you first inspected the building before the 22· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
23· purchase, the GRABB-IT anchors and the modifications were 23· · · ·A.· After the O'Connor incident?
24· plainly obvious to you, were they not? 24· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Yes, sir.
25· · · ·A.· Correct. 25· · · ·A.· No, we did not get a permit.

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 186..189
Page 186 Page 188
·1· · · ·Q.· You knew, didn't you, at the time of the repairs ·1· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Okay.· Well, that was my question
·2· being done after the O'Connor incident, that to do repairs ·2· to you.
·3· such as the installation of the GRABB-IT anchors required ·3· · · ·A.· Okay.· I believe they're -- they're all
·4· a permit from the City of Austin, did you not? ·4· qualified.
·5· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. ·5· · · ·Q.· So they're all equal is what you're telling me?
·6· · · ·A.· The way the repair after the O'Connor incident ·6· · · ·A.· Yes.
·7· went is Premier was in contact with Troy Collins, the City ·7· · · ·Q.· And is it true, then, that although there were
·8· code-enforcement representative who saw that case from the ·8· these GRABB-IT anchors, et cetera put on the ninth floor
·9· beginning to the end, and I facilitated bringing the ·9· after the O'Connor incident, that was changed by the
10· contractor in so that the work could get done.· And when 10· design of Walker?
11· the work was done, Premier communicated back to Troy 11· · · ·A.· So what we looked at --
12· Collins that the work was complete, that they would be 12· · · ·Q.· Actually, that's just an "is it true?" and then
13· producing a letter from the engineer.· And to my 13· I'll ask you to explain.
14· understanding, Troy never told any representative of the 14· · · ·A.· Yes, they were changed.
15· building that we needed to get it permitted because we, I 15· · · ·Q.· Please explain to me why it was changed.
16· guess, felt like he was overseeing the situation. 16· · · ·A.· The type of construction that that garage is has
17· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· Object as nonresponsive. 17· a post tension system.
18· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· In the time period after the 18· · · ·Q.· Right.
19· O'Connor incident, who was the contractor that installed 19· · · ·A.· And there is a lot of rebar in the columns.· So
20· the GRABB-IT anchors? 20· the columns don't have post tension, but the beams and the
21· · · ·A.· Blue & Associates. 21· slabs do.· The amount of rebar in the column prevents you
22· · · ·Q.· Had you used them before? 22· from adding any more barrier cables in line with the
23· · · ·A.· Yes. 23· existing barrier cables, the preexisting.· So you couldn't
24· · · ·Q.· For what? 24· add a run of cable in between here.· It had to be either
25· · · ·A.· They had done a what is called the pocket park on 25· done on the front face or on the back face.· And that is

Page 187 Page 189

·1· Congress Avenue.· They had done some tenant improvement ·1· why they had to be abandoned.
·2· work. ·2· · · ·Q.· All right.· And that applied to all levels of the
·3· · · ·Q.· Had they done, to your knowledge, any type of ·3· west side of the garage?
·4· cable barrier system for a vehicle restraint system on a ·4· · · ·A.· Yes.
·5· multilevel garage? ·5· · · ·Q.· And to the interior of the garage?
·6· · · ·A.· I don't know. ·6· · · ·A.· The interior, the post tension becomes a problem
·7· · · ·Q.· As -- ·7· so instead of passing by -- anchoring on the ends and
·8· · · ·A.· Not to my knowledge. ·8· passing by the columns like we're doing on the west side,
·9· · · ·Q.· As between Blue & Associates, Richard Martin, and ·9· the system will go from face to face.· But because of the
10· Walker, who, in your experience, has the best and most 10· amount of rebar, we are anchoring a tube steel to the face
11· expertise on how to properly design a vehicle restraint 11· of these and then running cables in between.
12· system for a multistory garage? 12· · · ·Q.· So the GRABB-IT anchor system that was put in by
13· · · ·A.· That's an opinion you're asking for? 13· Blue & Associates at the recommendation of Mr. Martin was
14· · · ·Q.· Sure. 14· changed and abandoned and Walker put in a completely
15· · · ·A.· In my opinion, an engineer can -- they're 15· different design.· Is that accurate?
16· knowledgeable about all aspects of building types and 16· · · ·A.· That's accurate.
17· building systems.· And if they don't know about that 17· · · ·Q.· Did Walker comment at all about the GRABB-IT
18· building type or that building system, it's not for me to 18· anchor system that had been put up as the fix for the
19· judge. 19· O'Connor incident?
20· · · ·Q.· Well, as an owner of a garage and as somebody who 20· · · ·A.· No.
21· would be ultimately responsible for a vehicle restraint 21· · · ·Q.· Did Walker tell you that that was not sufficient
22· system being on the garage, wouldn't you want to know if 22· to either, A, meet code or, B, safely act as a vehicle
23· the engineer was qualified to actually design that system? 23· barrier system?
24· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 24· · · ·A.· No.
25· · · ·A.· I believe that they were. 25· · · ·Q.· Then, why was it changed?

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 190..193
Page 190 Page 192
·1· · · ·A.· It was changed simply because it couldn't be used ·1· · · · · · · · MR. KURHAJEC:· Can we go off the record a
·2· with the existing structure to meet the four-inch sphere ·2· moment, Sean?
·3· requirement. ·3· · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· We're off at 2:23.
·4· · · ·Q.· So it needed to be changed to actually meet the ·4· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·(Break.)
·5· code? ·5· · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Back on at 2:24.
·6· · · ·A.· To meet current code. ·6· · · ·A.· (Pause.)
·7· · · ·Q.· To meet the current code.· Is that accurate? ·7· · · · · ·I don't see it in this one.
·8· · · ·A.· Yes, sir. ·8· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· This --
·9· · · ·Q.· So the fix that was put in after the O'Connor ·9· · · · · · · · (Discussion off the written record.)
10· incident in the Littlefield Garage didn't actually meet 10· · · ·A.· So yeah.· It's Page 1, technically Page 3 of the
11· the current code at the time it was put in.· Is that true? 11· exhibit.
12· · · ·A.· The system that was put in after the O'Connor 12· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Okay.
13· incident did not meet 2012 code. 13· · · ·A.· Page 1 of the parking facility's rules and
14· · · ·Q.· And it wasn't permitted by the City.· True? 14· regulations, Item No. --
15· · · ·A.· True. 15· · · ·Q.· Item 3?
16· · · ·Q.· The system that was put in now does meet code and 16· · · ·A.· -- 3.
17· is permitted by the City.· True? 17· · · ·Q.· "Parkers are prohibited from passing-back their
18· · · ·A.· Both correct. 18· access card or allowing another person use of their card"?
19· · · · · · · · (Exhibit 14 was marked.) 19· · · ·A.· Yes.
20· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Show you Exhibit 14. 20· · · ·Q.· Did Mr. Kopecki [phonetic] pass back his card to
21· · · · · ·Do you recognize 14? 21· Ms. Bowmer?
22· · · ·A.· I've seen the -- I think, if it's the same one I 22· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
23· saw, I've seen it once. 23· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Do you know?
24· · · ·Q.· I'm not sure if I -- I don't really know what 24· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· How would he know?
25· you've seen or not seen. 25· · · ·A.· I have no idea.

Page 191 Page 193

·1· · · · · ·But does it appear to be a monthly service ·1· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· Fair question.· He might know
·2· industry rate parking agreement? ·2· somehow.
·3· · · ·A.· Yes. ·3· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· I don't know.
·4· · · ·Q.· Regarding the Littlefield Garage? ·4· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Do you have regular corporate or
·5· · · ·A.· Yes. ·5· company meetings of GTT Parking, LP?
·6· · · ·Q.· Could you show me on this two-page document where ·6· · · ·A.· No.
·7· it says that the user cannot lend his or her card to ·7· · · ·Q.· Are there minutes kept of any of the business
·8· another person? ·8· dealings, discussions, business organization?
·9· · · ·A.· (Pause.) ·9· · · ·A.· If there are, I don't know about them.
10· · · · · ·This one does not -- or this document does not. 10· · · ·Q.· Has GTT Parking, LP, ever hired some type of
11· · · · · · · · (Exhibit 15 was marked.) 11· engineering consultant, other than the ones you and I have
12· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Show you Exhibit 15. 12· already talked about so far in the deposition, that would
13· · · · · ·Do you recognize Exhibit 15? 13· have been providing advice about the cable barrier system
14· · · ·A.· Possibly. 14· at the premises?
15· · · ·Q.· Does it say that it's a Premier Parking of 15· · · ·A.· No, sir.
16· Tennessee, LLC, parking agreement relating to Littlefield 16· · · ·Q.· Besides yourself in the purchase of the building,
17· Garage, 508 Brazos Street? 17· the Littlefield Garage, in September of 2015, who else, if
18· · · ·A.· Yes. 18· anybody, from GTT Parking participated in any kind of
19· · · ·Q.· For a monthly parking agreement? 19· inspection?
20· · · ·A.· Yes. 20· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· What time frame are you asking
21· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Could you show me on this agreement where 21· about.
22· it says that the person who pays the monthly parking 22· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· In 9 -- in September of 2015, in
23· agreement fee cannot lend his or her car to another 23· conjunction with the purchase.
24· person? 24· · · ·A.· Who else from GTT Parking?
25· · · ·A.· (Pause.) 25· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Right.

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 194..197
Page 194 Page 196
·1· · · · · ·Did Mr. Kahn?· That makes it easy. ·1· · · · · ·Do you have video surveillance in the building?
·2· · · ·A.· I'm sure he did walk through there. ·2· · · ·A.· None that I know of.
·3· · · ·Q.· Okay. ·3· · · ·Q.· Who would know if there's video surveillance in
·4· · · ·A.· But I can’t say with certainty.· That's why I ·4· the building?
·5· paused. ·5· · · ·A.· Premier.
·6· · · ·Q.· That's fine. ·6· · · ·Q.· In terms of there being any video surveillance
·7· · · · · ·Did you hire -- did GTT hire a -- an inspector? ·7· from Premier or GTT regarding the O'Connor or the Bowmer
·8· · · ·A.· Not that I know of. ·8· incident, there is none that you know of from GTT or
·9· · · ·Q.· Did GTT get provided any type of written ·9· Premier.· Is that true?
10· inspection report in conjunction with the purchase of the 10· · · ·A.· That is 100 percent true.
11· parking building? 11· · · ·Q.· Is there any kind of video footage of any other
12· · · ·A.· I don't believe so. 12· accidents in the garage?
13· · · ·Q.· Who was the prime contact with Stream, if it was 13· · · ·A.· No.
14· Stream that was the seller, for GTT in the purchase of the 14· · · ·Q.· Are you aware of any other either single, double
15· building?· In other words, who at Stream was the prime 15· or multiple car accidents in the garage in the time frame
16· seller contact? 16· that GTT owned it?
17· · · ·A.· I would have to go back and look at records. I 17· · · ·A.· No.· No, sir.
18· believe the contract -- I can't remember. 18· · · ·Q.· Would you expect Premier to be aware of that?
19· · · ·Q.· Who was it at GTT that made sure the building 19· · · ·A.· I would think they would know.
20· that you had purchased and were operating was up to code 20· · · ·Q.· If, for instance, there had been an accident
21· in 2015? 21· where a car had passed through the cables in the middle of
22· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 22· the garage, would you expect Premier would have known that
23· · · ·A.· Who at GTT? 23· and reported it to you?
24· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Yes, sir. 24· · · ·A.· One more time, please.
25· · · ·A.· I'm not a code expert.· Neither is David.· So I 25· · · ·Q.· If there had --

Page 195 Page 197

·1· don't think either one of us were. ·1· · · ·A.· Can I go back, actually?
·2· · · ·Q.· So the answer is no one at GTT made sure that the ·2· · · ·Q.· Yeah.
·3· building, the Littlefield Garage, was up to code at the ·3· · · ·A.· I just thought of something.· We did have an
·4· time of the purchase? ·4· incident where somebody drove through the barricade at the
·5· · · ·A.· You could say that.· Yes, sir. ·5· entrance of the garage.
·6· · · ·Q.· And did somebody do that for GTT in 2016? ·6· · · ·Q.· Okay.
·7· · · ·A.· Well, we hired an engineer in 2016. ·7· · · ·A.· And so they had to do a repair there.· But that's
·8· · · ·Q.· Did you ask the engineer to specifically check to ·8· the only reported vehicle-related incident.
·9· make sure the building was up to code? ·9· · · ·Q.· In terms of any vehicles passing through cables,
10· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 10· for instance, in the middle of the garage, I take it you
11· · · ·A.· I don't know.· What -- what is in his -- I don't 11· have no knowledge and have heard nothing at GTT to
12· know. 12· indicate that occurred.
13· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· And what was the purchase price 13· · · ·A.· I have not.
14· for the Littlefield Garage?· Do you remember? 14· · · ·Q.· Wouldn't you -- would you agree with me,
15· · · ·A.· I don't remember. 15· Mr. O'Brien, that it doesn't take an engineer to know that
16· · · ·Q.· How was it financed?· Was it financed through 16· the sagging or missing cables in the cable barrier system
17· largely a bank loan or for -- capital calls with GTT or 17· are dangerous and need investigation and repair?
18· how? 18· · · ·A.· Yes.· Sagging cables need investigation and
19· · · ·A.· It -- it was cash in Frost Bank, I believe. 19· repair.
20· · · ·Q.· All right. 20· · · ·Q.· What I said is accurate?
21· · · ·A.· I believe it's Frost Bank. 21· · · ·A.· Yes.
22· · · ·Q.· In the building, some of the pictures and/or at 22· · · ·Q.· Have you looked through the expert report
23· the inspection showed signs that say that the building -- 23· provided by Wiss Janney in this case?
24· the building, the parking garage, is under video 24· · · ·A.· It doesn't ring a bell.
25· surveillance. 25· · · ·Q.· That would be the expert report that Ms. Bowmer

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 198..201
Page 198 Page 200
·1· provided about the condition of the garage, the cables, ·1· O'Connor incident, the City performed an inspection and
·2· the barrier system, et cetera. ·2· found violations?
·3· · · · · ·Have you seen that? ·3· · · ·A.· Yes.· So the violation found was a result of the
·4· · · ·A.· Is Wiss Janney the same as WJE? ·4· vehicle going through the barrier.· They were reporting on
·5· · · ·Q.· Yes, it is. ·5· what they saw at that very minute.
·6· · · ·A.· I think I've seen it.· I apologize.· I didn't ·6· · · ·Q.· So you were familiar with it?
·7· read it cover to cover. ·7· · · ·A.· I'm familiar.
·8· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And anything you recall standing out to ·8· · · ·Q.· Will you look at 1482 with me, please.
·9· you as incorrect that you saw in that? ·9· · · · · ·There's a series of pictures that begin on 1482.
10· · · ·A.· I don't recall.· I'd have to -- being asked that 10· For instance, if you look at 1486, 1486 that I have up on
11· question, I would like to have time with the document to 11· the screen, that depicts the location that Mr. O'Connor's
12· go through it. 12· vehicle went off of the garage.· Is that correct?
13· · · ·Q.· Of course.· I won't take up your time right now 13· · · ·A.· That's correct.
14· in doing that.· We'll move on to something else.· But I 14· · · ·Q.· So for the jury, that would be -- the alley would
15· appreciate your response and understand. 15· be down below where both the O'Connor vehicle ultimately
16· · · · · · · · (Exhibit 16 was marked.) 16· was lowered and where Ms. Bowmer's vehicle came to rest?
17· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· I'm going to mark as Exhibit 16 17· · · ·A.· That's correct.
18· this notebook which contains the City of Austin 18· · · ·Q.· And is it accurate that the O'Connor vehicle
19· documents -- 19· literally passed through the cable barrier system that was
20· · · ·A.· Okay. 20· on top of the Littlefield Garage?
21· · · ·Q.· -- in this case. 21· · · ·A.· I -- I can't answer that.
22· · · · · ·They're segregated into two tabs.· One tab, the 22· · · ·Q.· You don't know?
23· first large section of the document, relates to the Bowmer 23· · · ·A.· I don't know.
24· incident.· The back part relates to Mr. O'Connor's 24· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Will you look at 1505 with me, please,
25· incident. 25· sir.

Page 199 Page 201

·1· · · · · ·Have you generally looked through, in preparation ·1· · · ·A.· Sure.· I guessed right.
·2· for your deposition, the City file regarding Littlefield ·2· · · ·Q.· Way to go.· It's probably kind of scary.
·3· Garage and GTT's interaction with them? ·3· · · · · ·The -- this section that is 1505 through
·4· · · ·A.· I've looked at -- at the specific pages where it ·4· approximately 1612 --
·5· highlights communications between me and the City.· Yes. ·5· · · ·A.· 1612?
·6· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Was GTT involved with the Littlefield ·6· · · ·Q.· Yes, sir.· That kind of collection of documents
·7· Garage when the elevator was broken and causing a hazard ·7· appears, to me, to be some type of summary done regarding
·8· and was cited by the City? ·8· the communications between people from GTT, and others,
·9· · · ·A.· What was the date? ·9· and the City of Austin.· Have you reviewed generally
10· · · ·Q.· October 10, 2014. 10· that -- this section of the file?
11· · · ·A.· No, sir. 11· · · ·A.· I believe so, yes.
12· · · ·Q.· Since GTT has been involved with the premises, 12· · · ·Q.· And was there anything that jumped out at you as
13· has there been any potential hazards identified or 13· being incorrect in terms of the communications that went
14· complaints about the elevator being a hazard? 14· back and forth between yourself and/or the City regarding,
15· · · ·A.· None that I know of.· We did a major elevator 15· in this case, the Bowmer incident?
16· repair, though, to the south unit.· We replaced the 16· · · ·A.· Not that I recall.
17· piston. 17· · · ·Q.· I noticed that there was an e-mail from you in
18· · · ·Q.· I apologize if you've already answered this. 18· the 2017 time frame after the Bowmer incident to the City,
19· · · · · ·But did you yourself ever actually speak with 19· requesting documents the City had relating to the O'Connor
20· Troy Collins? 20· incident.· Do you recall that?
21· · · ·A.· No. 21· · · ·A.· Yes.
22· · · ·Q.· Would you look at Page 1480 with me, please. 22· · · ·Q.· Had you not retained, at GTT Parking, the
23· · · · · ·Are you familiar with this complaint? 23· documents relating to the O'Connor incident?
24· · · ·A.· Yes. 24· · · ·A.· What I was looking for was the document that
25· · · ·Q.· And that, in September of 2016, following the 25· closed the case.

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 202..205
Page 202 Page 204
·1· · · ·Q.· So my question to you was had you not retained ·1· · · ·A.· There is --
·2· the documents? ·2· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.· What time
·3· · · ·A.· I could not find a copy of that particular piece ·3· frame?· I mean, in the 40-year history of the garage or
·4· of paper. ·4· are you speaking of the O'Connor incident or the Bowmer
·5· · · ·Q.· What was the gist of what the City told you, sir, ·5· incident?
·6· after the Bowmer incident, in terms of what the City was ·6· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· At the time you guys owned it.
·7· going to require for the Littlefield Garage to be opened ·7· I'm not asking you to be Carnac about when you weren't
·8· back up? ·8· there.· Just in the time that you owned it.
·9· · · ·A.· We put water barriers, and we kept the section of ·9· · · · · ·How was your experience with it, sir?
10· the seventh floor completely closed, and we put water 10· · · ·A.· There is a lot of factors at play in the time
11· barriers as an additional layer up against the existing 11· that we owned it.· So I can't -- I can't be the judge of
12· barrier cables. 12· that.
13· · · ·Q.· Why? 13· · · ·Q.· Let's go about it in the reverse order.· Do you
14· · · ·A.· It was what the City asked us to do and we 14· know of any vehicles that successfully restrained the
15· were -- it was -- it was what was requested. 15· cable system?
16· · · ·Q.· And did you think that was necessary? 16· · · ·A.· None that have been brought to my attention.
17· · · ·A.· It seemed reasonable to me. 17· · · ·Q.· Do you know of any vehicles that didn't
18· · · ·Q.· Why did it seem reasonable? 18· successfully restrain?
19· · · ·A.· It seemed reasonable to me because the discussion 19· · · ·A.· I do.
20· was going to be are the cables in place.· Because every 20· · · ·Q.· How many?
21· single one of these cables were code, and without -- I 21· · · ·A.· There is two.
22· couldn't answer that question.· So with -- water barriers 22· · · · · ·That's not to say that there aren't vehicles that
23· were the solution. 23· have been retrained by that system that aren't in some
24· · · ·Q.· So the water barriers were put up to be a 24· sort of records somewhere.
25· solution to the legal requirement that the garage have a 25· · · ·Q.· Any idea what vehicles, what records, where that

Page 203 Page 205

·1· vehicle restraint system on the edges of the upper floors. ·1· would be?
·2· True? ·2· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
·3· · · ·A.· It was put there as a secondary measure. ·3· · · ·A.· I don't know where that would be.
·4· · · ·Q.· Well, what was the primary measure? ·4· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Have you ever heard a single
·5· · · ·A.· The primary measure was the existing barrier ·5· iota, whisper, anything from anybody to suggest that there
·6· system. ·6· was actually an incident where that cable barrier system
·7· · · ·Q.· You told me the existing barrier system was for ·7· actually restrained a vehicle?
·8· pedestrians. ·8· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
·9· · · ·A.· Well, that's what -- the -- that's what -- okay. ·9· · · ·A.· Not in my experience.
10· So the code recom- -- says that a -- in 1976 it was 10· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Were you told by the people at
11· prescribed for pedestrians.· And my understanding is there 11· the City, specifically John Hale, that the cable system
12· wasn't a requirement for certain load for cars. 12· had been repaired on three floors without a permit being
13· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So the-- 13· obtained?
14· · · ·A.· But it still performed as a barrier system. 14· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
15· · · ·Q.· Well, how well did it perform, in your 15· · · ·A.· I don't recall that conversation.
16· experience, there? 16· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· It was on 1507.
17· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 17· · · ·A.· 1507?
18· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Did you give it an A, a B, a C, a 18· · · ·Q.· Yes, sir.
19· D, or an F? 19· · · ·A.· So 7/19/2017 "I met with building official Jose
20· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 20· Roig; with program manager, Tony Hernandez; and engineer,
21· · · ·A.· I don't feel comfortable with -- I don't know how 21· Jennifer Vehrlust from DSD on the property.· We found the
22· to levy a determination on that. 22· following, the cable system had been repaired on three
23· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· You don't know how to levy a 23· floors without obtaining a permit.· Guard spacing was
24· determination on how well that cable system worked as an 24· greater than 9 inches in several areas of the perimeter
25· effective vehicle barrier system? 25· and interior cables.· Several cables were loose in several

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 206..209
Page 206 Page 208
·1· areas in the perimeter and interior cables.· The ·1· violation and the description was for the cable system
·2· ninth-floor pedestrian wrought iron guardrail outside of ·2· serving as a vehicle barrier to the exterior and interior
·3· the stair elevator has become detached at the top right ·3· described in the violation report, referring to all floors
·4· anchor.· The owner will need to barricade or block off the ·4· and all sides of the exterior and interior of the parking
·5· perimeter parking spaces where the cable system exists." ·5· garage structure?
·6· · · · · ·So... ·6· · · ·A.· Yeah.· This is after -- this is their
·7· · · ·Q.· Was that information ever shared with you? ·7· determination after the incident.
·8· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.· What ·8· · · ·Q.· Exactly.· I was asking you about the citation
·9· information? ·9· that was issued.· You told me that the citation only
10· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· The one that I just asked about, 10· included the spot where Ms. Bowmer went off --
11· that he read. 11· · · ·A.· No.· What they do is they get a -- they --
12· · · ·A.· I can't -- I don't -- that doesn't seem -- it 12· · · ·Q.· I'm not asking you what they do.· Okay?· What I'm
13· doesn't look familiar. 13· asking you is do you recall that GTT Parking was given a
14· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· The fact that the cable system 14· notice of violation and it was for all floors, all sides
15· had been repaired on three floors without obtaining a 15· of the exterior and interior?
16· permit, I assume that may include the ninth floor when GTT 16· · · ·A.· This is -- I have to explain how the system works
17· did its repairs. 17· with the code enforcement for this to make any sense.
18· · · · · ·Do you know what other two floors were being 18· So...
19· referenced? 19· · · ·Q.· Well, why don't you just answer my question, and
20· · · ·A.· I do not. 20· then if your lawyer wants to ask you questions, she's
21· · · ·Q.· Were you ever told by the City what other -- 21· entitled to do that.· That's fine.· I don't have a problem
22· · · ·A.· No. 22· with that.
23· · · ·Q.· -- two floors? 23· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.· Objection to
24· · · · · ·Were you told by the City that the cable barrier 24· the sidebar.· He is answering your question.· Please let
25· system being used was dangerous? 25· him answer the question.

Page 207 Page 209

·1· · · ·A.· No. ·1· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· He's not answering my question.
·2· · · ·Q.· That it was a dangerous condition? ·2· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Well, then you object to the
·3· · · ·A.· No. ·3· nonresponsiveness, but don't tell him how to answer your
·4· · · ·Q.· Isn't that why the citation was actually issued, ·4· question.
·5· because it was a dangerous condition that needed to be ·5· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· Well, I'm just being very
·6· rectified? ·6· courteous and nice about it, but my question --
·7· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. ·7· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Are you?
·8· · · ·A.· As I said before on the previous incident with ·8· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· Yeah, I really am.· It's very --
·9· O'Connor, the citations were issued at that very minute, ·9· the video will show.· I'm just saying that's not the
10· what they were looking at. 10· question that I asked.
11· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Well, I'm talking about the 11· · · ·A.· If I knock this cup over and somebody asks you to
12· Bowmer incident. 12· come in and look at this cup and assess the situation with
13· · · ·A.· Right.· So after the Bowmer incident I show up, 13· this cup, you're going to tell them it's knocked over.
14· and they're standing there, and they report what they see, 14· That's what I'm trying to explain, is that it's a report
15· and they saw cables down. 15· of what is currently happening right that minute.
16· · · ·Q.· Will you look at 1689 with me? 16· · · · · ·And so their assessment was then they were going
17· · · ·A.· Okay. 17· to issue us a notice saying we needed to then start a plan
18· · · ·Q.· Do you recall receiving this notice of violation? 18· to repair -- or to replace all guardrails at that time.
19· · · ·A.· It looks familiar. 19· They had never told us to do this before, before this
20· · · ·Q.· Do you recall seeing the description of the 20· letter.
21· violation? 21· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· Objection; nonresponsive.
22· · · ·A.· Yes, this -- just the second paragraph? 22· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Did you understand that the
23· · · ·Q.· Yes, sir.· The description of the violation. 23· notice of violation that was being issued on August 21st,
24· · · ·A.· Yes. 24· 2017, by the City, was, as it states in its description,
25· · · ·Q.· Do you recall that GTT received a notice of 25· referring to all floors and all sides of the exterior and

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 210..213
Page 210 Page 212
·1· interior of the parking garage structure where vehicle ·1· to him or...
·2· barriers utilized cables as a barrier? ·2· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· To the -- he's here as a rep.
·3· · · ·A.· Yes, I understood that.· And we, from that point ·3· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· So I mean to your company.
·4· forward, started interviewing engineers to hire -- to ·4· · · ·A.· Where was that other one?
·5· design the new system, based on the date of August 21st, ·5· · · · · ·(Pause.)
·6· 2017 letter. ·6· · · · · ·Yes, I guess after -- if I'm looking at this
·7· · · ·Q.· And that's because at that time you had been ·7· letter here, going back to 1689, it says -- this is after
·8· notified by the City that it looked at it and it ·8· the Bowmer incident.· It says that we have to bring
·9· considered that system to be dangerous.· Right? ·9· everything up to 2012 code.· It's in the recommended
10· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 10· resolution, not in the description.
11· · · ·A.· (Pause.) 11· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So in terms of GTT receiving
12· · · · · ·It doesn't say that it's dangerous.· It just says 12· communications from the City, it's true that the City
13· that we have to replace all of them.· They're telling us 13· determined and communicated to GTT that the cable system,
14· to replace all of them.· That's all that it says. 14· as a whole, did not meet the City code for when it was
15· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· You think that they were 15· built.· Right?
16· requiring you to replace all of them because they were all 16· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
17· safe? 17· · · ·A.· This communication on August 21st, 2017 says
18· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 18· that.
19· · · ·A.· You asked me to confirm your statement, and I'm 19· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· And that the cable system was
20· saying your statement doesn't align with this document. 20· found to be hazardous because of loose cables, guard
21· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Okay.· Well, let's look at a 21· spacing, and previously unpermitted repairs on various
22· different one then. 22· levels.· True?
23· · · · · ·Can you turn to 1508 with me?· Actually, it's 23· · · ·A.· What page are you quoting that from?
24· 1560.· My apologies.· Have you seen the correspondence 24· · · ·Q.· I'm quoting that from what the City was
25· back and forth between the City and, for instance, 25· telling --

Page 211 Page 213

·1· Mr. Cruickshank [phonetic], who we were talking about ·1· · · ·A.· I think that "hazardous" word comes from Hilton,
·2· before? ·2· not from the City.
·3· · · ·A.· I don't believe I reviewed this specifically -- ·3· · · ·Q.· Well, it doesn't.· It comes from the City.
·4· · · ·Q.· All right. ·4· · · ·A.· I'm just -- if I'm going to agree, I need to know
·5· · · ·A.· -- in preparation, though I can read it now. ·5· what part you're reading.
·6· · · ·Q.· Sure. ·6· · · ·Q.· See it right up there?
·7· · · ·A.· The bottom section? ·7· · · ·A.· That's from Hilton to the City.
·8· · · ·Q.· Yes, sir. ·8· · · ·Q.· No, it isn't, sir.· It says from John Hale on --
·9· · · ·A.· (Pause.) ·9· · · ·A.· Oh, it's to Hilton.
10· · · · · ·Okay. 10· · · ·Q.· -- 1/3/18 to Hilton.· So I understand it can be a
11· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So was it ever communicated to you by the 11· little confusing sometimes, but this is from the City to
12· City that the cable system was found to be hazardous? 12· the person who was handling the third-party claim made by
13· · · ·A.· I don't -- no, this was communication between 13· your company to pay for repairs to change the system.
14· Hilton and the City. 14· · · · · ·Isn't that true?
15· · · ·Q.· No. 15· · · ·A.· That's true.· That's who this is to.
16· · · ·A.· This was never given to me. 16· · · ·Q.· Okay.
17· · · ·Q.· I'm not asking you about -- 17· · · ·A.· It's not to me.
18· · · ·A.· No, the City never told me it was dangerous. 18· · · ·Q.· I understand.
19· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And the City never told you it was 19· · · ·A.· Okay.
20· hazardous? 20· · · ·Q.· My question to you is, is it true that because of
21· · · ·A.· Not that I recall. 21· hazardous conditions, the entire cable system was required
22· · · ·Q.· And the City never said it was dangerous or 22· by the City to be brought into compliance with the 2012
23· hazardous because of loose cables, guard spacing, and 23· international building code?
24· previously unpermitted repairs on various levels? 24· · · ·A.· I'm not sure how they determined when something
25· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.· Do you mean 25· has to bring -- be brought up into current code.

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 214..217
Page 214 Page 216
·1· · · ·Q.· I didn't ask you how they determined that. I ·1· words?
·2· asked you if that was communicated, it's true that ·2· · · ·A.· Not that I recall.
·3· that's -- ·3· · · ·Q.· Did they indicate to you just the opposite, that
·4· · · ·A.· Yes.· They asked us to bring it up to 2012 code. ·4· on each floor there were issues with safety and it was
·5· · · ·Q.· And you then hired Walker and other people, ·5· going to require your company to bring the facility up to
·6· entities to do that? ·6· code?
·7· · · ·A.· I interviewed others.· I hired Walker. ·7· · · ·A.· It was mainly just to say that everything needs
·8· · · ·Q.· And that's what the intent was, to bring it up to ·8· to be brought up to code and four-inch sphere and certain
·9· the 2012 code? ·9· heights and minimum heights, things like that.
10· · · ·A.· Yes, sir. 10· · · ·Q.· Was anybody with Premier along for that
11· · · ·Q.· And that's the project that's undergone work and 11· inspection?
12· is still being taken now? 12· · · ·A.· I can't recall.
13· · · ·A.· Yes.· Yes. 13· · · ·Q.· Did Premier participate in any way with GTT
14· · · · · · · · MR. KURHAJEC:· Sean, I know you got more to 14· Parking in the exchanges with the City of Austin regarding
15· go through. 15· the safety issues of the cable system?
16· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· Do you need a quick break? 16· · · ·A.· Post incident, I assume?· I don't --
17· · · · · · · · MR. KURHAJEC:· If you don't mind. 17· · · ·Q.· Right.
18· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· Sure.· Let's take a quick break. 18· · · ·A.· I -- I'd have to go back and look at the e-mails.
19· · · · · · · · (Discussion off the record.) 19· · · ·Q.· I mean, there was no interfacing with the City of
20· · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· We're off at 2:57. 20· Austin pre --
21· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·(Break.) 21· · · ·A.· No.
22· · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· This is Segment No. 6. 22· · · ·Q.· -- Bowmer incident regarding the -- the building
23· We're back on the record, 3:07. 23· as a whole.· True?
24· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Would you look at Page 1509 with 24· · · ·A.· That's true.
25· me, please, Mr. O'Brien.· On 1509, the City's file 25· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.

Page 215 Page 217

·1· indicates that on July 21st, Mr. Roig and Mr. Hale met ·1· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Sorry to interrupt.
·2· with yourself and the engineer, Richard Martin, at the ·2· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· That's okay.
·3· property. ·3· · · ·A.· So I apologize.· I'd have to look at the
·4· · · · · ·Do you recall that meeting? ·4· communication and see who was cc'd on the certain letters.
·5· · · ·A.· Yes. ·5· I would instantly want to go back to that other letter and
·6· · · ·Q.· Can you tell me what you recall about that ·6· just see if they were cc'd on it because I can't remember.
·7· meeting. ·7· · · ·Q.· Were you informed by the City at the time of that
·8· · · ·A.· It was our first meeting on-site after the ·8· inspection in July that dangerous conditions existed
·9· incident and it was just to -- this is where it was ·9· relating to vehicle barriers or guards that utilized
10· decided that we would put up the water barriers and I was 10· cables as a barrier in the parking garage?
11· told that we would be required to bring the garage up to 11· · · ·A.· Can you repeat that.
12· 2012 code. 12· · · ·Q.· Sure.· In the July walk-through, were you
13· · · ·Q.· Anything else you recall? 13· notified by the City that dangerous conditions existed
14· · · ·A.· That's -- those are the main bullet points.· If I 14· relating to vehicle barriers, the guards that utilized
15· read this, it might jog my memory, I guess. 15· cables as a barrier in the parking garage?
16· · · ·Q.· Yeah.· Mr. Hale indicates that y'all went floor 16· · · ·A.· I believe they pointed out one loose cable, yes.
17· by floor of the parking garage.· Do you recall walking 17· · · ·Q.· Any other dangerous conditions that they showed
18· with Mr. Hale and Mr. Roig floor by floor? 18· you?
19· · · ·A.· Yes. 19· · · ·A.· He referred earlier to a handrail that was
20· · · ·Q.· Do you recall any specific observations or 20· missing one anchor in the top corner.· It still had the
21· comments they made to you about the cabling system as you 21· other three, but he said make sure and address this in
22· went floor by floor? 22· your repairs.
23· · · ·A.· Nothing that jumped out specifically. 23· · · ·Q.· Did they indicate to you at that time that the
24· · · ·Q.· Did they indicate to you that on any floor, the 24· cable system as a whole was insufficient and dangerous?
25· cable system was adequate, safe, anything of those type of 25· · · ·A.· No.

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 218..221
Page 218 Page 220
·1· · · ·Q.· Did the City ever indicate that to you? ·1· · · ·A.· I was indifferent.
·2· · · ·A.· No. ·2· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Why just indifferent?
·3· · · ·Q.· Did you apply for a building permit to do the ·3· · · ·A.· You asked if I supported it and I guess the
·4· work to bring the garage up to code and make the restraint ·4· answer is I didn't not support and I didn't support. I
·5· system safe? ·5· was indifferent.
·6· · · ·A.· I did. ·6· · · ·Q.· Was there any reason that you were indifferent?
·7· · · ·Q.· Would you look at Page 1900 with me. ·7· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
·8· · · ·A.· Okay. ·8· · · ·A.· I just didn't have -- I didn't have an opinion.
·9· · · ·Q.· Is 1900 and the next five or six pages, four ·9· · · · · · · · (Exhibit 18 was marked.)
10· pages or so, the building permit that you filled out? 10· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Show you Exhibit 18.· Exhibit 18,
11· · · ·A.· I did. 11· at the bottom of the page, which is GTT 054, appears to be
12· · · ·Q.· And is that your signature? 12· an e-mail that was back in the September 2016 time frame.
13· · · ·A.· It is. 13· Is that correct?
14· · · ·Q.· Okay. 14· · · ·A.· I'm sorry.· Say that again.
15· · · · · · · · (Exhibit 17 was marked.) 15· · · ·Q.· The bottom of GTT 054 which is Exhibit 18.
16· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Show you Exhibit 17.· Exhibit 17 16· · · ·A.· Yes.
17· is an e-mail exchange including Mr. Kahn, yourself, 17· · · ·Q.· That's -- the time frame of this e-mail is
18· Ms. Murray, and a few other people? 18· September of 2016.· True?
19· · · ·A.· Yes, sir. 19· · · ·A.· September 14th, 2016, yes.
20· · · ·Q.· And it was shortly after Mr. O'Connor's accident? 20· · · ·Q.· And that would have been after the O'Connor
21· · · ·A.· Uh-huh. 21· incident, shortly after that?
22· · · ·Q.· Is that true? 22· · · ·A.· Yes.
23· · · ·A.· Yes.· Yes. 23· · · ·Q.· The e-mail from Ryan Hunt, Mr. Hunt, is he with
24· · · ·Q.· And it included in this link a link to the 24· Premier?
25· Statesman article where Mr. O'Connor talks about the sheer 25· · · ·A.· He is.

Page 219 Page 221

·1· terror of hanging off the eight-story building? ·1· · · ·Q.· It's to you, is it not?
·2· · · ·A.· Yes, that -- that's the title of the link there. ·2· · · ·A.· It is.
·3· · · ·Q.· And this e-mail in it, were you part of the chain ·3· · · ·Q.· It says, "Do you want me to reach out to Stream
·4· where Ms. Murray from Premier says that the kid is really ·4· and get the details on the cabling work they performed in
·5· milking his 15 minutes, photo shoot and all? ·5· early 2015?"
·6· · · ·A.· I can't recall.· It doesn't show that I am on ·6· · · · · ·Do you see that?
·7· this, but it doesn't show all the information. ·7· · · ·A.· I do see that.
·8· · · ·Q.· Well, are you not in the chain that -- ·8· · · ·Q.· "I believe it was performed by someone Eric
·9· · · ·A.· I'm at the chain at the top, yes, I am. ·9· Herron knew well and had worked with before."
10· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Where -- 10· · · · · ·Did I read that correctly?
11· · · ·A.· Yeah.· So I probably did get this e-mail. 11· · · ·A.· You did.
12· · · ·Q.· Did you ever at any time indicate to Ms. Murray 12· · · ·Q.· Who is Eric Herron?
13· or anybody else, you know, this kid may really have 13· · · ·A.· I believe he was with Stream.
14· suffered from pretty serious trauma or anything to that 14· · · ·Q.· Did you know Mr. Herron?
15· effect from almost dying in your parking garage? 15· · · ·A.· I don't know him.
16· · · ·A.· I don't remember having a conversation like that 16· · · ·Q.· And did you indicate to Ryan that he should reach
17· with her. 17· out to Stream to get the details on that cabling work?
18· · · ·Q.· And was this e-mail, Exhibit 17, essentially the 18· · · ·A.· I don't remember.
19· genesis of the company's decision to put together a claim 19· · · ·Q.· Did you ever get the details on the cabling work?
20· against Mr. O'Connor for the damages the company would 20· · · ·A.· I have not received anything from Stream on this.
21· ultimately seek against him for that accident? 21· · · ·Q.· And in it, Mr. Hunt, in this chain up at the top,
22· · · ·A.· It looks that way.· Looks to be probably the 22· notes that he's more concerned from a liability
23· first communication of that. 23· perspective on who completed the work previously.
24· · · ·Q.· And did you support that? 24· · · · · ·Do you see that?
25· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 25· · · ·A.· I do.

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 222..225
Page 222 Page 224
·1· · · ·Q.· And that work completed previously, your ·1· breaks, they don't come to me for that.· It's just that
·2· understanding was that was some type of cabling work ·2· the garage has to work, has to be maintained.· And it's a
·3· performed by Stream? ·3· day-to-day thing.
·4· · · ·A.· That's -- that's what -- I would take that as ·4· · · ·Q.· And in your experience there at the Littlefield
·5· yes. ·5· Garage, what was it that you witnessed that Premier had
·6· · · ·Q.· Okay.· But in terms of what information, whether ·6· activity doing that it didn't need to come get permission
·7· you got it or when, you simply don't have any information? ·7· from you to do?· The ticket machine and what else?
·8· · · ·A.· I don't have it.· It's never been passed on to ·8· · · ·A.· Again, I wasn't there day to day.· I didn't park
·9· me. ·9· there.· So I didn't witness, as you're asking, their daily
10· · · ·Q.· Fair enough, sir. 10· maintenance.· But I know that they are there day to day.
11· · · ·A.· Sorry. 11· · · · · ·Traditionally, they're the day-to-day manager.
12· · · · · · · · (Exhibit 19 was marked.) 12· And I just would expect that there's certain maintenance
13· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· I show you Exhibit 19. 13· that goes into a building like that that they take care
14· · · ·A.· Can I set this binder aside? 14· of.
15· · · ·Q.· Yes, sir.· You can.· You can put it on the floor 15· · · ·Q.· And what safety protocol or safety items would
16· if you want or, if you want to hand it back to me, I'll 16· you expect would need to be done, if not on a day-to-day
17· put it out of your way. 17· basis in terms of the cable system, at least, for
18· · · · · ·Thank you very much, Mr. O'Brien. 18· instance, on a monthly basis?· Some type of inspection?
19· · · · · ·I don't have very many questions for you. 19· · · ·A.· It -- you're asking me to speculate on what it
20· There's just a couple questions that I have. 20· takes to manage a garage.
21· · · · · ·If you'll look at the answer to Interrogatory 6. 21· · · ·Q.· Well, you own a garage.· I'm asking you to tell
22· These -- what we've marked as Exhibit 19 are the answers 22· me what an --
23· under oath of Premier Parking of Tennessee, LLC. 23· · · ·A.· But I'm --
24· · · · · ·Do you see that? 24· · · ·Q.· -- an owner would do.
25· · · ·A.· No. 6, yes, sir. 25· · · ·A.· Well, we have a management company.

Page 223 Page 225

·1· · · ·Q.· Okay.· In response to the question of describing ·1· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So you understand that the way delegation
·2· in detail the regular procedure, if any, for maintaining ·2· works is that it originates with the owner.
·3· the premises, specifically the cable barrier, do you see ·3· · · · · ·And what you're telling me is that the owner has
·4· the response that was made by Premier? ·4· delegated that responsibility to a management company.
·5· · · ·A.· I do. ·5· Right?
·6· · · ·Q.· It indicates that Premier did not maintain the ·6· · · ·A.· So I'd expect that we would walk the garage
·7· cable barrier system at the Littlefield Garage.· Is that ·7· periodically at a minimum.
·8· correct? ·8· · · ·Q.· Anything else?
·9· · · ·A.· Not in my opinion. ·9· · · ·A.· No, sir.
10· · · ·Q.· It indicates that, as far as Premier knew, there 10· · · ·Q.· Were there any other significant exchanges or
11· was not anything wrong with the cable barrier system.· Is 11· meetings with anybody from the City of Austin that you
12· that correct? 12· were a participant and that we haven't covered here today?
13· · · ·A.· I can't speak for them. 13· · · ·A.· No, sir.· It's all documented by the City.
14· · · ·Q.· Well, haven't we seen e-mails specifically where 14· · · ·Q.· So between what you've told me and what we have
15· you were communicating with problems or issues with the 15· in Exhibit 16, you would expect that to cover everything?
16· cable barrier system? 16· · · ·A.· Yes, sir.
17· · · ·A.· Oh.· Yes.· Related to those, yes. 17· · · ·Q.· Are there any other significant discussions with
18· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Is it true that Premier was only allowed 18· anybody from Premier Parking of Tennessee, LLC, related to
19· to hire a vendor to do work at the garage after getting 19· matters germane to this lawsuit that you and I haven't
20· permission from the owner through the management company? 20· covered today?
21· · · ·A.· I wouldn't say that was across the board. 21· · · ·A.· Not that I can recall.
22· Certain things just have to be done. 22· · · ·Q.· How about with Weitzman Management Corp.?
23· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Such as what?· Like, for instance, 23· · · ·A.· No.
24· what would Premier -- 24· · · ·Q.· You'll remember at the very beginning,
25· · · ·A.· A, for instance, would be, if the ticket machine 25· Mr. O'Brien, of your deposition we had an agreement about

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 226..229
Page 226 Page 228
·1· alerting me if my behavior was causing you different ·1· · · ·A.· I worked for a company called Vaughn Construction
·2· issues. ·2· based out of Houston.
·3· · · · · ·Do you remember that agreement? ·3· · · ·Q.· What did you do for Vaughn?
·4· · · ·A.· I do. ·4· · · ·A.· Project management, project engineering.· Project
·5· · · ·Q.· Through my demeanor here today, have I caused you ·5· engineering for them was a different term.· It's not what
·6· to answer questions in some way other than you wanted to ·6· it sounds like.· Basically, project management, reviewing
·7· answer? ·7· paperwork and organizing subcontractors.
·8· · · ·A.· There were some questions where I feel you were ·8· · · ·Q.· Did you have to review contracts in that
·9· providing me the answer and I would try to give you the ·9· position?
10· answer that made the most sense from my perspective and 10· · · ·A.· I did not.
11· you would just re-ask the question. 11· · · ·Q.· What did you do after Vaughn?
12· · · · · ·But the one -- but the one time that I asked you 12· · · ·A.· After Vaughn, I worked for a company called Lago
13· to refrain from a certain approach, I feel like you 13· Builders for a short time.· And then I worked for IE2
14· changed your demeanor at that time.· So... 14· Construction before working with David.
15· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So is that a long way of telling me that 15· · · ·Q.· Were you in construction management at IE2?
16· you did what we agreed upon? 16· · · ·A.· Yes.· I was -- yes.
17· · · ·A.· I believe so. 17· · · ·Q.· And then you started working for David Kahn, I
18· · · ·Q.· So at the time that came up, did you alert me and 18· think you meant.· Right?
19· I handled it appropriately? 19· · · ·A.· Yes.· David Kahn.
20· · · ·A.· I believe so. 20· · · ·Q.· And that's the gentleman seated here next to me?
21· · · ·Q.· And -- and was I courteous to you? 21· · · ·A.· Correct.
22· · · ·A.· I believe so. 22· · · ·Q.· And was that around 2014?
23· · · ·Q.· And through my demeanor did I cause you to answer 23· · · ·A.· Four or five years ago.· Yes.· That sounds right.
24· in some way other than you wanted to other than when you 24· Almost five.
25· alerted me? 25· · · ·Q.· What basis did you have for GTT relying on

Page 227 Page 229

·1· · · ·A.· I don't believe so. ·1· Premier Parking of Tennessee to know that there were loose
·2· · · ·Q.· Thank you, sir. ·2· cables in the Littlefield Garage?
·3· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· I'll reserve the rest of my ·3· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
·4· questions. ·4· · · ·A.· Just a visual inspection.· So much like the
·5· · · · · · · · · · · · · EXAMINATION ·5· e-mails that I sent to Christina, I could just see that --
·6· BY MR. RHODES: ·6· or someone else could see that the cables were -- were
·7· · · ·Q.· Mr. O'Brien, my name is Chris Rhodes. I ·7· drooped and not tensioned.· It was just a visual.
·8· represent Premier Parking Tennessee, LLC, in this case. ·8· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. RHODES)· And -- and you're talking about
·9· · · · · ·You earned a Bachelor of Architecture in building ·9· Christina Murray at Premier.· Correct?
10· construction technology from Texas A&M University in 2003. 10· · · ·A.· Yes.· She was in charge of the staff there and
11· Isn't that true? 11· she was in charge of -- for a good amount of time she was
12· · · ·A.· Environmental design.· Yes, sir.· College of 12· officing out of our garage.
13· Architecture, Bachelor of Science, environmental design. 13· · · ·Q.· But why were you relying on Premier to look for
14· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Your LinkedIn profile -- you stated there 14· loose cables?
15· that it was a bachelor of architecture.· You called it a 15· · · ·A.· Because they're there on a daily basis.
16· BARCH. 16· · · ·Q.· Is that the only reason?
17· · · ·A.· That sounds about right.· Yes, sir.· That's 17· · · ·A.· That's not the only reason.· But they're there
18· correct. 18· daily.· They are there to organize if work needs to be
19· · · ·Q.· And it was in building construction technology. 19· done.
20· Is that right? 20· · · · · ·It's just traditionally how management works.
21· · · ·A.· It was an undergrad to -- it was an architectural 21· When you hire a property manager, a garage manager, a
22· undergrad. 22· building manager, whoever it is, traditionally they're
23· · · ·Q.· In 2003? 23· going to take care of the day-to-day and keeping the
24· · · ·A.· Yes. 24· building maintained.
25· · · ·Q.· What did you do after you graduated Texas A&M? 25· · · ·Q.· But you didn't know how traditional garages were

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 230..233
Page 230 Page 232
·1· handled because you'd never worked for a company that had ·1· · · ·A.· I don't know.· I was never told that they
·2· a garage and GTT -- I'm sorry -- yeah -- GTT had not had a ·2· couldn't handle something.· So I -- when I would send a
·3· garage previously.· Right? ·3· request or a notification and they'd say they were on it
·4· · · ·A.· That's true.· But this is how our buildings are ·4· and I wouldn't hear back saying they can't handle
·5· managed. ·5· something, I took that as a sign that the situation was
·6· · · ·Q.· But you hadn't had a building with a garage ·6· being taken care of by Premier.
·7· before.· Right? ·7· · · ·Q.· You said earlier that you brought loose cables to
·8· · · ·A.· That's correct. ·8· Premier's attention and they said that they were on it.
·9· · · ·Q.· And GTT had not had a building with a garage ·9· · · · · ·Do you remember that testimony?
10· before you came to work for GTT or the company you 10· · · ·A.· I do.
11· described earlier that pays your salary.· Right? 11· · · ·Q.· By "on it," did you mean that Ms. Murray told you
12· · · ·A.· That's correct.· It was our only garage. 12· they were on it?
13· · · ·Q.· Did Premier have engineers on its staff? 13· · · ·A.· Yes.
14· · · ·A.· I don't know. 14· · · ·Q.· And by saying "that they were on it," did you
15· · · ·Q.· Did Premier represent to you that it had 15· mean that Premier was going to do what GTT needed done?
16· engineers on its staff? 16· · · ·A.· That was my expectation.· Yes.
17· · · ·A.· I don't -- no.· No, they didn't. 17· · · ·Q.· Was what Ms. Murray and Premier going to do
18· · · ·Q.· Did Premier have someone like you with 18· something that she would have done at GTT's direction?
19· construction management, education, and training? 19· · · ·A.· I don't know that she needed my direction.· If --
20· · · ·A.· I don't know. 20· it depends on the situation and what -- what the work was.
21· · · ·Q.· Did Premier represent to you that it had someone 21· · · ·Q.· Did Premier bring loose cables to your attention?
22· with construction management, education, and training on 22· · · ·A.· I believe so.
23· its staff? 23· · · ·Q.· When was that?
24· · · ·A.· No.· But similar to why I hire consultants and 24· · · ·A.· I don't recall the date.
25· engineers, I would expect that they're going to hire 25· · · ·Q.· Was it before the incident involving Mr. O'Connor

Page 231 Page 233

·1· consultants and engineers. ·1· and his vehicle that Mr. Breen asked you about earlier?
·2· · · · · ·I'm not going to make any decisions.· I'm not an ·2· · · ·A.· I don't remember the date.
·3· engineer.· So based on the fact that they're garage ·3· · · ·Q.· Was it between the O'Connor incident and the
·4· experts, I would -- ·4· July 17, 2017, accident involving Plaintiff Christi
·5· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Let's -- let's talk about that. ·5· Bowmer?
·6· · · · · ·What led you to believe that Premier Parking was ·6· · · ·A.· I would have expected that there's been
·7· a garage expert? ·7· communication about loose cables between both of us across
·8· · · ·A.· Their sole responsibility as a -- I take -- let ·8· all of that time frame.
·9· me start over, please. ·9· · · ·Q.· What I'm particularly interested in, do you
10· · · · · ·They -- I do not believe that they manage any 10· recall when a representative of Premier brought loose
11· buildings.· They manage parking garages, and that's what 11· cables to the attention of you at GTT?
12· they do. 12· · · ·A.· I believe so.· Yeah.· I just don't know the date.
13· · · · · ·I think they have over 400 parking garages across 13· · · ·Q.· But do you remember if it was between these
14· the country, something along those lines, and it's -- 14· crucial time periods, the time period before the O'Connor
15· their main focus is the garage and parking industry. 15· incident, the time period between the O'Connor incident
16· · · ·Q.· What -- 16· and the Bowmer incident and the time period since the
17· · · ·A.· They -- I'm sorry.· Go ahead. 17· Bowmer incident?
18· · · ·Q.· What part of your understanding of Premier gave 18· · · ·A.· I don't remember.· I don't want to speculate,
19· you the impression that Premier was going to hire 19· given the situation.· But I do believe that they were told
20· engineers without GTT's approval or consent? 20· that I didn't have that same contractor which I referred
21· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Object to form. 21· them to for the O'Connor incident repair and that they
22· · · ·A.· Can you repeat the question? 22· were not available and that we didn't have anybody else
23· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. RHODES)· What part of your understanding 23· available at that time.· So I don't -- I'd have to go back
24· of Premier and its business gave you the impression that 24· and get specific details.· I -- I don't want to speculate.
25· it would hire engineers without GTT's approval or consent? 25· · · ·Q.· Where would those details be?

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 234..237
Page 234 Page 236
·1· · · ·A.· If they were communicated, they'd be in e-mail, ·1· Kahn to talk about the specifics of the agreement as our
·2· I'd assume. ·2· corporate rep.
·3· · · ·Q.· Why did you assume Premier would do safety ·3· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. RHODES)· Is this dated September 8, 2015,
·4· inspections? ·4· on the front page?
·5· · · ·A.· So our management companies do regular ·5· · · ·A.· This exhibit is, yes.
·6· inspections, annual inspections, quarterly inspections, on ·6· · · ·Q.· Do you think that's a true and correct copy of
·7· all of our buildings traditionally, and that's what our ·7· the agreement?
·8· management companies do for us. ·8· · · ·A.· I don't know.· I didn't sign it.· I didn't review
·9· · · ·Q.· But you had never dealt with a management company ·9· it.
10· for a garage before.· Right? 10· · · ·Q.· Is it marked GTT 001 at the bottom?
11· · · ·A.· This is our only garage. 11· · · ·A.· It is.
12· · · ·Q.· What documents have you reviewed showing 12· · · ·Q.· That's an agreement that GTT's lawyers provided
13· inspections to the carrier -- cable barrier system that 13· us.· Do you know if that agreement is a business record
14· Premier conducted that were not made at GTT's direction? 14· that was created or maintained by a person at GTT to have
15· · · ·A.· I'm sorry.· Can you restate the question. 15· personal knowledge of the events recorded in the course of
16· · · ·Q.· What documents have you reviewed showing 16· their business?
17· inspections to the cable barrier system that Premier made 17· · · ·A.· Yes.· It's signed by David.
18· which were not at GTT's direction? 18· · · ·Q.· Was the information in the agreement recorded at
19· · · ·A.· What reviews did Premier do that were basically 19· or near the time of the event in the -- in the agreement,
20· at their own -- at their own will? 20· meaning the agreement itself?
21· · · ·Q.· Right. 21· · · ·A.· I -- I don't know.· I didn't sign it.
22· · · ·A.· I would have to go back and look. 22· · · ·Q.· Was it the regular practice of GTT to enter into
23· · · ·Q.· What documents have you reviewed showing repairs 23· such agreements?
24· GTT made to the cable barrier system that were not done at 24· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Chris, do you want us to
25· GTT's direction?· I'm sorry.· Repairs that Premier made 25· stipulate it's a business record of GTT?· I'm happy to do

Page 235 Page 237

·1· that were not done at GTT's direction? ·1· that.
·2· · · ·A.· Specifically to the cables or in general? ·2· · · · · · · · MR. RHODES:· I suppose if all parties can
·3· · · ·Q.· To the cables. ·3· stipulate to that.
·4· · · ·A.· So it was my expectation that some -- when I ·4· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· I so stipulate.
·5· would bring something to their attention like in the ·5· · · · · · · · MR. KURHAJEC:· I so stipulate as well.
·6· example e-mails earlier, the other exhibits, if they said ·6· · · · · · · · MR. RHODES:· Thank you.
·7· they're on it and -- that it was getting repaired. ·7· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. RHODES)· Meaning it is what it is.
·8· · · ·Q.· But do you know of situations and have you ·8· · · ·A.· Okay.
·9· reviewed documents where GT -- where Premier made cable ·9· · · ·Q.· Instead of some other agreement I would pull out
10· barrier system repairs that were not done at GTT's 10· of thin air.
11· direction? 11· · · ·A.· Okay.
12· · · ·A.· I don't know because I -- again, I wouldn't have 12· · · ·Q.· Do you believe that the agreement that is
13· been involved in that communication.· I don't have access 13· Exhibit 10 was the agreement then in force and effect at
14· to that line of communication because it would have been 14· the time of the September 17, 20- -- I'm sorry, July 13,
15· done without my knowledge. 15· 2017, accident involving plaintiff Christi Bowmer.
16· · · ·Q.· So is the answer, no, you don't know of any 16· · · ·A.· As far as I know, but I can't -- I can't be
17· documents showing -- 17· 100 percent.
18· · · ·A.· I can't -- I don't think I could know. 18· · · ·Q.· Under 2 on the first page, does it state there,
19· · · ·Q.· You testified earlier that GTT had a contract 19· "Contractor agrees to perform contractor services for the
20· with Premier.· Isn't that right? 20· Property in accordance with the schedule and in the manner
21· · · ·A.· Yes. 21· specified in the specifications which are attached as
22· · · ·Q.· And the contract, I believe, is Exhibit 10.· Do 22· 'Exhibit A' and 'Exhibit B' - Operating Parameters"?
23· you still have that in front of you? 23· · · ·A.· I'm sorry.· What's the question?
24· · · ·A.· I should.· Here it is. 24· · · ·Q.· Does 2, "Services to be performed," state,
25· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Again, we've designated David 25· "Contractor agrees to perform contractor services for the

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 238..241
Page 238 Page 240
·1· Property in accordance with the schedule and in the manner ·1· didn't sign it.· I didn't write it, but what we've looked
·2· specified in the specifications which are attached hereto ·2· at so far doesn't state that.
·3· as 'Exhibit A' and 'Exhibit B' - Operating Parameters"? ·3· · · ·Q.· Was there any written addendum or supplementation
·4· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.· Objection; we ·4· or change to this agreement that you know of between GTT
·5· have designated the person with the most knowledge of this ·5· and Premier that expanded the duties that Premier was
·6· agreement as David Kahn, who is about to get deposed. ·6· supposed to conduct with respect to the Littlefield
·7· · · · · · · · You can answer. ·7· Garage?
·8· · · ·A.· That is what -- I can confirm you read what is on ·8· · · ·A.· Not that I'm aware of.
·9· the agreement in front of me. ·9· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
10· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. RHODES)· Can you go to the page marked 10· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. RHODES)· Is there anything in this
11· GTT 014, Mr. O'Brien. 11· agreement or anything else in writing that states that
12· · · ·A.· Okay.· I'm here. 12· Premier was to walk the garage periodically and look for
13· · · ·Q.· I'm sorry.· Wrong page.· 12.· Two pages before 13· loose cables?
14· it.· 012, please. 14· · · ·A.· Not that I'm aware of right now.
15· · · · · ·Does 3 state that the "Contractor agrees to 15· · · · · · · · MR. RHODES:· Pass the witness.
16· operate the Property in an efficient manner and on days 16· · · · · · · · · · · · · EXAMINATION
17· and hours customary in the trade, commensurate with 17· BY MR. KURHAJEC:
18· parking demand in the area"? 18· · · ·Q.· Mr. O'Brien, can you turn back to Exhibit 13,
19· · · ·A.· It does. 19· which is the -- or which are the e-mails that you all
20· · · ·Q.· And if you go to the next page, 13, about halfway 20· produced this morning.· In particular, Page -- or
21· down, does it state, "Any structural, mechanical, 21· GTT 000185, please.· Let me know when you're there.
22· electrical or other installations or any alterations 22· · · ·A.· Okay.· I'm there.
23· required by statutes or regulations pertaining to air 23· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And as I understand it and as -- let me
24· quality, environmental protection, provisions for persons 24· introduce myself to you again.· I introduced myself to you
25· with disabilities or similar governmental requirements 25· before the deposition.· I'm Curt Kurhajec.· I'm here for

Page 239 Page 241

·1· shall be the sole responsibility of Owner"? ·1· Weitzman Management.· Do you understand that?
·2· · · ·A.· It does say that right there, yes. ·2· · · ·A.· Yes, sir.
·3· · · ·Q.· Is your understanding "owner" as being GTT ·3· · · ·Q.· And as I understand it from previous questions by
·4· Parking? ·4· Mr. Breen, as far as you're concerned as a representative
·5· · · ·A.· Yes. ·5· of GTT today, Weitzman did not have any obligation or
·6· · · ·Q.· And does the next sentence state, "Owner ·6· responsibility for either the inspection, maintenance, or
·7· acknowledges that Contractor's obligations hereunder do ·7· repair of this cable barrier system.· Is that correct?
·8· not include the rendering of service, supervision, or ·8· · · ·A.· When I -- that -- that's correct.
·9· furnishing of personnel in connection with the personal ·9· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Then where I'm going to go with this is,
10· safety and security of any persons within or about the 10· obviously, you cc'd Carla Salas with Cencor Realty.
11· Property, nor does any insurance provided by Contractor 11· · · ·A.· Uh-huh.
12· cover such claims"? 12· · · ·Q.· And my simple question is, is that -- well, two
13· · · ·A.· It does say that. 13· questions, did you expect Carla Salas or Cencor Realty to
14· · · ·Q.· The next paragraph down, does it say, "It is 14· be doing anything with regard to the barrier cable system
15· agreed that any actions, costs, claims, losses, expenses, 15· and the e-mail that you directed to Christina Murray?
16· and/or damages resulting from design or structural faults 16· · · ·A.· No.· I think -- thinking back on this, I e-mail
17· or defects are the responsibility of Owner"? 17· Carla and James daily and it may have just been that they
18· · · ·A.· That's what it says. 18· are in charge of our downtown properties.· So I think I
19· · · ·Q.· Does it state anywhere in this document that 19· just cc'd them because they are someone I e-mail daily so
20· damages resulting from designer structural faults or 20· it may not have been --
21· defects are the responsibility of Premier identified as 21· · · ·Q.· It was simply a courtesy copy to them?
22· contractor? 22· · · ·A.· Yes, just a cc.
23· · · ·A.· Not that you've read. 23· · · ·Q.· Right.· And that's what I wanted to be sure of in
24· · · ·Q.· Does it state anywhere in this agreement? 24· case somebody said later that -- or would claim later that
25· · · ·A.· Again, I'm not an expert on this document. I 25· there was something that Ms. Salas or Cencor Realty was

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 242..245
Page 242 Page 244
·1· supposed to do concerning this barrier system, that was ·1· · · · · ·Did I read that correctly?
·2· not the intent of the e-mail that you sent to Christina ·2· · · ·A.· You did.
·3· Murray.· Is that correct? ·3· · · ·Q.· So somebody, I'm assuming maybe either you or
·4· · · ·A.· That's correct. ·4· Mr. Kahn because that's the only possibility as the
·5· · · · · · · · MR. KURHAJEC:· That's all I have.· Thank ·5· owners, expressed there were concerns about the exposed
·6· you. ·6· open west elevation and that it had and could potentially
·7· · · · · · · · (Exhibit 20 was marked.) ·7· lead to additional vehicular impacts.· True?
·8· · · · · · · · · · · · · EXAMINATION ·8· · · ·A.· That's what it says here.
·9· BY MR. BREEN: ·9· · · ·Q.· Do you find that to be not true?
10· · · ·Q.· I'm going to show you Exhibit 20.· Can you 10· · · ·A.· Well, I relayed the information that someone else
11· identify Exhibit 20 for me. 11· had said this could be a visual -- visually confusing. I
12· · · ·A.· It's an e-mail from Richard to me on July 20th, 12· relayed that to him and that's what he's writing here.
13· 2017. 13· · · ·Q.· Did you relay it as a concern?
14· · · ·Q.· So Mr. Martin, the engineer, on July 20th of 2017 14· · · ·A.· Yes.· I wanted -- I wanted his design work to be
15· is sending you an e-mail regarding building codes? 15· as good as it could be.
16· · · ·A.· Yes. 16· · · ·Q.· That the problem -- one of the problems with the
17· · · ·Q.· And he sets out what he determines to be a quick 17· open exposed west elevation was that it had and could
18· look at the building code requirements at certain periods 18· potentially in the future lead to vehicular impacts?
19· in time? 19· · · ·A.· I'm not sure where he came to the conclusion that
20· · · ·A.· That's what it looks like. 20· it had, but he put that in here.· I did not give him that
21· · · ·Q.· And was it your understanding from discussions 21· information.· I just told him that other people, at least
22· and the e-mail from Mr. Martin that since 1991 in the UBC, 22· one, had the perspective that there could be an illusion
23· a section was added defining a vehicle barrier as 23· to the garage on that west side and I would like for him
24· 12 inches tall centered, 18 inches above dried surface and 24· to consider that in his evaluation.· I didn't -- I did not
25· it needed to resist a 6,000-pound load? 25· know if there was any merit to the statement that someone

Page 243 Page 245

·1· · · ·A.· That's what this e-mail says.· That's -- yes. ·1· provided to me, but I was taking any information that I
·2· · · ·Q.· And does that still remain consistent with what ·2· had and passing it on to the engineer.
·3· you understand that at least as of 1991 the building code ·3· · · ·Q.· And did you ever tell Mr. Walker, "hey, this
·4· requirements were? ·4· paragraph that you have in here about concerns expressed
·5· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. ·5· by the owner is inaccurate"?
·6· · · ·A.· That's what I've been told. ·6· · · ·A.· I don't -- I don't think I did.
·7· · · · · · · · (Exhibit 21 was marked.) ·7· · · ·Q.· On Page 3, the total probable repair cost was
·8· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Show you Exhibit 21.· Could you ·8· estimated at approximately $1.154 million.
·9· identify 21 for me. ·9· · · · · ·Do you see that?
10· · · ·A.· This is a proposal from Walker Consultants to me 10· · · ·A.· Yes.
11· dated October 19th, 2017. 11· · · ·Q.· Is that approximately correct?· Has it, in your
12· · · ·Q.· This was a proposal related to the construction 12· estimation to date --
13· of the vehicle barrier system at the Littlefield Garage 13· · · ·A.· No.
14· following the Bowmer incident? 14· · · ·Q.· -- turned out to be approximately that?
15· · · ·A.· Yes. 15· · · ·A.· No, sir.
16· · · ·Q.· On Page 2, the second paragraph from the bottom, 16· · · ·Q.· More or less?
17· it says from Walker, "Concerns were expressed by the Owner 17· · · ·A.· Less.
18· over the exposed open west elevation, where there are 18· · · ·Q.· What's the price?
19· currently no reflective measures installed to alert 19· · · ·A.· As I told you, we are redesigning the interior,
20· drivers of the parking area extents." 20· the interior cables so the price has changed.· I think
21· · · · · ·Did I read that correctly? 21· it's around 400,000.
22· · · ·A.· You did. 22· · · ·Q.· So the total for the entire project is 400 as
23· · · ·Q.· "This causes confusion by those parking as to the 23· opposed to 1.1 million?
24· actual extents of the parking structure, which has, and 24· · · ·A.· I believe so.· I can get a firm number.
25· could potentially lead to additional vehicular impacts." 25· · · ·Q.· Great.· Thank you.· I'll just leave a blank in

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 246..249
Page 246 Page 248
·1· your deposition here. ·1· · · ·Q.· Okay.
·2· · · ·A.· ____________________. ·2· · · · · · · · (Exhibit 22 was marked.)
·3· · · ·Q.· The Walker consultants advised that the new ·3· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Finally, let me show you
·4· barrier system be installed immediately.· Is that ·4· Exhibit 22 and ask if you can just identify Exhibit 22 for
·5· accurate? ·5· me.
·6· · · ·A.· I believe that -- I don't know. ·6· · · ·A.· This is a press release, I believe.
·7· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Well, do you see where it says "it is ·7· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Did you participate in the drafting of
·8· recommended that the new barrier system be installed ·8· this press release on behalf of GTT?
·9· immediately"? ·9· · · ·A.· I did not participate in drafting it, but I read
10· · · ·A.· What page are you on? 10· it before it went out.
11· · · ·Q.· I'm on Page 3. 11· · · ·Q.· And did you approve it as truthful before it went
12· · · ·A.· The same page.· Oh, by the way, so they're 12· out?
13· projecting the construction cost was 886,000, and then 13· · · ·A.· Let me read that real quick.
14· they tacked on all their fees and things like that. 14· · · · · ·(Pause.)
15· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Well, the figure I was using was the total 15· · · · · ·I would have, yes, if this is what I read.
16· probable repair cost. 16· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So it is true that GTT regrets the Bowmer
17· · · ·A.· Okay. 17· accident?
18· · · ·Q.· So when you said 400, was that just for 18· · · ·A.· That's what it says here.· Yes, sir.
19· construction? 19· · · ·Q.· I mean, that's true, isn't it?
20· · · ·A.· That's my construction contract. 20· · · ·A.· Yes.· Yeah.
21· · · ·Q.· Would you tell me what you estimate the total 21· · · ·Q.· And if you could change anything about your
22· probable repair costs to be currently, or would you just 22· behavior between the O'Connor accident and the Bowmer
23· need a blank and you can tell me later? 23· accident, what would it be, if anything?
24· · · ·A.· Say around 500 after engineering fees and 24· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
25· testing. 25· · · ·A.· I did everything that was asked of me by

Page 247 Page 249

·1· · · ·Q.· And you and I were attempting to determine that ·1· engineers in the City.
·2· Page 3 does indeed say it was recommended by Walker that ·2· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Well, we determined that you
·3· the new barrier system be installed immediately? ·3· didn't actually, sir, because the engineer recommended to
·4· · · ·A.· What paragraph are you on? ·4· you that you have an inspection by somebody that was --
·5· · · ·Q.· Second to the bottom, Page 3. ·5· actually knew what they were doing in terms of the cable
·6· · · ·A.· Yes.· It goes on to state "Installation of the ·6· system.· Right?· Do you remember that?
·7· new barrier system can be phased and scheduled around peak ·7· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
·8· hours of operation to least impact those using the parking ·8· · · ·A.· Over time, yes.
·9· structure.· It will be possible for the structure to ·9· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· What do you mean "over time"?
10· remain open during construction, however, traffic control 10· · · ·A.· They recommended that we have it all looked at,
11· devices, signage, and other safety measures and 11· yes.
12· precautions will need to be implemented to properly 12· · · ·Q.· Right.· And you didn't do that, did you?
13· barricade the work areas for both vehicular and pedestrian 13· · · ·A.· Not immediately.
14· traffic." 14· · · ·Q.· Well, you didn't do that until after Ms. Bowmer's
15· · · · · ·So they deemed that the structure was safe to 15· accident.· Right?
16· continue to use while we do implement their measures. 16· · · ·A.· That is correct.
17· · · ·Q.· Provided that the water barriers were maintained 17· · · ·Q.· Now, it is true that a similar incident to
18· on the western side.· Correct? 18· Ms. Bowmer's happened in September 2016 in the same garage
19· · · ·A.· Yes, as a secondary measure. 19· on a different floor.· That's Mr. O'Connor's accident.
20· · · ·Q.· All right.· So as long as the water barriers were 20· Right?
21· maintained, and there was the appropriate safety measures 21· · · ·A.· Yes.
22· and precautions with regard to the barricades and signage, 22· · · ·Q.· And it is true that Ms. Bowmer's car hit the
23· it was okay to open the garage for business while the new 23· barriers at a rate of speed sufficient to break through
24· barrier system was going to be installed? 24· and hit the building across the alley.· Is that your
25· · · ·A.· I believe that to be correct. 25· understanding?

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 250..253
Page 250 Page 252
·1· · · ·A.· That was my understanding. ·1· · · · · · · · · · · · CORRECTION PAGE

·2· · · ·Q.· And that the garage was built in '79, but those ·2· WITNESS NAME:· SEAN O'BRIEN· · · · · DATE:· 06/19/2018

·3· were the only two such incidents that GTT knew of. ·3· PAGE· LINE· CHANGE· · · · · · · ·REASON

·4· · · · · ·Right? ·4· __________________________________________________________

·5· · · ·A.· Those were the only two we knew of. ·5· __________________________________________________________

·6· · · ·Q.· And that after the O'Connor incident, GTT engaged ·6· __________________________________________________________

·7· a structural engineer to review the situation, and repairs ·7· __________________________________________________________

·8· to the safety barriers were performed according to his ·8· __________________________________________________________

·9· recommendation.· Right? ·9· __________________________________________________________

10· · · ·A.· Yes. 10· __________________________________________________________

11· · · ·Q.· But it doesn't note in here that he had other 11· __________________________________________________________

12· recommendations that weren't followed.· True? 12· __________________________________________________________

13· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 13· __________________________________________________________

14· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· But you and I went over those. 14· __________________________________________________________

15· · · ·A.· Yes. 15· __________________________________________________________

16· · · ·Q.· Isn't that accurate? 16· __________________________________________________________

17· · · ·A.· It appears that way. 17· __________________________________________________________

18· · · ·Q.· And you note that the City of Austin permitted 18· __________________________________________________________

19· and inspected such repairs to their satisfaction.· The 19· __________________________________________________________

20· truth of the matter is the City of Austin didn't permit 20· __________________________________________________________

21· those repairs, did it, sir? 21· __________________________________________________________

22· · · ·A.· That is correct.· They just -- 22· __________________________________________________________

23· · · ·Q.· That was a false statement.· The City of Austin 23· __________________________________________________________

24· did not permit those repairs? 24· __________________________________________________________

25· · · ·A.· Correct. 25· __________________________________________________________

Page 251 Page 253

·1· · · ·Q.· Thank you. ·1· · · · · · · · · · · · SIGNATURE PAGE
·2
·2· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· I'll reserve the rest of my · · · · ·I, SEAN O'BRIEN, have read the foregoing deposition
·3· questions. ·3· and hereby affix my signature that same is true and
· · correct, except as noted on the correction page.
·4· · · · · · · · MR. RHODES:· Nothing further. ·4
·5· · · · · · · · MR. KURHAJEC:· Nothing further. ·5
· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·____________________________
·6· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Nothing from me. ·6· · · · · · · · · · · · ·SEAN O'BRIEN
·7· · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· It's 4:03.· We're off the ·7
·8
·8· record. ·9· THE STATE OF TEXAS· · · )
·9· · · · · · · · (Deposition concluded at 4:03 p.m.) · · COUNTY OF _____________ )
10
10
11· · · ·Before me ____________________ on this day personally
11 · · appeared _____________________ known to me [or proved to
12· me on the oath of __________________ or through
12
· · _____________________ (description of identity card or
13 13· other document)] to be the person whose name is subscribed
14 · · to the foregoing instrument and acknowledged to me that
14· he/she executed the same for the purposes and
15 · · consideration therein expressed.
16 15· · · ·Given under my hand and seal of office this ______
· · day of _______________, 2018.
17 16
18 17
· · · · · · · · · · · __________________________________
19 18· · · · · · · · · · NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR
20 · · · · · · · · · · · THE STATE OF T E X A S
19
21 20· My Commission Expires:
22 · · _______________________
21
23 22
24 23
24
25 25

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sean O'Brien on 06/19/2018 Pages 254..256
Page 254 Page 256
·1· · · · · · · · · CAUSE NO. D-1-GN-17-004456 ·1· · · · · ·FURTHER CERTIFICATION UNDER RULE 203 TRCP
·2· CHRISTI J. BOWMER,· · · · · ) IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ) ·2
·3· · · · · · Plaintiff,· · · · ) ·3· · · ·The original deposition was/was not returned to the
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · )
·4· VS.· · · · · · · · · · · · ·) TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS ·4· deposition officer on __________________________;
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ) ·5· · · ·If returned, the attached Changes and Signature page
·5· GTT PARKING, LP, SHELDON· · )
· · DAVID KAHN, PREMIER· · · · ·) ·6· contains any changes and the reasons therefor;
·6· PARKING OF TENNESSEE,· · · ·) 353RD JUDICIAL DISTRICT
· · LLC, and WEITZMAN· · · · · ·) ·7· · · ·If returned, the original deposition was delivered to
·7· MANAGEMENT CORPORATION,· · ·) ·8· SEAN BREEN, Custodial Attorney;
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · )
·8· · · · · · Defendants.· · · ·) ·9· · · ·That $ ______________ is the deposition officer's
·9 10· charges to Plaintiff for preparing the original deposition
· · · · · · · · · · ·REPORTER'S CERTIFICATION
10· · · · · · · · · DEPOSITION OF SEAN O'BRIEN 11· transcript and any copies of exhibits;
· · · · · · · · · · · ·TAKEN JUNE 19, 2018 12· · · ·That the deposition was delivered in accordance with
11
· · · · ·I, TAMARA CHAPMAN, Certified Shorthand Reporter and 13· Rule 203.3 and that a copy of this certificate was served
12· Notary Public in and for the State of Texas, hereby
· · certify to the following: 14· on all parties shown herein and filed with the Clerk.
13· · · ·That the witness, SEAN O'BRIEN, was duly sworn by the 15· · · ·Certified to by me this _______ day of
· · officer and that the transcript of the oral deposition is
14· a true record of the testimony given by the witness; 16· __________________, 2018.
· · · · ·That the deposition transcript was submitted on 17
15· July 9th, 2018 to the witness or to the attorney for
· · the witness for examination, signature and return to 18
16· HUSEBY, by July 29th, 2018;
19· · · · · · · · · · _____________________________________
· · · · ·That the amount of time used by each party at the
17· deposition is as follows: · · · · · · · · · · · Tamara Chapman, CSR (#7248), CRR, RPR
18· · · ·SEAN BREEN - 04:43
· · · · ·CHRISTOPHER L. RHODES -· 00:24 20· · · · · · · · · · Certification Expires 12/31/18
19· · · ·CURTIS J. KURHAJEC - 00:03 · · · · · · · · · · · HUSEBY, INC.
· · · · ·TASHA BARNES - 00:00
20 21· · · · · · · · · · 7000 North Mopac Expressway, 2nd Floor
· · · · ·That pursuant to information given to the deposition · · · · · · · · · · · Austin, Texas 78731
21· officer at the time said testimony was taken, the
· · following includes counsel for all parties of record: 22· · · · · · · · · · Identification No. 660
22
· · · · ·SEAN BREEN - ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF · · · · · · · · · · · (800)333-2082
23· · · ·CHRISTOPHER L. RHODES -· ATTORNEY FOR PREMIER PARKING 23
· · · · ·CURTIS J. KURHAJEC - ATTORNEY FOR WEITZMAN MGMT.
24· · · ·TASHA BARNES - ATTORNEY FOR GTT PARKING, LP 24
25· · · ·I further certify that I am neither counsel for, 25
· · related to, nor employed by any of the parties in the
Page 255
·1· action in which this proceeding was taken, and further
· · that I am not financially or otherwise interested in the
·2· outcome of the action.
·3· · · ·Further certification requirements pursuant to Rule
· · 203 of TRCP will be certified to after they have occurred.
·4· · · ·Certified to by me this 2nd of July, 2018.
·5
·6
·7
· · · · · · · · · · · _____________________________________
·8· · · · · · · · · · Tamara Chapman, CSR (#7248), CRR, RPR
· · · · · · · · · · · Certification Expires 12/31/18
·9· · · · · · · · · · HUSEBY, INC.
· · · · · · · · · · · 7000 North Mopac Expressway, 2nd Floor
10· · · · · · · · · · Austin, Texas 78731
· · · · · · · · · · · Identification No. 660
11· · · · · · · · · · (800)333-2082
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco
Exhibit S
 Sheldon David Kahn Vol 2
August 15, 2018 80
Page 80
·1· · · · · · · · · · ·NO. D-1-GN-17-004456

·2· ·CHRISTI J. BOWMER,· · · · ·) IN THE DISTRICT COURT

· · · · ·Plaintiff,· · · · · · ·)
·3· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · )
· · ·VS.· · · · · · · · · · · · ) TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS
·4· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · )
· · ·GTT PARKING, LP, SHELDON· ·)
·5· ·DAVID KAHN, PREMIER· · · · )
· · ·PARKING OF TENNESSEE,· · · )
·6· ·LLC, and WEITZMAN· · · · · )
· · ·MANAGEMENT CORPORATION,· · )
·7· · · ·Defendants.· · · · · · ) 353RD JUDICIAL DISTRICT

·8

·9
· · · · **************************************************
10· · · · · · · ORAL AND VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF

11· · · · · · · · · · · · GTT PARKING, LP

· · · · · · · · · · · ·(SHELDON DAVID KAHN)
12· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·VOLUME 2

13· · · · · · · · · · · ·AUGUST 15, 2018

· · · · *************************************************
14

15· · · ·ORAL AND VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF GTT PARKING, LP

16· ·(SHELDON DAVID KAHN), Volume 2, produced as a witness

17· ·at the instance of the Plaintiff, and duly sworn, was

18· ·taken in the above-styled and numbered cause on

19· ·August 15, 2018, from 9:38 a.m. to 2:46 p.m., before

20· ·Kim Seibert, CSR in and for the State of Texas,

21· ·reported by machine shorthand, at the law offices of

22· ·THOMPSON, COE, COUSINS & IRONS, LLP, 701 Brazos,

23· ·Suite 1500, Austin, Texas, pursuant to the Texas Rules

24· ·of Civil Procedure and the provisions stated on the

25· ·record or attached hereto.

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100
 Sheldon David Kahn Vol 2
August 15, 2018 81 to 84
Page 81 Page 83
·1· · · · · · · · · · A P P E A R A N C E S ·1· · · · · · · · · · · · · · INDEX
·2 ·2
·3· ·FOR THE PLAINTIFF: ·3· · Appearances.....................................· ·81
· · · · ·Mr. Sean E. Breen ·4
·4· · · ·HOWRY BREEN & HERMAN, LLP ·5
· · · · ·1900 Pearl Street ·6· ·SHELDON DAVID KAHN, VOLUME 2
·5· · · ·Austin, Texas 78705-5408
·7
· · · · ·(512) 474-7300
· · · Continued Examination by Mr. Breen..............· ·85
·6· · · ·sbreen@howrybreen.com
·7 ·8· · Examination by Mr. Rhodes.......................· 182
· · ·FOR THE DEFENDANTS GTT PARKING, LP, SHELDON DAVID KAHN: · · · Examination by Mr. Kurhajec.....................· 208
·8· · · ·Ms. Tasha Barnes ·9· · Further Examination by Mr. Breen................· 209
· · · · ·THOMPSON, COE, COUSINS & IRONS, LLP · · · Further Examination by Mr. Rhodes...............· 234
·9· · · ·701 Brazos 10
· · · · ·Suite 1500 · · · Witness' Signature Page.........................· 236
10· · · ·Austin, Texas 78701 11· · Reporter's Certificate..........................· 238
· · · · ·(512) 708-8200 12
11· · · ·tbarnes@thompsoncoe.com 13· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·EXHIBITS
12 14· ·NUMBER· · · · · DESCRIPTION· · · · · · · · · · · · PAGE
· · ·FOR THE DEFENDANT PREMIER PARKING OF TENNESSEE, LLC: 15· · Exhibit 23· · ................................· · 165
13· · · ·Mr. Christopher L. Rhodes
· · · · · · · · · · Agreement of Purchase and Sale
· · · · ·AYIK & ASSOCIATES
16· · · · · · · · · between 6th & Congress
14· · · ·9601 McAllister Freeway
· · · · ·Suite 910 · · · · · · · · · · Properties, LLC and GTT
15· · · ·San Antonio, Texas 78216 17· · · · · · · · · Parking, LP
· · · · ·(210) 525-2114 · · · · · · · · · · (CONFIDENTIAL)
16· · · ·crhodes2@travelers.com 18· · Exhibit 24· · ................................· · 126
17 · · · · · · · · · · E-mail to Witness, copying
· · ·FOR THE DEFENDANT WEITZMAN MANAGEMENT CORPORATION: 19· · · · · · · · · Sean O'Brien, from
18· · · ·Mr. Curtis J. Kurhajec · · · · · · · · · · Mr. Martin dated
· · · · ·NAMAN, HOWELL, SMITH & LEE, PLLC 20· · · · · · · · · September 9th
19· · · ·8310 Capital of Texas Highway North · · · Exhibit 25· · ................................· · 136
· · · · ·Suite 490 21· · · · · · · · · Timeline
20· · · ·Austin, Texas 78731
· · · Exhibit 26· · ................................· · 151
· · · · ·(512) 479-0300
22· · · · · · · · · E-mail Exchange Including
21· · · ·ckurhajec@namanhowell.com
· · · · · · · · · · Witness with
22
· · ·ALSO PRESENT: 23· · · · · · · · · Instructions to
23· · · ·Brent Kirby - Videographer · · · · · · · · · · Property Manager at
24 24· · · · · · · · · Premier
25 25

Page 82 Page 84
·1· ·REPORTED BY: ·1· ·Exhibit 27· · ................................· · 175
· · · · ·Kim Seibert, CSR, RPR · · · · · · · · · ·Open Parking Garages in City of
·2· · · · · · · · ·Austin
·2· · · ·U.S. Legal Support, Inc.
· · ·Exhibit 28· · ................................· · 214
· · · · ·Austin Centre
·3· · · · · · · · ·Consulting Engineer's Report
·3· · · ·701 Brazos, Suite 380 · · · · · · · · · ·from Maritech
· · · · ·Austin, Texas· 78701 ·4· · · · · · · · ·Engineering
·4· · · ·KimBowenCSR@yahoo.com · · ·Exhibit 29· · ................................· · 221
·5· · · · · · · · ·E-mail from Eric Herron to
· · · · ·(512) 788-8627
· · · · · · · · · ·Suzanne Pfeiffer dated
·5
·6· · · · · · · · ·7-3-14
·6 · · ·Exhibit 30· · ................................· · 222
·7 ·7· · · · · · · · ·E-mail exchange in July of 2014
·8 · · · · · · · · · ·Relating to Littlefield
·8· · · · · · · · ·Mall Garage Barrier
·9
· · · · · · · · · ·Cable Replacement
10 ·9· ·Exhibit 31· · ................................· · 224
11 · · · · · · · · · ·E-mail Exchange from Jessica
12 10· · · · · · · · ·Wright to Eric Herron
13 · · · · · · · · · ·dated 8-20-14
11
14
12
15 13
16 14
17 15
18 16
17
19
18
20 19
21 20
22 21
23 22
23
24
24
25 25

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Sheldon David Kahn Vol 2
August 15, 2018
Page 85
·1· · · · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· We're on the record,
·2· ·9:38 a.m.
·3· · · · · · · · · · ·SHELDON DAVID KAHN,
·4· · · · · ·having been previously sworn, testified
·5· · · · · · · · · · · further as follows:
·6· · · · · · · · · · CONTINUED EXAMINATION
·7· ·BY MR. BREEN:
·8· · · ·Q.· ·Mr. Kahn, we are back at your lawyer's office
·9· ·to resume your deposition.· Are you ready to proceed?
10· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
11· · · ·Q.· ·We're resuming your deposition, so do you
12· ·understand that you're still under oath, the same oath
13· ·you gave the last time?
14· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
15· · · ·Q.· ·And we have the same ground rules for
16· ·operating that you and I agreed upon?
17· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
18· · · ·Q.· ·In the interim between your depositions, did
19· ·you do anything to prepare yourself for your testimony
20· ·as corporate representative here today?
21· · · ·A.· ·You know, I've spoken to my lawyer and I've
22· ·seen some documents that, you know, were prepared
23· ·before.· And there was an e-mail that was interesting
24· ·that I hadn't seen lately.· And, you know, I read my
25· ·testimony from last time, part of it, and I wanted to
Page 86
·1· ·clarify a part of it.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· What part did you feel the need to
·3· ·clarify?
·4· · · ·A.· ·Where it says that we followed everything.
·5· ·And I followed what I -- what I was aware of.· I did my
·6· ·best to follow everything.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·And I'm sorry.· Could you just clarify for me?
·8· ·So somewhere in your deposition you feel like it says
·9· ·you followed everything.· What does that mean?
10· · · ·A.· ·All the recommendations.
11· · · ·Q.· ·All recommendations?· Do you mean of
12· ·Mr. Martin, the structural --
13· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
14· · · ·Q.· ·-- engineer?
15· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
16· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And just -- I'm going to do my very,
17· ·very best to do a couple things here today with you,
18· ·Mr. Kahn.· I'm going to try not to interrupt you at
19· ·all.· If you don't mind just letting me finish my
20· ·question, that will help Kim.· She's back on her first
21· ·day from an incident that she had.· So it will help us
22· ·get a clear booklet.· Okay?
23· · · ·A.· ·Okay.
24· · · ·Q.· ·So last time you testified to the jury as
25· ·corporate rep that your company followed everything
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
85 to 88
Page 87
·1· ·that Mr. Martin, the structural engineer, recommended
·2· ·following the O'Connor incident; is that correct?
·3· · · ·A.· ·We did our best effort, yeah.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· But last time you testified that you
·5· ·followed everything that he recommended.· Is that
·6· ·accurate?
·7· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·And what you want to do now is change that
·9· ·testimony to clarify what actually happened.· Is that
10· ·accurate?
11· · · ·A.· ·I'm clarifying, not changing.
12· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And your clarification is what?· What
13· ·did you not follow that Mr. Martin recommended?
14· · · ·A.· ·There were several letters from Mr. Martin
15· ·that had different recommendations and there was one
16· ·letter where he recommends more stuff than he does in
17· ·other letters, and so we didn't follow the one from
18· ·that one letter.
19· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· So do you recall which letter that is?
20· · · ·A.· ·The.
21· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.· I think he
22· ·gave you two parts.· I'm not sure which part you're
23· ·asking about.
24· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Sure.· No problem I'll
25· ·clarify.
Page 88
·1· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Why don't we just look at
·2· ·Exhibit 8 that you have there.· It's actually not in
·3· ·the booklet.· It's one of the ones with the yellow
·4· ·sticker.
·5· · · ·A.· ·7, 8.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·So Exhibit 8 is a letter dated September 10th,
·7· ·2016 from Richard A. Martin, PE, addressed to you,
·8· ·David Kahn.· Is that accurate?
·9· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
10· · · ·Q.· ·And is this the letter that gave
11· ·recommendations that you're indicating to the jury were
12· ·not followed by you?
13· · · ·A.· ·You know, I believe that -- I'm clarifying
14· ·that we followed some of the stuff that's in this
15· ·letter and some of the stuff we might not have followed
16· ·it.· It does say that based on visual assessment the
17· ·garage is safe for continued use.· And he recommended
18· ·we do other stuff, but I guess I focused on that part
19· ·where he said it was safe for continued use.
20· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Did you understand --
21· · · ·A.· ·And that's what I wanted to clarify.
22· · · ·Q.· ·I understand.
23· · · · · · · · ·Could you tell the jury what parts of the
24· ·recommendations made by the structural engineer on
25· ·September 10th, 2016 that you did not follow?
YVer1f
 Sheldon David Kahn Vol 2
August 15, 2018
Page 89
·1· · · ·A.· ·It says, "A more thorough investigation should
·2· ·be performed."
·3· · · ·Q.· ·You did not follow that, did you?
·4· · · ·A.· ·We believed we had, but we -- but apparently
·5· ·we didn't.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·So you're referring to the very last sentence
·7· ·of his letter where it says, quote, "A more thorough
·8· ·investigation should be performed to identify the full
·9· ·nature of damage and repairs required"?
10· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
11· · · ·Q.· ·And did you, in fact, do a more thorough
12· ·investigation as recommended by Mr. Martin to identify
13· ·the full nature of the damage and repairs required?
14· · · ·A.· ·Well, I believe we had, but I -- you know, we
15· ·could have done more.
16· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· So what thorough investigation was done
17· ·by your company after Mr. Martin's letter of
18· ·September 10th, 2016?
19· · · ·A.· ·Those things were done by Mr. O'Brien and
20· ·Mr. Martin.
21· · · ·Q.· ·And what were those?· List them for me.
22· · · ·A.· ·I think that they have, you know, been
23· ·deposed, haven't they?
24· · · ·Q.· ·Well, Mr. Martin, if that's what you said, has
25· ·not been.· Mr. O'Brien has been.· But my question is to
Page 90
·1· ·you as a corporate rep who's testified that you felt
·2· ·like at least some investigation was performed after
·3· ·Mr. Martin's letter.· Is that accurate?
·4· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· I would like you to tell me what the
·6· ·basis is for you telling the jury that you think a more
·7· ·thorough investigation was done after Mr. Martin's
·8· ·September 10th, 2016 letter?
·9· · · ·A.· ·I asked Mr. O'Brien if he had done more
10· ·investigation.
11· · · ·Q.· ·And what did he tell you?
12· · · ·A.· ·He said yes, that they -- you know, they were
13· ·working on their garage repairs.
14· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· So what investigation was actually done
15· ·to the vehicle restraint system after the
16· ·September 10th, 2016 letter from Mr. Martin?
17· · · ·A.· ·I think you have to ask Mr. O'Brien.
18· · · ·Q.· ·So as you sit here now, you don't know of any
19· ·investigation that your company performed to identify
20· ·the full nature of damage and repairs required
21· ·following the September 10th, 2016 letter.· Is that
22· ·accurate?
23· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
24· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I delegated that to
25· ·Mr. O'Brien.
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
89 to 92
Page 91
·1· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· And so by delegating it, I
·2· ·understand your answer to the jury to be that you do
·3· ·not know and cannot tell the jury what type of
·4· ·investigation, if any, Mr. O'Brien did after you
·5· ·delegated it.· Is that accurate?
·6· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·Have you asked Mr. O'Brien to provide for you
·8· ·or assure you or tell you what additional investigation
·9· ·into the vehicle restraint system was done following
10· ·the September 10th, 2016 letter?
11· · · ·A.· ·I just asked him in general if -- if it was --
12· ·you know, if he was taking care of the --
13· · · ·Q.· ·And what did he tell you?
14· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
15· · · ·Q.· ·And since the incident involving Ms. Bowmer,
16· ·have you made any determination whether, in fact,
17· ·Mr. O'Brien or anybody else affiliated with your
18· ·company did the investigation -- a more thorough
19· ·investigation as recommended by Mr. Martin?
20· · · ·A.· ·I have made no such determination.
21· · · ·Q.· ·In fact, do you not know, sir, that there was
22· ·no additional thorough investigation that was performed
23· ·in between the O'Connor incident and Ms. Bowmer's
24· ·incident by your company?
25· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
Page 92
·1· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· My lawyer objected.
·2· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· You can answer a question
·3· ·when I object.· Go ahead.
·4· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Can you repeat the
·5· ·question, please.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Sure.· Do you not, sir, know
·7· ·for a fact that your company did not perform a more
·8· ·thorough investigation into the full nature of damage
·9· ·and repairs required to the vehicle restraint system as
10· ·recommended in the September 10th, 2016 letter?
11· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
12· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I don't know that.
13· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Now, in the letter Mr. Martin,
14· ·the registered engineer, also indicated that the
15· ·barrier cables at all of the levels below where
16· ·Mr. O'Connor's vehicle was suspended should be reviewed
17· ·more closely by a barrier cable installer.· Do you see
18· ·that in the letter?
19· · · ·A.· ·Where is it?
20· · · ·Q.· ·That is in the first full paragraph on the
21· ·second page, the last sentence -- last two sentences.
22· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.· He says -- where it says, "The
23· ·barricade was at the level below where that vehicle was
24· ·suspended appear to be intact and anchored.· These
25· ·should be reviewed more closely by a barrier cable
YVer1f
 Sheldon David Kahn Vol 2
August 15, 2018
Page 93
·1· ·installer and adjusted as needed."
·2· · · · · · · · ·I see that.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·And do you know, sir, whether or not your
·4· ·company had those cables below the level of where
·5· ·Mr. O'Connor's vehicle went off were reviewed more
·6· ·closely by a barrier cable installer?
·7· · · ·A.· ·I -- I don't think they were.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·And can you explain to the jury why that
·9· ·recommendation from the registered engineer was not
10· ·followed?
11· · · ·A.· ·You know, it's a long letter and a lot of
12· ·things were happening at the time.· And the sentence
13· ·before that gave us enough comfort, plus the fact that
14· ·we thought it was a freak accident.· The sentence below
15· ·that reads that, "The cables appear to be intact and
16· ·anchored."
17· · · ·Q.· ·So your company received the recommendation,
18· ·saw that it was based on a visual observation only that
19· ·was preliminary, and specifically decided that your
20· ·company did not need to review the lower cables more
21· ·closely.· Is that accurate?
22· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
23· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I would not say that we
24· ·decided not to do a recommendation.· I would say that
25· ·we didn't do the one, but we did not make a decision
Page 94
·1· ·not to make one.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·So it was just an accident that you didn't
·3· ·follow the recommendation of the engineer?
·4· · · ·A.· ·I would say maybe we overlooked it, but I
·5· ·wouldn't, you know, describe it as an accident that
·6· ·would say we overlooked it.· Based on the fact that
·7· ·there was a lot of stuff happening at the same time we
·8· ·overlooked one sentence.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·Didn't you just testify to the jury that it
10· ·was a specific decision your company made that you
11· ·didn't need to pursue having it reviewed more closely
12· ·by a barrier cable installer?
13· · · ·A.· ·No.
14· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form, misstates
15· ·prior testimony.
16· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· No.· I wanted to clarify
17· ·that we never made a specific decision not to do an
18· ·investigation.
19· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· The two-page letter that
20· ·Mr. Martin -- page-and-a-half letter that Mr. Martin
21· ·delivered, did you personally read that, this
22· ·September 10th, 2016 letter that's addressed to you?
23· · · ·A.· ·I think I -- I read it, you know, after the
24· ·second incident, the Bowmer incident.
25· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· So after Ms. Bowmer's incident is
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
93 to 96
Page 95
·1· ·when you first read Mr. Martin's September 10th, 2016
·2· ·letter?
·3· · · ·A.· ·You know, my memory is not great, but, yeah, I
·4· ·think so.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·And is there a reason why after hiring a
·6· ·registered professional engineer who delivered you
·7· ·addressed to you a stamped recommendation letter you
·8· ·did not read it after the O'Connor incident and before
·9· ·Ms. Bowmer's incident?
10· · · ·A.· ·The reason was that there was a lot of
11· ·information going back and forth.· There were also
12· ·e-mails that, you know, I did read that, you know, said
13· ·things that made us feel comfortable.· I, you know,
14· ·relied on, you know, the garage managers and, you know,
15· ·the people working in our company and, you know, the
16· ·inspectors that came by, you know.· And -- and the
17· ·general feeling at the time was that the September
18· ·incident was a freak accident, first of all.· And the
19· ·second thing that was the most important in my mind is
20· ·it was a feeling that the cables did perform as -- as
21· ·they were supposed to in that September accident.
22· · · ·Q.· ·And who told you that the cables performed as
23· ·they were supposed to in Mr. O'Connor's accident?
24· · · ·A.· ·Well, no one.
25· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· So why was there a general feeling in
Page 96
·1· ·your company that the cables performed as they were
·2· ·supposed to?
·3· · · ·A.· ·Because the -- the -- so there was a feeling
·4· ·that they did perform, and that feeling came from,
·5· ·first and foremost, the police incident report that
·6· ·just called it a freak accident.· Second, you know,
·7· ·nothing like that had happened in 35 years that the
·8· ·garage had been in business at that time.· Third, the
·9· ·cables did hold the car and they prevented the car from
10· ·falling down.· So we felt that the cables had to be
11· ·attached properly so that the car would not fall down.
12· ·And, you know, the guys from Premier Parking did not
13· ·issue a warning saying, "Hey, you know, the cables in
14· ·the garage did not perform."
15· · · · · · · · ·The structural engineer in his letter
16· ·that you have quoted does not say that the cables did
17· ·not perform anywhere.· And, you know, when we talked to
18· ·the driver's insurance company they did not question
19· ·the driver's liability.
20· · · · · · · · ·MR. RHODES:· Objection, responsiveness.
21· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Now, can you show the jury in
22· ·the letter that is Exhibit 8 where it is that the
23· ·structural engineer indicates to you that the cables
24· ·performed as designed?
25· · · ·A.· ·Like I said, it was a general feeling because
YVer1f
 Sheldon David Kahn Vol 2
August 15, 2018
Page 97
·1· ·it doesn't say the opposite either.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·Well, in fact, what he --
·3· · · ·A.· ·It doesn't say that the cables did not
·4· ·perform.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·What he actually says is, is that it was a
·6· ·preliminary visual assessment and he recommends that
·7· ·the cables be reviewed more closely by a barrier cable
·8· ·installer, doesn't he?
·9· · · ·A.· ·But he didn't say what you said, that he
10· ·did -- that the cables did not perform.· Nowhere here
11· ·does he say that the cables did not perform.
12· · · ·Q.· ·I didn't say that, sir.· I'm sorry that we're
13· ·not communicating.· Let me re-ask ask my question to
14· ·you.
15· · · · · · · · ·What I asked was if you could point out
16· ·anywhere in the letter where he says the cables
17· ·performed as designed.· Can you?
18· · · ·A.· ·He doesn't say that they did not perform.
19· · · ·Q.· ·That's not my question to you.
20· · · · · · · · ·Can you point out to the jury where he
21· ·tells you the cables performed as designed?
22· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
23· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· He doesn't talk about the
24· ·performance of the cables.
25· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Okay.· Now, is it your --
Page 98
·1· · · ·A.· ·Does he talk about the performance of the
·2· ·cables?
·3· · · ·Q.· ·Sorry, sir.· If you would just listen to my
·4· ·questions it will go a little smoother.
·5· · · · · · · · ·Is it your understanding and testimony to
·6· ·the jury that the design of the barrier system at the
·7· ·time of the O'Connor incident was to allow a vehicle to
·8· ·leave the floor of the garage and catch it and suspend
·9· ·it in air before it hits the ground?
10· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
11· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Can you repeat your
12· ·question?
13· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Sure.· Is it your testimony to
14· ·the jury that the design of the vehicle barrier system
15· ·at the time of the O'Connor incident was to allow a
16· ·vehicle to leave the floor of the garage and catch it
17· ·before it hit the ground?
18· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
19· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I'm not -- I'm not an
20· ·expert on garage design.
21· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Okay.· Well, who was it that
22· ·told you that was the way it was intended to perform?
23· · · ·A.· ·They -- no one told me that the cables had
24· ·failed.
25· · · ·Q.· ·That's not what I asked you.· You testified to
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
97 to 100
Page 99
·1· ·the jury that at least four or five people or entities
·2· ·indicated to you that the cables performed as they were
·3· ·supposed to.· My question to you is, is it your
·4· ·understanding that the cables were supposed to let a
·5· ·vehicle leave the floor of the garage and catch it
·6· ·before it hits the ground?
·7· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form, misstates
·8· ·prior testimony.
·9· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I'm not an engineer.
10· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Do you think you need to be an
11· ·engineer to know that's not the intent of the system?
12· · · ·A.· ·That -- that the people are not supposed to
13· ·drive off the garage?· Yeah.
14· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Right.· The cables are supposed to keep
15· ·the car from leaving the floor of the garage, aren't
16· ·they?
17· · · ·A.· ·I don't know what the design was at the time.
18· ·I'm not an engineer.
19· · · ·Q.· ·Well, is it seriously your testimony to the
20· ·jury that you think you need to be an engineer to know
21· ·that a barrier cable is supposed to keep the car from
22· ·leaving the floor of the garage?
23· · · ·A.· ·I -- I -- I have heard that the code called
24· ·for, you know, a -- barriers for people and barrier
25· ·from falling off and barriers for cars from falling
Page 100
·1· ·off.· I don't know exactly which parts are supposed to
·2· ·do what, but I do know that there was a -- initially
·3· ·the garage codes were -- from what I -- from what I've
·4· ·been told -- and I'm not an engineer -- that the codes
·5· ·were made for people not to fall off and then they were
·6· ·strengthened for -- consequently for cars not to go
·7· ·off, the codes.· I'm not an engineer.· I can tell you
·8· ·that nobody told me that the cables had failed.
·9· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Object as nonresponsive.
10· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· What did the police tell you
11· ·that is the basis for your testimony to the jury that
12· ·the cables performed as they were supposed to?
13· · · ·A.· ·Well, whatever the police said, it's in the
14· ·report.· So, you know --
15· · · ·Q.· ·Please tell me what it is that you've just
16· ·said is the basis for your statement that they said it
17· ·performed as it was supposed to.
18· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
19· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Can we pull up the police
20· ·report?· What exhibit is it?
21· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· It's not an exhibit to any
22· ·of the depositions.· I think he's asking you based on
23· ·your memory anyway.
24· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Well, my memory is -- was
25· ·seared with the word in -- that I believe was in the
YVer1f
 Sheldon David Kahn Vol 2
August 15, 2018
Page 101
·1· ·police report that -- or that the policeman said that
·2· ·it was an unusual or freak accident, you know, that it
·3· ·was very unusual they hadn't seen anything like that
·4· ·and the garage had been, you know, in use for -- for,
·5· ·you know, 37 years, I believe.· So that's what I
·6· ·remember from the police report.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Okay.· Now, in Mister -- well,
·8· ·strike that.
·9· · · · · · · · ·Do you recall how many cables there were
10· ·in the barrier system on the floor in which
11· ·Mr. O'Connor's vehicle left?
12· · · ·A.· ·I don't recall that.
13· · · ·Q.· ·Do you know how far apart -- if you don't know
14· ·how many there were, do you know how far apart the
15· ·cables were?
16· · · ·A.· ·I've heard, you know, after the second
17· ·incident that the cables are 9-1/2 inches apart.
18· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Now, if you'll look at Exhibit 8,
19· ·Mr. Martin's letter to you, in the first paragraph it
20· ·talks about a Toyota 4Runner driving through the
21· ·barrier cables and over the edge of the ninth floor.
22· ·Do you see that?
23· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
24· · · ·Q.· ·Then it says, "The vehicle became tangled in a
25· ·barrier cable which suspended it in the air."
101 to 104
Page 103
·1· · · ·Q.· ·That's not my question to you.· I didn't ask
·2· ·about you what I'm doing or not doing.
·3· · · ·A.· ·Okay.· Ask me the question again.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·Yes, sir.· My question to you is, when you did
·5· ·get around to reading Ms. Martin's letter after
·6· ·Ms. Bowmer's incident, did you understand the mechanism
·7· ·of how Mr. O'Connor's vehicle went off the roof of your
·8· ·parking garage?
·9· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
10· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· No.· I don't think that
11· ·letter explains it.
12· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Did you read the second
13· ·paragraph where it talks about five horizontal
14· ·half-inch steel cables that are anchored into the
15· ·concrete columns?
16· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh.
17· · · ·Q.· ·You read that?
18· · · ·A.· ·Okay.· I'm reading the second paragraph.
19· ·Okay.
20· · · ·Q.· ·Do you now understand that there were
21· ·five cables on the top of your parking garage that were
22· ·the barrier system to keep vehicles from going off?
23· · · ·A.· ·That's what this letter says.
24· · · ·Q.· ·And do you understand that four out of the
25· ·five cables pulled out of the wall?

Page 102 Page 104

·1· · · · · · · · ·Do you you see that? ·1· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
·2· · · ·A.· ·Yes. ·2· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Not -- not fully.· Some
·3· · · ·Q.· ·So you understood at the time of ·3· ·got -- stayed on one side.· That's what it says.
·4· ·Mr. O'Connor's incident that his car actually went ·4· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· When you say "not fully," do
·5· ·through the barrier cables, but through luck became ·5· ·you mean that both sides where they were attached
·6· ·tangled in the cables and was suspended, preventing him ·6· ·didn't pull out, but one did?
·7· ·from plunging nine floors to the ground, right? ·7· · · ·A.· ·Right.
·8· · · ·A.· ·So I think you're describing it inaccurately. ·8· · · ·Q.· ·So do you understand that of the five cables
·9· · · ·Q.· ·Tell me how that's inaccurate. ·9· ·at least one side of four of the cables pulled out of
10· · · ·A.· ·Because I don't know if it went through or not 10· ·the wall --
11· ·before it got tangled on the cables. 11· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
12· · · ·Q.· ·Well, how did it get to the other side of the 12· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· -- or column to where they
13· ·cables? 13· ·were attached?
14· · · ·A.· ·You know, an item can go partially through and 14· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
15· ·then get, you know -- or begin to go through, get 15· · · ·Q.· ·And is it your testimony that that's your
16· ·tangled through the cables, and then go over and then 16· ·understanding of how the vehicle restraint system was
17· ·pull the cable.· I mean, there's many ways of -- of 17· ·designed to perform?
18· ·that happening.· The way you're describing is as if it 18· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
19· ·just went through fully and then it got tangled on a 19· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I'm not an engineer, but I
20· ·cable.· I don't know how you find that conclusion. 20· ·would think that, you know, the cables are designed for
21· · · ·Q.· ·Did you read -- when you did get around to 21· ·a certain speed and a certain weight.· And if it's a
22· ·reading Mr. Martin's letter after Ms. Bowmer's 22· ·very heavy vehicle with a lot of speed, at some point
23· ·incident, did you understand what he indicated to be 23· ·the cables might -- I mean, they're not -- they have --
24· ·the mechanics of how the O'Connor incident occurred? 24· ·they have a level at which the cables will dis-attach.
25· · · ·A.· ·I think you're mischaracterizing him. 25· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And did you have an investigation done

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Sheldon David Kahn Vol 2
August 15, 2018 105 to 108
Page 105 Page 107
·1· ·to determine whether or not that level was reached or, ·1· · · ·A.· ·I saw that they were attached.
·2· ·instead, the cables failed prior to what that level ·2· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· My question to you is, did you make a
·3· ·should be? ·3· ·visual inspection of the cables on the other floors
·4· · · ·A.· ·We don't believe that the cables were not ·4· ·after the O'Connor incident to make sure they were
·5· ·attached.· And, you know, at the time we believe that, ·5· ·safe?
·6· ·you know, the only reason why they got dis-attached was ·6· · · ·A.· ·I -- I saw that they were attached.· That's
·7· ·the force and momentum of the vehicle. ·7· ·all I did.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·And who did the force and momentum ·8· · · ·Q.· ·Was that to make sure they were safe?
·9· ·calculations for your company to determine that? ·9· · · ·A.· ·I saw that they were attached.· I don't
10· · · ·A.· ·I -- I didn't. 10· ·know -- you're -- you're trying to make me sound like I
11· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Who did? 11· ·didn't make calculations or, you know, I should have
12· · · ·A.· ·I don't know. 12· ·made calculations.· I'm not an engineer.· I saw that
13· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Well, you just testified to the jury 13· ·they were attached.
14· ·that your company believed that the force and momentum 14· · · ·Q.· ·My question to you, Mr. Kahn, is really
15· ·calculations were such that the vehicle exceeded the 15· ·simple.· Did you conduct a visual inspection of the
16· ·barrier system. 16· ·cables on the other floors after the O'Connor incident
17· · · ·A.· ·I think the force and momentum caused the 17· ·to make sure those cables were safe?
18· ·accident.· I don't -- I didn't -- I don't think I said 18· · · ·A.· ·I made a visual inspection and, you know, I
19· ·that there were calculations made. 19· ·thought they were safe from my visual inspection, but I
20· · · ·Q.· ·So nobody from your company made those 20· ·didn't do calculations.
21· ·calculations? 21· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And did Mr. O'Brien make a visual
22· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form. 22· ·inspection of the cables on the other levels of the
23· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I don't know. 23· ·floor after the O'Connor incident to make sure they
24· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Well, do you know if some -- 24· ·were safe?
25· · · ·A.· ·I didn't. 25· · · ·A.· ·I mean, you -- you have deposed him so you've

Page 106 Page 108

·1· · · ·Q.· ·Did you have somebody do it?
·2· · · ·A.· ·I don't know what Mr. O'Brien specifically
·3· ·talked to -- Mr. O'Brien and Martin -- or anybody else
·4· ·about.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·Did you ever talk to Mr. O'Brien or Mr. Martin
·6· ·or anybody where you said, "Hey, you know, we ought to
·7· ·check to see if maybe the vehicle restraint system
·8· ·failed because it's not installed properly"?
·9· · · ·A.· ·We -- we -- you know, we did believe that the
10· ·cable -- that the -- that the garage was -- was safe.
11· ·It looked like the cables on the other floors were
12· ·attached.· So on a visual inspection I didn't think we
13· ·needed to do more, and I delegated this to Mr. O'Brien.
14· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Who did the visual inspection of the
15· ·other cables on the other floor to make sure that they
16· ·were safe?
17· · · ·A.· ·I don't know if it was make sure that it was
18· ·safe, but we did have visual inspections by many
19· ·people; the people who manage the garage on a daily
20· ·basis, the people from the city who.· Came by, you
21· ·know, Mr. O'Brien, myself, we all saw that the cables
22· ·were attached.
23· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· So you made a visual inspection of the
24· ·cables on the other floors following the O'Connor
25· ·incident to make sure they were safe?
·1· ·asked him.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·I'm sorry.· Did you not understand my
·3· ·question?
·4· · · ·A.· ·You were asking me if somebody else did
·5· ·something else.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·That's right.· I assume maybe you talked to
·7· ·him.· There's only two people affiliated with your
·8· ·company, right?
·9· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
10· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· But you're also talking to
11· ·him directly.
12· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Can you answer my question or
13· ·no?
14· · · ·A.· ·You know, you can ask him.
15· · · ·Q.· ·Well, I'm asking you.· Did you --
16· · · ·A.· ·You're asking -- you're asking me about what
17· ·somebody else did.· You can ask that person.
18· · · ·Q.· ·Here's my question to you, Mr. Kahn.· Do you
19· ·know whether or not Mr. O'Brien conducted an inspection
20· ·of the cables under the level of Mr. O'Connor's
21· ·accident before Ms. Bowmer's accident to make sure they
22· ·were safe?
23· · · ·A.· ·I delegated the repairs of the garage to
24· ·Mr. O'Brien.
25· · · ·Q.· ·Did he report back to you?

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Sheldon David Kahn Vol 2
August 15, 2018
Page 109
·1· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·And he told you he made the inspection and
·3· ·they were safe?
·4· · · ·A.· ·He -- we didn't talk about the inspection.· He
·5· ·said, you know, "We're following all the -- we're
·6· ·following recommendations and we're fixing the garage."
·7· · · ·Q.· ·He said, "We're following all the
·8· ·recommendations," or just some of them?
·9· · · ·A.· ·You know, he didn't say some of them.· You
10· ·know, I was under the impression that this was a freak
11· ·accident and that the garage was safe and that they
12· ·were doing the repairs.
13· · · ·Q.· ·Now, who was it from the City that inspected
14· ·the cables under the level of Mr. O'Connor to make sure
15· ·they were safe?
16· · · ·A.· ·We -- we -- we had several people from the --
17· ·or my understanding is there were people from the City
18· ·that came by.· I -- can we look up from the report from
19· ·the City --
20· · · ·Q.· ·Sure.· You can look at whatever you want to.
21· · · ·A.· ·-- so we can recall their names?
22· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Well, it depends on how he's
23· ·asking the question.· If you --
24· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· He's asking me the name of
25· ·people.
Page 110
·1· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Right.
·2· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I don't recall their names
·3· ·unless we look at the paperwork.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Okay.· Well, it's there in the
·5· ·notebook in front of you.
·6· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· I don't think it is.
·7· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Right, because there isn't
·8· ·anybody from the City that came by to inspect those
·9· ·cables.
10· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Did you know that, Mr. Kahn?
11· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.· What he's
12· ·referring to is when the City came out after the
13· ·accident, I believe.· I mean, I can try to find the
14· ·documents, but I don't think you really want us to do
15· ·that.· But --
16· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Well, let me ask it a
17· ·different way because we can short-circuit a futile
18· ·effort.
19· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Is it your testimony that
20· ·somebody from the City after Mr. O'Connor and before
21· ·Ms. Bowmer came out and inspected the cables underneath 21· · · ·A.· ·If I recall, it was in the alley with the
22· ·the ninth floor where Mr. O'Connor went off?
23· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
24· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I would say that they
25· ·probably came by.
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
109 to 112
Page 111
·1· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Who was it and when?
·2· · · ·A.· ·I don't know what they did and I don't know
·3· ·exactly who it was, but it was not a secret to the
·4· ·City.· In order to find out we would have to take a
·5· ·break and go through my -- my -- the whole file to find
·6· ·out who came by from the City.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·Well, did you see somebody from the City come
·8· ·by?
·9· · · ·A.· ·It was my understanding that, you know,
10· ·somebody from the City came by.· That was relayed to me
11· ·by Mr. O'Brien.· And, you know, there is some City
12· ·documentation of the first incident.
13· · · ·Q.· ·There is.
14· · · ·A.· ·Well, where is it?
15· · · ·Q.· ·It's in the notebook that's in front of you.
16· · · ·A.· ·Which -- which exhibit?
17· · · ·Q.· ·That one right here you've got your hands on
18· ·there?
19· · · ·A.· ·Which exhibit is it?
20· · · ·Q.· ·It has a yellow sticker on the front of it.
21· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· That is Exhibit 16
22· ·apparently.
23· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Ah.· Okay.· So, then,
24· ·let's -- do you want me to take a break to review this,
25· ·because you're asking me who came by.· I don't know.
Page 112
·1· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Right.· You're not going to
·2· ·find it in there because nobody from the City came by
·3· ·between the O'Connor incident and the Bowmer incident
·4· ·to inspect the cables in your garage.
·5· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
·6· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I don't know if they came
·7· ·to inspect or not, but they came by.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Okay.· Well, your testimony
·9· ·previously was is that the City performed a visual
10· ·inspection of the cables under the O'Connor incident
11· ·level.· And my question was simple.· If that's the
12· ·case, I wanted the name of who it was.· And as you sit
13· ·here now, you can't provide that.· Is that accurate?
14· · · ·A.· ·I don't -- I don't -- they -- you know, I was
15· ·told that somebody from the City came by.
16· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Now, you also indicated that Premier
17· ·conducted a visual inspection of the cables under the
18· ·level of Mr. O'Connor's ninth floor accident in between
19· ·the O'Connor incident and the Bowmer incident.· Who was
20· ·it from Premier that conducted that visual inspection?
22· ·garage manager, Ms. Christina Murray.· We were all
23· ·looking at it from the alley side.
24· · · ·Q.· ·This is the day of Mr. O'Connor's incident?
25· · · ·A.· ·Yes.· And I would assume that they would have,
YVer1f
 Sheldon David Kahn Vol 2
August 15, 2018
Page 113
·1· ·you know, inspected or walked the garage on a regular ·1· ·one sentence in a whole thing that -- you know, that we
·2· ·basis.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·Right, because an inspection from the alley of
·4· ·all of the other levels wouldn't be an adequate
·5· ·inspection, would it?
·6· · · ·A.· ·It -- I don't think they only performed it
·7· ·from the alley.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·Right, because to do that from the alley
·9· ·wouldn't be adequate, true?
10· · · ·A.· ·It would be the first step.
11· · · ·Q.· ·Would that be the only step?
12· · · ·A.· ·No.
13· · · ·Q.· ·What would a prudent operator of the garage do
14· ·to inspect those cables?
15· · · ·A.· ·What would a prudent operator of the garage?
16· ·You know, looking back we could have done more.
17· · · ·Q.· ·What?
18· · · ·A.· ·But at the time we did what we thought was
19· ·prudent.· We were not trying to cut corners.· I mean,
20· ·we were trying to do everything we thought was prudent
21· ·at the time.· We walked -- I know I walked all the
22· ·floors of the garage.
23· · · ·Q.· ·What would the prudent operator who walked the
24· ·floors of the garage be looking for?
25· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
Page 114
·1· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· You know, we were looking
·2· ·for any obvious visual issues with the cables.· I don't
·3· ·think there were any obvious visual problems.· And, you
·4· ·know, given what we knew at the time and the situation
·5· ·at the time we did what we thought was prudent.· We,
·6· ·you know, were not trying to cut costs or not perform
·7· ·something that, you know -- we would have thought it
·8· ·was prudent at that time.· We did everything we thought
·9· ·was prudent at the time.
10· · · · · · · · ·Now, looking back on it, it's very easy
11· ·for you or somebody else to say, "Well, you could have
12· ·done more."· But in -- you know, we thought we -- we
13· ·thought we did what we thought was prudent at the time.
14· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Well, do you think it -- a
15· ·prudent garage operator would hire a structural
16· ·engineer to do a preliminary structural damage
17· ·assessment of the garage following the O'Connor
18· ·incident?
19· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
20· · · ·Q.· ·Do you think a prudent owner of the garage
21· ·would read the report of the structural engineer about
22· ·the preliminary structural damage assessment?
23· · · ·A.· ·I think that Mr. O'Brien read it.· And then I
24· ·read other reports that he did.· And I also read the
25· ·e-mail that he sent me.· So you are pointing
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
113 to 116
Page 115
·2· ·read.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·I'm not pointing at anything.· I asked you a
·4· ·very simple question, which is, do you think a prudent
·5· ·operator of a garage would read the preliminary
·6· ·structural damage assessment of the engineer hired
·7· ·following the O'Connor incident?
·8· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection.
·9· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Yes.
10· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· And do you think a prudent
11· ·operator of the garage would follow the recommendations
12· ·made by the structural engineer outlined in a
13· ·preliminary structural damage assessment?
14· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
15· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· We did our best effort.
16· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· The question isn't whether you
17· ·did your best effort.· It's whether a prudent operator
18· ·would follow those recommendations.
19· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
20· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· A prudent operator would do
21· ·their best effort.
22· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· What was it that prevented
23· ·you, sir, from having a barrier cable installer review
24· ·the cables more closely in the garage following
25· ·Mr. O'Connor's incident?
Page 116
·1· · · ·A.· ·Nothing prevented us.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·You could have done that, right?
·3· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·But you didn't do it?
·5· · · ·A.· ·We didn't.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·And you told me earlier that you didn't do not
·7· ·on purpose, but on accident; is that right?
·8· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
·9· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I delegated this whole
10· ·review to Mr. O'Brien.
11· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· You expected Mr. O'Brien to do
12· ·it, didn't you?
13· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
14· · · ·Q.· ·And you expected Mr. O'Brien to follow the
15· ·recommendations that including having the cables
16· ·reviewed more closely by a barrier cable installer,
17· ·right?
18· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
19· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I believe Mr. O'Brien did
20· ·his best effort.
21· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· What effort did he make to
22· ·have the cables reviewed by a barrier cable installer?
23· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
24· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I don't know.
25· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· He did nothing, did he?
YVer1f
 Sheldon David Kahn Vol 2
August 15, 2018
Page 117
·1· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
·2· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I -- I think you're
·3· ·characterizing it as nothing when he did a lot of stuff
·4· ·that he did.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Okay.· Well, what did he do?
·6· ·What stuff did he do to have a barrier cable installer
·7· ·review the cables in the building?
·8· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
·9· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· You know, I delegated to
10· ·him.· He did repairs.· They looked at the repairs.· The
11· ·repairs seemed to be done properly, you know.
12· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· So the answer to the question
13· ·is, as you sit here now you know of nothing that
14· ·Mr. O'Brien did to have a barrier cable installer
15· ·review the cables after the O'Connor incident, right?
16· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
17· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I'm not 100 percent sure
18· ·what he did or didn't do.
19· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Can you give us even a
20· ·1 percent estimation of what he did to have a barrier
21· ·cable installer review the cables more closely?
22· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
23· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I can't.
24· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Do you know that he didn't do
25· ·anything to have that done?
Page 118
·1· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
·2· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I think your characterizing
·3· ·it as nothing is incorrect.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Can you give me the name of
·5· ·the barrier cable installer that did the inspection?
·6· · · ·A.· ·He did many things.· I just don't agree with
·7· ·your word that he did nothing.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·I didn't say nothing.· I said nothing to have
·9· ·a barrier cable installer inspect it.· Did he or did he
10· ·not have somebody do that?
11· · · ·A.· ·I don't know.
12· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Do you know how many he called?
13· · · ·A.· ·I don't know.
14· · · ·Q.· ·When the Bowmer incident occurred, did you
15· ·have somebody that was a specialist in barrier cables
16· ·come inspect your facility?
17· · · ·A.· ·After the Bowmer incident?
18· · · ·Q.· ·Yes.
19· · · ·A.· ·You know, again, it was delegated to
20· ·Mr. O'Brien.
21· · · ·Q.· ·So even after the second person plunged off of
22· ·your parking garage you don't know whether or not an
23· ·expert was called to inspect the vehicle restraint
24· ·system?
25· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
117 to 120
Page 119
·1· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· You know, we know we have
·2· ·experts and we know we have people like Mr. O'Brien
·3· ·looking at these things.· I'm not an engineer or an
·4· ·expert on these things.· I'm not an expert.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· I didn't ask you if you were
·6· ·an expert.· What I asked was whether you know if after
·7· ·the second incident, the Bowmer incident, your company
·8· ·had somebody that was qualified as a barrier cable
·9· ·specialist inspect the vehicle restraint system in your
10· ·facility.
11· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
12· · · ·Q.· ·Who was it?
13· · · ·A.· ·I think we -- I saw several quotes, and I
14· ·think that Mr. O'Brien picked somebody.· And we did a
15· ·lot of repairs after the second incident.
16· · · ·Q.· ·Were those repairs necessary?
17· · · ·A.· ·Those -- those repairs were required by the
18· ·City and by the -- you know, by the City.
19· · · ·Q.· ·Did you believe they were necessary?
20· · · ·A.· ·I don't know.
21· · · ·Q.· ·Is it your contention that those repairs were
22· ·unnecessary?
23· · · ·A.· ·I don't know.
24· · · ·Q.· ·How was it that your company determined who
25· ·was a qualified barrier cable installer to call after
Page 120
·1· ·the Bowmer incident?
·2· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
·3· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· How is -- so there are a
·4· ·few companies that are specializing in garage
·5· ·engineering and there are engineering companies that
·6· ·specialize in garages, and we got quotes from several
·7· ·of them.· So if you're asking me if I reviewed the
·8· ·degrees or capabilities of these companies, I did not
·9· ·personally review them, but, you know, they -- you
10· ·know, in all their interactions with us they tell us
11· ·that they are licensed engineers.
12· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· And could you have done that
13· ·after the O'Connor incident?
14· · · ·A.· ·Could we have done it?
15· · · ·Q.· ·Yes, sir.
16· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
17· · · ·Q.· ·Could you have employed one or more licensed
18· ·engineers that were barrier cable experts to inspect
19· ·your facility and give you a recommendation on safety
20· ·and whether you needed repairs?
21· · · ·A.· ·Well, I mean, looking back on it, we could
22· ·have.
23· · · ·Q.· ·And why --
24· · · ·A.· ·At the time of the incident we thought we
25· ·didn't need them.· We were not trying to cut costs.· We
YVer1f
 Sheldon David Kahn Vol 2
August 15, 2018 121 to 124
Page 121 Page 123
·1· ·just didn't think we needed them. ·1· ·know, now that I look at it, it looks to me like it was
·2· · · ·Q.· ·Why did you think you didn't need them when ·2· ·a boilerplate last sentence at the end of a report.
·3· ·you had a specific recommendation from an engineer you ·3· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· So even if you had bothered to
·4· ·hired to actually go get one? ·4· ·read it at the time it was sent to you, you would have
·5· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form. ·5· ·disregarded it as a boilerplate?
·6· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· We had a lot of ·6· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
·7· ·recommendations, but the feeling from everyone at the ·7· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I didn't read it at the
·8· ·time was that it was a freak accident. ·8· ·time, but reading it now it looks to me like it's
·9· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Who's everyone? ·9· ·boilerplate.
10· · · ·A.· ·The police department, the people that were 10· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· And we started this by you
11· ·managing the garage, you know, everyone in our office, 11· ·indicating there was a clarification that you wanted to
12· ·you know, the press.· Everybody kept saying it was a 12· ·make.· Have we now covered the clarification that you
13· ·freak accident.· So we could have done more looking 13· ·wanted to make where you changed the testimony
14· ·back, but at the time we did what we thought was 14· ·previously about following everything the engineer
15· ·prudent. 15· ·recommended or are there other things that you want to
16· · · ·Q.· ·In the final sentence of Mr. Martin's 16· ·clarify?
17· ·September 10, 2016 report, he indicates that a more 17· · · ·A.· ·At this point there's nothing else I wanted to
18· ·thorough investigation should be performed to identify 18· ·clarify.
19· ·the full nature of damage and repairs required.· Was 19· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Thank you, sir.
20· ·that done before Ms. Bowmer's incident? 20· · · · · · · · ·Was there anything else about your
21· · · ·A.· ·I don't know how many -- let me put -- to say 21· ·previous deposition that you felt the need to clarify
22· ·the answer in perspective.· I don't know how many 22· ·at the outset of our continuation?
23· ·recommendations you get from professionals to do 23· · · ·A.· ·No.
24· ·everything, but, you know, the professionals always end 24· · · ·Q.· ·You indicated that in preparation for your
25· ·in the last few sentences, putting that sentences that 25· ·testimony today you read an interesting e-mail.· What

Page 122 Page 124

·1· ·would cover them in the future for anything that would
·2· ·happen, you know.· They always say more investigation
·3· ·should be performed.· And the reason is because at that
·4· ·point the engineers don't have anymore liability
·5· ·because they said, "Hey, more thorough investigation
·6· ·should be performed."
·7· · · · · · · · ·So you are taking one sentence that is
·8· ·repeated in -- in many reports by many professionals as
·9· ·boilerplate as, you know, a combination of the fact
10· ·that we did not do more.
11· · · ·Q.· ·So --
12· · · ·A.· ·But you're taking out of context of the entire
13· ·time and situation.
14· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Let me object as
15· ·nonresponsive.
16· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Did you find the final
17· ·sentence of Mr. Martin's report recommending a more
18· ·thorough investigation to be boilerplate?
19· · · ·A.· ·That's what I thought at the time.
20· · · ·Q.· ·Is that why it was disregarded?
21· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
22· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Like I told you, I
23· ·didn't -- I didn't really read this report.· I read
24· ·e-mails that came back and forth and Mr. O'Brien was in
25· ·charge of reading this report thoroughly.· And, you
·1· ·interesting e-mail is that?
·2· · · ·A.· ·Can we print it up?
·3· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· It's been produced.· Why
·4· ·don't you just --
·5· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Tell me what it is --
·6· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· -- answer the question.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· -- and I might have a copy
·8· ·handy NS we can look at it.
·9· · · ·A.· ·It was an e-mail from the structural engineer
10· ·to me.
11· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· And what -- what date was
12· ·that of?
13· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· What was the gist of the
14· ·e-mail?
15· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· You're supposed to answer
16· ·the questions.· I'm sorry.
17· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· That's all right. I
18· ·understand.· That's what --
19· · · ·A.· ·Well, I'm trying to --
20· · · ·Q.· ·Sure.· I get it.
21· · · ·A.· ·-- get help to produce a document.
22· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Where is that e-mail?
23· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· It's a September 9th
24· ·e-mail -- I don't remember exactly what the Bates
25· ·number is -- from Richard Martin to David Kahn.

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Sheldon David Kahn Vol 2
August 15, 2018
Page 125
·1· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· All right.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· So it's a September 9th e-mail
·3· ·from Mr. Martin to yourself, Mr. Kahn?· And what was
·4· ·the gist of it that you found interesting?
·5· · · ·A.· ·Can we take a break to find that document?
·6· · · ·Q.· ·Sure.· Let's take a break.
·7· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Okay.
·8· · · · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· We're off the record,
·9· ·10:26.
10· · · · · · (Recess from 10:26 a.m. to 10:39 a.m.)
11· · · · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Stand by.· This is
12· ·Segment No. 2.· We're back on the record, 10:39.
13· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Mr. Kahn, we're back on the
14· ·record.· And you wanted to have an opportunity to find
15· ·a copy of the interesting e-mail.· Did you find a copy
16· ·that?
17· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
18· · · ·Q.· ·And do you have it with you there?
19· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
20· · · ·Q.· ·Can we put Exhibit 24 sticker on that so that
21· ·we can identify what it is, if you don't mind.· Thank
22· ·you so much, sir.· Just put it someplace.· Yes, sir,
23· ·that's fine.
24· · · · · · · · · (Exhibit No. 24 marked.)
25· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· So this appears to be an
125 to 128
Page 127
·1· ·formalize this in a letter and send later tonight."
·2· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And what was it exactly you found to be
·3· ·interesting, that whole e-mail?
·4· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·And why was that interesting to you?
·6· · · ·A.· ·Because it refreshed my memory of the
·7· ·situation at the time.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·So when you read it recently it refreshed your
·9· ·memory?
10· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
11· · · ·Q.· ·And did you read it at the time Mr. Martin
12· ·sent it in September of 2016?
13· · · ·A.· ·I believe, yes.
14· · · ·Q.· ·Do you specifically remember reading it at the
15· ·time?
16· · · ·A.· ·Do I remember reading it at the time?
17· · · ·Q.· ·Yes, sir.
18· · · ·A.· ·I believe I read it.
19· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And what is it exactly that you find to
20· ·be interesting?
21· · · ·A.· ·I find interesting several things, that, you
22· ·know, it talks about, first of all, the cables are
23· ·severe -- severely damaged from the vehicle impact.· So
24· ·it talks about the cause of why the cables were
25· ·severed.· It didn't say that the cables were not

Page 126 Page 128

·1· ·e-mail to yourself copying Sean O'Brien from Mr. Martin ·1· ·properly attached to the building.· It just said that
·2· ·dated September 9th at 8:01 p.m.? ·2· ·they -- it was due to the vehicle impact, not from a
·3· · · ·A.· ·Yes. ·3· ·maintenance issue.· And then -- first thing.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·And what was it you found interesting about ·4· · · · · · · · ·Second thing it says that the slab beams
·5· ·this when you read it? ·5· ·and columns all appear to be in condition and that
·6· · · ·A.· ·So I found several things interesting.· It ·6· ·there appears to be minimal visible damage to the -- to
·7· ·says, "The cables on Level 9 are obviously seriously ·7· ·the slab and it does not appear to have any damage that
·8· ·damaged from the vehicle impact."· And it says, "These ·8· ·would affect the load-carrying capacity of the concrete
·9· ·cables will need to be repaired or replaced."· And then ·9· ·and is safe for continued use.· That was the second
10· ·it talks about the slab, beams, and columns appear to 10· ·thing that was interesting.
11· ·be in good condition and there appears to be very 11· · · · · · · · ·The third thing that was interesting is
12· ·minimal damage to the slab caused by the vehicle. 12· ·he talks about how the barrier cables at the lower
13· · · · · · · · ·"There does not appear to be any damage 13· ·levels on the alley side of the garage all appear to be
14· ·that would have a significant effect on the 14· ·intact and secure -- appear to be intact and secure and
15· ·load-carrying capacity of the concrete frame and is 15· ·don't appear to have been significantly compromised
16· ·safe for continued use.· Barrier cables at the lower 16· ·from the vehicle impact.
17· ·levels on the alley side of the garage all appear to be 17· · · · · · · · ·And then the fourth thing that I find
18· ·intact and secure and don't appear to have 18· ·interesting, it says that the ninth floor was unsafe,
19· ·significant -- significantly compromised from the 19· ·unusable, but otherwise -- and "otherwise" I guess he
20· ·vehicle impact."· It says -- furthermore, it says, "The 20· ·refers to the other floors, not the ninth floor.· They
21· ·vehicle incident appears to have severely damaged the 21· ·do not have to have damage that will cause any other
22· ·ninth level barrier cables used in the area of the 22· ·area of the garage to be unsafe.
23· ·garage to be unsafe and unusable, but otherwise does 23· · · · · · · · ·So when I read that, I said, "Well, the
24· ·not appear to have caused damage that would cause any 24· ·rest of the garage is not unsafe and he's going to
25· ·other area of the garage to be unsafe.· I will 25· ·follow up on a letter and Mr. O'Brien will follow up

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Sheldon David Kahn Vol 2
August 15, 2018
Page 129
·1· ·with him.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Anything else you found interesting?
·3· · · ·A.· ·No.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·Did you actually ever visit with Mr. Martin in
·5· ·person or on the telephone?
·6· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And what do you recall about those
·8· ·visits?
·9· · · ·A.· ·I recall we were all at the scene of the
10· ·incident and basically I recall him stating these
11· ·things to us saying, you know, the garage seems to be
12· ·safe and -- and, you know, the ninth floor needs to be
13· ·put out of circulation for the time being until the
14· ·repairs are done.
15· · · ·Q.· ·So this Exhibit 24 e-mail was sent to you on
16· ·September the 9th at 8:01 p.m.?
17· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
18· · · ·Q.· ·And do you recall getting any other written
19· ·communications from Mr. Martin?
20· · · ·A.· ·I think we've provided -- provided them.
21· · · ·Q.· ·Well, my question --
22· · · ·A.· ·There's many communications.
23· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· So do you recall any other
24· ·interesting e-mails or letters from Mr. Martin?
25· · · ·A.· ·I mean, you know, there's a lot of
Page 130
·1· ·communication.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·Sure.· I understand that.· I'm just wondering
·3· ·if you remember any other ones you found to be
·4· ·interesting.
·5· · · ·A.· ·I found this one interesting today juxtaposed
·6· ·with the letter from the day after, which I didn't
·7· ·read.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· So you find -- one of the things
·9· ·interesting about Exhibit 24 is your read of Exhibit 24
10· ·is obviously different from Mr. Martin than what's said
11· ·in Exhibit 8, his September 10th, 2016 letter?
12· · · ·A.· ·You know, what's your question?
13· · · ·Q.· ·My question to you is, do you find what
14· ·Mr. Martin is saying in Exhibit 24, the September 9th
15· ·e-mail, to be different than what he turned around a
16· ·day later and said to you in the September 10th, 2016
17· ·letter, which is Exhibit 8?
18· · · ·A.· ·Is it different?
19· · · ·Q.· ·Yes, sir.
20· · · ·A.· ·I wouldn't characterize it as different.
21· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Now, in the Exhibit 24 September 9th
22· ·e-mail, does Mr. Martin indicate that he has reviewed
23· ·the barrier cables on the other floor -- floors closely
24· ·and that they are safe and will perform as intended?
25· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· You asked him about the
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
129 to 132
Page 131
·1· ·e-mail, right?
·2· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Correct.
·3· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Okay.· You're looking at the
·4· ·letter.· So he asked you about the e-mail.
·5· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Oh.· What was your question
·6· ·again?
·7· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· My question to you was, in
·8· ·Exhibit 24, does Mr. Martin tell you that he has
·9· ·inspected the cables on the other floors closely and
10· ·finds them to be safe and that they will perform as
11· ·intended?
12· · · ·A.· ·Where do you find the word "inspected"?
13· · · ·Q.· ·I'm not finding anything.· I'm asking you.· If
14· ·in Exhibit 24 Mr. Martin tells you that he's inspected
15· ·all of the other cables in the garage closely and he
16· ·finds that they will be safe and perform as expected.
17· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
18· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I don't see the word
19· ·"inspected" anywhere.
20· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· All right.
21· · · ·A.· ·Is -- am I missing something?
22· · · ·Q.· ·No, sir.· Now, when -- after --
23· · · ·A.· ·It says "does not appear."
24· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Let him just ask the next
25· ·question.
Page 132
·1· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· All right.· What you're saying
·2· ·is, the barrier cable -- he says, "The barrier cables
·3· ·at the lower levels do not appear to have been
·4· ·significantly compromised from the vehicle impact."
·5· · · ·A.· ·It says that.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· So what he's saying is, is that
·7· ·the vehicle, Mr. O'Connor's vehicle, didn't compromise
·8· ·any of the barrier cables at the lower levels, right?
·9· · · ·A.· ·Correct.· And he's --
10· · · ·Q.· ·Yeah.· It doesn't say, "The barrier cables at
11· ·the lower levels have been inspected by me and they'll
12· ·perform as intended."
13· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.· And you
14· ·didn't let him finish his answer.
15· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· My apologies.· I thought he
16· ·was done.
17· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· He was still talking when
18· ·you started talking.
19· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· You know, when you use the
20· ·words "does not appear," does not appear mean after you
21· ·have been there to see if something appears.· It says
22· ·"does not appear to have caused damage that would cause
23· ·any other area of the garage to be unsafe."
24· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Right.· He's telling you in
25· ·this e-mail -- your understanding was that he's telling
YVer1f
 Sheldon David Kahn Vol 2
August 15, 2018
Page 133
·1· ·you Mr. O'Connor's car didn't cause damage to the ·1· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Did you specifically make a
·2· ·cables in any of the lower floors?
·3· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
·4· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· The vehicle appears to have
·5· ·severely damaged the ninth level barrier cables,
·6· ·causing that area of the garage to be unsafe and
·7· ·unusual, but, otherwise, does not appear to have caused
·8· ·damage that would have caused any other area of the
·9· ·garage to be unsafe.
10· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· All right.· Mr. O'Connor's car
11· ·when it was dangling --
12· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh.
13· · · ·Q.· ·-- off of your garage didn't damage any of the
14· ·other cables other than the ones on Floor 9?
15· · · ·A.· ·Right.· He -- he says that he does not have
16· ·caused damage that would cause any other area of the
17· ·garage to be unsafe.
18· · · ·Q.· ·So just to be clear to the jury, you never
19· ·asked Mr. Martin to conduct a thorough inspection of
20· ·the entire garage to make sure the vehicle barrier was
21· ·safe in the entire garage.· Isn't that accurate?
22· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
23· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· That we -- we -- we asked
24· ·him to inspect the ninth floor and to see if he felt
25· ·there was anything else that he thought was unsafe.
133 to 136
Page 135
·2· ·request to Mr. Martin to inspect the vehicle barrier
·3· ·system on all the floors to determine that it was safe?
·4· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
·5· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I don't recall.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Okay.· Did Mr. O'Brien?
·7· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
·8· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I don't know exactly what
·9· ·he requested Mr. Martin to do.
10· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· In reviewing Exhibit 8, the
11· ·letter from Mr. Martin, would you agree with me that he
12· ·did not conduct a safety inspection of all the barrier
13· ·cables on all the floors to determine that the vehicle
14· ·restraint system was safe; that, in fact, what he did
15· ·was indicate your company should have a barrier cable
16· ·installer do that?
17· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
18· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· In the last sentence of the
19· ·letter, he says a more thorough investigation should be
20· ·performed.
21· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· So what I said is accurate?
22· · · ·A.· ·In the last letter of the sentence -- in the
23· ·last sentence of the letter, yes.
24· · · ·Q.· ·Now, after Ms. Bowmer's incident, were you
25· ·involved with the retention of Walker Consultants?

Page 134 Page 136

·1· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Okay.· You're telling the jury ·1· · · ·A.· ·Just in the approval of the budget.
·2· ·that you asked Mr. Martin to inspect the entire garage ·2· · · ·Q.· ·And did you approve it?
·3· ·to see if the barrier cables in the entire garage were ·3· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·4· ·unsafe? ·4· · · ·Q.· ·And do you generally know how long it was
·5· · · ·A.· ·Had he, you know -- I mean, what I'm trying to ·5· ·between Mr. O'Connor's incident and Ms. Bowmer's
·6· ·do is I'm trying to explain to you how we work as a ·6· ·incident?
·7· ·company.· And, you know -- you know, he told me that he ·7· · · ·A.· ·I believe one incident was in September and I
·8· ·thought a wall and a building was unsafe, a historical ·8· ·believe the other incident was in April.
·9· ·building, and we spent a half a million dollars fixing ·9· · · · · · · · · (Exhibit No. 25 marked.)
10· ·that wall.· And we evicted -- I mean, we had to 10· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Okay.· Let me show you
11· ·terminate two tenants' leases or move them somewhere 11· ·Exhibit 25 just to make it easy for us and the jury.
12· ·else. 12· ·I've just done a little timeline with some various --
13· · · · · · · · ·And so whenever Mr. Martin tells me 13· · · ·A.· ·July.
14· ·something in a tone that he thinks that, you know, I 14· · · ·Q.· ·-- dates on it.· Is it accurate that your
15· ·need to do further work, we do the further work.· We 15· ·company purchased the parking garage in question on or
16· ·were at the time thinking that this was, you know, 16· ·about June 27th of 2015?
17· ·unusual freak accident that never had happened in 17· · · ·A.· ·It was in 2015, yes.
18· ·37 years and, you know, the -- you know, the -- there 18· · · ·Q.· ·And that the O'Connor incident occurred on
19· ·were no injuries.· And so we asked him to come to the 19· ·September 6th of 2016, which is approximately 437 days
20· ·garage and tell us what we should do next.· So we asked 20· ·after you purchased the garage?
21· ·him verbally to come to the garage and -- and take a 21· · · ·A.· ·I see that.
22· ·look at it and tell us what we -- he thought we should 22· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· I'm going to object because
23· ·do. 23· ·I think the actual sale was in September, but I just
24· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· I'm going to object as 24· ·want to put that on the record.
25· ·nonresponsive. 25· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Okay.

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Sheldon David Kahn Vol 2
August 15, 2018 137 to 140
Page 137 Page 139
·1· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· But -- they might have ·1· · · ·Q.· ·Why not?
·2· ·signed the agreement, but the actual transfer of sale ·2· · · ·A.· ·We were not -- we were not -- because, you
·3· ·it was September of 2015. ·3· ·know, the garage is a concrete structure that had been
·4· · · · · · · · ·Go ahead. ·4· ·in operations for -- I don't know -- 35, 37 years since
·5· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· That's fine.· The date that I ·5· ·it was -- got built -- it got built and, you know, it
·6· ·have reflected is the purchase agreement and the days ·6· ·seemed to be in good condition.· And we were retaining
·7· ·in between are from the purchase agreement.· So if it's ·7· ·the garage managers, who didn't indicate to us in our
·8· ·the actual closing, then we can modify it or do a ·8· ·meetings with them -- we had meetings with the garage
·9· ·different exhibit. ·9· ·managers to see if they would, you know, agree to
10· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Yeah, I -- I believe that 10· ·continue management of the garage, and they didn't
11· ·we had a period of time between the purchase agreement 11· ·bring anything up as being unsafe in the garage.
12· ·and the final closing. 12· · · ·Q.· ·And the garage --
13· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· To do what? 13· · · · · · · · ·MR. RHODES:· Objection, responsiveness.
14· · · ·A.· ·To arrange for financing. 14· ·Excuse me.
15· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And also do any inspections you wanted 15· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· No problem.
16· ·to? 16· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· The "garage managers," by that
17· · · ·A.· ·We were precluded from doing inspections 17· ·you mean Premier?
18· ·because we had -- well, not precluded, but we had hard 18· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
19· ·earnest money to buy the garage, so had we backed out 19· · · ·Q.· ·And who was it that was in any of the
20· ·from buying the garage we would have, you know, waived 20· ·prepurchase meetings with Premier?
21· ·our escrow deposit. 21· · · ·A.· ·I had meetings with Mr. Ryan Hunt.
22· · · ·Q.· ·Did you do that by choice? 22· · · ·Q.· ·How many?
23· · · ·A.· ·Yes. 23· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· What was the name, Ryanhurt
24· · · ·Q.· ·So did you conduct any inspections of the 24· ·or Ryanhart?
25· ·garage before you bought it? 25· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Mr. Ryan Hunt.

Page 138 Page 140

·1· · · ·A.· ·The word "inspection" is very open-ended. ·1· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Hunt.
·2· ·What exactly do you mean? ·2· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Ryan Hunt.· Okay.· I didn't
·3· · · ·Q.· ·Well, what the common usage of the term ·3· ·hear that.
·4· ·inspection would mean to an ordinary person. ·4· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Mr. Hunt is with Premier,
·5· · · ·A.· ·Inspection could be many things. ·5· ·true?
·6· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Well, tell the jury what inspections ·6· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·7· ·you or your company did of the garage before you closed ·7· · · ·Q.· ·Did you have meetings with anybody else from
·8· ·on it. ·8· ·Premier?
·9· · · ·A.· ·It's -- you know, it's been more than ·9· · · ·A.· ·I don't recall.
10· ·three years, but I remember we saw some -- you know, we 10· · · ·Q.· ·Did GTT Parking --
11· ·saw some contracts, we saw some, you know, financial 11· · · ·A.· ·Maybe.
12· ·reports, tax, a survey, inspections.· Whether we 12· · · ·Q.· ·-- have meetings with anybody else -- I guess
13· ·conducted a physical inspection of the property I don't 13· ·that would be Mr. O'Brien -- have any meetings with
14· ·believe we did.· There was inspections done on the 14· ·anybody else from Premier besides Mr. Hunt presale?
15· ·condition of the improvements for Gold's Gym and the 15· · · ·A.· ·I don't know.
16· ·progress of construction in those. 16· · · ·Q.· ·Was the vehicle restraint system and the
17· · · ·Q.· ·Could your company have conducted a physical 17· ·safety of it ever discussed with Mr. Hunt or anybody
18· ·inspection of the vehicle barrier restraint system in 18· ·from Premier by GTT Parking before the purchase of the
19· ·the garage before you bought it? 19· ·building?
20· · · ·A.· ·Yes, we could have. 20· · · ·A.· ·I don't believe so.
21· · · ·Q.· ·Did you? 21· · · ·Q.· ·Was there any specific representation made by
22· · · ·A.· ·No. 22· ·Mr. Hunt or Premier to GTT Parking before the sale of
23· · · ·Q.· ·Why not? 23· ·the building that the parking garage was safe and/or
24· · · ·A.· ·Because we didn't think we needed it.· I mean, 24· ·that the vehicle restraint system was safe?
25· ·the -- 25· · · ·A.· ·There was no specific representation.

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Sheldon David Kahn Vol 2
August 15, 2018
Page 141
·1· · · ·Q.· ·Did GTT Parking ask that of Premier?
·2· · · ·A.· ·We did not ask for a specific representation.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·Have you seen the documents that indicate that
·4· ·Premier to some level was familiar with repairs that
·5· ·had been done to the vehicle restraint system before
·6· ·GTT Parking purchased the building?
·7· · · ·A.· ·I did not see those documents.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·Did you know that?
·9· · · ·A.· ·No.
10· · · ·Q.· ·Did you know that the seller of the building,
11· ·6th & Congress, or related entities had done any type
12· ·of work to the vehicle restraint system before you
13· ·purchased it?
14· · · ·A.· ·I did not know.
15· · · ·Q.· ·Do you know now what extent such work was
16· ·done, if any?
17· · · ·A.· ·I understand now that they did some work to
18· ·the restraint systems.
19· · · ·Q.· ·Do you know what that is or was?
20· · · ·A.· ·The work that they performed?
21· · · ·Q.· ·Yes, sir.
22· · · ·A.· ·I'm not familiar with the details.
23· · · ·Q.· ·Have you visited with anybody related to 6th &
24· ·Congress Properties about the work or condition of
25· ·the -- work done to or condition of the restraint
Page 142
·1· ·system before your purchase of the building?
·2· · · ·A.· ·I was not aware of the repairs before the
·3· ·purchase.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·Since the purchase have you visited with
·5· ·anybody from 6th & Congress Properties or a related
·6· ·entity about that work or the condition of the
·7· ·restraint system?
·8· · · ·A.· ·I haven't personally.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·Was there an inspection period available to
10· ·GTT Parking before you put the earnest money down?
11· · · ·A.· ·No.
12· · · ·Q.· ·So at the point GTT Parking put the earnest
13· ·money down, it knew that there would be no actual
14· ·physical inspection available to it?
15· · · ·A.· ·We could do a physical inspection, but the
16· ·results of it would not affect the purchase price.
17· · · ·Q.· ·So GTT Parking had the ability to do a
18· ·physical inspection, but the price was set.· And if
19· ·it -- the inspection determined there were defects or
20· ·problems it was not going to affect the price, so there
21· ·was no point in doing the inspection.· Is that
22· ·accurate?
23· · · ·A.· ·There was no point in doing the inspection
24· ·because we didn't think the garage was unsafe.
25· · · ·Q.· ·And you didn't think it was unsafe based on
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
141 to 144
Page 143
·1· ·what, if it wasn't an inspection that you did?
·2· · · ·A.· ·Based on, you know, the fact that I had been
·3· ·parking across the street.· I had been using that
·4· ·garage since the early '90s and, you know, I had never
·5· ·heard of an incident at the garage.· The previous
·6· ·owners did not tell us that they had any incidents at
·7· ·the garage.· The parking managers who were to be
·8· ·remaining as parking managers did not tell us there was
·9· ·any incidents in the garage.
10· · · ·Q.· ·Anything else?
11· · · ·A.· ·I mean, that's the gist of it.· We did not --
12· ·not perform an inspection because we were trying to
13· ·save money or because we didn't think it was going to
14· ·help us in negotiating the prices.· We just didn't do
15· ·an inspection because we thought the garage was safe.
16· · · ·Q.· ·Now --
17· · · ·A.· ·Had we thought the garage was unsafe, we would
18· ·have, you know, performed an inspection.
19· · · ·Q.· ·Now, after Ms. Bowmer's incident your company
20· ·retained Walker Consultants to perform an inspection of
21· ·the condition of the vehicle restraint barrier system.
22· ·Is that accurate?
23· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
24· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Would you look at Exhibit 21 with me,
25· ·please.
Page 144
·1· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·The October 19th, 2017 report reflected in
·3· ·Exhibit 21 by Walker Consultants, did you read that at
·4· ·the time it came in?
·5· · · ·A.· ·No.· Mr. O'Brien was doing the reading of
·6· ·that.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·Have you read this report, Exhibit 21?
·8· · · ·A.· ·I might or I might not.· I don't recall.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·If you read it you don't recall it at all?
10· · · ·A.· ·I don't recall whether I read it or not.
11· · · ·Q.· ·So this report was done after the Bowmer
12· ·incident.· Is that accurate?
13· · · ·A.· ·It's -- yeah, this date is after the accident.
14· · · ·Q.· ·And do you have any reason to believe that the
15· ·condition of the vehicle barrier system in the
16· ·Littlefield Garage changed in any significant way
17· ·between the O'Connor incident and the Bowmer incident
18· ·other than the repairs that were done related to the
19· ·O'Connor incident?
20· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
21· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I don't have a way of
22· ·knowing that.
23· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Well, do you have any way of
24· ·indicating that it would have changed for some reason?
25· · · ·A.· ·I had no indication that it changed.
YVer1f
 Sheldon David Kahn Vol 2
August 15, 2018 145 to 148
Page 145 Page 147
·1· · · ·Q.· ·So, for instance, if following the structural ·1· ·issued.
·2· ·engineer's advice you had hired Walker Consultants in ·2· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Can we take a break to read
·3· ·between the O'Connor incident and Ms. Bowmer's ·3· ·the report again to refresh my memory?
·4· ·incident, you would expect that if they performed a ·4· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Well, he just asked you
·5· ·condition evaluation it would have been strikingly ·5· ·before the report was issued, so forget the report.
·6· ·similar to the condition that's reflected in ·6· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Before the report was
·7· ·Exhibit 21, true? ·7· ·issued, I know that we placed water barriers as an
·8· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form. ·8· ·additional item on the building.· So my understanding
·9· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· It could be. ·9· ·that before this report was issued the garage was safe.
10· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Do you have any reason to tell 10· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Okay.· So after water barriers
11· ·the jury that you know what conditions changed that 11· ·were placed you felt like the garage was safe?
12· ·would somehow be different in the less than one year 12· · · ·A.· ·After, yes.
13· ·between the O'Connor and the Bowmer incident? 13· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.
14· · · ·A.· ·I -- I don't understand the question. 14· · · ·A.· ·But that doesn't -- what you're trying to say
15· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· The question is, do you know of 15· ·is that it was not safe before?
16· ·anything; work that was performed, other accidents, 16· · · ·Q.· ·I'm not trying to say anything.· I'm just
17· ·hurricane, any kind of event that would have changed 17· ·asking you questions.
18· ·materially the conditions of the vehicle barrier system 18· · · · · · · · ·So before you placed the water barriers
19· ·between the O'Connor incident and the Bowmer incident? 19· ·up after Ms. Bowmer's incident and after Mr. O'Connor's
20· · · ·A.· ·None were reported to me. 20· ·incident, did you believe that the garage was safe?
21· · · ·Q.· ·Were you involved in choosing Walker 21· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
22· ·Consultants? 22· · · ·Q.· ·After you received the Walker Consultants'
23· · · ·A.· ·No, just on the approving of the expense. 23· ·report, did you believe the garage was safe?
24· · · ·Q.· ·The condition of the vehicle restraint system 24· · · ·A.· ·Then let's take a break and read the report.
25· ·at the time that Walker Consultants did its inspection 25· · · ·Q.· ·Sure.· If you feel like you need to, we can do

Page 146 Page 148

·1· ·and issued its report do you believe that it was a safe
·2· ·vehicle restraint system?
·3· · · ·A.· ·Do I believe it was safe --
·4· · · ·Q.· ·Yes, sir.
·5· · · ·A.· ·-- before -- before the Bowmer incident?
·6· · · ·Q.· ·At the time that the Walker Consultants issued
·7· ·their reports on October 19th, did you believe that the
·8· ·vehicle restraint system was safe?
·9· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
10· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Aren't -- aren't the
11· ·repairs after the incident not -- I mean --
12· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Just answer his question.
13· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I feel we went the extra
14· ·mile after the second incident.
15· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· I'm not asking you about that,
16· ·sir, with all due respect.· My question to you was
17· ·really straightforward.
18· · · · · · · · ·At the time that the Walker Consultants
19· ·issued their report in October of 2017, did you believe
20· ·that the vehicle restraint system on the Littlefield
21· ·Garage was safe?
22· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.· Are you
23· ·asking before the report was issued or after he got the
24· ·report?· I'm not clear on that either.
25· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Sure.· Before the report was
·1· ·that.
·2· · · ·A.· ·Well, you're asking me about the report.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·Not a problem.· I'm happy to do that.· Let's
·4· ·take a break so you can read it.
·5· · · · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· We're off the record,
·6· ·11:08.
·7· · · · · · (Recess from 11:08 a.m. to 11:21 a.m.)
·8· · · · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· This is Segment No. 3.
·9· ·Back on the record, 11:21.
10· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Mr. Kahn, we're back on the
11· ·record after a break for you to review the Walker
12· ·Consultants' Exhibit 21 report.· My question to you
13· ·was, after you received and reviewed this report in
14· ·October of 2017 did you still believe that your garage
15· ·was safe?
16· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
17· · · ·Q.· ·So is it fair to say that unless the City had
18· ·required your company to bring -- excuse me -- bring
19· ·the garage into compliance with the 2012 code, your
20· ·company would not have voluntarily done that?
21· · · ·A.· ·That's, you know, a supposition that we --
22· ·you're -- you're making an assumption.· We decided
23· ·to -- to do everything we could to make sure the garage
24· ·continues to be safe.
25· · · ·Q.· ·So regardless of whether the City had asked

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Sheldon David Kahn Vol 2
August 15, 2018 149 to 152
Page 149 Page 151
·1· ·you to bring the garage into compliance with the 2012 ·1· ·company and he was in charge of the repairs.
·2· ·code, is it your understanding that following the ·2· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· And my question was, you
·3· ·Bowmer incident your company would have done that? ·3· ·personally, Mr. Kahn, were you involved with
·4· · · ·A.· ·That's theoretical.· We -- we were trying to ·4· ·facilitating any type of safety inspections or repairs?
·5· ·do everything to keep our garage safe. ·5· · · ·A.· ·Personally, no.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·And what did you do between the O'Connor ·6· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Were you involved personally with
·7· ·incident and the Bowmer incident that was everything ·7· ·making a claim against or pursuing a claim against
·8· ·you could do to make the garage safe? ·8· ·Mr. O'Connor for the damage done to your garage by his
·9· · · ·A.· ·At the time, given the circumstances and given ·9· ·accident?
10· ·everything that we knew, we thought the garage was 10· · · ·A.· ·Personally, no.
11· ·safe. 11· · · · · · · · · (Exhibit No. 26 marked.)
12· · · ·Q.· ·That's not what I asked you.· I asked you what 12· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Let me show you Exhibit 26.
13· ·specifically you did.· You said, "We did everything we 13· ·Exhibit 26 is an e-mail exchange that includes you and
14· ·could to make it safe." 14· ·instructions from you to the property manager at
15· · · · · · · · ·And my question to you is, between 15· ·Premier, does it not.
16· ·O'Connor and Bowmer what did you do to make your garage 16· · · ·A.· ·Yes, an e-mail from me to the -- to the garage
17· ·safe? 17· ·manager.
18· · · ·A.· ·We thought -- we did everything we thought was 18· · · ·Q.· ·And it -- Exhibit 26 is an e-mail where you're
19· ·reasonable to do, which was repairing the location on 19· ·directing the property manager that you want to pursue
20· ·that ninth floor. 20· ·a claim against Mr. O'Connor for cost recovery,
21· · · ·Q.· ·Anything else? 21· ·including a number of spots left unusable for a period
22· · · ·A.· ·Nobody else thought that anything else was 22· ·of time due to his accident.· Is that true?
23· ·unsafe. 23· · · ·A.· ·That's what we had -- this -- this is after we
24· · · ·Q.· ·Well, you got a specific report from a 24· ·had a meeting with the parking garage manager.
25· ·structural engineer that told you that you should have 25· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· So can you explain to the jury why you

Page 150 Page 152

·1· ·a specialist inspect it, didn't you?
·2· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
·3· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· He said further review on
·4· ·one line, yes.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· And you didn't do that, did
·6· ·you?
·7· · · ·A.· ·We didn't think it was necessary.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·So you didn't do everything that you could
·9· ·have done to make the garage safe.· Isn't that true?
10· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
11· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· We could have done more,
12· ·but we did everything we believed was prudent to do at
13· ·the time.
14· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Now, following the receipt of
15· ·the report from Mr. Martin, the one that you didn't
16· ·read until after the Bowmer incident, what was your
17· ·level of focus and activity with the O'Connor incident?
18· ·Was it ensuring that repairs were done and the garage
19· ·was made safe or was it pursuing Mr. O'Connor for
20· ·damages to the garage?
21· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
22· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· The company had a property
23· ·manager that was -- you know, a garage manager that was 23· · · ·A.· ·I read some newspaper coverage.· I don't know
24· ·pursuing stuff.· We also had, you know, a person who
25· ·was in charge of doing all the construction in our
·1· ·spent time and energy pursuing Mr. O'Connor for damages
·2· ·to your garage but not in reading the report issued by
·3· ·the structural engineer about safety in the garage?
·4· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
·5· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I read a lot of stuff and I
·6· ·missed reading some stuff.· I delegated stuff to
·7· ·people.· And this -- when you say "spent time on it," I
·8· ·wrote a line-and-a-half e-mail.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· On what?
10· · · ·A.· ·To Christina telling her to go ahead with what
11· ·they had suggested.
12· · · ·Q.· ·Which was what, pursuing Mr. O'Connor for
13· ·damages to the garage?
14· · · ·A.· ·To pursue whatever they thought was reasonable
15· ·management of the garage.
16· · · ·Q.· ·Well, specifically in Exhibit 26 that would be
17· ·pursuing a claim against Mr. O'Connor, would it not?
18· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
19· · · ·Q.· ·Did you ever visit with Mr. O'Connor?
20· · · ·A.· ·No.
21· · · ·Q.· ·Did you read the newspaper coverage of
22· ·Mr. O'Connor's incident?
24· ·if I read all.
25· · · ·Q.· ·Would you look at Exhibit 2 with me, please.

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Sheldon David Kahn Vol 2
August 15, 2018
Page 153
·1· ·Did you see the article prominently displayed in the
·2· ·American-Statesman that's reflected in Exhibit 2?
·3· · · ·A.· ·You know, I vaguely recalled seeing this
·4· ·article, yes.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·And did it give you any concerns that perhaps
·6· ·you ought to have the 35-year-old cables in your
·7· ·parking garage inspected to see if they were safe and
·8· ·would hold cars on the garage?
·9· · · ·A.· ·No.
10· · · ·Q.· ·Did you see Exhibit 3, which is another
11· ·article in the American-Statesman about what
12· ·Mr. O'Connor went through as he was hanging off the
13· ·nine-story parking garage?
14· · · ·A.· ·I don't recall seeing this one.
15· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· This article was forwarded to you,
16· ·among other people, by Christina Murray in what's
17· ·contained as Exhibit 17, if you want to look at it in
18· ·the exhibits here.· It's an e-mail that says, "In case
19· ·you didn't see this in the Statesman."
20· · · · · · · · ·Do you see Exhibit 17?
21· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
22· · · ·Q.· ·Does it refresh your recollection about seeing
23· ·article Exhibit 3 when it was forwarded to you back in
24· ·September of 2016, "In case you didn't see it in the
25· ·Statesman"?
Page 154
·1· · · ·A.· ·That's from Carla Salas, which is -- she's not
·2· ·the garage manager.· She sent that to Christina
·3· ·supposedly and Christina --
·4· · · ·Q.· ·Forwarded it to you?
·5· · · ·A.· ·Put her opinion and, you know, forwarded it to
·6· ·me.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·The opinion that says, "This kid is really
·8· ·milking his 15 minutes"?
·9· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh, yes.
10· · · ·Q.· ·And did you agree with that opinion?
11· · · ·A.· ·I don't know.· I have no opinion.
12· · · ·Q.· ·Did you review the video that's in the
13· ·article, Exhibit 3?
14· · · ·A.· ·Probably not.
15· · · ·Q.· ·Let's take a minute and take a look at it. I
16· ·have it marked as an exhibit.· Just one second and I'll
17· ·tee it up for us.
18· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· What exhibit number is that?
19· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· The exhibit that the video
20· ·is?
21· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Uh-huh.· Just curious.
22· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· It's 4, 5, 6, or 7.· I have
23· ·to look at my chart.· I apologize for not knowing it
24· ·off the top of my head.
25· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· No problem.
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
153 to 156
Page 155
·1· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· I believe it's 4.
·2· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Okay.
·3· · · · · · · · · · ·(Videotape played.)
·4· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Give me one second to pull it
·5· ·up here because my thing was asleep.· Let's go off
·6· ·while I pull it up.
·7· · · · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· We're off the record,
·8· ·11:32.
·9· · · · · · · · · · · (Off the record.)
10· · · · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Stand by.· Back on the
11· ·record, 11:33.
12· · · · · · · · · · ·(Videotape played.)
13· · · · · · · · ·"Though I feel like whenever I describe
14· ·it the words that I'm using are so inadequate, just
15· ·like the sheer terror.· That's like a hopeless
16· ·situation, you know.· You like bust through those
17· ·cables and you're not really like at that point trying
18· ·to figure anything out.· You're just -- you know that
19· ·you're about to die."
20· · · · · · · · ·"At 2:30 this afternoon we're called out
21· ·to Sixth and Congress because a car had gone off the
22· ·top floor of the parking garage and one of the guide
23· ·wires, the protected wires on the top floor, is wrapped
24· ·around one wheel, and that's what's keeping the car on
25· ·the side of the wall."
Page 156
·1· · · · · · · · ·"I don't know exactly what happened. I
·2· ·mean, it was -- it happened fast.· That's all I know.
·3· ·I hadn't been drinking.· I hadn't used any drugs. I
·4· ·wasn't on my phone.· It was just a freak accident.
·5· ·Just pulling into the parking spot to head down to the
·6· ·gym and everything, obviously, went haywire.· The car
·7· ·accelerated and I went over the parking block and
·8· ·through the metal cables and over the edge.· I don't
·9· ·remember like perceiving anything except the sounds of
10· ·the car coming apart, my own screaming.· All I can
11· ·remember visually is just like the spinning.· I knew I
12· ·was dead.· I knew that that was the end of my life
13· ·while it was happening.· There was no part of me that
14· ·like was hoping for anything.· I stopped moving and
15· ·just immediately started yelling out, 'Help.'· That's
16· ·when Zack came up.· It was like he knew what he was
17· ·doing.· I'm scared to move because I don't know if this
18· ·car is going to fall as soon as I move.· He just
19· ·grabbed me and pulled me up.· And so that was kind of
20· ·that, and then I was standing on the edge of the floor
21· ·and climbed over the cables and everybody else got
22· ·there right after that.· He's amazing.· He's a hero. I
23· ·like -- I don't know how to adequately thank him. I
24· ·couldn't believe it when I got out of the stairs and
25· ·saw the hundreds of people that had gathered around in
YVer1f
 Sheldon David Kahn Vol 2
August 15, 2018
Page 157
·1· ·like the two minutes, or whatever it had been.· So many ·1· · · ·Q.· ·And is that your contention as to the accident
·2· ·people and cameras.· I didn't even think -- you know, I
·3· ·was so out of it I didn't even know what I had just
·4· ·done was like a big deal at all.· The biggest
·5· ·difference between then and now is the types of things
·6· ·that will register as important or stressful.· It like
·7· ·recalibrated my perception.· Yeah, I mean, I went off
·8· ·right there where it's still roped off and fell down
·9· ·three floors.· Everything is still the same as it was,
10· ·but to me it's -- everything is so much better with
11· ·like a little pinch of gratitude mixed in.· You know
12· ·what I mean?· Wow.· Oh, my God."
13· · · · · · · · ·"That's a long way up, Dude."
14· · · · · · · · ·"It is a long way up."
15· · · · · · · · · · · · (Video ended.)
16· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Mr. Kahn, does that refresh
17· ·your recollection about whether you took -- whether you
18· ·saw the video that was embedded in the article that was
19· ·sent to you in Exhibit 17?
20· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
21· · · ·Q.· ·Did you see it?
22· · · ·A.· ·No.
23· · · ·Q.· ·That's the first time that you've seen it?
24· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
25· · · ·Q.· ·Is that the first time you've ever seen
Page 158
·1· ·Mr. O'Connor talking about his experience?
·2· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·Can you imagine the sheer terror Mr. O'Connor
·4· ·must have been going through as he went through the
·5· ·cables and over the edge of the garage?
·6· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·You would agree that that is really something
·8· ·that can hardly even be put into words?
·9· · · ·A.· ·I mean, he put it into words.
10· · · ·Q.· ·After seeing Mr. O'Connor and his description
11· ·of what happened, does that give you any curiosity
12· ·about determining how it is a car could go off the
13· ·ninth floor of that garage through the barrier system
14· ·like that?
15· · · ·A.· ·Mr. O'Connor described it as a freak accident
16· ·in the video.
17· · · ·Q.· ·So, therefore, you don't need to investigate
18· ·it at all.· You just assume it's a freak accident.· Is
19· ·that the approach?
20· · · ·A.· ·We -- we believe that what had caused that
21· ·accident was that he accelerated into the -- into the
22· ·side of the -- the building.
23· · · ·Q.· ·So then it was Mr. O'Connor's fault that the
24· ·accident occurred?
25· · · ·A.· ·That's how I understood it.
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
157 to 160
Page 159
·2· ·that injured Ms. Bowmer, it's all her fault?
·3· · · ·A.· ·It -- it -- it definitely is a large portion
·4· ·of why that accident happened.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·What's the other portion that's not
·6· ·Ms. Bowmer's fault?
·7· · · ·A.· ·Well, you know, that's for, you know, the
·8· ·court to determine how much is -- she contributed to
·9· ·the accident and how much it was not -- how much is the
10· ·contribution that's not attributed to her.
11· · · ·Q.· ·Well, who else is involved that is a cause
12· ·that's not Ms. Bowmer that should be considered for
13· ·attribution of responsibility?
14· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
15· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I -- you know, I'm not
16· ·an -- I'm not an expert, and you're asking me to make a
17· ·determination of who's at fault in this -- in that
18· ·accident.
19· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Well, I'm asking you for your
20· ·contention.· Do you think that the -- Mr. Johnson and
21· ·his company, the fellow that did the repairs prior to
22· ·you buying the garage, bears any responsibility?
23· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· The name is Curtis Brown
24· ·instead of Johnson.
25· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Curtis Brown.· Excuse me.
Page 160
·1· ·Yeah.· He's good friends with Mr. Johnson.
·2· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I don't know.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· You don't know?
·4· · · ·A.· ·I don't know.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·What about the previous owner?
·6· · · ·A.· ·I don't know.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·What about your property manager?
·8· · · ·A.· ·Our property manager?· I don't know.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·What about your company?
10· · · ·A.· ·I don't think we were responsible.
11· · · ·Q.· ·So on the others you don't know, but as to
12· ·your company you know you weren't responsible?
13· · · ·A.· ·Right.
14· · · ·Q.· ·Do you believe that your company had a
15· ·responsibility to have a vehicle restraint system that
16· ·would keep cars on the garage and keep them from going
17· ·off the edge?
18· · · ·A.· ·It depends on how fast the cars were driving.
19· · · ·Q.· ·What level do you think a reasonably prudent
20· ·garage operator would have a barrier system that would
21· ·hold to?
22· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
23· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I'm not an everything. I
24· ·don't know.
25· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Well, do you have any idea at
YVer1f
 Sheldon David Kahn Vol 2
August 15, 2018
Page 161
·1· ·all?
·2· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
·3· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I don't know.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· You would agree that there
·5· ·should be some level though, right, some ability to
·6· ·sustain what is foreseeable; that is, a car that would
·7· ·have an accident and need to be restrained from going
·8· ·off the edge?
·9· · · ·A.· ·I'm sure it's happened before, that, you know,
10· ·people have hit the restraint system at different
11· ·speeds over 38 years.· And at certain speeds it's held
12· ·them and at certain speeds -- I guess this must have
13· ·been the biggest speed ever.· I don't know.
14· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Well, tell the jury what investigation
15· ·you did that determined any other person had struck the
16· ·cable barriers but had been successfully kept from
17· ·going over the edge.
18· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
19· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I was -- I was speculating
20· ·that other people have hit the garage.· It would be
21· ·hard -- I mean, the barriers.· It would be hard for me
22· ·to think that over a period of 38 years no one has hit
23· ·it.· But I did not make any specific investigation
24· ·because I don't think that whenever somebody hits the
25· ·barrier an incident report is made.
Page 162
·1· · · ·Q.· ·Certainly by the time of Ms. Bowmer's incident
·2· ·you knew that at least one vehicle had gone through the
·3· ·vehicle restraint system and luckily had been tangled
·4· ·and didn't hit the ground?
·5· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·Did you ever view the videos of Ms. Bowmer's
·7· ·incident?
·8· · · ·A.· ·I saw a security camera video.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·Is it this one here?
10· · · ·A.· ·I believe so.· Is this from the building
11· ·across?
12· · · ·Q.· ·No, sir.· It is across the alley, if that's
13· ·what you meant by "across."
14· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
15· · · ·(Video of camera from alleyway being played.)
16· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· When was the first time that
17· ·you saw this video, sir?
18· · · ·A.· ·I saw a clip of that video and I had -- I
19· ·hadn't seen this whole video.
20· · · ·Q.· ·Have you seen the part here where the good
21· ·samaritans are coming and extracting Ms. Bowmer from
22· ·the crushed vehicle?
23· · · ·A.· ·I only saw when the first guy came in. I
24· ·didn't see the rest.
25· · · ·Q.· ·This video was taken, I believe, from one of
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
161 to 164
Page 163
·1· ·the cameras that is affiliated with Stream, the
·2· ·previous owner of the garage.· Is that accurate?
·3· · · ·A.· ·I don't know.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·They're -- they're -- are they located in the
·5· ·building right across the alley from Littlefield?
·6· · · ·A.· ·The camera looks like it's from that building.
·7· ·I don't know who owns the building now.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·Do you know where Stream was located at the
·9· ·time or where their offices were?
10· · · ·A.· ·I think their offices are in that building. I
11· ·think they sold that building.
12· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Since Ms. Bowmer's accident?
13· · · ·A.· ·I don't know when they sold it.
14· · · ·Q.· ·Did you have any conversations with anybody
15· ·affiliated with the seller, any of the companies
16· ·affiliated with the seller, following Ms. Bowmer's
17· ·accident about anything to do with the vehicle
18· ·restraint system at the garage?
19· · · ·A.· ·I didn't.
20· · · ·Q.· ·Did Mr. O'Brien that you know of?
21· · · ·A.· ·I don't know.· Perhaps.
22· · · ·Q.· ·Were you involved with the decision by your
23· ·company to pursue first-party coverage to get money to
24· ·repair the vehicle restraint system after Ms. Bowmer's
25· ·accident?
Page 164
·1· · · ·A.· ·Can you please repeat the question?
·2· · · ·Q.· ·Sure.· Were you involved with the pursuit of
·3· ·first-party, your insurance company's, money to get
·4· ·money to conduct repairs or changes to the vehicle
·5· ·restraint system following Ms. Bowmer's accident?
·6· · · ·A.· ·Yeah, it's part of our coverage, our insurance
·7· ·coverage.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· What coverage is it, do you know?
·9· · · ·A.· ·I'm not an expert, but I believe it has to do
10· ·with if a property has to be brought up to code, then
11· ·that's covered by a certain part of your insurance.
12· · · ·Q.· ·Is it true that in -- at the time of
13· ·Ms. Bowmer's accident the garage in question did not
14· ·comply with the 2012 building code?
15· · · ·A.· ·The 2012 code?
16· · · ·Q.· ·Yes, sir.
17· · · ·A.· ·No.
18· · · ·Q.· ·It did not, correct?
19· · · ·A.· ·It did not.
20· · · ·Q.· ·And has it now been brought into compliance
21· ·with the 2012 code?
22· · · ·A.· ·I believe we are working on that.· I don't
23· ·know exactly what the status of it is.
24· · · ·Q.· ·The repairs and/or modifications to the garage
25· ·are undergoing or currently going on as we speak?
YVer1f
 Sheldon David Kahn Vol 2
August 15, 2018
Page 165
·1· · · ·A.· ·They -- I know that the work to bring it to
·2· ·compliance -- to the code is -- is started.· I'm not
·3· ·sure exactly what status it's in.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·Did your company recover money from
·5· ·Mr. O'Connor for the damages you sought related to his
·6· ·accident in the garage?
·7· · · ·A.· ·I don't know.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·Who would know that?
·9· · · ·A.· ·The parking managers.
10· · · ·Q.· ·At the time that you bought the building from
11· ·the seller did the seller make any representations to
12· ·you about the fitness of the vehicle restraint system?
13· · · ·A.· ·No.
14· · · · · · · · · (Exhibit No. 23 marked.)
15· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Let me show you what I've
16· ·marked as Exhibit 23.· Do you recognize Exhibit 23?
17· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
18· · · ·Q.· ·That is the agreement of purchase and sale
19· ·between 6th & Congress Properties, LLC, the seller, and
20· ·your company, GTT Parking, LP?
21· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
22· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Can I note just for the
23· ·record, it should say confidential because we've
24· ·stamped every single page confidential.
25· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Oh, I'm happy to --
Page 166
·1· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· I don't know why it doesn't.
·2· ·So just for the record, it falls underneath our
·3· ·confidentiality order --
·4· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· That's fine.
·5· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· -- we had entered yesterday.
·6· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· I think this may have been
·7· ·produced by somebody other than you.
·8· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Oh, okay.
·9· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· So that's fine.· I don't have
10· ·a problem with it being confidential.
11· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· The purchase price reflected
12· ·on Page 2 is $52 million.· Is that accurate?
13· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
14· · · ·Q.· ·On Page 15 there is an "as is" disclaimer.
15· ·You understood that your company was purchasing the
16· ·building as is --
17· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
18· · · ·Q.· ·-- as reflected in that section?· And are
19· ·those your initials on Page 16?
20· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
21· · · ·Q.· ·On Page 17, under 9.2, there is a "Purchaser's
22· ·Release" section where the purchaser forever released
23· ·and discharged seller and a number of affiliates to
24· ·seller.· Did you see that?
25· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
165 to 168
Page 167
·1· · · ·Q.· ·And is that your signature, Mr. Kahn, that is
·2· ·on Page 30 -- I believe it's right around 31 or -2.
·3· ·Let's see here.· 34.· Excuse me.
·4· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·In the agreement in Exhibit 23 there's a list
·6· ·of documents on Exhibit B, due diligence documents to
·7· ·be delivered by the seller.· It's about halfway
·8· ·through.
·9· · · · · · · · ·My question to you is, were there any
10· ·documents provided to your company specifically
11· ·relating to the vehicle restraint system?
12· · · ·A.· ·I don't know.· I don't recall.
13· · · ·Q.· ·When you bought the building what
14· ·representations, if any, about the fitness of the
15· ·building were made to you by anybody at Premier
16· ·Parking?
17· · · ·A.· ·Can you repeat the question?
18· · · ·Q.· ·Sure.· When your company purchased the
19· ·building in question, what representations, if any,
20· ·were made to you by anybody at Premier Parking about
21· ·the safety or fitness of the building?
22· · · ·A.· ·There was no representation made, but there
23· ·was no mention either of any items that were unsafe.
24· · · ·Q.· ·So Premier Parking was simply silent on the
25· ·issue of the vehicle restraint system?
Page 168
·1· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·Were you involved with any interaction with
·3· ·the City of Austin following the O'Connor incident?
·4· · · ·A.· ·Mr. O'Brien is in charge of that.· I'm not.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·And were you involved with any interaction
·6· ·with the City of Austin following the Bowmer incident?
·7· · · ·A.· ·No, not personally.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·So Mr. O'Brien would be the person that has
·9· ·the personal knowledge and the interaction with the
10· ·City on both of those incidents?
11· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
12· · · ·Q.· ·Where were you, Mr. Kahn, when you received
13· ·notice of the Bowmer incident?
14· · · ·A.· ·I believe I was at home.
15· · · ·Q.· ·And who notified you?
16· · · ·A.· ·I believe it was Christina Murray.
17· · · ·Q.· ·And what did Ms. Murray tell you?
18· · · ·A.· ·That there has been an incident at the garage.
19· · · ·Q.· ·Could you just describe for me best of your
20· ·recollection the entire conversation about it.
21· · · ·A.· ·She said there's been an incident at the
22· ·garage and she described the incident.· And I said
23· ·since I live, you know, in -- you know, locally, I
24· ·said, "I'm on my way."
25· · · ·Q.· ·Did she tell you that somebody had gone off
YVer1f
 Sheldon David Kahn Vol 2
August 15, 2018
Page 169
·1· ·the garage?
·2· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·Did she tell you it was similar to the
·4· ·O'Connor incident except that the cables hadn't caught
·5· ·into the car and it had crashed all the way to the
·6· ·ground?
·7· · · ·A.· ·I don't know if she used those words.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·Did you understand at the time that it was
·9· ·similar to the O'Connor incident except that the car
10· ·had actually crashed to the ground?
11· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.
12· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Could you describe for the jury what
13· ·your thought process was when you had been notified
14· ·that there was another car now that had gone through
15· ·the barrier off the garage, but this time had hit the
16· ·ground?
17· · · ·A.· ·You know, it's -- it's a -- I'm trying to
18· ·recall to the best I can.· We were trying to find out
19· ·what the condition of Ms. Bowmer was.· That was my
20· ·foremost thought.· And we tried to find out at first,
21· ·and we were told that because of patient
22· ·confidentiality that they could not tell us what the
23· ·condition was of the -- of the person involved in the
24· ·accident.· And I remember trying to find out that.
25· · · · · · · · ·What we -- what I do remember finding out
Page 170
·1· ·that same day was that they had told us that it was not
·2· ·a fatality.· So, you know, that was good news, I guess.
·3· ·And -- and then I remember also calling Mr. O'Brien.
·4· ·And I don't remember if he called Mr. Martin at my
·5· ·behest or if Mr. Martin was already on his way or maybe
·6· ·Mr. O'Brien was already on his way.· Basically I think
·7· ·we all went to the -- to the garage.· And I remember
·8· ·that I was there with Ms. Murray and Mr. O'Brien and
·9· ·Mr. Richard Martin that day at the garage.
10· · · ·Q.· ·And what discussions do you recall?· What was
11· ·the substance of the discussions with any or all of
12· ·those people there?
13· · · ·A.· ·I think we were all in shock.· You know, we
14· ·were thinking that, you know, we couldn't believe that
15· ·this had happened, you know, and we were trying to
16· ·figure out what had happened.· And the first thought I
17· ·thought was like, you know, "What do we do with the
18· ·garage at this moment to make sure that, you know,
19· ·the -- we can make the necessary repairs or temporary
20· ·repairs to ensure the safety at that moment of the
21· ·people who were still parked in the garage and what
22· ·would be the process for the safety for the next few
23· ·days."
24· · · · · · · · ·And then, you know, we talked about the
25· ·fact that, you know, once we figured out what the safe
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
169 to 172
Page 171
·1· ·actions to take were for the next few days, then that
·2· ·we would all try to figure out what the safe actions
·3· ·would be, you know, on a more permanent basis.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·Did Mr. Martin ask if the recommendations he
·5· ·had sent almost a year earlier had been followed,
·6· ·whether anybody had done the inspections that he had
·7· ·encouraged to be done?
·8· · · ·A.· ·I don't -- I don't recall that.· I don't
·9· ·believe so.
10· · · ·Q.· ·Did Ms. Murray offer any comments about any
11· ·kind of efforts or inspections that Premier Parking had
12· ·done after the O'Connor incident?
13· · · ·A.· ·I don't recall.
14· · · ·Q.· ·Did anybody discuss that it would be a good
15· ·idea to have the cables in the entire building
16· ·inspected to see exactly what the issue was with the
17· ·restraint system and why it wasn't restraining
18· ·vehicles?
19· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
20· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· The day of the incident we
21· ·were worried mostly about immediate safety.· And I
22· ·don't recall if we talked about, you know, more
23· ·permanent or longer-term solutions or actions.
24· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· What, if any, comments do you
25· ·recall Mr. Martin making?
Page 172
·1· · · ·A.· ·I don't recall.· I don't have a very good
·2· ·memory.· I don't recall.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·After having hired a structural engineer about
·4· ·a year earlier with the O'Connor incident, did you have
·5· ·questions in your mind as to how an event like
·6· ·Ms. Bowmer's could happen again in the garage?
·7· · · ·A.· ·I mean, I was in total shock and disbelief
·8· ·that, you know, the same freak accident happened at the
·9· ·same garage.· We thought that this was a one in, you
10· ·know, 38-year occurrence and that, you know, somehow --
11· ·you know, Mr. O'Connor seemed very calm and collected,
12· ·but I don't know what state he was when he drove off
13· ·the garage.· And even Mr. O'Connor just -- you know, in
14· ·the interview described it as a freak accident.· So,
15· ·you know, we were in shock.
16· · · ·Q.· ·Did you think at that time that it was time to
17· ·do something to make sure another vehicle didn't go
18· ·off?
19· · · ·A.· ·Did we think it was time to do something?
20· · · ·Q.· ·Right.
21· · · ·A.· ·I mean, yeah.· When you have an -- an incident
22· ·that happens once in 38 years, you think it's a freak
23· ·accident.· And then, you know, it happens a second
24· ·time, you say, "Well, we need to review everything
25· ·again."
YVer1f
 Sheldon David Kahn Vol 2
August 15, 2018
Page 173
·1· · · ·Q.· ·Did -- after that initial visit at the parking
·2· ·garage, did you ever personally have any type of visit
·3· ·with Premier Parking about how or why or what role
·4· ·Premier may have had in not alerting your company that
·5· ·there may be an issue with the vehicle restraint
·6· ·system?
·7· · · ·A.· ·We -- we -- we were focused mostly on what
·8· ·actions we were going to take going forward.· From a
·9· ·real estate perspective like I thought, you know, we
10· ·have what is called a 500-year flood, you know.· And if
11· ·you have a 500-year flood, well, you think it's once
12· ·every 500 years.· If you have a second 500-year flood,
13· ·then you go, "Well, you know, maybe there's something
14· ·we should do in the future."
15· · · ·Q.· ·What is the role of Weitzman in the building
16· ·in question, the parking garage?
17· · · ·A.· ·So mostly the role of Weitzman is they are to
18· ·collect the rent and interact with the gymnasium
19· ·operator, which is Gold's Gym, and the Tip -- Top Trip
20· ·Rentals, which leases the apartments.
21· · · ·Q.· ·Does Weitzman have the ability to report to
22· ·you or Mr. O'Brien about any issues it may observe
23· ·regarding safety in the garage?
24· · · · · · · · ·MR. KURHAJEC:· Objection, form.
25· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· The ability?
173 to 176
Page 175
·1· ·their buildings that they manage across the street
·2· ·would have questions.· That's my assumption.
·3· · · · · · · · · (Exhibit No. 27 marked.)
·4· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· I show you Exhibit 27.
·5· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·Have you seen 27 before?
·7· · · ·A.· ·No.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·In the first part of your deposition with me
·9· ·you discussed that there were other parking garages in
10· ·Austin that you described as open parking garages.· And
11· ·Exhibit 27 has been produced to us.· Are these
12· ·depicting what you have described as open parking
13· ·garages in the City of Austin?
14· · · ·A.· ·I'm going through the exhibit.
15· · · ·Q.· ·Yes, sir.· No problem.
16· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· This was compiled by Haag
17· ·Engineering.
18· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· At our request.
19· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Uh-huh.
20· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Okay.
21· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· It sounds like Exhibit 27 was
22· ·compiled by Haag Engineering at your request; is that
23· ·right?
24· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Are you asking me or asking
25· ·him?

Page 174 Page 176

·1· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Right. ·1· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· I'm asking Mr. Kahn.
·2· · · ·A.· ·I would say everybody has the ability to warn ·2· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Okay.
·3· ·anybody about anything. ·3· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· That -- that's --
·4· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Do you expect that if Weitzman saw ·4· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· That's your understanding?
·5· ·anything that it would bring it to your attention? ·5· · · ·A.· ·That's what my lawyer just informed me.
·6· · · · · · · · ·MR. KURHAJEC:· Objection, form. ·6· · · ·Q.· ·Fair enough.· Did you see any pictures of any
·7· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I -- I don't think those ·7· ·parking garages in there that use five cables as a
·8· ·guys would withhold something that they knew about. I ·8· ·restraint system?
·9· ·don't think that makes them responsible to warn us. ·9· · · ·A.· ·No.
10· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· I just noticed that Weitzman 10· · · ·Q.· ·Did you see any pictures in there of any
11· ·was copied on some of the correspondence regarding the 11· ·parking garages that use any cables as a restraint
12· ·accident and things that were going on afterwards and I 12· ·system?
13· ·just wanted to understand -- 13· · · ·A.· ·Let me go through it again.· I think this one
14· · · ·A.· ·Yes. 14· ·looks like cables.· It's hard to tell.
15· · · ·Q.· ·-- what role they would have had in that. 15· · · ·Q.· ·Do you know of any garages in Austin that are
16· · · ·A.· ·Ah.· That's a good question.· So Weitzman 16· ·multilevel garages like the Littlefield Garage that use
17· ·manages the Hannig Row office building, 610 Brazos; the 17· ·cables as a vehicle restraint system other than your
18· ·Scarbrough office building; and the Littlefield office 18· ·garage?
19· ·building.· So a lot of the people park in the garage, 19· · · ·A.· ·It's hard to tell.· I mean, I see cables on
20· ·also office in the buildings that, you know, Weitzman 20· ·some of them.
21· ·is in charge of managing, which are across the street, 21· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Which ones do you think, sir, in
22· ·you know, a couple blocks away.· So there would be a 22· ·Exhibit 27 look like they are cable restraint systems
23· ·lot of questions that the tenants might have.· And, you 23· ·like the one that was used in your garage at the time
24· ·know, we thought we were bringing them in just in case 24· ·of Ms. Bowmer's accident?
25· ·tenants in the building -- their -- the tenants in 25· · · ·A.· ·Well, like -- they have cables.· The one --

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Sheldon David Kahn Vol 2
August 15, 2018
Page 177
·1· ·the one -- like our system.· I don't think there's many
·2· ·that are older than our garage.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·Do you see any that use cables like your
·4· ·garage for the vehicle restraint system in Exhibit 27?
·5· · · ·A.· ·I see the ones that use cables.
·6· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
·7· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I wouldn't say that they're
·8· ·like our garage.· I don't see any garages that are
·9· ·older than our garage.· Maybe one.· It's hard to tell
10· ·from these pictures.· But from the dates I can tell you
11· ·that, you know, all these are newer.
12· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· At any time before
13· ·Mr. O'Connor's incident, did your company discuss what
14· ·the building code application was to the vehicle
15· ·restraint system in your building?
16· · · ·A.· ·No.
17· · · ·Q.· ·At any time between Mr. O'Connor's incident
18· ·and Ms. Bowmer's incident, did your company discuss
19· ·what the applicable building code was for the vehicle
20· ·restraint system in your building?
21· · · ·A.· ·I didn't.
22· · · ·Q.· ·Anybody that you know of?
23· · · ·A.· ·I don't know what other people discussed.
24· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· So it would have been -- the only other
25· ·person would have been Mr. O'Brien, correct?
Page 178
·1· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·And did Mr. O'Brien ever indicate to you that
·3· ·he had discussed what the applicable building code was
·4· ·for the vehicle restraint system before Ms. Bowmer's
·5· ·incident?
·6· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
·7· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· He didn't share that with
·8· ·me.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Okay.· Did you have any
10· ·personal interaction or meetings with the engineers
11· ·involved in the design of the new vehicle restraint
12· ·system that's been implemented in the garage?
13· · · ·A.· ·I got one phone call from a person who was
14· ·doing an investigation on behalf of the insurance
15· ·company, and I referred him to Mr. O'Brien.
16· · · ·Q.· ·Anything else besides that?
17· · · ·A.· ·No.
18· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Let's take a short break here
19· ·and let me just go through my notes and see what else I
20· ·have.
21· · · · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Off the record, 12:12.
22· · · · · · (Recess from 12:12 p.m. to 12:21 p.m.)
23· · · · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Stand by.· This is
24· ·Segment No. 4.· We're back on the record, 12:21.
25· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Mr. Kahn, previously you and I
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
177 to 180
Page 179
·1· ·discussed in your first deposition some of the
·2· ·interaction your company had with Premier, and one of
·3· ·the things I recall discussing was, is that my
·4· ·understanding was, is that your company was relying on
·5· ·Premier to help your company stay current on the
·6· ·applicable laws and regulations for parking garages; is
·7· ·that correct?
·8· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·And could you tell me the process in which
10· ·that was to occur; that is, that Premier was going to
11· ·help your company stay current on the applicable laws
12· ·and regulations?
13· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.· I mean, the -- they pay the -- they
14· ·collect and pay the sales tax.· So, you know, if any
15· ·methods or rates of collection of taxes, of sales tax
16· ·on the garage revenues would change, they would know
17· ·and they would make the appropriate payments to the --
18· ·to the State.· Now and then I believe that they hire
19· ·people to work in the garage, you know.· So if there
20· ·was any regulations with those employees as far as like
21· ·minimum wage or, you know, retention of taxes or
22· ·payment of taxes that they would deal with all that.
23· · · · · · · · ·If there were any -- the City of Austin
24· ·did any particular regulations for parking garages,
25· ·they would know about them since they operate, you
Page 180
·1· ·know, dozens of garages in Austin and hundreds
·2· ·nationally.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·How about building codes for the vehicle
·4· ·restraint system, would you have relied on Premier to
·5· ·give you advise about that?
·6· · · ·A.· ·Building code, I think that it would be at the
·7· ·time that we build a garage.· So I don't think that --
·8· ·either they build garages or we build garages, so
·9· ·that's what we consider in laymen terms building codes.
10· · · · · · · · ·As of the items being in safe condition
11· ·or not, I would say that they are in the premises,
12· ·so -- and they operate a lot of garages, so they are
13· ·knowledgeable with, you know, garage conditions.· And,
14· ·you know, they would call us if they had any -- any
15· ·issues with those rules or laws and we would be
16· ·responsible for -- our company would be responsible
17· ·completely for the payment of, you know -- or
18· ·reimbursement of payment of any such items.
19· · · · · · · · ·MR. RHODES:· Objection, responsiveness.
20· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· The -- would you in your
21· ·relationship with Premier expect Premier to inform you
22· ·of its familiarity with any previous problems or
23· ·inspections regarding the vehicle restraint system?
24· · · ·A.· ·Can you repeat the question?
25· · · ·Q.· ·Sure.· Given your knowledge of your
YVer1f
 Sheldon David Kahn Vol 2
August 15, 2018 181 to 184
Page 181 Page 183
·1· ·relationship and the expectation of that with Premier, ·1· ·questions for you.· Let me hand you a copy of
·2· ·would you expect that Premier, if it had, would inform ·2· ·Exhibit 10 to Mr. O'Brien's deposition.
·3· ·your company of knowledge of previous problems or ·3· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· You probably have the
·4· ·issues with the vehicle restraint system? ·4· ·original right there.
·5· · · ·A.· ·If they had knowledge if they would share that ·5· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. RHODES)· The parties stipulated that
·6· ·knowledge with us?· I would think so. ·6· ·that is the agreement between GTT and Premier that was
·7· · · ·Q.· ·After the O'Connor incident, do you know of ·7· ·in effect in 2017.· Are you familiar with that
·8· ·any discussions with either yourself or Mr. O'Brien and ·8· ·document?
·9· ·anybody at Premier about any previous issues or ·9· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
10· ·problems with the vehicle restraint system in the 10· · · ·Q.· ·Did you sign that document?
11· ·building? 11· · · ·A.· ·I think so, yeah.· Yes.
12· · · ·A.· ·None with me. 12· · · ·Q.· ·The operating parameters are addressed in the
13· · · ·Q.· ·Was there any discussions that you know of 13· ·document.· Let's see.· It looks like it's under
14· ·about Premier's knowledge of repairs that had been done 14· ·services to be performed right there on the first page.
15· ·in the last few years prior to the O'Connor incident to 15· ·Do you see that?
16· ·the vehicle restraint system? 16· · · ·A.· ·No. 2?
17· · · ·A.· ·They were not brought up to us until after the 17· · · ·Q.· ·Right.
18· ·Bowmer incident. 18· · · ·A.· ·And it refers to Exhibit A and Exhibit B.
19· · · ·Q.· ·And how were they brought up to you after the 19· · · ·Q.· ·Right.
20· ·Bowmer incident? 20· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
21· · · ·A.· ·I don't recall.· Through -- through this 21· · · ·Q.· ·Let's go to the top here real quick.· Does it
22· ·process. 22· ·define contractor as my client, Premier Parking in
23· · · ·Q.· ·Through the litigation process? 23· ·Tennessee?
24· · · ·A.· ·Yes. 24· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
25· · · ·Q.· ·So before the litigation process started, 25· · · ·Q.· ·And your company is considered owner?

Page 182 Page 184

·1· ·nobody at Premier mentioned anything to anybody at your ·1· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·2· ·company that you know of about previous repairs and/or
·3· ·inspections of the vehicle restraint system in the
·4· ·garage?
·5· · · ·A.· ·I'm not aware.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·Through my demeanor here today have I caused
·7· ·you to answer questions other than you wanted to answer ·7· ·understand them to be?
·8· ·them?
·9· · · ·A.· ·No.
10· · · ·Q.· ·Have I been courteous to you?
11· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.
12· · · ·Q.· ·I am going to let the other lawyers ask you
13· ·questions.· I understand we're going to take a break.
14· ·If I have any follow-ups after that it will be very
15· ·brief.· Thank you for your time.
16· · · ·A.· ·Okay.
17· · · · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· We're off the record,
18· ·12:27.
19· · · · ·(Lunch recess from 12:27 p.m. to 1:05 p.m.)
20· · · · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Stand by.· This is
21· ·Segment No. 5.· Back on the record, 1:05.
22· · · · · · · · · · · · ·EXAMINATION
23· ·BY MR. RHODES:
24· · · ·Q.· ·Mr. Kahn, I represent Premier Parking of
25· ·Tennessee in this case, and I have a couple of
·2· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· So looking at No. 2, what were the
·3· ·services to be performed by Premier or contractor?
·4· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Object, form.
·5· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Do you mean what services
·6· ·are called for in the contract or what -- what do I
·8· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. RHODES)· No.· What -- what services
·9· ·were called for in the contract.
10· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Same objection.
11· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· It says -- I guess it would
12· ·be the entire contract.· In this paragraph it says,
13· ·"Refer to Exhibit A and B."· And Exhibit A, blank, and
14· ·Exhibit B, it looks like it's blank.
15· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. RHODES)· Right.· It looks like there
16· ·was a disconnect between the numbering of the exhibits.
17· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Object, form.
18· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. RHODES)· And does it look like
19· ·Exhibit C is actually the operating parameters?
20· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Same objection.
21· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I'm confused.
22· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. RHODES)· Okay.· Well, if you -- if you
23· ·flip through to the end past the main part of the
24· ·agreement and --
25· · · ·A.· ·Yes, I see that.· I just don't understand why

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Sheldon David Kahn Vol 2
August 15, 2018
Page 185
·1· ·Exhibit A is blank.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·Right.· That -- I -- I think there was some
·3· ·disconnect between whoever wrote that first part and
·4· ·whoever numbered the exhibits, because if we look at
·5· ·the page that's marked GTT 010 that -- that part of
·6· ·Exhibit 10 is called Exhibit C; is that right?
·7· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Object, sidebar.
·8· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I see that.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. RHODES)· And it's labeled "Operating
10· ·Parameters"; is that right?
11· · · ·A.· ·It is.
12· · · ·Q.· ·So does it look like No. 2 on the first page
13· ·actually was referring to Exhibit C instead of
14· ·Exhibit B?
15· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Objection, form.
16· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I'm confused, but go ahead.
17· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. RHODES)· Well, I -- I want to kind of
18· ·clear this up because I was confused when I first read
19· ·it also.· But does it look like where someone referred
20· ·to "Exhibit B - Operating Parameters" in Paragraph 2,
21· ·that should have said "Exhibit C - Operating
22· ·Parameters"?
23· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Form.
24· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I think I see it the same
25· ·way you're seeing it.
185 to 188
Page 187
·1· · · ·Q.· ·Did Premier do what was required of Operating
·2· ·Parameter 3?
·3· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Form.
·4· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Contractor -- so I'm
·5· ·confused because when we've raised rates, I don't know
·6· ·if they approved the rates in writing or not, but we
·7· ·initiated the rate changes.· I think we've had a couple
·8· ·rate changes since we bought the garage.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. RHODES)· Did Premier operate the
10· ·garage in an efficient manner?
11· · · ·A.· ·Did they -- I believe so.
12· · · ·Q.· ·Did Exhibit 10 serve to --
13· · · ·A.· ·Exhibit -- Exhibit -- you mean --
14· · · ·Q.· ·The whole thing in your hand is Exhibit 10.
15· · · ·A.· ·Oh, I'm sorry.
16· · · ·Q.· ·And I know it's confusing because Exhibit 10
17· ·has exhibits that are --
18· · · ·A.· ·Got it.· Got it.· Got it.· I'm sorry.
19· · · ·Q.· ·-- labeled with -- with letters inside of that
20· ·exhibit.· But does the agreement outline what you
21· ·expected Premier to do with regard to the Littlefield
22· ·Garage in 2017?
23· · · ·A.· ·There were expectations in the contract and
24· ·there were expectations in, you know, verbal
25· ·conversations we had.

Page 186 Page 188

·1· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. RHODES)· Okay.· So -- ·1· · · ·Q.· ·Did Premier live up to the expectations in the
·2· · · ·A.· ·It's confusing, but, yeah, I agree with your ·2· ·contract?
·3· ·interpretation. ·3· · · ·A.· ·I believe so.
·4· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Objection, nonresponsive. ·4· · · ·Q.· ·What were the verbal expectations?
·5· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. RHODES)· Was one of the operating ·5· · · ·A.· ·The verbal expectations were, in my mind, as
·6· ·parameters that is included in Exhibit C -- and this is
·6· ·important as the contract because we didn't really
·7· ·on the last page of Exhibit C -- no.· I'm sorry.· It ·7· ·negotiate the contract.· We just signed the contract
·8· ·looks like it's the second page -- third page of ·8· ·that it was from the previous owners.· I met with
·9· ·Exhibit C.· Do you see where it says -- and I'm on ·9· ·Mr. Hunt and I said, "Hey, can you manage the garage
10· ·GTT 012 -- 10· ·for us?"
11· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh. 11· · · · · · · · ·And he said, "Yeah, we can manage the
12· · · ·Q.· ·-- No. 3 at the bottom. 12· ·garage for you."
13· · · ·A.· ·Yeah, No. 3.· I see it. 13· · · · · · · · ·So I did not have an attorney review this
14· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· What does No. 3 state? 14· ·contract before we signed it.
15· · · ·A.· ·"This contractor agrees to operate the 15· · · · · · · · ·MR. RHODES:· Objection, responsiveness.
16· ·property in an efficient manner and based on hours 16· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· What was your question?
17· ·customarily in the trade commensurate with parking a 17· ·I'm sorry, then.
18· ·man in the area.· Such operation shall be continuous 18· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. RHODES)· What were the verbal
19· ·unless manager shall otherwise agree in writing. 19· ·representations?
20· ·Charges for parking in the property will be 20· · · ·A.· ·That they would manage the garage properly.
21· ·commensurate with the demand for parking space and in 21· · · ·Q.· ·How does that differ from the written
22· ·accord with" -- and then it goes to the next page, I 22· ·expectations contained in Exhibit No. 10?
23· ·suppose -- "in accord with existing parking rates in 23· · · ·A.· ·They differ in the fact that if they saw
24· ·the area.· Parking rates shall not be -- shall not be 24· ·something that was -- no, I don't think they -- they
25· ·varied without written approval of the manager." 25· ·differ.· Maybe the difference is from the fact that,

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Sheldon David Kahn Vol 2
August 15, 2018 189 to 192
Page 189 Page 191
·1· ·you know, the contract has more limitations than we ·1· · · ·A.· ·Well, what is in Exhibit 10 is a lot of
·2· ·verbally thought we had. ·2· ·limitations added to what Mr. Ryan Hunt told me.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·In what way? ·3· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· What did he tell you in your meetings
·4· · · ·A.· ·In the way that verbally I understood that, ·4· ·that you feel like Exhibit 10 served to limit him?
·5· ·you know, if there was a repair issue that we would be ·5· · · ·A.· ·Well, specifically about the -- the, you know,
·6· ·responsible to pay for it.· And I believe the contract ·6· ·duty to -- to inspect.· I mean, he never talked about
·7· ·says that if there's a repair issue they absolve ·7· ·the duty to inspect the property, and I think that
·8· ·themselves of any responsibility, which is now how I ·8· ·there's some limitations to that in the agreement.· But
·9· ·understood it. ·9· ·if you want a specific instance why don't we take a
10· · · ·Q.· ·Who told you about the verbal expectations 10· ·couple of minutes to go through the -- through the --
11· ·that you're referring to?· Who did you talk to? 11· ·give me a couple of minutes to go through the agreement
12· · · ·A.· ·I talked to Mr. Ryan Hunt. 12· ·and I can tell you what was different from that meeting
13· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· When was that? 13· ·we had.
14· · · ·A.· ·It was somewhere in August or September 14· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Go ahead and do that.
15· ·of 2015. 15· · · ·A.· ·Specifically No. 5, which says, "Owners shall
16· · · ·Q.· ·And what did Mr. Hunt tell you? 16· ·be responsible for property repairs, including, but not
17· · · ·A.· ·Mr. Hunt asked me if we wanted to continue 17· ·limited" -- my understanding was that we were
18· ·engaging their services to manage the garage.· And, you 18· ·responsible for the payment, not for the -- either the
19· ·know, we said, yes, we would because we don't know how 19· ·identification of those repairs or, you know --
20· ·to manage garages.· We don't manage any garages and we 20· · · ·Q.· ·So did you meet with Mr. Hunt before you
21· ·would like to have a professional garage management 21· ·signed the agreement that is now Exhibit 10?
22· ·company. 22· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
23· · · · · · · · ·We had a meeting and he represented how 23· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· So you met with him and then you were
24· ·many garages they manage in Austin, which was, you 24· ·presented with a written agreement and you signed the
25· ·know, several dozen, I think; and the length of times 25· ·written agreement and GTT was bound by all the terms of

Page 190 Page 192

·1· ·they had been managing this garage; the length of time
·2· ·that they've been in business and, you know, the
·3· ·operations they have all over the country in many
·4· ·cities managing garages.· So the meeting we had he
·5· ·shared with me all the depth and experience and breadth
·6· ·of management operations that they have in the garage
·7· ·business.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·What did he tell you in that meeting that is
·9· ·not addressed in Exhibit 10, if anything?
10· · · ·A.· ·We did not refer to Exhibit 10 in that
11· ·meeting, so that was separate from the exhibit.
12· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· But you've looked at Exhibit 10?
13· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
14· · · ·Q.· ·And you recall your meeting with Mr. Hunt?
15· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
16· · · ·Q.· ·What did Mr. Hunt tell you about what Premier
17· ·could or would do that is not addressed in Exhibit 10?
18· · · ·A.· ·The Exhibit 10 was not brought up at that
19· ·meeting.· What he said is, "We are the best at managing
20· ·garages.· We have a lot of experience in managing
21· ·garages in a lot of cities and in Austin and we will
22· ·manage your garage, you know, as garages need to be
23· ·managed."
24· · · ·Q.· ·Is that all that was not included in
25· ·Exhibit 10?
·1· ·the written agreement, right?
·2· · · ·A.· ·Yes, of course.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·But you feel like because Mr. Hunt told you
·4· ·some other things before you signed the written
·5· ·agreement that those things that he told you should
·6· ·actually control what the agreement is.· Is that your
·7· ·position?
·8· · · ·A.· ·I don't know which one controls, but I can
·9· ·tell you what he told me when we met.
10· · · ·Q.· ·If we look at Page 13 of the agreement --
11· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh.
12· · · ·Q.· ·-- about halfway down, does it say, "Any
13· ·structural, mechanical, electrical, or other
14· ·installations or any alterations required by statutes
15· ·or regulations pertaining to air quality environmental
16· ·protection, provisions for persons with disabilities,
17· ·or other similar government -- governmental
18· ·requirements shall be the sole responsibility of
19· ·owner"?
20· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
21· · · ·Q.· ·Did Mr. Hunt tell you that -- something
22· ·different, that those would not be the sole
23· ·responsibility of owner, GTT?
24· · · ·A.· ·My understanding was that we were going to pay
25· ·for them, but they were managing -- if we had to do any

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Sheldon David Kahn Vol 2
August 15, 2018
Page 193
·1· ·structural, mechanical, electrical, or installation or
·2· ·alterations, they would be managed by them.· By
·3· ·responsibility, I don't think he expected us to do the
·4· ·repairs.· I think he expected Premier to do the repairs
·5· ·and the -- by responsibility he meant payment.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·So your reading of "sole responsibility of
·7· ·owner" means that GTT will pay for these things, but
·8· ·somebody else is responsible for them in addition to
·9· ·GTT?
10· · · ·A.· ·GTT is responsible for payment, but not for
11· ·the -- picking the contractors, assessing if the
12· ·contractors are any good --
13· · · ·Q.· ·So --
14· · · ·A.· ·-- you know.
15· · · ·Q.· ·So "sole responsibility" in your mind only
16· ·means payment?
17· · · ·A.· ·Yeah, like we're not sharing any of the
18· ·payment.· We're solely responsible for the payment.
19· · · ·Q.· ·What words should the drafter of this have
20· ·used to tell you, the person that signed this, that you
21· ·were going to be responsible for those things listed?
22· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
23· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. RHODES)· What could they have said
24· ·that would be more direct than "sole responsibility of
25· ·owner"?
193 to 196
Page 195
·1· ·some have small repairs, medium repairs, and they get
·2· ·reimbursed for them.· But we don't get involved in the
·3· ·repairs because we're not there.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· So let's say you were confused about
·5· ·the words "sole responsibility."· If we look at the
·6· ·next paragraph, does that say, "Owner acknowledges that
·7· ·contractor's obligations hereunder do not include the
·8· ·rendering of service, supervision, or furnishing of
·9· ·personnel in connection with the personal safety or
10· ·security of any persons within or about the property
11· ·nor does any insurance provided by contractor cover
12· ·such claims.· Contractor has no knowledge or expertise
13· ·as a guard or security service employees, no personnel
14· ·for that purpose, and contractor's employees do not
15· ·guard or protect customers or any other persons or
16· ·property against the intentional acts of third parties.
17· ·Owner shall determine in its discretion the extent to
18· ·which precautionary warnings and security devices or
19· ·services may be required to protect persons in and
20· ·about the property."
21· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
22· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· What's the question?
23· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. RHODES)· Did Mr. Hunt tell you
24· ·something that was contrary to that provision where GTT
25· ·acknowledged what Premier's obligations were?

Page 194 Page 196

·1· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form. ·1· · · ·A.· ·Well, I mean, that clause -- I think it comes
·2· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I mean, looking back, you ·2· ·from when, you know, the majority of, you know,
·3· ·can write it in many, many different ways that would be ·3· ·incidents in garages might include, you know,
·4· ·more clear.· But I understood the way it was written. ·4· ·vandalism, theft of property, you know, violence, acts
·5· ·And the way it was written it says that -- you know, ·5· ·of violence, or whatever.· So what they're saying is
·6· ·and the way it was portrayed to us is that we were not ·6· ·that, you know, the safety and security of people --
·7· ·going to be at the garage.· We were not going to be ·7· ·the way I read it, it's -- they're talking about, you
·8· ·doing repairs to the garage.· We would not be ·8· ·know, acts of violence and theft and all that and, you
·9· ·collecting money at the garage.· We would not be at the ·9· ·know -- and their insurance does not cover such claims.
10· ·garage at all.· They would be at the garage at all 10· ·And I would say, "Yeah, it does not cover theft of
11· ·times and they would, you know, make the repairs 11· ·vandalism," you know.· I guess when we were reading
12· ·happen.· And, you know, when it says "sole 12· ·that paragraph we were not considering an event like
13· ·responsibility" our responsibility is to pay for them, 13· ·this one.· I mean, most of the times when you're
14· ·because it was understood from day one that we were not 14· ·thinking in a garage you're thinking that the incidents
15· ·going to be at the garage.· We don't office at the 15· ·you're going to have is, you know, related to safety
16· ·garage like they do.· Their main office is in the 16· ·are, you know, where the garage was not properly lit or
17· ·garage.· The main office in Austin is in their garage. 17· ·there was theft of some sort or there was vandalism.
18· · · · · · · · ·So the understanding for that -- from 18· · · ·Q.· ·The next sentence states that, "It is agreed
19· ·that is that, you know, they would do the work.· They 19· ·that any actions, costs, claims, losses, expenses,
20· ·would hire the people.· They would vet the people. 20· ·and/or damages resulting from design or structural
21· ·They would pay the people, which they do in a regular 21· ·faults or defects are the responsibility of owner."
22· ·basis on many repairs, and then we reimburse them. 22· · · · · · · · ·Isn't that right?
23· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. RHODES)· Okay.· So let's -- 23· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
24· · · ·A.· ·That happens all the time.· I mean, every 24· · · ·Q.· ·Did Mr. Hunt tell you something contrary to
25· ·monthly report they must have repairs.· On most months 25· ·that agreement that you entered into?

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Sheldon David Kahn Vol 2
August 15, 2018 197 to 200
Page 197 Page 199
·1· · · ·A.· ·Yeah. ·1· ·too"?· Was there ever a conversation like that?
·2· · · ·Q.· ·What did he tell you? ·2· · · ·A.· ·In my conversations with Christina we never
·3· · · ·A.· ·That they are the best in the business and ·3· ·brought up the contract.
·4· ·that they would be on site and that we wouldn't have to ·4· · · ·Q.· ·Did Ms. Murray do anything that was outside of
·5· ·be on site.· So when I read that again, I say ·5· ·this contract that you know of?
·6· ·responsibility of the owner, had they told me, "Hey, ·6· · · ·A.· ·Did she do anything that's outside that
·7· ·this needs to be fixed," I'm responsible to pay.· But ·7· ·contract?
·8· ·that was -- needed to be fixed, that light bulb needed ·8· · · ·Q.· ·Yes.
·9· ·to be changed, you know, that's my responsibility. ·9· · · ·A.· ·No.
10· · · · · · · · ·But it was very clear from the beginning 10· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Do you understand what he
11· ·that Premier was going to have personnel on site and 11· ·was asking you?
12· ·that they not only had personnel on site, but they had 12· · · · · · · · ·I need to object to the form.
13· ·systems and they had, you know, many, many people 13· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Did she do something that
14· ·working for them in many, many cities in many, many 14· ·was against the contract?
15· ·garages.· And we are a company with no employees and we 15· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. RHODES)· Right.
16· ·are hiring them to, you know, be on site and manage the 16· · · ·A.· ·I mean, everything that she did was, you know,
17· ·garage. 17· ·authorized by the contract.· She failed to do things
18· · · · · · · · ·That's what he told me like, he said, 18· ·that she could have done, but that failure is not a --
19· ·"You don't have to show up on site.· We'll take care of 19· ·like that she did an action that was outside the scope
20· ·it."· I mean, the phrase he keeps using is, "We're the 20· ·of the contract.· She just didn't meet the scope of the
21· ·best in the business." 21· ·contract.
22· · · · · · · · ·It's like, "Okay." 22· · · ·Q.· ·When did she not meet the scope of the
23· · · ·Q.· ·Were there any e-mails between you and 23· ·contract?
24· ·Mr. Hunt or between Mr. O'Brien and Mr. Hunt or between 24· · · ·A.· ·I would say by not notifying us of the
25· ·you and anyone else at Premier or Mr. O'Brien or anyone 25· ·previous repairs and, you know, perhaps not suggesting

Page 198 Page 200

·1· ·else at Premier that expanded the responsibilities
·2· ·under this agreement?
·3· · · ·A.· ·Perhaps.· I don't recall.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·Did Mr. Hunt put in writing in e-mails or any
·5· ·other communication that his understanding of "sole
·6· ·responsibility of owner" was limited to owner just
·7· ·paying for things and actually Premier was going to be
·8· ·responsible for things contrary to the contract?
·9· · · ·A.· ·I don't recall him saying that in -- in those
10· ·words, but I do recall him saying, "We're the best in
11· ·the business.· We'll manage your garage."
12· · · ·Q.· ·Did Mr. Hunt ever put in an e-mail or
13· ·communicate in any other written form the part about
14· ·being the best in the business?
15· · · ·A.· ·Verbally he told me he was the best in the
16· ·business and that they would manage the garage.
17· ·Perhaps it's also in writing.· We would have to go back
18· ·to the -- to the e-mail record.· I don't recall.
19· · · ·Q.· ·Did you talk to Christina Murray about things
20· ·that Premier needed to do or was going to do that were
21· ·not addressed in this contract that's Exhibit 10?
22· · · ·A.· ·I don't know.· Maybe.
23· · · ·Q.· ·Did you tell her, "Look, Christina, I know the
24· ·contract says that GTT is solely responsible for
25· ·safety, but I want Premier to be responsible for safety
·1· ·at some point that we should have the cables checked
·2· ·out given that they have so much more experience than
·3· ·we do.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·Where in the contract did it state that
·5· ·Premier was to notify GTT of the previous repairs?
·6· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
·7· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· It's -- it's not stated,
·8· ·but it does say that they would run the garage in
·9· ·efficient manner.· And if we had repairs that were not
10· ·done in an efficient manner, then -- or if repairs --
11· ·if there were repairs that were made and they were not
12· ·done properly, then I would say that it wasn't running
13· ·in an efficient manner.· Failure to notify the new
14· ·owners of repairs that were not done in an efficient
15· ·manner would not be efficient.
16· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. RHODES)· Where does it say in the
17· ·contract that Premier was supposed to notify GTT about
18· ·the efficiency level of these cables?
19· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
20· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I would say the contract
21· ·implies the fact that, you know, they have personnel on
22· ·site and we don't.
23· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. RHODES)· Okay.· What else did
24· ·Christina Murray or anyone at GTT -- I'm sorry -- at
25· ·Premier do that was not addressed in the contract

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Sheldon David Kahn Vol 2
August 15, 2018
Page 201
·1· ·that's Exhibit 10?
·2· · · ·A.· ·My understanding would be that given that they
·3· ·are in the garage business they could have insisted
·4· ·that we do other inspections or other repairs after
·5· ·the -- the first incident.· There was no such
·6· ·discussion at all with the guys from Premier.· I said,
·7· ·"Does the garage look good to you?"
·8· · · · · · · · ·And, you know, they've -- they never told
·9· ·us, "Hey, in our opinion the garage should be looked
10· ·at," or, "In our opinion, you know, you should do
11· ·something different."· They never told us that we
12· ·should be doing something different, which I would
13· ·expect, you know, from somebody who was in the garage 13· ·don't have personnel."· GTT Parking, LP has zero
14· ·all the time and who knows how to manage garages and
15· ·manages dozens or hundreds of garages.· I don't know
16· ·how many they manage.
17· · · ·Q.· ·Where -- where in Exhibit 10 does it state
18· ·that Premier had those responsibilities?
19· · · ·A.· ·I mean, it's not -- it's not in this -- it
20· ·might not be in a specific clause, but it is the spirit
21· ·of the contract.· It's my understanding that the spirit
22· ·of the contract was that they were going to be on site
23· ·and tell us, given their experience, how to manage a
24· ·garage.
25· · · ·Q.· ·Is there a certain clause that tells you what
Page 202
·1· ·the spirit of the contract is that is different from
·2· ·this very clear statement that says, "Any structural,
·3· ·mechanical, electrical, or other installations or any
·4· ·alterations required by statutes or regulations,
·5· ·et cetera, shall be sole responsibility of owner"?
·6· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
·7· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I mean, we're not suing
·8· ·Premier for breach of the contract.
·9· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Just answer his question.
10· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. RHODES)· Well, you're talking about
11· ·the spirit of the contract and I'm trying to figure out
12· ·where you got this spirit of the contract, because when
13· ·I read the contract it seems very clear that these
14· ·things are sole responsibility of owner.· And you've
15· ·told me your -- your interpretation of "sole
16· ·responsibility" is different.· Now you're using a
17· ·different term.· You're talking about the spirit of the
18· ·contract, and I'm trying to figure out what you read in
19· ·this document that gave you the spirit of the contract?
20· · · ·A.· ·Just from my meetings before we purchased the
21· ·garage with Mr. Hunt.
22· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form to the last
23· ·question.
24· · · · · · · · ·MR. RHODES:· Okay.
25· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Same objection.· Sidebar too.
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
201 to 204
Page 203
·1· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· You said from where?· From
·2· ·where do I get the spirit of the contract?
·3· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. RHODES)· Yes.
·4· · · ·A.· ·From my meeting with Mr. Hunt.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Okay.· So did Mr. Hunt say, "We're
·6· ·going to present a contract to you," and in this
·7· ·contract what did he say?
·8· · · ·A.· ·He didn't say those words.· What he said was,
·9· ·you know, "We are very experienced.· We would be
10· ·managing this garage and we would really like to manage
11· ·this garage for you" was the understanding.
12· · · · · · · · ·I said, "Was it the understanding that we
14· ·employees, and so he was going to be doing the
15· ·management of the garage.
16· · · ·Q.· ·Did Mr. Hunt tell you that Premier was going
17· ·to take responsibility for structural, mechanical,
18· ·electrical, or other installations or any alterations
19· ·required by statutes or regulations pertaining to air
20· ·quality environmental protection, provisions, persons
21· ·with disabilities, or other similar governmental
22· ·requirements?
23· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
24· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· He didn't say those words.
25· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. RHODES)· Did he tell you that Premier
Page 204
·1· ·was going to take responsibility for structural
·2· ·elements of the garage?
·3· · · ·A.· ·He didn't say those words.· He didn't say
·4· ·that.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·What did he say about the cable system in the
·6· ·garage?· Did he say, "Premier is going to take
·7· ·responsibility for the cables that keep pedestrians
·8· ·from falling off of the garage"?
·9· · · ·A.· ·He didn't mention the cable system.
10· · · ·Q.· ·Does the Exhibit 10, the agreement, state that
11· ·Premier was to inspect the garage at any given time?
12· · · ·A.· ·It doesn't specifically say that.
13· · · ·Q.· ·Did you expect Premier to inspect the garage
14· ·at any particular time?
15· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
16· · · ·Q.· ·Why?
17· · · ·A.· ·Because they are on site.· They are supposed
18· ·to inspect it daily.
19· · · ·Q.· ·Why didn't you get that in the agreement then?
20· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
21· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· It's not in the agreement,
22· ·but that's --
23· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. RHODES)· Who told you that they were
24· ·going to inspect the garage daily?
25· · · ·A.· ·That's what managing a garage means.
YVer1f
 Sheldon David Kahn Vol 2
August 15, 2018 205 to 208
Page 205 Page 207
·1· · · ·Q.· ·Who told you that that's what managing a ·1· · · · · · · · ·I'm not an owner of multiple parking
·2· ·garage means? ·2· ·garages.· I own one parking garage and have never
·3· · · ·A.· ·Mr. Ryan hunt said -- ·3· ·managed a parking garage before and I don't manage this
·4· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Let him finish. ·4· ·parking garage.· So I hired a professional, well
·5· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Okay. ·5· ·established, multi-city, multi-garage management
·6· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. RHODES)· Who told you that managing a ·6· ·company to help us identify items of concern.· Of
·7· ·garage meant inspecting it daily? ·7· ·course, we are in charge of paying for them.· You know,
·8· · · ·A.· ·That's how I understand it. ·8· ·I wouldn't expect them as managers to pay for the
·9· · · ·Q.· ·Where did you obtain that understanding? ·9· ·repairs ultimately.· I mean, they could pay for repairs
10· · · ·A.· ·From my meeting with Mr. Hunt. 10· ·and we would reimburse them, but ultimately we're in
11· · · ·Q.· ·So did Mr. Hunt tell you that Premier was 11· ·charge of paying for all the repairs.
12· ·going to inspect the garage daily? 12· · · ·Q.· ·You assumed that Premier was going to inspect
13· · · ·A.· ·Mr. Hunt said that they would be on site 13· ·the garage daily, but that is not addressed in the
14· ·daily. 14· ·agreement that you entered into with Premier, correct?
15· · · ·Q.· ·Did Mr. Hunt tell you that Premier was going 15· · · ·A.· ·It's not in the agreement that was my
16· ·to inspect the garage daily? 16· ·understanding, yes.
17· · · ·A.· ·He didn't say those words. 17· · · ·Q.· ·Is there anyone other -- at -- anyone else at
18· · · ·Q.· ·Did anyone at Premier tell you that Premier 18· ·Premier, other than Ryan Hunt and Christina Murray,
19· ·was going to inspect the garage daily? 19· ·that you communicated with verbally or in writing?
20· · · ·A.· ·They didn't use those words. 20· · · ·A.· ·No.· Oh, before -- since -- before the Bowmer
21· · · ·Q.· ·What words did they use? 21· ·incident, like recently they've introduced another
22· · · ·A.· ·They didn't say that.· They said, "We are 22· ·person that works with Ryan, but unrelated to this
23· ·going to be at the garage daily." 23· ·case.
24· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· So no one at Premier told you that 24· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· So --
25· ·Premier was going to inspect the garage daily, though, 25· · · ·A.· ·They have a new regional manager.

Page 206 Page 208

·1· ·right?
·2· · · ·A.· ·Correct.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·Did anyone at Premier tell you that Premier
·4· ·was going to inspect the cable system around the
·5· ·perimeter of the garage?
·6· · · ·A.· ·No.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· So you and GTT assumed that Premier was ·7· · · ·A.· ·No.
·8· ·going to take responsibility of structural and
·9· ·mechanical installations at the garage.· But that was
10· ·not addressed in the agreement that's Exhibit 10,
11· ·correct?
12· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
13· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· That's not how we
14· ·understand it.· We would take responsibility of paying
15· ·for those.
16· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. RHODES)· What responsibility do you
17· ·think Premier was to take for structural -- structural
18· ·and mechanical installations?
19· · · ·A.· ·I mean, you know, looking back -- with the
20· ·benefit of looking back on it, the responsibility they
21· ·should have taken is that, you know, they're in the
22· ·parking industry and these accidents have happened in
23· ·other cities.· And looking back, they could have or
24· ·should have come back to us and said, "This is an item
25· ·of concern."
·1· · · ·Q.· ·But he came along well after the July 2017
·2· ·accident involving Ms. Bowmer?
·3· · · ·A.· ·Yeah, way after.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Is there anyone other than Mr. Hunt and
·5· ·Ms. Murray that you feel like made representations to
·6· ·GTT?
·8· · · · · · · · ·MR. RHODES:· Pass the witness.
·9· · · · · · · · · · · · ·EXAMINATION
10· ·BY MR. KURHAJEC:
11· · · ·Q.· ·Mr. Kahn, my name is Kurt Kurhajec.· I'm here
12· ·for Weitzman Management --
13· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· You need to put a mic on
14· ·there, MC.
15· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. KURHAJEC)· -- and I just have a couple
16· ·of questions for you.
17· · · · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Pas the mic.
18· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. KURHAJEC)· I guess the simplest way of
19· ·putting it, you know who Weitzman Management is and
20· ·what they do, right?
21· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
22· · · ·Q.· ·Did Weitzman Management amount the time of
23· ·'Ms. Bowmer's incident or any time before that have any
24· ·responsibility or involvement in the inspection,
25· ·maintenance, or repair of the cable barrier system

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Sheldon David Kahn Vol 2
August 15, 2018 209 to 212
Page 209 Page 211
·1· ·that's at issue in this case? ·1· ·Mr. Ryan Hunt and Ms. Christina Murray from Premier
·2· · · ·A.· ·No. ·2· ·Parking?
·3· · · ·Q.· ·That's all I have.· Thank you. ·3· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·4· · · · · · · · ·(Discussion off the record.) ·4· · · ·Q.· ·That type of procedure; that is, they being
·5· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Mr. Kahn, I have a few more ·5· ·the eyes and ears and making either a recommendation or
·6· ·questions based on some of the questions that you were ·6· ·an action is what GTT relied upon Premier to do?
·7· ·asked. ·7· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·8· · · · · · · · · · ·FURTHER EXAMINATION ·8· · · ·Q.· ·Is it true that -- strike that.
·9· ·BY MR. BREEN: ·9· · · · · · · · ·Have you become aware that Premier
10· · · ·Q.· ·Is it my understanding that prior to 10· ·Parking was involved with the previous owner in the
11· ·operating -- strike that. 11· ·assessment of the vehicle restraint system, at least
12· · · · · · · · ·Is it true that prior to operating the 12· ·generally?· You may not be familiar with all of the
13· ·garage in question at Littlefield, GTT had little to no 13· ·details, but you know in concept Premier Parking was
14· ·experience in the operation of a multilevel garage? 14· ·involved with repairs done to the vehicle restraint
15· · · ·A.· ·Correct. 15· ·system?
16· · · ·Q.· ·And that because GTT had little to no 16· · · ·A.· ·Now I know that.
17· ·experience in operating a multilevel garage, you 17· · · · · · · · ·MR. RHODES:· Objection, form.
18· ·consulted with Premier Parking, whom you considered to 18· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· And to be fair and clear to
19· ·be one of the experts in the industry with multiple 19· ·you, the fact that Premier Parking was involved and
20· ·garages and multiple cities and multiple levels of 20· ·that those repairs have been done was not made aware to
21· ·experience? 21· ·you at GTT until after Ms. Bowmer's incident, correct?
22· · · ·A.· ·Yes. 22· · · ·A.· ·Correct.
23· · · ·Q.· ·And that you at GTT were going to rely on 23· · · ·Q.· ·In other words, at no time prior to either
24· ·Premier Parking to be the eyes and ears for GTT at the 24· ·Mr. O'Connor's incident or Ms. Bowmer's incident did
25· ·facility since Premier was going to be there on a daily 25· ·anybody from Premier come to you at GTT and say, "Hey,

Page 210 Page 212

·1· ·basis? ·1· ·there's been issues with the vehicle restraint system
·2· · · ·A.· ·Yes. ·2· ·in the past under the previous owners that we are aware
·3· · · ·Q.· ·And that your understanding was that operating ·3· ·of"?
·4· ·and managing a garage required eyes and ears on a daily ·4· · · ·A.· ·Correct, no one did.
·5· ·basis at the garage to look for safety issues, right? ·5· · · ·Q.· ·And is it true that you, as the owner at GTT,
·6· · · ·A.· ·Yes. ·6· ·would expect that Premier would have come to you at
·7· · · ·Q.· ·And that in such and in order to protect the ·7· ·some point prior to Ms. Bowmer's incident and told you
·8· ·safety of people using the garage that type of daily ·8· ·about those issues?
·9· ·inspection needed to be done, correct? ·9· · · ·A.· ·I wish they had.
10· · · ·A.· ·Yes. 10· · · ·Q.· ·Not just that you wish they had, but that you
11· · · ·Q.· ·And you at GTT were going to rely upon Premier 11· ·believe under the agreement you had with Premier they
12· ·to do that type of daily inspection? 12· ·should have done that, right?
13· · · ·A.· ·Yes. 13· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
14· · · ·Q.· ·Were there actually instances where Premier 14· · · ·Q.· ·They should.· Premier should have come to you
15· ·would report back to somebody at GTT that because 15· ·at GTT and said, "As part of our responsibility and
16· ·Premier was at the facility they had noticed items and 16· ·duties this is what we were involved in, this is what
17· ·recommended that they be repaired? 17· ·we think the prudent best course of action would be to
18· · · ·A.· ·They would not report that directly to me. 18· ·make this garage safe," right?
19· · · ·Q.· ·Who would it be reported to, Mr. O'Brien? 19· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
20· · · ·A.· ·Well, first of all, they would repair it 20· · · ·Q.· ·And that never happened, did it --
21· ·themselves or find a contractor to repair it, and then 21· · · ·A.· ·Not --
22· ·it would be reported at the end of the month on the 22· · · ·Q.· ·-- until after Ms. Bowmer's incident?
23· ·expenses that they -- they paid for. 23· · · ·A.· ·Not that I'm aware of.
24· · · ·Q.· ·And that type of procedure, was that 24· · · ·Q.· ·Now, for instance, were you aware before
25· ·consistent with the oral understanding you had with 25· ·Ms. Bowmer's incident that there had been significant

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Sheldon David Kahn Vol 2
August 15, 2018 213 to 216
Page 213 Page 215
·1· ·enough issues with the vehicle restraint system that ·1· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Mr. Kahn, we're back on the
·2· ·the previous owner, with knowledge of Premier, had ·2· ·record.· We were going to look at Exhibit 28 and I
·3· ·hired consultant engineers to inspect and make some ·3· ·briefly misspoke on Exhibit 28.· Exhibit 28 is a
·4· ·type of recommendations regarding the vehicle restraint ·4· ·June 23rd, 2014 letter to Mr. Eric Herron at Stream
·5· ·system? ·5· ·Realty from Maritech Engineering.· Do you have a copy
·6· · · ·A.· ·Was I aware? ·6· ·of that in front of you?
·7· · · ·Q.· ·Yes, sir. ·7· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·8· · · ·A.· ·No. ·8· · · ·Q.· ·And I believe you testified that this
·9· · · ·Q.· ·That was not disclosed to you by either the ·9· ·deposition is the first that you've learned of and seen
10· ·previous owner or Premier, correct? 10· ·the Maritech Engineering letter that's Exhibit 28.· Is
11· · · ·A.· ·Not until after the litigation started. 11· ·that accurate?
12· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· Not until after Mr. Bowmer was 12· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
13· ·hurt, right? 13· · · ·Q.· ·Now, if Premier Parking was aware of this
14· · · ·A.· ·Yes. 14· ·letter and this issue, under your agreement with
15· · · · · · · · · (Exhibit No. 28 marked.) 15· ·Premier you certainly would have expected that Premier
16· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Now let me show you Exhibit 28 16· ·would have made you aware of it certainly before
17· ·to your deposition.· For instance, an example, before 17· ·Ms. Bowmer's incident, wouldn't you?
18· ·Ms. Bowmer's injuries were you ever made aware that the 18· · · · · · · · ·MR. RHODES:· Objection, form.
19· ·previous owner, with the knowledge of Premier, had 19· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· It's addressed to Stream.
20· ·hired Maritech Engineering to do some type of 20· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· I understand who it's
21· ·assessment of the vehicle restraint system? 21· ·addressed to.· My question was, if Premier was aware of
22· · · ·A.· ·This is the first time I've seen this 22· ·engineering analysis and problems with the vehicle
23· ·document. 23· ·barrier before your company bought the building, you
24· · · · · · · · ·MR. RHODES:· Objection, form. 24· ·would have expected that at some point prior to
25· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Okay.· Exhibit 28 is what 25· ·Ms. Bowmer's incident, certainly after Mr. O'Connor's

Page 214 Page 216

·1· ·you're referring to as "this document"?
·2· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·Exhibit 28 has been produced by Stream Realty,
·4· ·the previous owner, or an affiliate of the previous
·5· ·owner.· And Exhibit 28, you see, is a consulting
·6· ·engineer's report from Maritech Engineering, true?
·7· · · ·A.· ·That's what it looks to be.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·And do you see that in the first section of
·9· ·the background, Maritech Engineering is noting that
10· ·they're offering a letter proposal in response to
11· ·Stream Realty's request of June 17th, '24 (sic) for
12· ·structuring engineering consulting services related to
13· ·the Littlefield Garage?
14· · · ·A.· ·Would you like me to take a few minutes to
15· ·read the whole document?
16· · · ·Q.· ·Sure.· If you feel comfortable doing that, you
17· ·can.· I want you to --
18· · · ·A.· ·I've never seen this document before.
19· · · ·Q.· ·Yes, sir, please.· Let's go off the record and
20· ·you can take a look at that document.
21· · · · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· We're off the record,
22· ·2:00 p.m.
23· · · · · · ·(Recess from 2:00 p.m. to 2:17 p.m.)
24· · · · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Stand by.· Segment
25· ·No. 6.· Back on the record, 2:17.
·1· ·incident, Premier would have made you aware of its
·2· ·experience with any problems with the vehicle barrier
·3· ·system, true?
·4· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·5· · · · · · · · ·MR. RHODES:· Objection, form.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· And that did not happen, did
·7· ·it?
·8· · · ·A.· ·It did not happen.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·Now, in this exhibit, Exhibit 28, do you see
10· ·that the first paragraph notes that, "The intended
11· ·focus and intent of the project is the remediation of
12· ·the dilapidated vehicle barrier components in the
13· ·Littlefield Garage"?
14· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
15· · · ·Q.· ·At any time did Stream or Premier disclose to
16· ·you that at least one engineer had described the
17· ·vehicle barrier components in June of 2014 as
18· ·dilapidated?
19· · · ·A.· ·They never disclosed that to us.
20· · · ·Q.· ·Would you have expected that would have been
21· ·disclosed to you?
22· · · ·A.· ·Had they done the repair and inspected the
23· ·repair and the repair had been done properly.· But they
24· ·should have disclosed it to us.
25· · · ·Q.· ·So whether or not they ultimately hired

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Sheldon David Kahn Vol 2
August 15, 2018 217 to 220
Page 217 Page 219
·1· ·competent people to perform competent repairs, setting ·1· · · ·Q.· ·Yes, sir.
·2· ·that aside, at a minimum, you would have expected that ·2· · · ·A.· ·And repaired subsequently?
·3· ·both Stream and Premier would have disclosed to you ·3· · · ·Q.· ·Yes, sir.
·4· ·that at least one engineer told them that the vehicle ·4· · · ·A.· ·I would have checked all the repairs.
·5· ·barrier system was dilapidated in 2014, right? ·5· · · ·Q.· ·You would have hired somebody that was
·6· · · ·A.· ·Yes.· Especially Premier, yes. ·6· ·competent to actually look at all of the wires in the
·7· · · ·Q.· ·Why especially Premier? ·7· ·garage and check to make sure that they were repaired
·8· · · ·A.· ·Because they continued to manage the garage ·8· ·and in safe condition.· Is that accurate?
·9· ·and -- and Stream probably relied on them to manage the ·9· · · ·A.· ·Probably.
10· ·garage also -- 10· · · ·Q.· ·Now, in that final paragraph of the first page
11· · · ·Q.· ·Okay. 11· ·of Exhibit 28, it says, "In no case do the current
12· · · · · · · · ·MR. RHODES:· Objection, responsiveness. 12· ·condition rise to the level of vehicle or pedestrian
13· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· -- I would think. 13· ·protection required in current code and the current
14· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Now, the report, Exhibit 28, 14· ·standard of care."
15· ·in the bottom of the first page has some descriptions 15· · · · · · · · ·Did I read that correctly?
16· ·of the wires, et cetera, that were part of the 16· · · ·A.· ·You read that correctly.
17· ·dilapidated vehicle barrier components.· Do you see 17· · · ·Q.· ·So this report indicates that not only was the
18· ·that last paragraph? 18· ·dilapidated vehicle barrier not up to the current code,
19· · · ·A.· ·Yes. 19· ·but it wasn't up to the current standard of care
20· · · ·Q.· ·It says, "Some nominal barriers in the form of 20· ·either, true?
21· ·stressed wire stand spaces at approximately 12 inches 21· · · ·A.· ·That's what the engineer says.
22· ·do exist, but have fallen into disrepair to the extent 22· · · ·Q.· ·Now, did anybody from Premier or Stream ever
23· ·that that offer little, if any, hope of vehicle 23· ·indicate to you that they had been told by an engineer
24· ·restrain and in several cases virtually no pedestrian 24· ·that the vehicle restraint system was not only up to
25· ·safety." 25· ·the current code, but it wasn't up to the current

Page 218 Page 220

·1· · · · · · · · ·Did I read that correctly?
·2· · · ·A.· ·I see that.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·At any time did anybody from Premier or Stream
·4· ·alert you that an engineer had informed them that one
·5· ·or more of the barrier wires offered little, if any,
·6· ·hope of vehicle restraint?
·7· · · ·A.· ·They never -- they never brought that to my
·8· ·attention.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·For instance, after the O'Connor incident
10· ·where he plunged off of the garage, but was not
11· ·injured, would you have expected that somebody from
12· ·Premier would have alerted you that within a couple
13· ·years prior to Mr. O'Connor's incident there had been
14· ·at least one engineer who had indicated the wires in
15· ·question offered little, if any, hope of vehicle
16· ·restraint?
17· · · ·A.· ·Yes, I expect them to warn me.
18· · · · · · · · ·MR. RHODES:· Objection, form.
19· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· And if, in fact, somebody from
20· ·Premier or Stream had alerted you after Mr. O'Connor's
21· ·incident that they had been told the vehicle barrier
22· ·system was dilapidated, what as a reasonable owner
23· ·would you have done?
24· · · ·A.· ·If they would have told me that the system was
25· ·dilapidated in 2014?
·1· ·standard of care either?
·2· · · ·A.· ·They never told me that.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·And would you have expected that would have
·4· ·been communicated to you, at a minimum, after the
·5· ·O'Connor incident?
·6· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·And by "communicated to you," I mean
·8· ·specifically communicated to you by somebody at
·9· ·Premier?
10· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
11· · · ·Q.· ·And would your answer be similar to your
12· ·previous answer, which is, if somebody had communicated
13· ·to you that they had been made aware that the vehicle
14· ·restraint system was not up to either current code or
15· ·current standard of care, you would have acted as a
16· ·responsible owner and hired a competent person to make
17· ·sure that it was.· Is that accurate?
18· · · ·A.· ·If I would have been made aware that it was
19· ·nonconforming with the code, but legal, because a lot
20· ·of things the code changes and maybe they don't meet
21· ·the code, but it's legal and safe, we wouldn't have,
22· ·you know, upgraded the garage.· If I would have known
23· ·that -- and I don't know what the current standard of
24· ·care is and I don't know what -- what that means to
25· ·that engineer.· But in any event, had Premier said to

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Sheldon David Kahn Vol 2
August 15, 2018 221 to 224
Page 221 Page 223
·1· ·us, "Hey, we have this issue," we would have spent more ·1· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh, yes.
·2· ·time on it. ·2· · · ·Q.· ·And that CB Construction, I'll represent to
·3· · · · · · · · · (Exhibit No. 29 marked.) ·3· ·you, is the Curtis Brown Construction who ultimately
·4· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Let me show you Exhibit 29. ·4· ·did some work on the cables.· Are you familiar at all
·5· ·Exhibit 29, likewise, has the same June 27, 2014 report ·5· ·with Curtis Brown Construction?
·6· ·attached to it.· And in this e-mail it discusses the ·6· · · ·A.· ·No.· I mean, I -- through this litigation I've
·7· ·fact that Stream had several subcontractors reject to ·7· ·heard their name, but I had never worked with them
·8· ·bid on repairs to the vehicle restraint system based on ·8· ·before.
·9· ·the fact that the garage is not up to current codes. ·9· · · ·Q.· ·Fair enough.· The second listed is VSL
10· ·Do you see that? 10· ·(Ft Worth big-boys) - wade Smith.· Are you familiar
11· · · ·A.· ·Okay.· This is like a pretty lengthy exhibit 11· ·with that entity?
12· ·and I've never seen this exhibit before. 12· · · ·A.· ·No.
13· · · ·Q.· ·Well, do you see the part that I just read to 13· · · ·Q.· ·It says, "Previously looked at this with
14· ·you that's the first sentence of it?· It says -- second 14· ·Jessica/ Nate.· Will not do the work unless it is a
15· ·sentence, "We have had several subs reject to bid on 15· ·fully engineered barrier system to meet current code.
16· ·repairs based upon the fact that the garage is not up 16· ·I expect this will double the price and will likely
17· ·to current codes"? 17· ·cost at least $125K."
18· · · ·A.· ·I see that. 18· · · · · · · · ·Did I read that correctly?
19· · · ·Q.· ·Did anybody from Stream or Premier ever 19· · · ·A.· ·You did.
20· ·disclose to you that several subs had rejected to bid 20· · · ·Q.· ·Do you know a Jessica that was involved with
21· ·on repairs to the vehicle restraint system based upon 21· ·the garage at Littlefield?
22· ·the fact that the garage is not up to current code? 22· · · ·A.· ·No.
23· · · ·A.· ·No. 23· · · ·Q.· ·Is -- do you know anybody -- strike that.
24· · · ·Q.· ·Would you have expected, at a minimum, Premier 24· · · · · · · · ·Was at any time it ever disclosed to your
25· ·to disclose that to you? 25· ·company that four or more entities or contractors were

Page 222 Page 224

·1· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·2· · · · · · · · · (Exhibit No. 30 marked.)
·3· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Let me show you Exhibit 30.
·4· ·Exhibit 30 is an e-mail exchanged in July of 2014
·5· ·relating to the Littlefield mall garage barrier cable
·6· ·replacement.· Do you see that in the title?
·7· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh, yes.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·Would you turn to the second page with me.· Up
·9· ·at the top of the second page, which is Bates labeled
10· ·128 in the bottom corner, it says in an exchange from
11· ·Lance Sallis that he had been working on this for some
12· ·time to get a price for the work and it's been a
13· ·difficult task to find someone willing to do the work
14· ·who can do it in a reasonable timeframe and who will do
15· ·it as a repair cable replacement, not a complete
16· ·redesign to current code.· Do you see that?
17· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
18· · · ·Q.· ·And then there is a summary of the results
19· ·listed of what has been worked on for, according to the
20· ·e-mail, some time below it.· Do you see that?
21· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
22· · · ·Q.· ·The first one is listed as CB Construction,
23· ·which then in red is disclosed as the future
24· ·father-in-law of the author of the e-mail, Eric Herron.
25· ·Do you see that?
·1· ·contacted about doing work on the dilapidated vehicle
·2· ·barrier system?
·3· · · ·A.· ·No.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·Would you expect that that would have been
·5· ·disclosed to you?
·6· · · ·A.· ·Yes, I wish it had.
·7· · · · · · · · · (Exhibit No. 31 marked.)
·8· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Finally, let me show you
·9· ·Exhibit 31.· In the last e-mail you and I looked at
10· ·that was Exhibit 30, a note that the Fort Worth
11· ·big-boys - Wade Smith had refused to do the work unless
12· ·it is fully engineered barrier system to meet current
13· ·code.· Do you recall that provision I read to you.
14· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
15· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And it said, "Previously looked at this
16· ·with Jessica/ Nate"?
17· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
18· · · ·Q.· ·And do you see in Exhibit 31 there is a
19· ·Jessica Wright that is the author of the e-mail?
20· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
21· · · ·Q.· ·And Exhibit 31 is a copy of an e-mail --
22· ·pardon me here.· Let me give it to everybody.· My
23· ·apologies.· Let me stop while everybody gets their
24· ·copies.
25· · · · · · · · ·MR. RHODES:· Sorry.

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Sheldon David Kahn Vol 2
August 15, 2018
Page 225
·1· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· No, no.· It's my fault.
·2· · · · · · · · ·MR. KURHAJEC:· There you go.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Let me give everybody a
·4· ·second, Mr. Kahn, to take a peek at 31.
·5· · · · · · · · ·So previously I asked you if you
·6· ·recognized whether the term or name Jessica had been
·7· ·involved with the Littlefield Garage.· Does Exhibit 31
·8· ·jog or refresh your memory about Jessica Wright from
·9· ·Premier Parking being involved with the Littlefield
10· ·Garage?
11· · · ·A.· ·I've never met Jessica Wright.
12· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Do you see in the top of 31 that
13· ·Jessicawright@premierparking.com (sic) is the author of
14· ·this particular e-mail?
15· · · ·A.· ·I see that.
16· · · ·Q.· ·If Jessica Wright in Exhibit 31 is the same
17· ·Jessica that is referred to in Exhibit 30 as meeting
18· ·with the big boys from Fort Worth who refused to do the
19· ·work unless it was fully engineered, would you have
20· ·expected somebody at Premier to disclose that to you?
21· · · ·A.· ·That one contractor refused to do the work?
22· · · ·Q.· ·One or more.
23· · · ·A.· ·I would have -- if one contractor refused to
24· ·do the work or -- I don't think that that would be
25· ·something that I expected them to -- to disclose.
Page 226
·1· · · ·Q.· ·And what about if that contractor refused to
·2· ·do the work because it wasn't going to be fully
·3· ·engineered and brought up to code?
·4· · · ·A.· ·If it was one contractor, I don't think that
·5· ·that would be that material, that I would expect them
·6· ·to disclose that.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·And what if it was up to four?
·8· · · ·A.· ·For four contractors to refuse to do the work
·9· ·because of the -- it's not current code, yes.
10· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Now, in this e-mail, Exhibit 31,
11· ·Ms. Wright is writing to the then owner of the
12· ·property, the garage, and talking about performing work
13· ·in-house much cheaper than Curtis Brown, and that
14· ·includes work for wheel stops, relocating existing
15· ·wheel stops, et cetera.· Do you see that?
16· · · ·A.· ·"I can perform the work in-house."· So Premier
17· ·Parking would be performing the work in-house.
18· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· You see that?
19· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.
20· · · ·Q.· ·Now, is that an example of what you were
21· ·talking about in your previous testimony when you were
22· ·talking about the relationship and expertise with
23· ·Premier for Premier to be able to do certain things at
24· ·the garage?
25· · · ·A.· ·Correct.
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
225 to 228
Page 227
·1· · · ·Q.· ·And one of those, obviously, was to do work on
·2· ·the -- or components of the vehicle restraint system as
·3· ·indicated in Exhibit 31?
·4· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.· I mean, it seems like they proposed to
·5· ·do some -- to perform some the work in-house.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·And is this 31 an example of what you were
·7· ·telling the jury about of how you would have relied on
·8· ·Premier's expertise in terms of things such as repairs
·9· ·to the vehicle restraint system?
10· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
11· · · ·Q.· ·Would you look at the big notebook with me
12· ·there, sir.· And turn to Page -- that is Exhibit 16, I
13· ·believe.· And turn to Page 1505.· There's page numbers
14· ·in the bottom right corner.· It's only about 20 or so
15· ·pages in.
16· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.
17· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Do you have 1505 on the bottom right
18· ·corner there?· Yes, sir, that's it.· Thank you.
19· · · · · · · · ·This particular section of the City of
20· ·Austin records appears to be a synopsis of the letters
21· ·and e-mails that are contained behind it.· It's some
22· ·type of computerized log that was done, just to give
23· ·you some context of what we're looking at.· I only have
24· ·a very few questions for you regarding that.
25· · · · · · · · ·This page, 1505, notes that on July 13th
Page 228
·1· ·of 2017 John Hale from the City met with property
·2· ·manager, Carla Salas with Weitzman and with parking
·3· ·manager, Christina Murray, with Premier Parking.· And
·4· ·it appears as if they were calling some fence companies
·5· ·to secure the missing and damaged guards on the alley
·6· ·side of the garage, but have been unsuccessful.
·7· · · · · · · · ·Were you involved with or aware of the
·8· ·efforts by Weitzman and Premier, as reflected in that
·9· ·entry, to get fence companies to secure missing and
10· ·damaged guards?
11· · · ·A.· ·What's a -- what's a missing -- what's a
12· ·guard?
13· · · ·Q.· ·I assume that they mean some type of exposed
14· ·area where somebody or something can fall, but I don't
15· ·know.· I wasn't Mr. Hale?
16· · · ·A.· ·I don't know.
17· · · ·Q.· ·So you may not be familiar with that.
18· · · ·A.· ·Yeah, I'm not familiar with this.
19· · · ·Q.· ·Were you familiar that the City actually put
20· ·up some temporary fencing or guarding and then
21· ·ultimately billed your company either directly or
22· ·indirectly for that?
23· · · ·A.· ·I'm not aware of that.
24· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Were you aware that the City filed a
25· ·lien relating to the billing of that work for fencing
YVer1f
 Sheldon David Kahn Vol 2
August 15, 2018
Page 229
·1· ·that the City did?
·2· · · ·A.· ·I'm not aware of that.· I would be surprised
·3· ·if they filed a lien.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Mr. Hale in the -- Page 1506, the next
·5· ·part of his entry there at the top, says that he
·6· ·discussed a similar incident with Ms. Salas and
·7· ·Ms. Murray, that being the O'Connor incident, and he
·8· ·told them with the two incidents they may want to
·9· ·consider upgrading or reinforcing the metal cables
10· ·currently in place.
11· · · · · · · · ·Did either Ms. Salas or Ms. Murray ever
12· ·pass on to you or GTT the recommendations of the City
13· ·that were given to them shortly after the Bowmer
14· ·incident?· And it may be that they interfaced with
15· ·Mr. O'Brien and you weren't involved.· So to be fair to
16· ·you, I'm just asking.
17· · · ·A.· ·So this is -- how many days is this after the
18· ·incident.
19· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· It's the day of.
20· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· The day of.
21· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· The day of the incident, yes,
22· ·sir.
23· · · ·A.· ·Okay.· What was your question?
24· · · ·Q.· ·My question is, did either Ms. Salas or
25· ·Ms. Murray ever pass on what the investigator told them
Page 230
·1· ·shortly after the incident occurred about reinforcing
·2· ·the metal cables?
·3· · · ·A.· ·I'm hazy about memories on that day.· You
·4· ·know, a lot of people were -- everybody was talking
·5· ·with everybody and a lot of people had, you know,
·6· ·opinions.· At that time -- at that point if the guy
·7· ·from the City said that, said, "You might want to
·8· ·consider upgrading," that would be an opinion, you
·9· ·know.· And, consequently, we did a rigorous study with
10· ·Walker Engineering, you know.
11· · · ·Q.· ·Yes, sir.· Thank you.· Would you look at 1507
12· ·with me, just a couple pages further along in the book.
13· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.
14· · · ·Q.· ·In the middle of the page, the 7 --
15· ·"July 19th, 2017, John Hale."· Then it says,
16· ·"July 24th, 2017 Follow-up Inspection" right in the
17· ·middle.· Do you see that?
18· · · ·A.· ·July.
19· · · ·Q.· ·It's on the left-hand column.· It says
20· ·July 19.· See right over here?
21· · · ·A.· ·Okay.
22· · · ·Q.· ·You got that?· It said -- it starts out with,
23· ·"I met with the building official," et cetera?
24· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.
25· · · ·Q.· ·And then it says, "We found the following,"
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
229 to 232
Page 231
·1· ·colon?
·2· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·See that?
·4· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·Now, at the time in July 19th of 2017, were
·6· ·you aware that the City found that the cable system had
·7· ·been repaired on three floors without obtaining a
·8· ·permit?
·9· · · ·A.· ·Was I aware of that?
10· · · ·Q.· ·Yes, sir.
11· · · ·A.· ·No.
12· · · ·Q.· ·And did you rely on Premier to tell you guys
13· ·at your company whether or not you needed to obtain a
14· ·permit to do the cable system repairs that had been
15· ·done on three floors?
16· · · ·A.· ·Cable system repairs?· I would think so.
17· · · ·Q.· ·Do you have an explanation for why there had
18· ·been repairs to the cable system on three floors
19· ·without obtaining a city permit?
20· · · ·A.· ·Well, it's hard to answer that question
21· ·because I don't know the dates of those repairs or what
22· ·repairs they're talking about.
23· · · ·Q.· ·Do you have any explanation for why any
24· ·repairs would have been done to the cable system on any
25· ·floor without obtaining a permit?
Page 232
·1· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
·2· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· You know, I don't know if a
·3· ·repair requires a permit or not.· That -- I don't know
·4· ·those things.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Okay.· It goes on to note that
·6· ·one of the findings was that the guard spacing was
·7· ·greater than nine inches in several areas of the
·8· ·perimeter and interior cables.· And you understand that
·9· ·being greater than nine inches was not an acceptable
10· ·gap in the cables, correct?
11· · · ·A.· ·I don't know if it's nine or 9-1/2.· That was
12· ·the 1970s code.
13· · · ·Q.· ·So were you relying, sir, on Premier to
14· ·inspect and know whether or not the guard spacing
15· ·exceeded even the 1970s code of nine inches?
16· · · ·A.· ·Yeah, they would know more than we would.
17· · · ·Q.· ·So if, in fact, the guard spacing was greater
18· ·than even the 1970s code, you would have expected
19· ·Premier to notice that?
20· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
21· · · ·Q.· ·It goes on to state that, "One of the findings
22· ·was several cables were loose in several areas of the
23· ·perimeter and interior cables."
24· · · · · · · · ·Do you see that?
25· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
YVer1f
 Sheldon David Kahn Vol 2
August 15, 2018
Page 233
·1· · · ·Q.· ·Is that something that you were relying on
·2· ·Premier to notice and fix?
·3· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·Would you turn to the next page?
·5· · · ·A.· ·But by "fix," I mean we would pay for the
·6· ·fixing.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·Yes, sir.· As described in the process earlier
·8· ·by you, if I understand correctly, it could be one of
·9· ·two ways.· Either Premier did it, paid for it, and was
10· ·reimbursed or Premier could do it and you would pay for
11· ·it directly?
12· · · ·A.· ·Yeah, or they could do it and take it off from
13· ·the funds that they collect from customers.
14· · · ·Q.· ·That would be sort of a self-reimbursement
15· ·process.· They would take it off of the funds at the
16· ·end of the month that were -- had been collected for
17· ·that month from the customers?
18· · · ·A.· ·That's -- the majority of repairs were handled
19· ·that way.
20· · · ·Q.· ·Do you have any knowledge of why the repairs
21· ·done on Level 9 after the O'Connor incident were not
22· ·permitted?
23· · · ·A.· ·My understanding is that we tried to get a
24· ·permit and that the City told us that they don't issue
25· ·permits for repairs like that.
Page 234
·1· · · ·Q.· ·And your understanding of that is from whom?
·2· · · ·A.· ·Sean O'Brien.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·If, in fact, there were dangerous conditions
·4· ·regarding the vehicle restraint system prior to
·5· ·Ms. Bowmer's incident, would you have expected that
·6· ·Premier would have noticed and alerted you to that?
·7· · · ·A.· ·I wish they had, yes.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·Thank you, Mr. Kahn.· I appreciate your time.
·9· · · · · · · · ·MR. RHODES:· Thanks.
10· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· You're welcome, sir.
11· · · · · · · · · · ·FURTHER EXAMINATION
12· ·BY MR. RHODES:
13· · · ·Q.· ·Mr. Kahn, you don't know whether Premier
14· ·received a copy of Exhibit 28, the June 23rd, 2014
15· ·letter from Mr. Donoghue at Maritech, do you?
16· · · ·A.· ·Today is the first day I've seen that letter,
17· ·so I would have not -- no, I don't know who received
18· ·that letter.
19· · · ·Q.· ·If you look at Exhibit 31, the repairs that
20· ·were conducted that were the subject of Exhibit 31 have
21· ·nothing at all to do with the cable barrier system, do
22· ·they?
23· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
24· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· They don't seem to have to
25· ·do anything with cables, but the wheel stops are part
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
233 to 236
Page 235
·1· ·of the restraint system.
·2· · · · · · · · ·MR. RHODES:· Pass the witness.
·3· · · · · · · · ·MR. KURHAJEC:· Nothing further.
·4· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Noting further.
·5· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Reserve our questions for
·6· ·time of trial.
·7· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Thank you, Mr. Kahn.
·8· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Thank you.
·9· · · · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Off the record, 2:46.
10· · · · · · (Proceedings concluded at 2:46 p.m.)
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 236
·1· · · · · · · · · · CHANGES AND SIGNATURE
· · ·WITNESS NAME: SHELDON DAVID KAHN
·2· ·DATE OF DEPOSITION: AUGUST 15, 2018
·3· ·PAGE· ·LINE· · · · · · ·CHANGE· · · · · · REASON
·4· ·_______________________________________________________
·5· ·_______________________________________________________
·6· ·_______________________________________________________
·7· ·_______________________________________________________
·8· ·_______________________________________________________
·9· ·_______________________________________________________
10· ·_______________________________________________________
11· ·_______________________________________________________
12· ·_______________________________________________________
13· ·_______________________________________________________
14· ·_______________________________________________________
15· ·_______________________________________________________
16· ·_______________________________________________________
17· ·_______________________________________________________
18· ·_______________________________________________________
19· ·_______________________________________________________
20· ·_______________________________________________________
21· ·_______________________________________________________
22· ·_______________________________________________________
23· ·_______________________________________________________
24· ·_______________________________________________________
25· ·_______________________________________________________
 Sheldon David Kahn Vol 2
August 15, 2018
Page 237
·1· ·_______________________________________________________
·2· ·_______________________________________________________
·3· ·_______________________________________________________
·4· · · · · · I, SHELDON DAVID KAHN, have read the foregoing
· · ·deposition and hereby affix my signature that same is
·5· ·true and correct, except as noted above.
·6
·7
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·_______________________________
·8· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·SHELDON DAVID KAHN
·9
10· ·THE STATE OF __________)
· · ·COUNTY OF _____________)
11
12· · · ·Before me, ___________________________, on this day
13· ·personally appeared SHELDON DAVID KAHN, known to me (or
14· ·proved to me under oath or through
15· ·___________________________) (description of identity
16· ·card or other document) to be the person whose name is
17· ·subscribed to the foregoing instrument and acknowledged
18· ·to me that they executed the same for the purposes and
19· ·consideration therein expressed.
20· · · ·Given under my hand and seal of office this
21· ·__________ day of ________________________, __________.
22
23
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·_______________________________
24· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·THE STATE OF___________________
25· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·COMMISSION EXPIRES:____________
237 to 240
Page 239
·1· · · ·Mr. Sean E. Breen - 2 hrs. 45 min.
· · · · ·Ms. Tasha Barnes -
·2· · · ·Mr. Christopher L. Rhodes - 50 min.
· · · · ·Mr. Curtis J. Kurhajec - 1 min.
·3
·4· · · ·That pursuant to information given to the
·5· ·deposition officer at the time said testimony was
·6· ·taken, the following includes counsel for all parties
·7· ·of record:
·8· · · ·Mr. Sean E. Breen, Attorney for Plaintiff;
· · · · ·Ms. Tasha Barnes, Attorney for Defendants GTT
·9· ·Parking, LP, Sheldon David Kahn;
· · · · ·Mr. Christopher L. Rhodes, Attorney for Defendant
10· ·Premier Parking of Tennessee, LLC;
· · · · ·Mr. Curtis J. Kurhajec, Attorney for Defendant
11· ·Weitzman Management Corporation.
12· · · ·I further certify that I am neither counsel for,
13· ·related to, nor employed by any of the parties or
14· ·attorneys in the action in which this proceeding was
15· ·taken, and further that I am not financially or
16· ·otherwise interested in the outcome of the action.
17· · · ·Further certification requirements pursuant to Rule
18· ·203 of TRCP will be certified to after they have
19· ·occurred.
20
21
22
23
24
25

Page 238 Page 240

·1· · · · · · · · · · ·NO. D-1-GN-17-004456 ·1· · · ·Certified to by me this ______ of _____________,
·2· ·CHRISTI J. BOWMER,· · · · ·) IN THE DISTRICT COURT ·2· ·2018.
· · · · ·Plaintiff,· · · · · · ·) ·3
·3· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · )
·4
· · ·VS.· · · · · · · · · · · · ) TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS
·5
·4· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · )
· · ·GTT PARKING, LP, SHELDON· ·) ·6

·5· ·DAVID KAHN, PREMIER· · · · ) · · · · · · · · · · · · · · Kim Seibert, Texas CSR 4589

· · ·PARKING OF TENNESSEE,· · · ) ·7· · · · · · · · · · · · · Expiration Date 12-31-2018
·6· ·LLC, and WEITZMAN· · · · · ) · · · · · · · · · · · · · · U.S. Legal Support, Inc.
· · ·MANAGEMENT CORPORATION,· · ) ·8· · · · · · · · · · · · · 701 Brazos, Suite 380
·7· · · ·Defendants.· · · · · · ) 353RD JUDICIAL DISTRICT
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · Austin, Texas· 78701
·8
·9· · · · · · · · · · · · · Firm Registration 10558
· · · · · · · · · · ·REPORTER'S CERTIFICATION
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · Expiration Date 12-31-2018
·9· · · · · · · ORAL AND VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF
· · · · · · · · · · · · · GTT PARKING, LP 10
10· · · · · · · · · · ·(SHELDON DAVID KAHN) 11· ·Job No. 4-AUSTIN 274347 KS
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·VOLUME 2 12
11· · · · · · · · · · · ·AUGUST 15, 2018 13
12· · · ·I, KIM SEIBERT, Certified Shorthand Reporter in and 14
13· ·for the State of Texas, hereby certify to the
15
14· ·following:
16
15· · · ·That the witness, SHELDON DAVID KAHN, was duly
16· ·sworn by the officer and that the transcript of the 17
17· ·oral deposition is a true record of the testimony given 18
18· ·by the witness; 19
19· · · ·That the deposition transcript was submitted on 20
20· ·_______________, 2018, to the witness or to the 21
21· ·attorney for the witness for examination, signature and
22
22· ·return to me by _________________, 2018;
23
23· · · ·That the amount of time used by each party at the
24· ·deposition is as follows: 24

25 25

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100
Exhibit T
.·-. .. " .... .,-,, ''·l 1--·--:···-·-:.- -----· ._. --- - . - -...--- -- ·1 . .. ,_ .-.-- ...- . -.-." .. . . . . ··-1 . ~. -.- ·.· . .. , ·1 r ·-·-.-.-.-.--•..

EXHIBIT

Littlefield Garage -508 Brazos St.

/0
SERVICE CONTRACT

Parking Management

THCS SERVICE CONTRACT (the "Agreement"), dated as of September 8, 2015, and between,
GIT Parking LP (hereinafter refe1Ted to as "Owner"), and Premier Parking of Tennessee, LLC
(hereinafter referred to as ''Contractor") (all references hereinafter to 'Manager" means Owner or its
designated property manager) is executing this Agreement solely in its capacity as managing agent
for Owner, and Manager is authorizedtoexecutethisAgreementonbehalfofOwner.

WITNESSETH

WHEREAS, Owner desires to avail itself of the services of Contractor to provide Parking
Management Service for that certain property located at 508 Brazos St. (the 'Property"), and Contractor
is willing to so act,

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises herein contained the parties agree as
follows:

I. TERM:

Owner hereby engages Contractor as an independent contractor, to perfonn and provide the Service
hereinafter described for a period of twelve months, commencing on September 11 2015, and
expiring on September 11, 2016. Owner or Manager, may terminate this agreement (a) immediately
upon written notice to contractor in the event of the sale of all or any portion of the Property, (b)
immediately upon written notice to Contractor in the event of default by Contractor under this
Agreement or (c) at any time by giving Contractor thirty (30) days prior written notice of Owner's
election to terminate. Contractor may terminate this Agreement to be effective on the next annual
anniversary date of the commencement of this Agreement,provided that Contractor provides Manager
written notice at least ninety (90) days prior to such annual anniversary date of the commencement of
this Agreement.

2. SERVICES TO BEPERFORMED:

For the consideration hereinafter set forth in Paragraph Number 3 hereof, Contractor agrees to
perform contractor services for the Property in accordance with the schedule and in the manner
specified in tl1e specifications which are attached hereto as "Exhibit A" and 'ExhibitB"-Operating
Parameters", both made a parthereofby reference (the "Service").

3. CONSIDERATION:

During the term of this Agreement, Manager shall pay Contractor the sum set forth in Section 2 of
Exhibit B per month, plus applicable sales tax, for the Service.

4. RELATIONSHIP OFTHEPARTIES:

Contractor does hereby acknowledge, represent and warrant that it is an independent contractor in its
relationship with Owner. In no event and/or under no circumstance shall Contractor, in the
performance of the Service be deemed or considered to be acting as a servant, agent, or employee of
Owner or Manager. Contractor agrees that it is solely responsible for all payments due or to become
·---_, ... --- .. --..• --··1 . ·-1 - .' . ..- . . . ·- ...·.._.,.. - ..•'] ,. -.--.~---. ,._. ···. ·-1 ·.·.·' . ·.. -· •. -.•·-.•.·· .•- ·.--- ·1

due to all its employees, or material suppliers including the withholding of appropriate taxes and the
compliance with any and all worker's compensation laws or similar employer obligations or
requirements with respect to its employees. Contractor acknowledges that (a) Manager has been
hired by Owner to manage the Property, (b) Manager is not affiliated with Owner, (c) Manager does
not have an ownership interest in the Property or Owner, and (d) Manager is acting under this
Agreement solely as the managing agent for Owner and not on Manager's own behalf:

5. PERSONNEL:

Contractor shall supply an adequate number of employees who have been trained and are competent
to perform the services required hereunder. The personnel provided shall be supervised and directed
by a supervisor, who shall be trained and duly qualified to act in such capacity. All personnel shall be
properly uniformed or suitably attired. Contractor agrees to maintain good order and shall be
responsible for the good behavior of its employees while in, on or about the Property. In the event
that Owner or Manager in the exercise of its reasonable discretion shall notify Contractor in writing
that Contractor's employee is unacceptable or unsatisfactory, Contractor immediately shall remove
such employee from the work force at the Property, and Contractor shall supply a replacement
therefor.

6. SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT:

Any and all supplies, equipment, uniforms and/or materials whatsoever, which may be necessary to
perform the Service, shall be furnished by Contractor pursuant to the terms hereof. All materials and
supplies shall be of a quality in keeping with the Budget

7. COMPLIANCE WITHLAWSANDREGULATIONS:

Contractor agrees to comply with all Federal, State and Local laws, ordinances and/or rules and
regulations in connection with the performance of the Service under this Agreement. fu addition,
Contractor agrees to provide to Owner a copy of the Texas Sales and Use Tax Permit which is
attached hereto as ''Exhibit G". ·

8. AGREEMENT OF INDEMNITY AND INSURANCE:

Contractor shall fully defend, indemnify, andhold harmless Manager and Owner, and their respective
directors, officers, members, partners, shareholders, agents, affiliates, subsidiaries and employees
(collectively, the 'Other Indemnified Parties'1, from and against any and all claims, demands,
liabilities, causes of action, suits,judgments, and expenses (including attorney's fees), for any loss
arising out of or incident to or in connection with the perfo1mance of the Service or resulting from
Contractor's failure to perform its other obligations under this Agreement ( other than a loss arising
from the sole or gross negligence ofManager, Owner or the Other Indemnified Parties) even though
caused or aUeged to be caused by the joint, comparative, or concurrent negligence or fault ofManager
and Owner or the Other Indemnified Parties, and even though any such claim, cause of action, or suit
is based upon or alleged to be based upon the strict liability of Manager and Owner or the Other
Indemnified Parties. TIDS INDEMNITY PROVISION IS INTENDED TO INDEMNIFY
MANAGER, OWNER AND THE OTHER INDEMNIFIBD PARTIES AGAINST THE
CONSEQUENCES OF THEIR OWN NEGLIGENCE OR FAULT AS PROVIDED ABOVE
WHEN MANAGER, OWNER OR THE OTHER INDEMNIFIED PARTIES ARE JOINTLY,
COMPARATIVELY, OR CONCURRENJLY NEGLIGENT WITH CONTRACTOR This
indemnity provision shall survivetennination or expiration of this Agreement.

GTf 002
. .----.,--,-.-------, :·-1 ....... ·.-..:.._-: ·:-:.~-.--;:-.· ~-:.:.- .- .,_ .. ~-, . : '1 !" ••• -.-....• .•.•. • . · · · . · ·.' ·. · · 1 -.... ·-··.:. · · · . · · -: ·- .--- .- ··-.: -- -- 1 ··-1 --- .... , .. -., •• -.. ,- 1 r -.--.---..·.•

Contractor shall at all times carry and maintain on its operations hereunder: Worker's Compensation
and Employer's Liability covering all of its employees in an amount reasonably acceptable to Owner
in keeping with the Budget; Comprehensive General Liability Insurance including Automobile
Liability, with limits of liability not less than $1,000,000 combined single limit. Such liability
insurance shall be endorsed to include the Owner, Manager, and the Other Indemnified Parties as
additional insureds, and to provide a cross liability provision. Contractor shall also provide Umbrella
Liability coverage in excess of the Employer's Liability, Automobile Liability and Comprehensive
General Liability listed above in an amount not less than $2,000,000 per occurrence $2,000,000
aggregate.

Such insurance shall be with insurance companies licensed to do business in the State of Texas.
Before Contractor performs work at or on the Property or delivers material to the Property, Contractor
shall furnish evidence ofthe foregoing insurance coverage satisfactory to Owner and Manager. The
certificates of liability insurance shall state that the policies insure the Owner and Manager, as
Owner's agent, against liability for all claims arising out of or in connection with the Service to be
performed by the Contractor, and that the policies insure the performance of the Contractor's defense
and indemnity obligations described in the first grammatical paragraph ofthis Paragraph NW11ber 8.
Said insurance certificates shaJl verify that Contractor's insurance policies will not be canceled or
reducedwithoutten(l0)dayspriorwrittennoticetoOwnerandManager.

Contractor shall maintain all of the foregoing insurance coverage in full force and effect, and in
accordance with 'Exhibit C" (titled Insurance Requirements for Service Contracts), until the te11n of
this Agreement is fully completed. The requirements for carrying the foregoing insurance shall not
derogate from the provision for indemnification.

Contractor shall look solely to Owner for performance under this Agreement and recourse against
Owner hereunder shall be limited to proceeding against Owner's interest in the Property or the
proceeds ofdisposition of the Property.

9. PERMITTED ASSIGNMENT:

Contractor may not assign this Agreement without the prior written consent of Owner or Manager. If
Contractor does assign this Agreement without such prior written consent, Owner or Manager may
immediately terminate this Agreement without penalty.

Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, Owner or Manager shall be pennitted to
assign all of its right, title and interest in and to this Agreement to any other entity that is directly or
indirectly wholly-owned by Owner or Manager. Such permitted assignment shall include any
assignment that may be deemed to occur by operation of law in connection with any merger or
consolidation of Manager with and/or into any other entity directly or indirectly wholly-owned by
(an ''lntragroup Merger"). Any such Intragroup Merger shall not be deemed a breach of, cause a
default or trigger any right of tennination under, any other provision of this Agreement.

l 0. NOTICES :

GTT003 :-,..-·
· •· ! r ·.--.-., ·:-:· _:: ~. ·...•.. ---.--.•..··. ·1 .... .. ··-1 r .· .. ·. , ..

All notices or other writing in this Agreement to be given shaU be deemed to have been fully given,
made or sent when hand delivered or deposited in the United States mail, certified or registered, and
postage prepaid and address as follows:

CONTRACTOR: Premier Parking ofTennessee, LLC

Attn: Hunter Kitchens
421 Church Street
Nashville, Tennessee
37219_

OWNER: GTT Parking LP

Attn: David Kahn
804 Congress, No. 300
Austin, Texas 78701

The address to which any notice or other writing may be given, made or sent to either party, may be
changed by written notice given by such party as above described.

11. CONFLICT:

Should there be a conflict between this Agreement and any of the Schedules or Exhibits attached
hereto, this Agreement shall take precedence.

12. EMPLOYEE QUALIFICATIONS:

Contractor agrees to take reasonable steps to adequately screen its employees during the hiring
process to prevent employees or laborers from working on the Property if they have a conviction or
deferred-adjudication history of any crime that may pose a serious potential risk of injury to persons
working or visiting the Property. This requirement is subject to applicable Jaw; and it includes, but is
not limited to, crimes such as rape, molestation, sexual assault, indecent exposure, indecency with a
child, murder and kidnapping. Contractor will be responsible for determining the best way to exercise
that due diligence. This employee screening requirement is consistent with the Contractor's duty under
the common Jaw of negligent hiring and includes screening steps, such as using questions on
applications to check for criminal backgrounds, contacting previous employers listed in the
employment application, and utilizing online services such as www.publicdata_can and
www-txdps.state..txns. Costs incurred by Contractor in comp_leting ruch screening will be
reimbursable Operating Expenses, as defined in Exhibit B.

13. PATENT INFRINGEMENT:

Contractor warrants that none of the methods or materials used by Contractor in performing the

GTI004
 r···-.-.·•..•.-. :.1 ,. •. __ : % - - - .• - -~-. -1
. .

Service will infringe any patent, trademark, copyright or other right ofany third party.

14. CONFIDENTIALITY OFINFORMATION:

Contractor recognizes that in performing the Service under this Agreement,Contractor may be given
access to Manager's or Owner's premises, processes and documents. Contractor agrees as follows
with regard to any and all information and documents it comes into possession of while perfotming
the Service:

a, To keep in confidence and prevent disclosure to any persons or organizations outside its
organization, or to any persons within its organization not having a need to know, all
information heretofore or hereafter provided to Contractor by Manager or Owner or their
respective designees, provided, however, that Contractor shall not be liable for disclosure or
use of such information if it

I) was in the public domain at the time it was disclosed;

2) was known to Contractor at the time of receipt (other than by previous disclosure to
Contractor by Manager or Owner);

3) is required to be disclosed to any governmental authority in the performance of the

obligations of either party related to this Agreement;

4) was independently developed by Contractor; or

5) Becomes known to Contractor from a source other than Manager or Owner or their
affiliates without breach of this Agreement by Contractor.
b. At the conclusion of the term of this Agreement, upon Manager's written request and at no
expense to Contractor, Contractor agrees to tum over to Manager for Owner's benefit copies
of all notes, tapes, drafts, files, data, drawings and every other tangible piece of infmmation
collected or prepared while perfomling the Service. ·

15. OWNERSHIP AND USE OF DOCUMENTS AND INVENTIONS:

a. All drawings and specifications, computations, sketches, test data, survey results,
photographs, renderings, models and other materials peculiar to the Service prepared by
Contractor or Contractor's consultants shall be and remain the property of Owner and for
Owner's exclusive use and re-use at any time without further compensation to Contractor and
without any restrictions; provided, however, that if Owner uses such drawings, specifications
or other documents or data for any other project, Owner shall indemnify Contractor for any
claims or liabilities incurred by Contractor and resulting therefrom, other than any such
claims relating to the negligence, gross negligence, or intentional misconduct of Contractor.
Contractor shall treat all such materials and infonnation as confidential, and Contractor mall
neither use any such materials or infonnation or copies thereof on other work nor disclose
such materials or information to any other party without Manager's or Owner's prior written
approval.

b. Any and all discoveries, improvements or inventions that Contractor or its employees may
conceive or make pertaining to, resulting from, or suggested by the Service performed or any
information acquired during the performance of the Service, concerning any processes,
methods, machines or tools used or capable of being used, by or for Manager or Owner, shall

GTI005
 r···-.·.--..·.· .. ···:··· ·.:· ·r ... ···1 ~-
. .· ....... · ..
. .. .
-. ... -~··· ,.· ..·.·...

be the property of Owner, and to that end Contractor agrees to assign to Owner alJ Contractol''s
right, title and interest, including patent rights, in and to any and all such discoveries,
improvements and inventions. Contractor shall not use for its own benefit or disclose or
deliver .any such information or data to any other person or persons without Manager's or
Owner's prior written consent

16. BINDING EFFECT:

It is the intention of the parties hereto that the terms, conditions and provisions of this Agree.ti1ent
shall be legally binding upon and insure to the benefit of and be enforceable by each of the parties
hereto and their respective ru.ccessors and assigns.

17. JURY WANER:

The parties hereby waive ajury trial inany suit relating to or arising out of this Agreement.

18. GOVERNING LAW:

This Agreement and the rights and obligations of the parties shall be interpreted, construed and
enforced in accordance with the laws of the state of Tex.as.

19. COUNTERPARTS/ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES:

This Agreement may be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an
original, and all of which, when taken together, shall constitute one instrument. Documents executed
and transmitted by facsimile or electronic mail shall have the same force and effect as documents
bearing original signatures and transmitted by non--electronic means.

20. FULL AGREEMENT: AMENDMENTS.

This Agreement along with the Exhibits contains the parties' entire agreement regarding the subject
matter hereof. All understandings, discussions, and agreements previously made between the parties,
written or oral, are superseded by this Agreement, and neither party is relying upon any warranty,
statement or representation not contained in this Agreement. This Agreement may be modified only by
a written agreement signed by Contractor and Owner.

[Remainder ofpage mtentionally left. blankJ

GTI006
-. ! .... . . ··- ,, .. --- ,, ---.,·-·· ., . ''·" ,•• . .--.-.--,-.· ....._... ""•! •. .·.'·.-.,·.•.·: !-" .··• ·- . -.-:.-.;..-.-=----·--..--·._-,.·-·-·-!

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by
their duly authorized .representatives on the date below.

CCNTRACTOR: OWNER:

Premier Parking of Tennessee, LLC. Ownership Legal Entity.

GTT Parking LP
By: OUP Management, Inc.

By: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Its: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ By: _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Date: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Sheldon David Kahn, President
Date:
---------

GTT007
 ..
. -.,·-.-- --.-:-.~----.:: . ·.·... ., --,~----- .--..- .·. ·1 .,•.-.·.-·.. ··,C•·•.1 1·-.·-... _.

EXHIBIT A

GTI008
 ·.: ...-... .1
~ c• · , ·.·.•·.· •••• , ••• • • · ·· ··._•. - ··1 .·-. ·;··.'" ,,.• .•.. ·•.·::. ,·1

!·
I

EXHIBITB

INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR SERVICE CONTRACT

PROPERTY: [Property Name]

Austin, TX

MANAGER:

OWNER:

CONTRACTOR:

SERVICE: [Type of Service]

ADDIDONALLY
INSURED:

LOSS PAYEE:

COVERAGE
REQUIREMENTS: Refer to Section 8 in body ofthe contract forthis requirement.

GTT009
•. ...... ---_-'
. . ,.. ···, ... ·-1 . . ·.•·:;,.····.-•.---~-,'c'·:.'····,· ·.•'] !" -.· ---~-,: .-.-. ·...,.., .•.. •·· ..- .-·· ·1 ··-1

EXHIBITC

OPERATING PARAMETERS

l. Gross Revenues, Operating Expenses, and Operating Surplus are defined as follows:

(a) ''Gross Revenues" shall include all revenues received by Contractor (excluding aU sales
taxes or other charges required to be remitted to any governmental agency) from its
operation ofthe Property.

(b) ''Operating Expenses" shall include all the expenses of providing the management
services as set forth in the one-year Approved Budget, a copy of which is attached hereto
as Exhibit 'D," other than (i) expenses of a capital cost nature; (ii) those expenses to be
borne by Contractor (set forth in Exhibit E; and (iii) those expenses to be borne by
Owner (set forth in Exhibit F). Operating Expenses shall include but shall not be limited
to:

1) Wages of supervisory personnel assigned or allocated to the Property, attendants,

cashiers, clerical and audit staff and a charge from Contractor for employee benefits
including, but not limited to payroll taxes, social security, workers' compensation
insurance, unemployment insurance, group health in&1rance, and retirement
benefits, and a fee for administering such benefits;

2) Telephone expenses; including office fax, cell phones and other data lines necessary
for computers, credit card processing and elevators communications.

3) Business taxes, other than franchise taxes on income orprofits;

4) License and permits;

5) Advertising and promotion costs;

6) Insurance to the extent required of Contractor in this Agreement;

7) Sundry items such as uniforms, receipt paper, light bulbs, ballasts, paint, oil
absorbent, office supplies, tickets and janitorial supplies, etc.;

8) Payroll processing and accounts receivable processing expense;

9) Voluntary settlement of patrons' claims for vehicle damage or loss of contents

provided that the same has been authorized by Manager and approved by
Contractor;

!.
GTTOIO II .
,
.
. ··-1 1· ·.··.-.,.. , •• . • •••• , •• ---·--··-. _-. j_ .• ·1
:.1

10) Normal maintenance and repairs ofthe Property including snow removal, repainting
of stall markings, replacement or repair of signs, automated equipment and ticket
dispensing equipment;

11) Legal or audit charges directly attributable to the operation of the Property other
than those perfonned by the staff of Contractor or Manager ifapproved in advance
by Manager or Owner;

12) Costs of special audits performed by Contractor's staff auditor for the mutual
benefit of Contractor, Owner and Manager; provided, however, that the time and
manner of the taking of the audit is approved by Manager in advance. Costs
qualifying as Operating Expense shall be limited to a mutually agreed upon per
diem rate and actual out-of-pocket expenses of the auditor during the period of an
approved special audit_;

13) Payment ofthe ''deductible" amount of insurance claims settlement, and payment of
claims in excess ofpolicy limits;
14) Expenses incurred by Contractor in screening employees who apply for work for
Cmtractor at the Property pursuant to Section 5 ofthe Service Contract

(c) 'Ope.rating Surplus" shall be defined as ''Gross Revenues" less "Operating Expenses."

(d) At least 15 days prior to the commencement of the first year of the term hereof (the first
''Contract Year"), Contractor shall prepare and submit to Manager for its approval a
proposed operating budget (the 'Budget") for such first Contract Year. The Budget shall
include all expenses to be paid by Contractor in the operation of the Property pursuant to
the terms l1ereof. The Budget for each subsequent Contract Year of the term hereof shall
include an automatic adjustment tied to the Consumer Price Index for all Urban
Consumers (CPI-U). In the event the parties cannot agree on the proposed budget by the
beginning of the new contract year, Contractor shall utilize the last Approved Budget,
adjusted by the CPI-U until such time as the proposed budget is approved. Contractor
shall not, without first obtaining the prior written approval of Manager, incur any
expense item in excess of the greater of One Thousand Dollars ($1,000)·or 110% of the
amount, for such item as shown on the Budget unless such item is necessitated by an
emergency which does not permit Contractor to obtain the prior written approval of
Manager; provided Manager shall be informed by the next business day of any such
expenditure.

(e) Contractor shall provide consulting and advisory services to Manager conceming the
Property without additional charge except for reimbursement of out-of-pocket expenses
such as postage, printing and supply charges, phone charges, drafting expenses in
connection with the performance of services requested or required by Manager, and
similar wt-of-pocket expenses. Such expenses shall be supported by cash receipts ·or
other documentary proof ofpayment.

GTTOll
•. --·1 r-.--.-.-,-.,.-- , .. · .. ··-J • · ' -.. -- •.. ·•. ,.·.·v-,_-,] r•··-.-.··.·;.·- .- ·: ...,.. - --~
(
i
I
i

2. Contractor covenants that it will use methods widely accepted in the parking industry to
collect or cause to be collected all of the gross 1·eceipts from the operation and use of the
Property, but Contractor is not a guarantor of revenues. TI1e Gross Revenues for each
month's operation shall thereafter, on or before the fifteenth (15th) day of the succeeding
month, be disbursed by Contractor as follows:

(a) Contractor shall pay all Operating Expenses,

(b) Contractor shall then pay to itself out of the Gross Revenue the following amount:

For each month commencing with the date of this Agreement, an amount based on an
annualized computation, which shall be mathematically adjusted monthly, equal to the
following Schedule:

3% of the first $1,500,000 of Operating Surplus per Contract Year; plus

5% of Operating Surplus above $1,500,000 per Contract Year

Thresholds shall be adjusted upwards ( equal to excess amount) if total Operating

Expenses exceed I 05% of the total Operating Expense Budget for a given Contract Year
with exception of "repairs and maintenance" or other unforeseen circumstances.

(c) After payment of the amounts as directed in (a) and (b) above, the balance of the
O_perating Surplus shall be paid to Manager monthly in conjunction with Contractor's
monthly report to Manager listing Gross Revenues and Operating Expenses generated by
the Property in the preceding calendar month ("Monthly Report"). The Monthly Report
is to be submitted by Contractor for each month of the term hereof by the fifteenth (15th)
day ofthe next succeeding calendar month.

( d) If the Gross Revenues for any month are insufficient to make the payments required
under subparagraphs (a) and (b) above, Owner agrees to remit to Contractor the amount
of such deficit within ten (I 0) days after receipt of Contractor's report. In the event
Owner fails to reimburse Contractor within said ten (1 0) day period, and Owner does not
remedy such failure within five (5) days of receipt of written notice from Contractor,
then Contractor shall have the right to terminate this Agreement with immediate effect.
Within thirty (30) days of such termination, Owner shall remit to Contractor the full
amount of any non-reimbursed Operating Expenses paid by Manager. In no event shall
Contractor be obligated to pay Operating Expenses when sufficient Gross Revenues from
Contractor's operation oftl1e Property are not available.
I
I
3. Contractor agrees to cperate the Property in an efficient manner and on days and hours customary I :
. I
in the trade, commensurate with parking demand in the area. Such operation shall be continuous
unless Manager shall otherwise agree in writing. Charges for parking in the Property will be
commensurate with the demand for parking space and in accord with

GTI012
 . ·. ··-1 -·-.-.··-1 :-· ·:.· ""--:·- ·_ ---.-. ·j ... ··-1 -
·'.
I
1·

existing parking rates in the area. Parking .rates shall not be varied without written approval
ofthe Manager.

4. Contractor agrees that it will keep records of Gross Revenue and Operating Expenses
pertaining to each Contract Year of its operation of the Property for one ( 1) year, fo1lowing
such Contract Year and Client's rights of action against Manager shall be co-terminus with
said record retention period.

5. Owner agrees to maintain the sidewalks and curb cuts adjacent to the Property in accordance
with applicable municipal statutes. Owner shall also be responsible for all Property repairs
including, but not limited to: electrical, plumbing, pavement repair, painting of the structure,
replacement of aU mercury or sodium lighting tubes and ballasts, repairs to the walls and
floors of the Property, booths, sinkholes, and maintenance of ventilation system and
elevators.

Contractor agrees to use reasonable diligence in the care and protection of the Property during
the term of this Agreement and to surrender the Property at the termination of this Agreement
in as good condition as received, ordinary wear and tear and casualty excepted.

Any structural, mechanical, electrical or other installations or any alterations required by statutes or
regulations pertaining to air quality, environmental protection, provisions for persons with
disabilities or other similar gove1nmental requirements shaJI be the sole responsibility ofOw11er.
Owner acknowledges that Contractor's obligations hereunder do not include the rendering of
service, supervision, or furnishing of personnel in connection with the personal safety and security
of any persons within or about the Property, nor does any insurance provided by Contractor cover
such claims. Contractor has no knowledge or expertise as a guard or security service, employs no
personnel for that purpose, and Contractor's employees do not guard or protect customers or any
other persons or property against the -intentional acts of third parties. Owner shall detennine, in its
discretion, the extent to which precautionary wamings and security devices or services may be
required to protect persons in and about the Property.

It is agreed that any actions, costs, claims, Josses, expenses, and/or damages resulting from design
or structural faults or defects are the responsibility of Owner.

Owner does hereby waive all rights of .recovery, if any, against Contractor for damage to, or
destruction of, the Property in the event such damage or destruction is caused by fire or other
casualty which can be covered under a standard :fire and extended coverage insurance policy.

Owner shall obtain and maintain liability insurance 011 elevators in the Property including
Contractor as additional insured.

Owner shall obtain fire and extended coverage insurance covering the Property and the equipment
contained therein.

GTI013
. . :".~ · .... ~. -;:-·.,·.. ,--· .,'·] r····.-.•..- ....... . · •· • .. · ·. ·. l ,···.·.·.·. · . --,-.·-····"'·---.--..,·-·· · 1 ....... ··-1 ' .. .. . .... -~-- ·.. ··•·:.·, ·1 r. --.-.~. ~---. ·. ! \. "

All insurance coverages are subject to a deductible amount, not to exceed $2,500 per claim, except
Workers' Compensation which deductible shall be $0, and insurance for stolen vehicles, which
deductible shall be $5,000. The deductible amounts and inrurance premiums may be changed upon
60 days written notice to Manager. The payment of the deductible amount will be considered an
Operating Expense ofthe Property. It is understood that the liability policies carried by Manager as
noted above do not provide coverage for any claim pertaining to security issues or services. Any
losses not covered by the above insurance shall constitute expenses ofthe Owner

6. Upon completion of the first Contract Year of this Agreement, and again on every
subsequent anniversary date, this Agreement shall be automatically renewed for additional
one-year periods, unless either party shall give written notice to the other, at least sixty (60)
days prior to the expiration ofthe initial term or any renewal hereof, that the Agreement shall
not be so extended.

7. In the event Contractor shall intentionally fail to fully and faithfully deposit all the Gross
Revenues from the operation of the Property or lhall intentionally fail to disburse same only
in the manner provided for herein, or in the event Contractor shall become bankrupt or
insolvent, or suffer the appointment of a receiver, or make an assignment for creditors,
Manager or Owner shall have the right to forthwith tenninate this Agreement, regain
immediate possession of the Property, and hold the Contractor liable for any damages
resulting to Owner.

!.

i
"
I
!

GTT014
_.._.. '--, ..,---. -._..-·-:I .-·,.·:-:-_--,.~--~--·-·,:,.•-.. ,.,-. ·:•'·] r,--.-.·-.-.·.-. : ... _,._, 1 •• ·---,-2_ --- .. -_....--- ·1
··-1
!·

EXHIBIT D - BUDGET

GTf 015

I.
 ..... -·-1 - ·r···. - - •.• ' ~--- 1 .. - .'. _.,......... -- . ·1
~

EXHIBITE

EXPffiSESOF
CDNIRACIDR
i
I. Salaries, travel and accommodation expenses of all executive personnel of Manager.

2. General and administrative expenses of Manager not allocable directly to operations at the
Property.

3. Personal property taxes of Contractor's property.

1!
:;

i:
;.

!--

GTT016
.--~-~-.::···•·----•,.·,,,:_.·.··c.-, • ·.- ·1 r •.· ·.w .•.•. ... ........ -------..... - . 1 .. :: ::·1 • .. _._.,. .... ,,.-.-·.,·,:;..··.... , .'."'] r····.-...,_,.•....

EXHIBlTF

EXPENSES OF OWNER

l. Real and personal property taxes ofOwner'sproperty.

2. All claims, expenses and/or damages arising from, or caused by structural or design
deficiencies or by improper work or supervision during construction including, without
limitation, settlement, collapse or inadequacy of structure or equipment, and all repairs related
thereto.

3. Debt service with respect to land, building and equipment.

4. Costs oflegal and auditing fees of Owner.

5. Salaries and wages of all employees of Owner.

I
6. Costs incurred by Manager in the supervision of obligations of Contractor.

7. Costs ofmaintaining elevators, sprinkler and ventilation systems.

8_ Utilities expense ofthe Property.

9. Capital expenditures, improvements, alterations, additions and all new equipment,including

all architectural and engineering fees in connection therewith.

I 0. Costs ofpayroll and equipment of security personnel.

11. Cost ofpremiums for fire and extended coverage insurance covering the Property.

GTI017
Exhibit U
 Ryan Hunt
January 09, 2019 1
Page 1
·1· · · · · · · · ·CAUSE NO. D-1-GN-17-004456

·2· ·CHRISTI J. BOWMER,· · · · · · · · )IN THE DISTRICT

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·)COURT OF
·3· · · · · · · · Plaintiff,· · · · · ·)
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·)TRAVIS COUNTY,
·4· ·vs.· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·)TEXAS
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·)
·5· ·GTT PARKING, LP, SHELDON DAVID· · )
· · ·KAHN, PREMIER PARKING OF· · · · · )353RD JUDICIAL
·6· ·TENNESSEE, LLC, and WEITZMAN· · · )DISTRICT
· · ·MANAGEMENT CORPORATION,· · · · · ·)
·7· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·)
· · · · · · · · · Defendants.· · · · · )
·8· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·)
· · ·_________________________________ )
·9

10

11

12
· · · · · · ·Videotaped Deposition of:
13

14
· · · · · · ·RYAN HUNT
15

16
· · · · · · ·Taken on behalf of the Plaintiff
17

18
· · · · · · ·January 9, 2019
19

20

21
· · -------------------------------------------------------
22

23

24

25

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

1-800-567-8757 YVer1f
 Ryan Hunt
January 09, 2019 2 to 5
Page 2 Page 4
·1· APPEARANCES: ·1· · · · · · The videotaped deposition of RYAN HUNT
·2· ·For the Plaintiff:· · SEAN BREEN, ESQ.
·2· ·was taken by counsel for the Plaintiff, at the
· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·Howry Breen & Herman
·3· · · · · · · · · · · · ·1900 Pearl Street ·3· ·offices of Butler Snow, 150 3rd Avenue South,
· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·Austin, Texas 78705
·4· ·Suite 1600, Nashville, Tennessee, on
·4· · · · · · · · · · · · ·(512) 430-4844
·5· ·For the Defendant· · ·TASHA L. BARNES, ESQ. ·5· ·January 9, 2019 at 8:42 a.m. for all purposes
· · ·GTT Parking:· · · · · Thompson Coe Cousins & Irons,
·6· ·under the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure.
·6· · · · · · · · · · · · ·LLP
· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·701 Brazos, Suite 1500 ·7· · · · · · The formalities as to notice, caption,
·7· · · · · · · · · · · · ·Austin, Texas 78701
·8· ·certificate, et cetera, are waived.· All
· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·(512) 703-5038
·8· · · · · · · · · · · · ·tbarnes@thompsoncoe.com ·9· ·objections, except as to the form of the question,
·9· ·For the Defendant· · ·CHRISTOPHER L. RHODES, ESQ.
· · ·Premier Parking:· · · Holstein & Associates 10· ·are reserved to the hearing.
10· · · · · · · · · · · · ·9601 McAllister Freeway 11· · · · · · It is agreed that Rhonda S. Nicholson,
· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·Suite 910
11· · · · · · · · · · · · ·San Antonio, Texas 78216 12· ·being a licensed court reporter and notary public
· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·(512) 423-2058 13· ·for the State of Tennessee, may swear the witness,
12· · · · · · · · · · · · ·Crhodes2@travelers.com
13· ·For the Defendant· · ·CURTIS J. KURHAJEC, ESQ. 14· ·and that the reading and signing of the completed
· · ·Weitzman· · · · · · · Naman, Howell, Smith & Lee, 15· ·deposition by the witness were not discussed.
14· ·Management:· · · · · ·PLLC
· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·Prominent Pointe One 16
15· · · · · · · · · · · · ·8310 N. Capital of Texas 17
· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·Highway, Suite 490
16· · · · · · · · · · · · ·Austin, Texas 78731 18· · · · · · · · · · · · ·* * *
· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·(512) 479-0300 19
17· · · · · · · · · · · · ·ckurhajec@namanhowell.com
18 20
19 21
20
· · ·Also Present:· · · · ·David Drumel, Videographer 22
21· · · · · · · · · · · · ·Hunter Kitchens, Esq. 23
22
23 24
24 25
25

Page 3 Page 5
·1· · · · · · · · · · · · ·I N D E X ·1· · · · · ·* * * P R O C E E D I N G S * * *
·2· Questions by Mr. Breen· · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·5
·2· · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Good morning.· We
·3
·3· ·are now on the record at 8:42 a.m.· This is the
·4
·4· ·video deposition of Ryan Hunt in the matter of
·5· · · · · · · · · · · ·E X H I B I T S
·5· ·Bowmer versus GTT Parking, LP.· Cause Number
·6· No. 45:· · Biography Material· · · · · · · · · · · ·67
·7· No. 46:· · E-mail Chain· · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·36
·6· ·D-1-GN-17-004456.
·8· No. 47:· · E-mail Chain· · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·42
·7· · · · · · · · This deposition is being held at
·9· No. 48:· · E-mail Chain· · · · · · · · · · · · · · 143 ·8· ·Butler Snow, 150 3rd Avenue South, in Nashville,
10· No. 49:· · E-mail Chain· · · · · · · · · · · · · · 150 ·9· ·Tennessee.· Will counsel please state their name
11· No. 50:· · Littlefield Garage December 2017 10· ·for the record.
· · · · · · · ·Executive Summary· · · · · · · · · · · ·131 11· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· Sean Breen for the
12 12· ·plaintiff, Christi Bowmer.
· · No. 51:· · Littlefield Garage December 2017 13· · · · · · · · MR. RHODES:· Christopher L. Rhodes
13· · · · · · ·Executive Summary· · · · · · · · · · · ·132 14· ·for defendant, Premier Parking Tennessee.
14· No. 52:· · Premier Parking Accounting Summary· · · 133
15· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Tasha Barnes for GTT
16· ·Parking.
15
16
17· · · · · · · · MR. KURHAJEC:· Curt Kurhajec for
17
18· ·Weitzman Properties.
18
19
19· · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Okay.· Will the
20
20· ·reporter please swear in the witness.
21 21· · · · · · · · THE COURT REPORTER:· Could you raise
22 22· ·your right hand?· Do you swear that the testimony
23 23· ·you're about to give shall be the truth, the whole
24 24· ·truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
25 25· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· I do.

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

1-800-567-8757 YVer1f
 Ryan Hunt
January 09, 2019
Page 6
·1· · · · · · · · · · · ·RYAN HUNT
·2· ·was called as a witness, and after having been
·3· ·first duly sworn, testified as follows:
·4· · · · · · · · · · · EXAMINATION
·5· ·BY MR. BREEN:
·6· ·Q.· · · Good morning, sir.· Would you introduce
·7· ·yourself for the record, please?
·8· ·A.· · · Yeah.· My name is Ryan Hunt.
·9· ·Q.· · · Mr. Hunt, my name is Sean Breen. I
10· ·represent Christi Bowmer.· Ms. Bowmer was injured
11· ·when her car went off the Littlefield parking
12· ·garage on July 13th, 2017 in Austin, Texas.· Do
13· ·you understand who I am and who I represent?
14· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
15· ·Q.· · · We're here in Nashville, Tennessee this
16· ·morning, the home city of Premier Parking, to take
17· ·your deposition.· Do you understand what a
18· ·deposition is?
19· ·A.· · · I do.
20· ·Q.· · · Have you ever given a deposition before?
21· ·A.· · · I have not.
22· ·Q.· · · You have fine counsel with you here today,
23· ·and I'm sure he's gone over it with you.· Just a
24· ·couple things to make sure we have it on the
25· ·record to try it make it more expeditious here
Page 7
·1· ·today.· If you don't mind answering with a yes, no
·2· ·or explanation as opposed to using an uh-huh or an
·3· ·huh-uh.· Okay?
·4· ·A.· · · Yes.
·5· ·Q.· · · And if you don't understand one of my
·6· ·questions, will you let me know at the time so I
·7· ·can rephrase it?
·8· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
·9· ·Q.· · · If through some mannerism or way I'm being
10· ·rude or causing you to answer questions other than
11· ·you want to -- I don't intend to do that.· Will
12· ·you let me know at the time so that I can fix
13· ·that?
14· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
15· ·Q.· · · That way we don't get to the end of the
16· ·deposition and wonder whether that occurred or
17· ·not.· Okay?
18· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
19· ·Q.· · · And do you understand you're under oath
20· ·today?
21· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
22· ·Q.· · · And if you need to take a break at any
23· ·time, if you'll just let me know.· As long as it's
24· ·not in the middle of a question or an answer,
25· ·we'll take a break and try to make this as smooth
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
6 to 9
Page 8
·1· ·as possible.· All right?
·2· ·A.· · · Great.
·3· ·Q.· · · Can you give me a little bit about your
·4· ·personal background, Mr. Hunt, where you grew up,
·5· ·your schooling?
·6· ·A.· · · Sure.· Born and raised in Nashville,
·7· ·Tennessee.· Graduated from Hillsboro High School.
·8· ·Went on to Lipscomb University here locally.
·9· ·Graduated from there in 2010.· Began working for
10· ·Premier -- Premier Parking in '06 and have been
11· ·working there 'til this day.
12· ·Q.· · · And what is Premier Parking?
13· ·A.· · · Premier Parking is a parking management
14· ·services firm based in Nashville, Tennessee.
15· ·Q.· · · And what -- what is parking management?
16· ·A.· · · What is parking management?
17· ·Q.· · · Right.· You said Premier is a parking
18· ·management firm.· What is parking management?
19· ·A.· · · So we manage parking facilities throughout
20· ·the country.· So typically we would manage the
21· ·parking revenues in the day-to-day management of
22· ·people coming in and out of the parking structure:
23· ·Surface parking lot, hospitals, hotels, valet
24· ·operations, special event centers.
25· ·Q.· · · You said typically.· Is there some
Page 9
·1· ·atypical management that Premier is involved in?
·2· ·A.· · · We do guest services at hospitals, so --
·3· ·where it's not necessarily parking related, but we
·4· ·manage front desks or, you know, wayfind people
·5· ·through, you know, large structures, like help
·6· ·them get to where they need to go.
·7· ·Q.· · · Does Premier advertise its services?
·8· ·A.· · · We do.
·9· ·Q.· · · Is the marketing on the Internet, in
10· ·paper, digitally, that Premier does, is that
11· ·accurate?
12· ·A.· · · Yes.
13· ·Q.· · · We would be able to look at that and rely
14· ·on that as an accurate rendition of what type of
15· ·services and expertise Premier has?
16· ·A.· · · Yes.
17· ·Q.· · · Does Premier market itself to parking
18· ·garage owners as a turnkey or complete management
19· ·company?
20· ·A.· · · I don't know if we use the word "turnkey"
21· ·or not in our marketing materials.
22· ·Q.· · · Do you know the phrase "turnkey"?
23· ·A.· · · I do.
24· ·Q.· · · And what would that connote to you?
25· ·A.· · · On the parking management side, it would
YVer1f
 Ryan Hunt
January 09, 2019
Page 10
·1· ·be soup-to-nuts.· So we're there to help you pick
·2· ·the parking equipment that you want to select.
·3· ·We're -- help to scale up that parking garage,
·4· ·help you understand and forecast revenues and
·5· ·expenses for what that parking structure is going
·6· ·to do from a long-term basis and -- and guide you
·7· ·through that process.
·8· ·Q.· · · And you said that as part of parking
·9· ·management services that Premier offers, that
10· ·includes day-to-day management?
11· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
12· ·Q.· · · Does day-to-day management include safety
13· ·of the premises?
14· ·A.· · · Safety as in specifically -- what types of
15· ·safety?
16· ·Q.· · · Well, any safety.· General safety of the
17· ·patrons that are going to come into the premises.
18· ·A.· · · Well, we don't provide security services.
19· ·So that's one of the things we do not do as a
20· ·company.
21· ·Q.· · · Okay.· What else do you not provide in
22· ·terms of safety?
23· ·A.· · · We do not provide structural assessments
24· ·of parking facilities.
25· ·Q.· · · What is a structural assessment?
Page 11
·1· ·A.· · · That would be something that an
·2· ·engineer -- I don't -- I actually do not know what
·3· ·a structural assessment of a parking garage would
·4· ·be.
·5· ·Q.· · · And how long have you been in the parking
·6· ·garage business?
·7· ·A.· · · Almost 13 years.
·8· ·Q.· · · So over 13 years, you've never received or
·9· ·reviewed a structural assessment of a parking
10· ·garage?
11· ·A.· · · Our company has.· Premier has.
12· ·Q.· · · And what's your title with the company?
13· ·A.· · · I'm the president of the company.
14· ·Q.· · · Is there anybody higher than you are?
15· ·A.· · · There is.
16· ·Q.· · · Who is that?
17· ·A.· · · The chief executive officer.
18· ·Q.· · · Is that Mr. Chapman?
19· ·A.· · · It is.
20· ·Q.· · · And so in what context as president have
21· ·you received structural assessments of a parking
22· ·garage?
23· ·A.· · · That would be outside of the company.· So
24· ·any real estate that we've owned which is not part
25· ·of the operating company.· So if there is somebody
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
10 to 13
Page 12
·1· ·that was receiving a structural assessment for a
·2· ·garage that needed some capital repairs or
·3· ·maintenance.
·4· ·Q.· · · And does Premier, or whatever entity
·5· ·you're talking about that would have received
·6· ·these structural assessments, own any parking
·7· ·garages that are open-air garages that have cables
·8· ·as a vehicle restraint system?
·9· ·A.· · · I do not think so.
10· ·Q.· · · Other than the Littlefield garage in
11· ·Austin, is Premier -- has Premier ever been
12· ·involved with being the parking manager for a
13· ·garage that had cable barrier vehicle restraint
14· ·systems?
15· ·A.· · · I do not know.· I'm sure we have.
16· ·Q.· · · Any idea where those would be?
17· ·A.· · · I do not.
18· ·Q.· · · As we sit here now, the only garage you
19· ·could think of that Premier was involved in
20· ·managing that had cables as a vehicle restraint
21· ·system would be the Littlefield garage in Austin?
22· ·A.· · · That's the one I know as of right now.
23· ·Yes, sir.
24· ·Q.· · · In your experience with Premier or even
25· ·personally, other than the two vehicles that left
Page 13
·1· ·the Littlefield garage through the vehicle
·2· ·restraint system, are you aware of any other
·3· ·instances of vehicles leaving a multilevel parking
·4· ·garage through or because of the restraint system?
·5· ·A.· · · Not in a garage that we have managed.
·6· ·Q.· · · How about in general?
·7· ·A.· · · I have heard stories, but I don't have a
·8· ·basis of that.
·9· ·Q.· · · When you say you've heard stories, do you
10· ·mean news or with Premier or in what context?
11· ·A.· · · With -- in context of when somebody --
12· ·this happened the first time, somebody would say
13· ·Oh, I saw that happen, so and so, in general
14· ·parking news.· So colleagues and things like that,
15· ·but I don't know where it happened or who it
16· ·happened with.
17· ·Q.· · · Okay.· When you said "this happened the
18· ·first time," do you mean the O'Connor incident in
19· ·September of 2016?
20· ·A.· · · If that was the incident where the vehicle
21· ·drove off and was held by the barrier cables.
22· ·Yes.
23· ·Q.· · · Yes.· September 9th of 2016, you became
24· ·aware that a young man went off the ninth level of
25· ·the Littlefield garage but was saved from crashing
YVer1f
 Ryan Hunt
January 09, 2019
Page 14
·1· ·to the ground below because the cables tangled in
·2· ·his vehicle and held him there dangling, right?
·3· ·A.· · · I believe so.· Yes.
·4· ·Q.· · · You'd agree with me that that's not the
·5· ·intent of a vehicle restraint system in a parking
·6· ·garage?· That is, to tangle itself in the axle and
·7· ·keep a car from hitting the ground by having it
·8· ·dangle?
·9· ·A.· · · I don't know what the -- the capabilities
10· ·of that is or what it's meant to do.
11· ·Q.· · · Do you believe and are you going to tell
12· ·the jury you believe that part of the design of a
13· ·vehicle restraint system would be that it would --
14· ·supposed to tangle up in the car and catch it from
15· ·falling?
16· ·A.· · · I -- I wouldn't think so, but I don't know
17· ·if that's part of it.
18· ·Q.· · · As your role as president of Premier, you
19· ·understand the purpose of a vehicle restraint
20· ·system on an open-air garage, don't you?
21· ·A.· · · By vehicle restraint system, you mean --
22· ·Q.· · · Barrier.
23· ·A.· · · Barrier of what sort?· The cable --
24· ·Q.· · · Any sort.
25· ·A.· · · I would think that in a garage, if there's
Page 15
·1· ·a barrier there, is -- is meant to show that
·2· ·you're not supposed to go past that.
·3· ·Q.· · · Do you think it's there to indicate to
·4· ·somebody they're supposed to stop their car before
·5· ·the edge of the garage?
·6· ·A.· · · I think it serves a multitude of purposes,
·7· ·I would think.
·8· ·Q.· · · What -- what multitude?
·9· ·A.· · · Well, I think it's saying like -- you
10· ·know, wheel stops, for instance, in a parking
11· ·space would say, you know, Don't go over this.
12· · · · · · It's meant to stop the vehicle before --
13· ·or identify to the customer that this is where the
14· ·parking space ends.· But a vehicle barrier system
15· ·or a cable barrier system, I don't have enough
16· ·knowledge to say what it's designed or designed
17· ·not to do.· Depending on when the garage was
18· ·built, you know, I'm not an expert in code
19· ·compliance and things of that nature.
20· ·Q.· · · Setting aside code compliance, as the
21· ·president of a company that owns how many now --
22· ·or not owns, but operates how many parking
23· ·garages?
24· ·A.· · · Approximately 500 parking facilities.
25· ·Q.· · · So as the president of a -- of a company
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
14 to 17
Page 16
·1· ·that operates 500 parking facilities, what would
·2· ·your testimony to the jury be about what your
·3· ·common sense perspective of a vehicle restraint
·4· ·system in an open-air garage should do?
·5· ·A.· · · It's to ensure that -- honestly, I don't
·6· ·know how to answer that question, a common sense
·7· ·perspective.· I mean, to me, it's designed to say
·8· ·this is where the garage ends, and it's designed
·9· ·to protect the garage and protect the customer --
10· ·Q.· · · Okay.
11· ·A.· · · -- to some degree.
12· ·Q.· · · And how is it supposed to protect the
13· ·customer?
14· ·A.· · · I don't know.
15· ·Q.· · · Well, as president of a company that
16· ·operates 400 garages, wouldn't you think that a
17· ·vehicle restraint system is supposed to keep a car
18· ·at some level from falling off of the garage in
19· ·case of an accident?
20· ·A.· · · I would think so.· Yes, sir.
21· ·Q.· · · And that as the operator of 400 garages,
22· ·you understand certainly that accidents happen in
23· ·a garage?
24· ·A.· · · We don't operate 400 garages.· We operate
25· ·400 locations, just to clarify.· So those could be
Page 17
·1· ·surface parking lots or hotels where we don't park
·2· ·in any garages.
·3· ·Q.· · · As the president of Premier, you
·4· ·understand that it's a virtual certainty that
·5· ·accidents are going to occur in a parking garage,
·6· ·right?
·7· ·A.· · · Yes.
·8· ·Q.· · · And that one of the reasons you have a
·9· ·vehicle restraint system in a garage is because
10· ·it's certain that accidents are going to happen.
11· ·And if they do, you want to keep people from going
12· ·off the edge of the garage?
13· ·A.· · · I'm sure that's what the design of the
14· ·parking structure is meant to do.· I'm sure that's
15· ·what the engineers put it in there for, but I
16· ·don't know from a factual basis exactly what it's
17· ·designed to do and what it's supposed to stop and
18· ·things of that specific nature.
19· ·Q.· · · So after Mr. O'Connor went off the edge of
20· ·a garage that Premier was managing, did you
21· ·endeavor to find out anything about that?
22· ·A.· · · Endeavor to find out what happened?
23· ·Q.· · · Well, endeavor to find out -- yeah -- why
24· ·the vehicle restraint system didn't keep his car
25· ·from going off the edge.
YVer1f
 Ryan Hunt
January 09, 2019
Page 18
·1· ·A.· · · Well, we were asked to -- so I talked with
·2· ·our client, and my recommendation to our client at
·3· ·that time was to seek a third-party structural
·4· ·assessment firm for the parking structure.
·5· ·Q.· · · Okay.· Why don't you tell me everything
·6· ·you remember about that.· You mean your
·7· ·conversations with somebody at GTT?
·8· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
·9· ·Q.· · · Please tell me everything you remember
10· ·about that -- those conversations.
11· ·A.· · · Yeah.· It was -- it was a surprise, I
12· ·think, to our client, and it was a surprise to us
13· ·because it's certainly nothing that we had seen
14· ·before.
15· · · · · · And, you know, my client asked me if I
16· ·had ever seen this before in my years of
17· ·parking -- of course, when something like that
18· ·happens, we have to prepare a statement as far as
19· ·what we know and what we know about what happened
20· ·and what we're doing to find out what took place.
21· · · · · · And, you know, my initial time,
22· ·anything -- I don't know anything -- I want to
23· ·talk to people that do know something about it,
24· ·and so I made the recommendation, which they were
25· ·already, I believe, were going to do, is -- I'd
Page 19
·1· ·contact someone from a structural engineering firm
·2· ·with experts in parking structures to figure out
·3· ·what did take place.
·4· ·Q.· · · And who was this conversation with?
·5· ·A.· · · David Kahn.· And I think we -- there were
·6· ·multiple conversations of -- the day of the
·7· ·incident and the subsequent days after the
·8· ·incident.· So they would have been with David and
·9· ·Sean O'Brien.
10· ·Q.· · · Okay.· And best you recall, who was the
11· ·first conversation with?
12· ·A.· · · I believe David.
13· ·Q.· · · And tell me the substance you recall of
14· ·that conversation.
15· ·A.· · · I don't recall.· It was -- it was more a
16· ·shock of -- that this had happened.
17· ·Q.· · · Did you disclose to Mr. Kahn in that
18· ·conversation that your company previously had been
19· ·involved with inspections of the premises that
20· ·indicated the cable barrier system was dilapidated
21· ·and dangerous?
22· ·A.· · · I did not.
23· ·Q.· · · Why not?
24· ·A.· · · Because, to my knowledge, we were not in
25· ·conversations of that nature.
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
18 to 21
Page 20
·1· ·Q.· · · Were you not aware of the meetings that
·2· ·occurred between Premier representatives and one
·3· ·or more engineers in 2014 at the premises?
·4· ·A.· · · Which -- which meetings?
·5· ·Q.· · · Well, I'm just asking you generally.· Are
·6· ·you aware that Premier met with engineering
·7· ·representatives at the garage in 2014 for
·8· ·inspections of the cable barrier system?
·9· ·A.· · · I was not at that time.
10· ·Q.· · · Are you now?
11· ·A.· · · Yes.
12· ·Q.· · · And what -- what meetings were -- Premier
13· ·involved with that you were made aware of?
14· ·A.· · · I don't know specific meetings, so...
15· ·Q.· · · Well, generally, what were you made aware
16· ·of?
17· ·A.· · · So I received an e-mail from our general
18· ·counsel asking me to review a set of e-mails to
19· ·see if I was aware of it or remember any of it.
20· ·Q.· · · And were you?
21· ·A.· · · I would remember that our manager at the
22· ·time walked the garage or helped, what I would
23· ·say, block off parking spaces so people could do
24· ·work in the garage.
25· ·Q.· · · What e-mails did you review about the
Page 21
·1· ·inspections?
·2· ·A.· · · I -- I don't recall the specifics, but
·3· ·they were part of e-mails between Jessica Wright
·4· ·and the property management firm of Stream Realty.
·5· ·Q.· · · Okay.· Stream was the owner or affiliated
·6· ·with the owner of the Littlefield garage before
·7· ·GTT?
·8· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
·9· ·Q.· · · And Premier Parking had a contract and was
10· ·the garage manager for Stream at the Littlefield
11· ·garage?
12· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
13· ·Q.· · · And in 1994, was Premier asked by Stream
14· ·to participate in inspections or meetings with
15· ·engineers about the vehicle restraint system?
16· ·A.· · · In -- when?
17· ·Q.· · · In 2014.
18· ·A.· · · So according to those e-mails, that we did
19· ·walk the garage with Stream.
20· ·Q.· · · You did walk the garage with Stream.· What
21· ·does that mean?
22· ·A.· · · Well, they walked the garage with Stream
23· ·and engineers, but I was not a part of them.
24· ·Q.· · · Who was a part of that?
25· ·A.· · · Jessica Wright.
YVer1f
 Ryan Hunt
January 09, 2019
Page 22
·1· ·Q.· · · Anybody else?
·2· ·A.· · · Not to my knowledge.
·3· ·Q.· · · Did you know that Mr. Chapman was?
·4· ·A.· · · I was not aware of that.
·5· ·Q.· · · Have you seen e-mails produced in this
·6· ·case that indicate Mr. Chapman was involved in
·7· ·inspections at the facility?
·8· ·A.· · · I don't recall.
·9· ·Q.· · · Have you asked Mr. Chapman?
10· ·A.· · · I have not.
11· ·Q.· · · Mr. Chapman is an engineer, isn't he?
12· ·A.· · · He's a civil engineer.· Yes, sir.
13· ·Q.· · · Mr. Chapman has extensive experience with
14· ·design and safety issues with parking garages,
15· ·doesn't he?
16· ·A.· · · I would say functional design of parking
17· ·structures, he has an extended knowledge of.· Yes.
18· ·Q.· · · Ms. Wright, how long was she an employee
19· ·of Premier?
20· ·A.· · · Ms. Wright was an employee of Premier at
21· ·the time, probably three years, at the time of
22· ·Austin.· Maybe a little shorter.· I can't -- I
23· ·can't remember.
24· ·Q.· · · And was she a competent employee?
25· ·A.· · · At the time.
Page 23
·1· ·Q.· · · Reliable person?
·2· ·A.· · · At the time.
·3· ·Q.· · · Did she somehow become incompetent or
·4· ·unreliable?
·5· ·A.· · · She did.
·6· ·Q.· · · At what point?
·7· ·A.· · · I can't recall the exact dates.
·8· ·Q.· · · At some point that she was working with
·9· ·Premier?
10· ·A.· · · Yes.
11· ·Q.· · · And was it during the summer of 2014?
12· ·A.· · · No.
13· ·Q.· · · After that?
14· ·A.· · · Yes.
15· ·Q.· · · Of -- the year of 2015?
16· ·A.· · · I would have to check and make sure of
17· ·those dates, but I would say it was sometime
18· ·within the first four to six weeks of Christina
19· ·Murray's employment.· So whenever that would have
20· ·been.
21· ·Q.· · · So is there some type of file that you
22· ·have at Premier that would indicate to you when
23· ·Ms. Wright became incompetent to be an employee?
24· ·A.· · · I don't know, but I would hope our HR team
25· ·has that.
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
22 to 25
Page 24
·1· ·Q.· · · What characteristics did Ms. Wright
·2· ·exhibit while an employee of Premier that
·3· ·indicated to you she was incompetent?
·4· ·A.· · · When -- well, how are we defining
·5· ·incompetent?· I would -- I would say that
·6· ·Ms. Wright was a very bright individual, very
·7· ·smart.· Had a high ceiling with the company.· But
·8· ·I think personal issues for a period of about four
·9· ·to six weeks led to her dismissal from the
10· ·company.
11· · · · · · So I wouldn't say that she was
12· ·incompetent.· I would say that she had a very
13· ·difficult personal time, which made her unreliable
14· ·to handle the day-to-day aspects of --
15· ·specifically regarding the money management and
16· ·revenue management, which is a core aspect of our
17· ·business.
18· ·Q.· · · Is Premier paid a portion of the profits
19· ·that the garage makes typically?
20· ·A.· · · So we are paid -- we have numerous
21· ·different ways that we get paid, but one of the
22· ·ways we are paid is a percentage of net operating
23· ·income, which is how this deal is structured with
24· ·the Littlefield parking garage.
25· ·Q.· · · All right.· So with Stream Realty or its
Page 25
·1· ·affiliated entity, how was the deal structured,
·2· ·just for the jury, so that Premier got paid?
·3· ·A.· · · It was a percentage of net operating
·4· ·income.
·5· ·Q.· · · And net operating income is what?
·6· ·A.· · · It's defined as revenue less taxes less
·7· ·expenses excluding, I believe, property taxes.
·8· ·Q.· · · So the less expenses, the more net
·9· ·revenue?
10· ·A.· · · Typically, yeah.
11· ·Q.· · · The more net revenue, the more Premier
12· ·makes?
13· ·A.· · · Correct.
14· ·Q.· · · And is that the same structure Premier had
15· ·with GTT?
16· ·A.· · · It is.
17· ·Q.· · · The less expenses, the more Premier made?
18· ·A.· · · Yes.
19· ·Q.· · · And was it set up where Premier collected
20· ·the money, paid expenses and then turned over the
21· ·net revenue minus its share of the money to GTT?
22· ·A.· · · That's correct.
23· ·Q.· · · So we would be able to look at the
24· ·expenses to see what Premier was paying and for
25· ·what at the time?
YVer1f
 Ryan Hunt
January 09, 2019
Page 26
·1· ·A.· · · Absolutely.
·2· ·Q.· · · Have you done that in this case?
·3· ·A.· · · Not for this case.· No.
·4· ·Q.· · · Now, back to the 2014 time frame.· What
·5· ·did the e-mail --
·6· ·A.· · · Excuse me.
·7· ·Q.· · · -- that you reviewed indicate to you that
·8· ·Premier was made aware of about the condition of
·9· ·the cable barrier system on the Littlefield garage
10· ·in -- in the summer of 2014?
11· ·A.· · · I think we were aware that it needed work,
12· ·but we were also aware that we were not the ones
13· ·that were going to do it, so...
14· ·Q.· · · When you say "needed work," do you know
15· ·anything more specific than that?
16· ·A.· · · I don't.· I don't.· As -- I believe that's
17· ·why Stream hired a -- a firm to perform that work.
18· ·Q.· · · Do you know how many firms Stream had come
19· ·look at the garage?
20· ·A.· · · I do not.
21· ·Q.· · · Do you know how many firms Premier was
22· ·involved with that were looking at the garage
23· ·about repairs?
24· ·A.· · · I know of one that we -- is the one that
25· ·was selected to do the contract, the actual
Page 27
·1· ·contract.
·2· ·Q.· · · And who is that?
·3· ·A.· · · I don't recall, actually.
·4· ·Q.· · · Was that Mr. Brown?
·5· ·A.· · · Was Mr. Brown the one that was doing the
·6· ·work?
·7· ·Q.· · · Mr. Curtis Brown is the one who put some
·8· ·cables --
·9· ·A.· · · Curtis Brown.· So I knew him as Curtis,
10· ·so --
11· ·Q.· · · Yeah.· He's a gentleman.· So Mr. Curtis
12· ·Brown is his name.
13· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
14· ·Q.· · · You knew him?
15· ·A.· · · I've met him.· Yes.
16· ·Q.· · · And you met him in what context?
17· ·A.· · · Well, he was doing work in the garage. I
18· ·lived in Austin at the time.· So I saw him in the
19· ·garage.
20· ·Q.· · · Were you actually in the Littlefield
21· ·garage in the 2014 time frame?
22· ·A.· · · At different times.· Yes.
23· ·Q.· · · And did you inspect the cable barrier
24· ·system?
25· ·A.· · · I did not.
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
26 to 29
Page 28
·1· ·Q.· · · Had you ever noticed that there were
·2· ·cables missing?
·3· ·A.· · · I did not.
·4· ·Q.· · · Had you ever noticed that there were
·5· ·cables missing?
·6· ·A.· · · I did not.
·7· ·Q.· · · Had you ever noticed there were rusted,
·8· ·dilapidated cables?
·9· ·A.· · · I did not.
10· ·Q.· · · Did Ms. Wright ever tell you that anybody
11· ·ever indicated to her as an engineer that they
12· ·thought the garage was dangerous or dilapidated?
13· ·A.· · · Not that I recall.
14· ·Q.· · · If you were on-site as a parking person
15· ·for Premier and an engineer indicated that to you,
16· ·what would you do?
17· ·A.· · · I would recommend that we find someone
18· ·outside, a third-party, structural assessment
19· ·firm, to come and give us an assessment on the
20· ·work that was required for the parking structure.
21· ·Q.· · · So the scenario I'm giving you is, is
22· ·that's been done and the third party, who is an
23· ·engineer, is indicating that there are major
24· ·safety issues with the vehicle barrier system and
25· ·that it needs to be either replaced to meet the
Page 29
·1· ·standard of care or replaced to bring it up to the
·2· ·code, what would Premier do as a parking manager
·3· ·if it came into that information?
·4· ·A.· · · If it came -- we would let the landlord
·5· ·know immediately.
·6· ·Q.· · · And if the landlord refused to do what the
·7· ·engineer had recommended, what would Premier do?
·8· ·A.· · · We would do our best to strongly have them
·9· ·take another look at that, but that's also not a
10· ·core aspect of our business.· So we would continue
11· ·to work for the client in whatever capacity they
12· ·asked us to.
13· ·Q.· · · So even if it meant continuing to operate
14· ·a garage and allowing people to park in a garage
15· ·where Premier knew an engineer had said it was
16· ·dangerous, Premier would allow that to occur?
17· ·A.· · · No.· If Premier -- so if -- if there was
18· ·an absolute dangerous situation -- so I'll -- I'll
19· ·use this as an example.· If there was a parking
20· ·structure that we knew had the capacity to -- a
21· ·level could fall apart -- right -- or something,
22· ·you know, could take place, we would probably
23· ·consult with our in-house counsel on what
24· ·liability that we have with that structure and
25· ·determine whether it was best for us to continue
YVer1f
 Ryan Hunt
January 09, 2019
Page 30
·1· ·to work with that client in that capacity.
·2· ·Q.· · · That -- that is what would drive it for
·3· ·Premier, whether it had liability or not?
·4· ·A.· · · That's -- that is one of the reasons that
·5· ·would drive for Premier.· But also, we don't want
·6· ·to work with -- you know, we wouldn't want to work
·7· ·in certain situations where clients are not
·8· ·willing to spend the money to -- for an asset that
·9· ·could be in a considerable amount of trouble.
10· ·Q.· · · All right.· It would be important for
11· ·Premier to assure itself that it wasn't working
12· ·with a client that would spend less amount of
13· ·money than is necessary to make basic safety fixes
14· ·at a garage, right?
15· ·A.· · · I -- specifically if it was what you
16· ·referred to previously as serious danger and a
17· ·structural engineer said that there's serious
18· ·problems here, we would make those determinations
19· ·at that point.
20· ·Q.· · · Would you agree with me, as president of
21· ·Premier, that a vehicle plunging off the ninth
22· ·floor of a garage is a serious danger?
23· ·A.· · · Absolutely.
24· ·Q.· · · That's a serious problem?
25· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
Page 31
·1· ·Q.· · · Would you agree with me that a vehicle
·2· ·plunging off the seventh floor is a serious
·3· ·danger?
·4· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
·5· ·Q.· · · Serious problem?
·6· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
·7· ·Q.· · · And if Premier was made aware that there
·8· ·was a dilapidated or defective vehicle restraint
·9· ·system that increased that danger, you would agree
10· ·with me that basic safety principles would dictate
11· ·Premier to do something about that, right?
12· ·A.· · · Premier do something about -- as in?
13· ·Q.· · · As in either insist to the client that the
14· ·garage be appropriately fixed or disassociate
15· ·itself so that it wasn't making money off of a
16· ·dangerous situation.
17· ·A.· · · I think we did do that.· We implored on
18· ·certain aspects of how to move forward.· And from
19· ·my understanding, which I don't have the specifics
20· ·on what was repaired for the garage after the
21· ·first incident -- but I was under the impression
22· ·that there was work that was conducted on the
23· ·parking structure.
24· ·Q.· · · Who did Premier implore to fix the danger
25· ·in 2014?
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
30 to 33
Page 32
·1· ·A.· · · I made recommendations to work with a
·2· ·third-party consultant, structural assessment.
·3· ·Q.· · · What recommendations did you make to whom?
·4· ·A.· · · I connected Sean O'Brien with a group
·5· ·called Walker Parking Consultants.
·6· ·Q.· · · I think you're talking about 2017 or
·7· ·later.· I'm talking about --
·8· ·A.· · · I'm sorry.
·9· ·Q.· · · -- 2014.
10· ·A.· · · Oh, no.· I did not -- David -- GTT Parking
11· ·didn't own the structure in 2014.
12· ·Q.· · · Understand.
13· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
14· ·Q.· · · Right.· Stream did?
15· ·A.· · · That's correct.
16· ·Q.· · · And in 2014, you've indicated to me that
17· ·you've seen e-mails that show there were
18· ·engineers, one or more, out at the premises
19· ·indicating there was a serious safety issue with
20· ·the vehicle restraint system, right?
21· ·A.· · · I believe they made that known to the
22· ·landlord.
23· ·Q.· · · And so what did Premier do to implore the
24· ·landlord to make the garage safe?
25· ·A.· · · We understood that the landlord was
Page 33
·1· ·working with Curtis Brown to do that very thing.
·2· ·Q.· · · Okay.· How about in the time period before
·3· ·Curtis Brown started his work?· Did Premier do
·4· ·anything to ensure the safety of patrons who were
·5· ·using a garage that Premier knew was unsafe?
·6· ·A.· · · I don't recall.· I don't know if we knew
·7· ·it was unsafe at the time.
·8· ·Q.· · · Well, if an engineer told representatives
·9· ·of Premier that the vehicle restraint system was
10· ·dilapidated or defective or out of code or not to
11· ·the standard of care, that would indicate it was
12· ·unsafe, wouldn't it?
13· ·A.· · · Sure.· But just for clarity, when did the
14· ·engineer tell Premier that it was unsafe and
15· ·dilapidated between that time period and when
16· ·Curtis Brown did the work?
17· ·Q.· · · Well, did you not see that in the e-mails
18· ·you reviewed?
19· ·A.· · · I don't -- I mean, it's been some time
20· ·since I reviewed those e-mails.
21· ·Q.· · · Okay.
22· ·A.· · · I'm happy to review them now if you'd like
23· ·me to.
24· ·Q.· · · Sure.· I'll find one for you.· Would you
25· ·look at Exhibit 30 with me?
YVer1f
 Ryan Hunt
January 09, 2019
Page 34
·1· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.· Is it tabbed on 30?
·2· ·Q.· · · Yes.· It's tabbed on 30.
·3· ·A.· · · Thank you.
·4· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Are you going to
·5· ·identify it by Bates number or something?
·6· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· Well, it's Exhibit 30.
·7· ·It is Bates 1 -- I don't know if his documents
·8· ·are.· Bates 127 through 129.
·9· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· I don't have what you
10· ·have, so...
11· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· Oh.
12· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Okay.
13· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· It's just the previous
14· ·Exhibit 30.· They're all consecutively done.
15· ·BY MR. BREEN:
16· ·Q.· · · Is this one of the e-mails that you
17· ·reviewed?
18· ·A.· · · I believe so.
19· ·Q.· · · Okay.· Can you go to the second page with
20· ·me?
21· ·A.· · · And that's Page 128?
22· ·Q.· · · Yes, sir.
23· ·A.· · · Okay.
24· ·Q.· · · In the middle of the page, it talks about
25· ·VSL, the Fort Worth "big boys" and Wade Smith.· Do
Page 35
·1· ·you know who that is?
·2· ·A.· · · I do not.
·3· ·Q.· · · Did -- you didn't know that those were
·4· ·engineers?
·5· ·A.· · · I did not.
·6· ·Q.· · · Were you not made aware by your employee,
·7· ·Jessica Wright, that she was inspecting the garage
·8· ·with one or more engineers from VSL?
·9· ·A.· · · I was not.
10· ·Q.· · · Who would Ms. Wright have been reporting
11· ·to to indicate she was doing that inspection?
12· ·A.· · · This was in -- July 14th.· I believe she
13· ·was reporting to Bob Chapman at the time.
14· ·Q.· · · And his title at the time was what?
15· ·A.· · · Vice president.
16· ·Q.· · · So you would have expected Bob Chapman
17· ·then to know that Jessica was meeting for Premier
18· ·with engineers to inspect the barrier system?
19· ·A.· · · I would think that Bob might or might not
20· ·have been aware, but specifically Jessica would
21· ·not have been doing any of the inspecting.
22· · · · · · So to be clear, the engineers would have
23· ·been doing the inspecting.· Jessica would have
24· ·been walking them through the parking structure.
25· ·Q.· · · She would be walking them through and then
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
34 to 37
Page 36
·1· ·visiting with them as they walked through, right?
·2· ·A.· · · Giving them a tour, so to speak.
·3· ·Q.· · · And who is Nate?· Do you know?
·4· ·A.· · · Is it Nate from Stream?
·5· ·Q.· · · I'm not sure.· I'm asking.
·6· ·A.· · · I believe there was a Nate from Stream
·7· ·that was a director of facilities maybe, but I
·8· ·can't be a hundred-percent certain.· But not a
·9· ·Premier employee.
10· ·Q.· · · Other than VSL and its engineers, are you
11· ·aware of any other engineers that Premier
12· ·participated in inspections with?
13· ·A.· · · I am not.· Excuse me.
14· ·Q.· · · Have you seen or reviewed e-mails
15· ·indicating that Maritech Engineering also provided
16· ·inspections of the garage in June of 2014 or about
17· ·that time?
18· ·A.· · · I don't recall.
19· · · · · ·(Document marked Exhibit No. 46.)
20· ·BY MR. BREEN:
21· ·Q.· · · Show you Exhibit 46.· Did you know
22· ·Mr. Herron?
23· ·A.· · · I did.
24· ·Q.· · · Did you deal with Mr. Herron?
25· ·A.· · · Not regularly.
Page 37
·1· ·Q.· · · When you lived in Austin, what was your
·2· ·role with the Littlefield garage?
·3· ·A.· · · High-level client communication.
·4· ·Q.· · · In the Exhibit 46 that I've handed to you
·5· ·from May of 2014, do you see some pictures that
·6· ·are attached to the back?
·7· ·A.· · · I do.
·8· ·Q.· · · Do you see the pictures that show vehicle
·9· ·restraint cables broken and/or laying on the
10· ·ground?
11· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
12· ·Q.· · · Do those appear safe to you?
13· ·A.· · · They do not.
14· ·Q.· · · Do those appear to be in a working order
15· ·that would be a safe vehicle restraint system?
16· ·A.· · · I would say they do not.
17· ·Q.· · · As a property manager, would it be
18· ·acceptable for Premier to allow vehicles to park
19· ·in a multistory garage that had cables like this?
20· ·A.· · · That had cables like the broken one or --
21· ·Q.· · · Right.· Exactly.
22· ·A.· · · -- just like the picture?
23· ·Q.· · · Exactly.· Like we see in the picture from
24· ·the summer of 2014.
25· ·A.· · · Premier would be concerned.
YVer1f
 Ryan Hunt
January 09, 2019
Page 38
·1· ·Q.· · · What would be the concern?
·2· ·A.· · · The concern that the landlord would need
·3· ·to repair these.
·4· ·Q.· · · And the concern also is that it's unsafe
·5· ·until repaired?
·6· ·A.· · · I think that this incident has proven to
·7· ·show that.
·8· ·Q.· · · Not only Ms. Bowmer's, but Mr. O'Connor's,
·9· ·right?
10· ·A.· · · Correct.
11· ·Q.· · · It's proven that when a vehicle restraint
12· ·system that's in an unsafe condition is allowed to
13· ·be in an open garage, catastrophic accidents can
14· ·occur, right?
15· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
16· ·Q.· · · And it's proven that an owner, when on
17· ·notice of a defective vehicle restraint system,
18· ·should do something before an accident occurs, not
19· ·after, in order to prevent it, right?
20· ·A.· · · If I were the owner of a garage, I would
21· ·say yes.
22· ·Q.· · · I mean, you would agree with me that what
23· ·we're looking at in Exhibit 46 are examples of a
24· ·dangerous condition?
25· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
Page 39
·1· ·Q.· · · And that this garage shouldn't be open in
·2· ·a dangerous condition, should it?
·3· ·A.· · · Shouldn't be open to the public?
·4· ·Q.· · · Right.
·5· ·A.· · · I would think to some degree -- I don't
·6· ·know specifically what those cables are supposed
·7· ·to restrain or not to restrain.
·8· ·Q.· · · So don't you think they're supposed to
·9· ·restrain a car from going off the edge?
10· ·A.· · · A car at what speeds or anything of that
11· ·specifically --
12· ·Q.· · · Well, setting aside speeds for a minute,
13· ·don't you think that the cables are supposed to
14· ·restrain a car from going off the edge?
15· ·A.· · · I would think at -- at certain scenarios,
16· ·they would.· I think they would probably be
17· ·uncapable -- incapable of doing so at specific
18· ·speeds or things like that.
19· ·Q.· · · Okay.· Well, I thought you told me you
20· ·didn't have any expertise in --
21· ·A.· · · I don't.· I'm saying in common sense --
22· ·Q.· · · Okay.
23· ·A.· · · -- terms.
24· ·Q.· · · So common sense -- let's talk about that
25· ·then.· Common sense then indicates to you as
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
38 to 41
Page 40
·1· ·president of Premier that what we're looking at in
·2· ·Exhibit 46 is a dangerous scenario, isn't it?
·3· ·A.· · · It's -- it's a concern.· Yes.
·4· ·Q.· · · Dangerous concern, isn't it?
·5· ·A.· · · I would say so.
·6· ·Q.· · · And that a vehicle restraint system is not
·7· ·intended to prevent necessarily an accident, but
·8· ·it's intended to prevent injuries that could occur
·9· ·because of an accident where somebody goes off of
10· ·the garage, right?
11· ·A.· · · Say again.· I'm sorry.
12· ·Q.· · · Yeah.· A vehicle restraint system may not
13· ·prevent an accident from occurring.· That is,
14· ·somebody may accidentally accelerate or go over
15· ·the curb stop, something to that effect.· But the
16· ·intent is to keep the car from leaving the
17· ·building when that occurs, right?
18· ·A.· · · I would say so.
19· ·Q.· · · And that at a low speed, say,
20· ·10-mile-per-hour collision, common sense tells you
21· ·the injuries, if any, from that are going to be
22· ·much less significant than falling nine stories to
23· ·the ground, right?
24· ·A.· · · I'm sorry.· Say that again.
25· ·Q.· · · From a common sense perspective --
Page 41
·1· ·A.· · · Yes.
·2· ·Q.· · · -- an accident at 10 miles per hour --
·3· ·A.· · · A normal car accident?
·4· ·Q.· · · Yes, sir.
·5· ·A.· · · Okay.
·6· ·Q.· · · -- into a barrier --
·7· ·A.· · · Okay.
·8· ·Q.· · · -- where the barrier holds you is going to
·9· ·be much less significant in terms of injuries than
10· ·falling nine --
11· ·A.· · · Sure.
12· ·Q.· · · -- or seven --
13· ·A.· · · Yes.
14· ·Q.· · · -- stories?
15· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
16· ·Q.· · · And so you expect because of human nature,
17· ·that people are going to have accidents.· But
18· ·common sense tells you the barrier is there to
19· ·keep the accident from becoming catastrophic?
20· ·A.· · · I don't know, but I would assume that's
21· ·the design of the parking structure.
22· ·Q.· · · Well, isn't that what common sense tells
23· ·you?
24· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
25· ·Q.· · · Okay.· You are saying you personally never
YVer1f
 Ryan Hunt
January 09, 2019
Page 42
·1· ·noticed any of the cables in the conditions that
·2· ·we see in Exhibit 46; is that true?
·3· ·A.· · · That's true.· Just for clarity, I parked
·4· ·right next to the office right above the ramp.· So
·5· ·I would -- never traveled to any of the higher
·6· ·floors.
·7· ·Q.· · · Ms. Wright did?
·8· ·A.· · · I believe so.· Yeah.
·9· ·Q.· · · Would Mr. Chapman have?
10· ·A.· · · I don't know.
11· · · · · ·(Document marked Exhibit No. 47.)
12· ·BY MR. BREEN:
13· ·Q.· · · Show you Exhibit 47.
14· ·A.· · · Are we good with this?
15· ·Q.· · · Yes, sir.
16· ·A.· · · Okay.· Thank you.
17· ·Q.· · · If you don't mind just setting it aside,
18· ·that's awesome.
19· ·A.· · · Thank you.
20· ·Q.· · · Were you aware of any interaction between
21· ·Premier representatives and anybody from Maritech
22· ·Engineering in the summer of 2014?
23· ·A.· · · Who -- who is with Maritech Engineering?
24· ·Q.· · · Well, they have a couple different people.
25· ·Here it's a C.M.D.· Michael Donoghue, PE.· And
Page 43
·1· ·there's been reports from him produced in the case
·2· ·that are attached in the exhibits.
·3· ·A.· · · Okay.· Anyone else from Mike -- was it
·4· ·just Maritech or any other individuals?· I don't
·5· ·recall.
·6· ·Q.· · · Yeah.
·7· ·A.· · · But I just want to make sure I have names
·8· ·to be clear.
·9· ·Q.· · · I'm doing the best I can with you, so --
10· ·A.· · · Gotcha.· Gotcha.
11· ·Q.· · · My question to you was:· Were you aware of
12· ·any interaction between people from Premier and
13· ·Maritech Engineering in June of 2014?
14· ·A.· · · I don't believe so.
15· ·Q.· · · Did you know that Maritech Engineering, in
16· ·addition to the engineering company from Fort
17· ·Worth we already looked at, likewise did an
18· ·inspection of the garage?
19· ·A.· · · I was not.
20· ·Q.· · · In this e-mail on 47, it indicates that
21· ·this licensed professional engineer, Mr. Donoghue,
22· ·did a quick cursory visit to the garage.· Do you
23· ·see that?
24· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
25· ·Q.· · · He says, "Based on what we saw in a
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
42 to 45
Page 44
·1· ·10-minute tour, there are definitely numerous
·2· ·basic safety issues to be addressed regarding the
·3· ·vehicle barriers.· Looking at the current IBC
·4· ·code, there are also potential pedestrian and
·5· ·guardrail issues.· The absence of structural
·6· ·documents only compounds the issues most likely."
·7· ·And then he goes on to say a few other things.· Do
·8· ·you see that there?
·9· ·A.· · · I do.
10· ·Q.· · · Who would at Premier -- would it be
11· ·Ms. Wright or Mr. Chapman -- if there was anybody
12· ·involved with inspections that would be the likely
13· ·people to visit with about that issue regarding
14· ·Maritech Engineering?
15· ·A.· · · Would Maritech be specifically meeting
16· ·with Premier about their findings?· Is that --
17· ·Q.· · · Well, for --
18· ·A.· · · -- what you're asking?
19· ·Q.· · · -- instance -- no.· I'm not asking you
20· ·that.· What I'm asking you is:· Do you know if
21· ·either Bob or Ms. Wright walked the premises with
22· ·Maritech like they did with the company from Fort
23· ·Worth?
24· ·A.· · · I do not.
25· ·Q.· · · Fair enough.· Do you see on the second
Page 45
·1· ·page of this Exhibit 47 there is a note from the
·2· ·engineer, Donoghue, D-O-N-O-G-H-U-E -- so I
·3· ·imagine that may be Donoghue (phonetic) -- that
·4· ·says, "Thank you for your reply.· It's a relief
·5· ·not dealing with current requirements, not to
·6· ·mention the standard of care.· They are onerous."
·7· · · · · · Did I read that correctly?
·8· ·A.· · · You did.
·9· ·Q.· · · Was Premier aware in 2014 that Stream
10· ·Realty was deliberating about doing work on the
11· ·vehicle restraint system that did not bring it up
12· ·to current code requirements or the current
13· ·standard of care?
14· ·A.· · · I was not aware.
15· ·Q.· · · Is this a surprise to you?
16· ·A.· · · That they were not bringing it up to
17· ·current code requirements?
18· ·Q.· · · Right.
19· ·A.· · · That's not necessarily a surprise, but
20· ·standard of care would be a surprise.
21· ·Q.· · · Yeah.· The fact that a garage owner would
22· ·determine not to bring the garage vehicle
23· ·restraint system up to a standard of care, a
24· ·minimum level of the standard of care, is that
25· ·acceptable to Premier?
YVer1f
 Ryan Hunt
January 09, 2019
Page 46
·1· ·A.· · · No.· I would want our clients to protect
·2· ·their assets.
·3· ·Q.· · · Well, wouldn't you also want them to
·4· ·protect the people that use the garage?
·5· ·A.· · · Well, in protecting their assets, that's
·6· ·exactly what they would do.
·7· ·Q.· · · What is the priority?· Protect the asset
·8· ·or protect the people that use it?
·9· ·A.· · · Well, it's what -- specifically in order
10· ·to protect the people that use it, you have to
11· ·protect the asset.· So the priority would be the
12· ·asset, because without it, the people aren't
13· ·parking there.
14· ·Q.· · · Do you find at Premier that your garage
15· ·owners typically believe complying with the
16· ·standard of care is onerous?
17· ·A.· · · I do not.
18· ·Q.· · · Do you encourage your garage owners to
19· ·comply with the standard of care?
20· ·A.· · · We -- we encourage our garage owners to
21· ·take care of their assets.· Yes.
22· ·Q.· · · Well, in this case, you have an asset as
23· ·of June 16th that in a 10-minute walk, the
24· ·engineer has determined that it does not comply
25· ·with current code and does not comply with the
Page 47
·1· ·standard of care.· Yet Premier is managing the
·2· ·garage and allowing people to park there; isn't
·3· ·that true?
·4· ·A.· · · That is true.
·5· ·Q.· · · Do you know of anything that Premier did
·6· ·to encourage the owner to bring the garage to the
·7· ·minimum standard of care in the summer of 2014?
·8· ·A.· · · I'm not aware.
·9· ·Q.· · · What was Premier's involvement with
10· ·Mr. Brown?· You indicated to me that you met
11· ·Mr. Brown.
12· ·A.· · · I did.· He did work on the garage for
13· ·several months, I believe.
14· ·Q.· · · And in what context did you meet
15· ·Mr. Brown?
16· ·A.· · · He was in and out of the parking office.
17· ·Q.· · · Is Mr. Brown an engineer?
18· ·A.· · · I do not know.
19· ·Q.· · · Do you think that he is?
20· ·A.· · · I think that he is.
21· ·Q.· · · What -- what indications to you from
22· ·Mr. Brown made you think that he's an engineer?
23· ·A.· · · I didn't have any indications from him
24· ·that made me think he was an engineer.
25· ·Q.· · · Okay.· When you just told me you think
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
46 to 49
Page 48
·1· ·that he is, what was it that -- about Mr. Brown
·2· ·that made you think he was an engineer?
·3· ·A.· · · It wasn't anything about Mr. Brown. I
·4· ·think it was about the e-mails that I reviewed
·5· ·just now previously.
·6· ·Q.· · · All right.· By "just now," do you mean the
·7· ·ones I showed you?
·8· ·A.· · · Yeah.· Curtis Brown, conversations with
·9· ·Eric Herron here.
10· ·Q.· · · Okay.· Well, I think the ones you and I
11· ·just looked at was an engineer, Mr. Donoghue, from
12· ·Maritech, not Mr. Brown.
13· ·A.· · · He's referenced in the e-mails.
14· ·Q.· · · He's copied --
15· ·A.· · · Curtis is.
16· ·Q.· · · -- in the e-mail?
17· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
18· ·Q.· · · But what is it about that e-mail that
19· ·indicates to you Mr. Brown is an engineer?
20· ·A.· · · I don't know.
21· ·Q.· · · Okay.· Did -- is it basically that as
22· ·president of Premier, you would expect that if an
23· ·owner has an individual design affixed to a
24· ·vehicle restraint system in a nine-story garage,
25· ·that person is going to be an engineer?
Page 49
·1· ·A.· · · I don't know, but I would assume so.
·2· ·Q.· · · You would assume that that's a reasonable
·3· ·thing to do, right, have an engineer involved in
·4· ·the fix?
·5· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
·6· ·Q.· · · You would assume that a reasonable owner
·7· ·would have an engineer design the either
·8· ·replacement or fix of a dilapidated vehicle
·9· ·restraint system, right?
10· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
11· ·Q.· · · Did Premier ever undertake any activity to
12· ·ensure Stream was doing that, having somebody
13· ·qualified to actually do a fix to what Premier
14· ·knew was a dangerous scenario?
15· ·A.· · · I do not recall.
16· ·Q.· · · Who would know that at Premier?
17· ·A.· · · Jessica Wright.
18· ·Q.· · · Anybody else?
19· ·A.· · · I don't know.
20· ·Q.· · · Why was Ms. Wright terminated from the
21· ·company?
22· ·A.· · · For erratic behavior and concerns about
23· ·her personal well-being.
24· ·Q.· · · What erratic behavior?
25· ·A.· · · We had reason to believe that she was
YVer1f
 Ryan Hunt
January 09, 2019
Page 50
·1· ·struggling with substance abuse, and we sent her
·2· ·for a drug screen that she refused to take.· And
·3· ·she was terminated for not complying with company
·4· ·procedures and policies.
·5· ·Q.· · · What other erratic behavior?
·6· ·A.· · · I think specifically related to -- she
·7· ·showed behavior that was representative of
·8· ·somebody that might be on some chemical substance
·9· ·of some sort.
10· ·Q.· · · What behavior was that?
11· ·A.· · · I don't recall all of the behavior, but
12· ·not being herself is -- is probably the best way
13· ·to describe it.
14· ·Q.· · · Well, certainly it must have been some
15· ·type of negative behavior, I take it?
16· ·A.· · · Sure.· I think any time anybody is not
17· ·being themselves, it's not a good thing.
18· ·Q.· · · Was it inattention or lack of showing up
19· ·at work?· Did it affect her performance?
20· ·A.· · · For -- there was a period of three weeks
21· ·where we were very concerned, and then that's when
22· ·we sent her for the drug screen.
23· ·Q.· · · And she refused to go for the drug screen?
24· ·A.· · · She refused that day.· Yes.
25· ·Q.· · · What was it particularly in those three
Page 51
·1· ·weeks that made Premier concerned?· What was she
·2· ·doing?
·3· ·A.· · · I don't remember all the specifics, but I
·4· ·believe that there was a tardiness, kind of in and
·5· ·out of the -- or in and out of the office.
·6· ·Q.· · · In the 2014 time frame, besides Ms. Wright
·7· ·and Mr. Chapman and yourself, who else would have
·8· ·been for Premier in the garage in Austin at
·9· ·Littlefield?
10· ·A.· · · Maintenance -- well, when I say
11· ·maintenance, janitorial employees.· You know, say
12· ·entry-level parking attendant employees.
13· ·Q.· · · Anybody else?
14· ·A.· · · A couple of executives might have visited
15· ·the parking office because it was the place -- it
16· ·was the only parking office that we had in Austin,
17· ·Texas at the time.
18· ·Q.· · · So Premier's basically headquarters in
19· ·Austin was at the Littlefield garage?
20· ·A.· · · We didn't have a headquarters in Austin.
21· ·Q.· · · In the 2014 time frame, what was the
22· ·trajectory at that time of Premier going from how
23· ·many to what it is now --
24· ·A.· · · I don't recall.
25· ·Q.· · · -- in terms of facilities?· Was it at the
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
50 to 53
Page 52
·1· ·cusp of the major growth?
·2· ·A.· · · We've had major growth over the last 10
·3· ·years, so...
·4· ·Q.· · · Growing from what to what?
·5· ·A.· · · One parking location to over 500.
·6· ·Q.· · · Has that been evenly spaced over the 10
·7· ·years?
·8· ·A.· · · It hasn't.
·9· ·Q.· · · In 2014 --
10· ·A.· · · But from a compounded annual growth rate,
11· ·I would say it has been.
12· ·Q.· · · Has the company been in contact with
13· ·Ms. Wright since she was terminated?
14· ·A.· · · I don't believe so.
15· ·Q.· · · Did the company in any way press charges
16· ·against Ms. Wright?
17· ·A.· · · We did.
18· ·Q.· · · For what?
19· ·A.· · · We believed that she had stolen from a
20· ·parking meter.
21· ·Q.· · · What was the outcome of that?
22· ·A.· · · I don't believe that the City of Austin
23· ·proceeded with the charges.
24· ·Q.· · · And Ms. Murray replaced Ms. Wright?
25· ·A.· · · She did.
Page 53
·1· ·Q.· · · Have you read Ms. Murray's deposition as
·2· ·the corporate representative of Premier in this
·3· ·case?
·4· ·A.· · · I have not.
·5· ·Q.· · · Would you describe Premier's services for
·6· ·GTT as solely janitorial?
·7· ·A.· · · No.
·8· ·Q.· · · What else besides janitorial did Premier
·9· ·provide as services --
10· ·A.· · · Revenue management.
11· ·Q.· · · What else?
12· ·A.· · · So AR, management of AR, accounts
13· ·receivable, monthly parkers.
14· ·Q.· · · Help manage the asset?
15· ·A.· · · We manage the day-to-day operation.· Yeah.
16· ·Parking equipment selection.· They ask us to
17· ·review something -- changing light bulbs, you
18· ·know, replacing signage, working with tenants,
19· ·working with local businesses to capture
20· ·additional revenue or additional opportunities or
21· ·make it -- you know, ideally parking is -- is an
22· ·amenity, and you want to be able to provide that
23· ·to people.
24· ·Q.· · · Did GTT ask Premier to meet with, for
25· ·instance, professionals or vendors who needed to
YVer1f
 Ryan Hunt
January 09, 2019
Page 54
·1· ·inspect the facility?
·2· ·A.· · · I don't think so.
·3· ·Q.· · · Did GTT ask Premier to coordinate, for
·4· ·instance, meeting with representatives of the City
·5· ·of Austin who might be looking at code compliance
·6· ·or either of the incidents where people were hurt?
·7· ·A.· · · There is -- I don't know, but it's not
·8· ·uncommon for a parking manager to be the
·9· ·designated kind of tour guide if somebody needs to
10· ·come and do the garage.
11· · · · · · So if you were power washing the garage,
12· ·if you're striping the garage, if you're looking
13· ·at replacing ballasts in the garage, typically a
14· ·parking manager will be the person that
15· ·coordinates that.
16· ·Q.· · · If the garage owner wanted safety work
17· ·like, for instance, installing curb stops, could
18· ·it call Premier Parking to do that?
19· ·A.· · · In some degree, yes.· We would install
20· ·wheel stops.
21· ·Q.· · · So -- and you, I think, told me before
22· ·that wheel stops are part of a vehicle restraint
23· ·system in a garage, right?
24· ·A.· · · I didn't say they're part of a vehicle
25· ·restraint system.· What you say, I think
Page 55
·1· ·they're -- wheel stops are actual -- they are
·2· ·designed to stop a vehicle once in a space, and
·3· ·it's for several reasons.· But to keep it from
·4· ·hitting something -- distance from the wheel stop
·5· ·to the edge of a garage or the edge of a parking
·6· ·lot.
·7· ·Q.· · · Well, isn't that, by definition, a
·8· ·restraint of the vehicle?
·9· ·A.· · · Sure.
10· ·Q.· · · All right.· So whether you call it a wheel
11· ·stop or a vehicle restraint, it's synonymous,
12· ·right?
13· ·A.· · · I think wheel stop is wheel stop.· I think
14· ·it's a specific type of thing.
15· ·Q.· · · It's a specific type of a vehicle
16· ·restraint?
17· ·A.· · · I would say a wheel stop -- my -- my
18· ·definition of a wheel stop, it -- it just is what
19· ·it is.· A wheel stop is a wheel stop.· There's no
20· ·other really --
21· ·Q.· · · Well, what's it intended to do, Mr. Hunt?
22· ·A.· · · It could be a number of different things.
23· ·Q.· · · It's intended to stop the car, isn't it?
24· ·A.· · · But it's also, you know, aesthetic.· You
25· ·know, people install wheel stops for aesthetic
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
54 to 57
Page 56
·1· ·reasons.
·2· ·Q.· · · What is aesthetic about a wheel stop?
·3· ·A.· · · Well, it just -- look, parking lots are
·4· ·never aesthetic, in my opinion.· But some owners
·5· ·like everything, you know.· They want wheel stops.
·6· ·They want florescent paint.
·7· · · · · · They want different things that are, you
·8· ·know, maybe not required, but they want specific
·9· ·things in the -- in the -- in the structure or in
10· ·the surface parking lot.· You know, there's
11· ·different type of wheel stops.· There's concrete
12· ·wheel stops, rubber wheel stops.
13· ·Q.· · · Would you agree with me that Premier was
14· ·involved with installing wheel stops in the
15· ·Littlefield garage?
16· ·A.· · · I don't know.
17· ·Q.· · · Would it surprise you if it was?
18· ·A.· · · In the Littlefield garage --
19· ·Q.· · · Yes, sir.
20· ·A.· · · -- if we had specifically installed wheel
21· ·stops?
22· ·Q.· · · Right.
23· ·A.· · · I don't know.· I -- I would have to look
24· ·at the wheel stops and how they're actually
25· ·installed.
Page 57
·1· ·Q.· · · Well, is there a certain way Premier
·2· ·installs them?
·3· ·A.· · · Well, like on a surface parking lot, we
·4· ·would -- if there was no real safety concerns, the
·5· ·wheel stop is just there for the parking space --
·6· ·you can glue them on.· But in certain parking
·7· ·structures, you might have some rebar that's in
·8· ·there, that's actually in the concrete.
·9· ·Q.· · · And has Premier put in wheel stops in
10· ·parking structures where it needed to use rebar?
11· ·A.· · · I don't think so.
12· ·Q.· · · How many structures do you know of that
13· ·Premier has installed wheel stops?
14· ·A.· · · I wouldn't know.
15· ·Q.· · · More than one?
16· ·A.· · · I wouldn't know if we've done any, so...
17· ·Q.· · · Who would know that if not the president?
18· ·A.· · · I'm not sure.
19· ·Q.· · · Would you agree with me that proposing to
20· ·install wheel stops or installing wheel stops is
21· ·not janitorial?
22· ·A.· · · Yes, I would.
23· ·Q.· · · That there is, among other things, a
24· ·safety component to a wheel stop?
25· ·A.· · · Yes.
YVer1f
 Ryan Hunt
January 09, 2019
Page 58
·1· ·Q.· · · Would you agree with me that checking to
·2· ·see whether vehicle restraint cables were up or
·3· ·functional is not janitorial?
·4· ·A.· · · It is not janitorial.· Yes.
·5· ·Q.· · · There's a safety component to that, is
·6· ·there not?
·7· ·A.· · · Yes.
·8· ·Q.· · · Would you agree with me that replacing
·9· ·cables or facilitating the replacement of cables
10· ·in a cable barrier system is not janitorial?
11· ·A.· · · Yes.
12· ·Q.· · · There's a safety component to that?
13· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
14· ·Q.· · · To what extent was Premier involved in
15· ·helping Mr. Brown with the repairs to the cable
16· ·restraint system in 2014?
17· ·A.· · · I don't know.
18· ·Q.· · · Who would know that?
19· ·A.· · · Jessica Wright.· Bob Chapman might as
20· ·well.
21· ·Q.· · · Okay.
22· ·A.· · · I do know that we would block off parking
23· ·spaces, because that's part of our function, for
24· ·work to be performed on the garage.
25· ·Q.· · · You indicated that you saw Mr. Wright
Page 59
·1· ·[sic] in the garage in the summer of 2014?· Pardon
·2· ·me.
·3· ·A.· · · Who's that?
·4· ·Q.· · · Let me re-ask that because I messed up the
·5· ·name.· You indicated to me that you saw Mr. Brown
·6· ·working in the garage in 2014?
·7· ·A.· · · Yes.
·8· ·Q.· · · What did you see him doing?
·9· ·A.· · · Well, he would come in and out of the
10· ·parking office, which is where I was.
11· ·Q.· · · For what purpose?
12· ·A.· · · I don't know.
13· ·Q.· · · Was Premier paying Mr. Brown?
14· ·A.· · · Not that I recall.· If we were doing so,
15· ·we were doing so as -- at the request of the
16· ·landlord.
17· ·Q.· · · Did the -- did Premier have an agreement
18· ·with Stream as to how any expenses like, for
19· ·instance, recabling were going to be booked in
20· ·terms of how Premier's payment was going to be
21· ·calculated?
22· ·A.· · · Typically repairs of a capital nature,
23· ·anything above a thousand dollars, that we're not
24· ·required to perform.· If -- we also do control all
25· ·the reviews that come in the garage.· It comes in
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
58 to 61
Page 60
·1· ·our bank account.· So they might want to pay that
·2· ·out of those -- out of that revenue, but it would
·3· ·be held below the line.· So it wouldn't calculate
·4· ·on the incentive fee.
·5· ·Q.· · · And was that an unwritten agreement you
·6· ·had with Stream?
·7· ·A.· · · I don't -- I don't know.· I mean, I'd have
·8· ·to review the contract, but typically our
·9· ·contracts call out -- repairs are -- of a capital
10· ·nature, have nothing to do with our incentive fee.
11· ·Q.· · · Did you do the contract with Stream?
12· ·A.· · · I did not do the contract.
13· ·Q.· · · Who did?
14· ·A.· · · Hank Abbott --
15· ·Q.· · · Who's --
16· ·A.· · · -- potentially.
17· ·Q.· · · Could you spell his last name for me?
18· ·A.· · · A-B-B-O-T-T.
19· ·Q.· · · Is Hank --
20· ·A.· · · Hunter Kitchens might know this answer
21· ·better if he's allowed to respond.
22· ·Q.· · · I can -- he -- he's not.
23· ·A.· · · Okay.· Sorry.
24· ·Q.· · · Yeah.· That's all right.· I can ask him
25· ·off the record.· Is Mr. Abbott still with the
Page 61
·1· ·company?
·2· ·A.· · · He was not with the company.· He was
·3· ·outside counsel.
·4· ·Q.· · · He was counsel.· Okay.· Were you in any
·5· ·way involved in the negotiations with Stream on
·6· ·Premier's deal with Stream?
·7· ·A.· · · I was not.
·8· ·Q.· · · Besides Mr. Abbott, who was?
·9· ·A.· · · Mr. Chapman.· Ryan Chapman.· Excuse me.
10· ·Q.· · · How about the Premier agreement with GTT?
11· ·Were you involved with formulating that?
12· ·A.· · · I don't believe we formulated a new
13· ·agreement.· I think we just assigned the original
14· ·agreement.
15· ·Q.· · · Okay.· There -- there's actually a signed
16· ·agreement between Premier and GTT in this case.
17· ·Did you know that?
18· ·A.· · · I did not.· I would assume it's an
19· ·assignment of the original agreement with the same
20· ·terms.· That's what I remember when David bought
21· ·the garage.
22· ·Q.· · · What -- what triggers that memory?
23· ·A.· · · Well, David and I had coffee, David,
24· ·myself and Sean O'Brien, to talk about -- they
25· ·were closing on the asset and wanted to know how
YVer1f
 Ryan Hunt
January 09, 2019
Page 62
·1· ·we were going to continue to manage it.
·2· ·Q.· · · All right.· So --
·3· ·A.· · · It was an interview of some sorts.
·4· ·Q.· · · Okay.· Your recollection, as you sit here
·5· ·now, is, is that the way the deal operated with
·6· ·GTT was the same way as how it operated with
·7· ·Stream, that being the agreement between Premier
·8· ·and the garage owner?
·9· ·A.· · · I would say the same contractual language
10· ·that was with Stream is with GTT Parking.
11· ·Q.· · · Well, did it operate functionally the
12· ·same?
13· ·A.· · · The parking garage operated the same.
14· ·Q.· · · What was different?
15· ·A.· · · Who we reported to.
16· ·Q.· · · Anything else?
17· ·A.· · · I don't believe so.
18· ·Q.· · · All right.· So in terms of how Premier
19· ·acted and operated vis-à-vis either Stream or GTT,
20· ·Premier acted and operated the same with both,
21· ·with the exception it was just different people;
22· ·is that fair?
23· ·A.· · · I don't know if that's fair or not fair.
24· ·I'm sure there are differences and subtleties
25· ·within the arrangement.
Page 63
·1· ·Q.· · · Well, tell me what they were.
·2· ·A.· · · How often we met.
·3· ·Q.· · · What was the difference?
·4· ·A.· · · I'm just saying these could be
·5· ·differences.· I'm not -- I'm not aware of any
·6· ·strong differences.
·7· ·Q.· · · Okay.· Well, absent you being --
·8· ·A.· · · Every client is different, is what I'm
·9· ·trying to stay.
10· ·Q.· · · I understand.· I'm just trying to
11· ·understand your statement before that you thought
12· ·it essentially was an assignment, and
13· ·functionally, with maybe some minor differences,
14· ·it sounds like Premier's relationship was the --
15· ·with the owner was the same with Stream as it was
16· ·with GTT?
17· ·A.· · · Sure.· As parking operator, exactly.
18· ·Yeah.
19· ·Q.· · · Can you think of any differences between
20· ·how Premier functioned its role, its interaction
21· ·between doing it with Stream and doing it with
22· ·GTT?
23· ·A.· · · Since I didn't handle the day-to-day
24· ·management, probably not the best to answer that.
25· ·Q.· · · So the answer would be no?· You don't know
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
62 to 65
Page 64
·1· ·of any?
·2· ·A.· · · Correct.· Thank you.
·3· ·Q.· · · Yes, sir.· Now, you mentioned that you had
·4· ·what you characterized as a job interview with
·5· ·Mr. O'Brien and Mr. Kahn?
·6· ·A.· · · That's fair.· Yes.
·7· ·Q.· · · Okay.· And when was that?
·8· ·A.· · · Probably 30 -- 30 days before they closed
·9· ·on the parking garage.· When I say "closed,"
10· ·bought the parking garage.
11· ·Q.· · · Like actually consummated the transaction?
12· ·A.· · · Correct.
13· ·Q.· · · Thank you.· So if my memory serves me
14· ·correctly, the purchase agreement between GTT and
15· ·6th and Congress was July 27th of 2015.· That's
16· ·Exhibit 23.· And then it closed about
17· ·mid-September of 2015.· Does that time frame sound
18· ·generally correct to you?
19· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
20· ·Q.· · · And that you would have then been meeting
21· ·with them in some period of time in the weeks
22· ·before September 15th of 2015?
23· ·A.· · · Probably early September.
24· ·Q.· · · The date of the service contract between
25· ·Premier and GTT is dated September 8th of 2015.
Page 65
·1· ·So with that benchmark, would that indicate to you
·2· ·it was a couple weeks prior to September 8th?
·3· ·A.· · · That's -- yes.
·4· ·Q.· · · All right.· And was that the -- this
·5· ·meeting you had with Mr. O'Brien and Mr. Kahn, was
·6· ·that the first time you had met with them?
·7· ·A.· · · Yes.
·8· ·Q.· · · Had you interfaced with them prior to that
·9· ·time frame in September of 2015, before then?
10· ·A.· · · I had not.
11· ·Q.· · · And how did it come up?
12· ·A.· · · Excuse me?
13· ·Q.· · · Like did you solicit them?· Did they call
14· ·you?· How did the meeting --
15· ·A.· · · No.· We were introduced by Stream, and so
16· ·I believe that they -- Stream gave them our
17· ·contact information, and David asked to have a cup
18· ·of coffee.
19· ·Q.· · · Great.· And was it in Austin?
20· ·A.· · · It was.
21· ·Q.· · · Where?
22· ·A.· · · I can't think of the place, but it's on
23· ·6th Street adjacent to the garage.
24· ·Q.· · · How long did you meet?
25· ·A.· · · 45 minutes or an hour.
YVer1f
 Ryan Hunt
January 09, 2019
Page 66
·1· ·Q.· · · And what --
·2· ·A.· · · Maybe not even.
·3· ·Q.· · · Okay.· What -- what did you tell Mr. Kahn
·4· ·that Premier would offer in terms of services for
·5· ·the garage for the owner?
·6· ·A.· · · I don't know that we talked about that.
·7· ·Q.· · · Okay.· Well, what did you talk about for
·8· ·45 minutes?
·9· ·A.· · · He asked my opinion on the Austin parking
10· ·market.· He wanted more specifics about who
11· ·Premier was.· You know, kind of where we hailed
12· ·from, what we thought about the assets that we're
13· ·selling, because there was -- it wasn't just that
14· ·one.· It was two others.
15· ·Q.· · · Anything else?
16· ·A.· · · I mean, I'm sure.· I just don't recall all
17· ·the specifics.
18· ·Q.· · · Did you make any kind of representations
19· ·to Mr. Kahn about what services Premier could
20· ·provide to the owner of the garage?
21· ·A.· · · I think we talked about the revenue
22· ·management side of the -- the opportunity that
23· ·existed for, I would say, higher parking rates.
24· ·Q.· · · Anything else?
25· ·A.· · · I don't specifically recall.
Page 67
·1· · · · · · · · MR. RHODES:· Let us know when you're
·2· ·at a stopping point --
·3· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· I'm fine.
·4· · · · · · · · MR. RHODES:· -- for a break.
·5· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· Whenever you guys want
·6· ·to -- let's take a break then.
·7· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Cool.
·8· · · · · · · · MR. RHODES:· Thank you.
·9· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· Sure.· You bet.
10· · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· You want to go off
11· ·the record?
12· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· Yes.
13· · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Off the record at
14· ·9:47 a.m.
15· · · · · · · (Recess, 9:47 to 10:06 a.m.)
16· · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Returning to the
17· ·record.· The time is 10:06 a.m.
18· · · · · ·(Document marked Exhibit No. 45.)
19· ·BY MR. BREEN:
20· ·Q.· · · Mr. Hunt, we're back on the record.· Are
21· ·you okay to proceed?
22· ·A.· · · I am.
23· ·Q.· · · All right.· Let me show you Exhibit 45. I
24· ·neglected to show you that before.· It's a little
25· ·packet of some stuff that I pulled off of the
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
66 to 69
Page 68
·1· ·Internet that looks like it's bio material on you.
·2· ·A.· · · Okay.
·3· ·Q.· · · The first one is --
·4· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· And I apologize for not
·5· ·having copies for everybody.· I just kind of
·6· ·plucked this off this morning here.
·7· ·BY MR. BREEN:
·8· ·Q.· · · The first page looks like it's your
·9· ·LinkedIn -- or the first two pages there.
10· ·A.· · · Okay.
11· ·Q.· · · You -- you manage and operate your
12· ·LinkedIn account or somebody does it for you?
13· ·A.· · · Yes.· It's a couple people.· Yes.
14· ·Q.· · · Okay.· And --
15· ·A.· · · Including myself.
16· ·Q.· · · Great.· The information that's contained
17· ·there, that's accurate, on your LinkedIn account?
18· ·A.· · · I believe so.· Yes.
19· ·Q.· · · All right.· And then there's a page in
20· ·here of -- a good picture of you sitting in front
21· ·of a brick wall that looks like it is the "Who we
22· ·are" page about you on the Premier website.· Do
23· ·you see that?
24· ·A.· · · What -- is that Page 4?
25· ·Q.· · · It's that page with you there.
Page 69
·1· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
·2· ·Q.· · · Has your -- you -- when you were a kid,
·3· ·you wanted to be Michael Jordan when you grew up
·4· ·page?
·5· ·A.· · · Yeah.· Yes, sir.
·6· ·Q.· · · Are you still aspiring for that?
·7· ·A.· · · I gave it up a long time ago.
·8· ·Q.· · · Never quit dreaming --
·9· ·A.· · · That's right.
10· ·Q.· · · -- Mr. Hunt.
11· ·A.· · · I still try at least to play.
12· ·Q.· · · Have you ever dunked a basketball in your
13· ·life?
14· ·A.· · · I have.
15· ·Q.· · · You have?
16· ·A.· · · Yeah.
17· ·Q.· · · For real?
18· ·A.· · · Yeah.
19· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· You --
20· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· On a nine-foot goal.
21· ·BY MR. BREEN:
22· ·Q.· · · Okay.· Good answer.· All right.· Again,
23· ·the information on the "Who we are" page, that --
24· ·that information is accurate?
25· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
YVer1f
 Ryan Hunt
January 09, 2019
Page 70
·1· ·Q.· · · And then -- congratulations.· In 2018,
·2· ·you were named president of Premier Parking, and
·3· ·there's a few pages about that and your bio
·4· ·relating to that.· Do you see that on there?
·5· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
·6· ·Q.· · · All right.· The reason I marked these is
·7· ·you and I were talking about your meeting with
·8· ·Mr. Kahn back when the transition was being
·9· ·contemplated about the garage from Stream to GTT.
10· ·And you indicated it was like an interview; is
11· ·that right?
12· ·A.· · · First-time meeting.· An introduction.
13· ·Q.· · · And do you recall expressing to Mr. Kahn
14· ·the capabilities of Premier in managing the garage
15· ·for GTT?
16· ·A.· · · I don't.
17· ·Q.· · · Did you read Mr. Kahn's deposition?
18· ·A.· · · I did not.
19· ·Q.· · · Are you aware of what Mr. Kahn's
20· ·understanding of what Premier would provide for
21· ·GTT was based on his meetings with you?
22· ·A.· · · I do not.
23· ·Q.· · · One of the things Mr. Kahn indicated was
24· ·that Premier, through you, indicated they would
25· ·manage the garage the way it should be managed.
Page 71
·1· ·Does that sound like something you would say?
·2· ·A.· · · I don't recall.
·3· ·Q.· · · That Premier indicated that it was the
·4· ·best in the business at managing garages.· Does
·5· ·that sound like something that you would indicate?
·6· ·A.· · · It does.
·7· ·Q.· · · That Premier indicated it could be the
·8· ·eyes and ears for the owner in the garage.· Does
·9· ·that sound like something you would indicate?
10· ·A.· · · Does it sound like something I would
11· ·indicate or sound like something I shared with
12· ·David at the time of the meeting?
13· ·Q.· · · Both.
14· ·A.· · · Yeah.· I don't -- I don't recall.
15· ·Q.· · · So if Mr. Kahn indicated that you said
16· ·those things to him, you're not disputing that, I
17· ·take it?
18· ·A.· · · I don't -- I don't know.
19· ·Q.· · · Well, you would seem like you would know
20· ·whether you dispute you said it or not.· So if you
21· ·don't know, that means you don't dispute you said
22· ·it, right?
23· ·A.· · · I don't recall saying it.
24· ·Q.· · · Do you recall not saying it?
25· ·A.· · · I do not.
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
70 to 73
Page 72
·1· ·Q.· · · Do you recall saying to him words to the
·2· ·effect of, Mr. Kahn, the owner doesn't have to
·3· ·show up on-site, we'll take care of the garage, or
·4· ·words to that effect?
·5· ·A.· · · I don't.
·6· ·Q.· · · Do you dispute that you conveyed words to
·7· ·that effect to him?
·8· ·A.· · · I don't recall.
·9· ·Q.· · · Do you recall indicating that Premier had
10· ·systems and operated garages in many cities and
11· ·had considerable experience in operating garages?
12· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
13· ·Q.· · · You did indicate that?
14· ·A.· · · I'm sure.
15· ·Q.· · · Did -- do you recall indicating to
16· ·Mr. Kahn that you had an office in the garage and
17· ·assured him that Premier would be there daily to
18· ·manage on a day-to-day basis or words to that
19· ·effect?
20· ·A.· · · I don't recall.· David was aware the
21· ·office is in the garage and knew that our staff
22· ·would be in the office at certain times.
23· ·Q.· · · Was there any discussion that you do
24· ·recall of the specific terms of the engagement
25· ·between GTT and Premier in a meeting with Mr. Kahn
Page 73
·1· ·or Mr. O'Brien before the contract between the two
·2· ·entities was executed?
·3· ·A.· · · Specific business terms?
·4· ·Q.· · · Yes, sir.
·5· ·A.· · · I don't recall.
·6· ·Q.· · · What else do you recall occurred in the
·7· ·meeting, that coffee/interview meeting, with
·8· ·Mr. Kahn that we haven't covered?
·9· ·A.· · · I think we came highly recommended by
10· ·Stream, and I think they -- our contacts at Stream
11· ·suggested that Premier be retained to operate the
12· ·garage.· And I believe that recommendation was --
13· ·I believe that recommendation was pretty strong.
14· ·Q.· · · From whom?
15· ·A.· · · And I think David took that recommendation
16· ·pretty strongly.
17· ·Q.· · · Who -- who made that recommendation at
18· ·Stream?
19· ·A.· · · I'm sure a number of people at Stream, but
20· ·I would say Suzanne Pfeiffer, Caitlyn Ryan, Lance
21· ·Sallis.
22· ·Q.· · · Anything else you recall discussing with
23· ·Mr. Kahn or Mr. O'Brien at that meeting that we
24· ·haven't covered?
25· ·A.· · · I don't.
YVer1f
 Ryan Hunt
January 09, 2019
Page 74
·1· ·Q.· · · Did you have any meetings after that with
·2· ·Mr. Kahn or Mr. O'Brien, either in person or by
·3· ·telephone, where any terms were discussed about
·4· ·Premier's role with GTT before the contract was
·5· ·executed?
·6· ·A.· · · I don't recall.
·7· ·Q.· · · Do you recall specifically executing the
·8· ·agreement between GTT and Premier?
·9· ·A.· · · I don't.
10· ·Q.· · · Were you involved in that?
11· ·A.· · · I'm sure I was.
12· ·Q.· · · Do you recall any of the involvement you
13· ·had, for instance -- let me ask it this way:
14· ·After the Kahn coffee interview meeting, what was
15· ·the next step that you recall before Premier was
16· ·retained?
17· ·A.· · · I don't know.
18· ·Q.· · · What is the next interaction you recall
19· ·having with Mr. Kahn or Mr. O'Brien after the Kahn
20· ·coffee interview meeting?
21· ·A.· · · I don't remember.
22· ·Q.· · · Would you look at Exhibit 10 in your
23· ·notebook with me, please?
24· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
25· ·Q.· · · If you go to Premier 0012 down in the
Page 75
·1· ·bottom right corner, that's where the service
·2· ·contract begins.
·3· ·A.· · · One second.
·4· ·Q.· · · Yeah.· Sure.· It's Tab 10.
·5· ·A.· · · Yeah.· One of these is pretty big.· Take
·6· ·awhile to get through it.· Okay.· I'm there.· Tab
·7· ·10.
·8· ·Q.· · · Right.· And then go to Page 0012 there.
·9· ·That's the beginning of the contract.
10· ·A.· · · 0012?
11· ·Q.· · · Right.
12· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
13· ·Q.· · · I noticed in the -- in 0018, Mr. Chapman
14· ·is the one who signed the contract as president
15· ·and CEO for Premier Parking?
16· ·A.· · · Sorry.· I'm on 001 -- I'm on 012.
17· ·Q.· · · Right.
18· ·A.· · · Do I need to be somewhere else?
19· ·Q.· · · 0012 is the first page of the contract.
20· ·And then if you go to 0018, that's where the
21· ·signatures are.
22· ·A.· · · You mean just 008.· I'm sorry.
23· ·Q.· · · Well, it's actually 0018 in the bottom
24· ·right corner.· I don't know.· Maybe the copy
25· ·didn't come out good.· It's the one --
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
74 to 77
Page 76
·1· ·A.· · · Yeah.· Sorry.· I don't see anything in the
·2· ·bottom right -- I'm looking at the GTT 007 page
·3· ·number.· So if you have a page number on the
·4· ·left-hand side --
·5· ·Q.· · · Okay.
·6· ·A.· · · -- that might be helpful.
·7· ·Q.· · · All right.· At any rate, you see
·8· ·Mr. Chapman's signature on the contract?
·9· ·A.· · · Let's see.· I do not.· I might be looking
10· ·at the wrong page, though.
11· ·Q.· · · Take a look real quick.
12· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· My Exhibit 10 only goes
13· ·to 17.
14· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Yeah.· I've got a
15· ·signature page with David Kahn's signature, but
16· ·not with Ryan Chapman's.
17· ·BY MR. BREEN:
18· ·Q.· · · Okay.· Let me ask it this way:· The -- the
19· ·contract with Premier and GTT is signed by
20· ·Mr. Chapman.· Do you know if Mr. Chapman had any
21· ·conversations with Mr. Kahn about the role of
22· ·Premier?
23· ·A.· · · I don't think so.
24· ·Q.· · · Okay.· The -- the contract would have been
25· ·between -- for Premier and GTT would have been
Page 77
·1· ·with you, Mr. O'Brien and Mr. Kahn?
·2· ·A.· · · That's correct.
·3· ·Q.· · · And Mr. Chapman would have just been
·4· ·signing the contract, but not involved with any
·5· ·type of negotiations or comments with Mr. Kahn?
·6· ·A.· · · I don't believe he was on this.
·7· ·Q.· · · Okay.· Do you recall when it was Mr. Kahn
·8· ·indicated that, on behalf of GTT, he was going to
·9· ·engage Premier?
10· ·A.· · · In that first meeting.
11· ·Q.· · · Okay.· In the coffee interview meeting?
12· ·A.· · · Yes.
13· ·Q.· · · And did you gentlemen determine that you
14· ·would simply use the same service contract that
15· ·had been used for Stream?
16· ·A.· · · I think that was the determination, but I
17· ·don't recall specifics.
18· ·Q.· · · In the contract with Stream and the
19· ·contract with Premier, they're virtually
20· ·identical.· Did you know that?· They used the same
21· ·form.· Does that surprise you?
22· ·A.· · · It doesn't.
23· ·Q.· · · And in this -- both contracts, they
24· ·reference an Exhibit A, but the Exhibit A is
25· ·blank.· Was that intentional?
YVer1f
 Ryan Hunt
January 09, 2019
Page 78
·1· ·A.· · · I don't know.
·2· ·Q.· · · Now, when you met with Mr. Kahn, did
·3· ·Mr. Kahn or Mr. O'Brien ask you anything about the
·4· ·history of the garage?
·5· ·A.· · · Specifically related to --
·6· ·Q.· · · Well --
·7· ·A.· · · -- what type of history?
·8· ·Q.· · · Like, for instance, if renovations or
·9· ·repairs had been performed in the years running up
10· ·to the purchase.
11· ·A.· · · They did not.
12· ·Q.· · · Did they ask you anything about the
13· ·condition of the garage?
14· ·A.· · · I don't recall.
15· ·Q.· · · Did the issue of the work by Mr. Brown
16· ·come up in any way?
17· ·A.· · · I don't think so.
18· ·Q.· · · Did you ever disclose that to Mr. Kahn or
19· ·Mr. O'Brien?
20· ·A.· · · I don't think so.
21· ·Q.· · · Did you ever disclose to Mr. Kahn or
22· ·Mr. O'Brien any of the interaction Premier had had
23· ·with any engineers or Mr. Brown regarding the
24· ·vehicle restraint system in 2014?
25· ·A.· · · I don't think so.
Page 79
·1· ·Q.· · · At any time before Ms. Bowmer's incident,
·2· ·did you ever indicate to Mr. O'Brien or Mr. Kahn
·3· ·the knowledge Premier had about the vehicle
·4· ·restraint system and the work done to it in 2014?
·5· ·A.· · · I don't think so.
·6· ·Q.· · · After Mr. O'Connor's car went off of the
·7· ·garage, why did you not tell Mr. Kahn or
·8· ·Mr. O'Brien about the previous work that had been
·9· ·done on the vehicle restraint system?
10· ·A.· · · I never said that I didn't say anything
11· ·about the previous work done on the system after
12· ·the first incident of driving off the vehicle.
13· ·Q.· · · All right.· Well, when is the first time
14· ·you indicated anything to Mr. Kahn or Mr. O'Brien
15· ·about the work previously that had been done
16· ·before their purchase on the vehicle restraint
17· ·system?
18· ·A.· · · If I recall correctly, my conversations
19· ·with David and Sean about hiring a third-party
20· ·consultant, which I recommended Walker Parking
21· ·Consultants -- I believe we did say -- I
22· ·recommended that they reach out to Eric Herron at
23· ·Stream who had more knowledge about the work that
24· ·would have been performed on the carrier -- cable
25· ·barrier system.
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
78 to 81
Page 80
·1· ·Q.· · · Did you tell him why?
·2· ·A.· · · That Eric was the one who performed the
·3· ·work or managed the project.
·4· ·Q.· · · Was this a conversation or in an e-mail
·5· ·that you communicated this?
·6· ·A.· · · Phone conversation.
·7· ·Q.· · · Okay.· When did that occur?
·8· ·A.· · · Within the days after the first incident,
·9· ·if not the day of.
10· ·Q.· · · And with whom?
11· ·A.· · · David and Sean, I believe.
12· ·Q.· · · Jointly?
13· ·A.· · · I don't recall.
14· ·Q.· · · Tell me the --
15· ·A.· · · There were a lot of -- sorry.· There were
16· ·a lot of conversations.
17· ·Q.· · · A lot of conversations about the --
18· ·A.· · · Just --
19· ·Q.· · · -- O'Connor incident?
20· ·A.· · · Just after the fact, you know, because
21· ·there was a lot of things to do.· Block it off.
22· ·You know, make sure everything was -- you know, do
23· ·whatever we needed to do regarding the incident to
24· ·help out.
25· ·Q.· · · And what exactly did Premier do after the
Page 81
·1· ·O'Connor incident to help out?
·2· ·A.· · · Well, we blocked off the spaces to make
·3· ·sure that there was no issues with people trying
·4· ·to park in those spaces once the system was broken
·5· ·and to assist with -- however we could with the
·6· ·assessment.· So the tours, so to speak -- we need
·7· ·to be on-site to walk anybody through.· If the
·8· ·City of Austin came by to inspect, that we made
·9· ·ourselves available to walk them through that.
10· ·Q.· · · Who primarily did that?
11· ·A.· · · I believe Christina.
12· ·Q.· · · Were you involved in any of that?
13· ·A.· · · I don't remember.· I don't think so.
14· ·Q.· · · Was Mr. Chapman involved in any of that?
15· ·A.· · · He was not.· I believe I was out of town
16· ·when the incident occurred, but I can't recall.
17· ·Q.· · · How did you hear about the incident?
18· ·A.· · · Christina informed me via text message. I
19· ·called her.
20· ·Q.· · · Oh.· And what did she tell you?
21· ·A.· · · She said someone just drove off the
22· ·parking garage.
23· ·Q.· · · Anything else?
24· ·A.· · · Well, it was kind of like, Call me ASAP.
25· ·Q.· · · And what was your reaction to that?
YVer1f
 Ryan Hunt
January 09, 2019
Page 82
·1· ·A.· · · Shocked.· Scared.· I mean, it was
·2· ·frightening, so...
·3· ·Q.· · · In what sense?
·4· ·A.· · · Well, just that someone -- I had never
·5· ·seen it before.· And I'd been in the business for
·6· ·a long time, so...
·7· ·Q.· · · Had you not heard of people that have gone
·8· ·through barriers and off of garages?
·9· ·A.· · · Not at that time.
10· ·Q.· · · Had you not heard of one that happened in
11· ·the recent past to that in Houston?
12· ·A.· · · I had not.
13· ·Q.· · · Are you aware of that now?
14· ·A.· · · I'm not.· Not -- I'm sure if you pointed
15· ·it out, the specific, I might be, but --
16· ·Q.· · · Other than the two in the Littlefield
17· ·garage, are you now aware of other cars that have
18· ·gone through barrier systems?
19· ·A.· · · I'm aware that it's happened.
20· ·Q.· · · Do you know the number?
21· ·A.· · · I don't.
22· ·Q.· · · Do you know the result?
23· ·A.· · · I don't.
24· ·Q.· · · Would you agree that it is extremely
25· ·fortunate that neither Ms. Bowmer nor Mr. O'Connor
Page 83
·1· ·died in their incidents?
·2· ·A.· · · I don't know.
·3· ·Q.· · · You don't know?
·4· ·A.· · · I mean, I think it's -- falling from a
·5· ·parking garage at that level, I think -- yes.
·6· ·It's fortunate that nothing -- that she didn't
·7· ·die, of course, but --
·8· ·Q.· · · So --
·9· ·A.· · · -- I don't know what constitutes
10· ·whether -- what an accident -- would cause
11· ·something, so...
12· ·Q.· · · Well, but certainly common sense would
13· ·tell you that if you fall seven stories and live,
14· ·you're fortunate?
15· ·A.· · · Sure.
16· ·Q.· · · And if you go through a barrier and dangle
17· ·from nine stories and live, you're fortunate,
18· ·right?
19· ·A.· · · Sure.
20· ·Q.· · · So when you heard Mr. O'Connor's car went
21· ·through the barrier system and was dangling there,
22· ·did it concern you that there had been issues in
23· ·2014 and perhaps those issues haven't been
24· ·rectified?
25· ·A.· · · Yeah.
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
82 to 85
Page 84
·1· ·Q.· · · Why were you concerned?
·2· ·A.· · · Well, because we trust our property owners
·3· ·to repair those issues, and I assumed that they
·4· ·had done that.
·5· ·Q.· · · So you assumed Stream had properly
·6· ·repaired those?
·7· ·A.· · · Yes.
·8· ·Q.· · · And did you come to the knowledge that it
·9· ·hadn't been properly repaired?
10· ·A.· · · I don't know.
11· ·Q.· · · Well, do you think it was?
12· ·A.· · · What do I think what was?
13· ·Q.· · · Do you think Stream properly repaired the
14· ·system?
15· ·A.· · · I don't know.
16· ·Q.· · · Well, if Stream was told that the repairs
17· ·they were contemplating didn't bring it up to code
18· ·and didn't have it meet the standard of care, that
19· ·wouldn't be proper repairs, would it?
20· ·A.· · · I don't know.
21· ·Q.· · · As a property manager of over 400 garages
22· ·and president of Premier, you don't know that a
23· ·vehicle restraint system that's not to code and
24· ·not to the standard of care isn't proper?
25· ·A.· · · I don't know specifics about code
Page 85
·1· ·requirements in Austin or any other markets and
·2· ·how they differ and whether certain garages are
·3· ·required to be caught up to current code or the
·4· ·code that they were actually built in.
·5· ·Q.· · · I'm not asking you the specifics.· So let
·6· ·me be clear.· I'm asking you -- assume with me a
·7· ·garage has a restraint system that's neither up to
·8· ·code and it doesn't meet the standard of care.
·9· ·That's unacceptable, isn't it?
10· ·A.· · · I don't know.
11· ·Q.· · · You don't know?· What would be acceptable
12· ·about having a restraint system that's not up to
13· ·code and not up to the standard of care?
14· ·A.· · · I don't know.
15· ·Q.· · · Wouldn't that be dangerous?
16· ·A.· · · Sure.
17· ·Q.· · · And wouldn't that be exposing patrons to a
18· ·danger that could take their life or cause serious
19· ·injury?
20· ·A.· · · I don't know.
21· ·Q.· · · What's the standard of care for?
22· ·A.· · · What is the standard of care?
23· ·Q.· · · The standard of care is what a reasonably
24· ·prudent garage owner would do in terms of safety,
25· ·right?
YVer1f
 Ryan Hunt
January 09, 2019
Page 86
·1· ·A.· · · I know.· I'm saying -- I don't know
·2· ·specifics on standard of care --
·3· ·Q.· · · And I'm not asking you --
·4· ·A.· · · -- what you're --
·5· ·Q.· · · -- specifics.
·6· ·A.· · · -- referencing.
·7· ·Q.· · · Right.
·8· ·A.· · · Yeah.
·9· ·Q.· · · I'm keeping it real general.
10· ·A.· · · Okay.
11· ·Q.· · · Real basic.
12· ·A.· · · Okay.
13· ·Q.· · · Bright line.· Okay.· Bright line.· If it's
14· ·not to code and if it's below the standard of
15· ·care, that's dangerous, isn't it?
16· ·A.· · · Common sense, sure.
17· ·Q.· · · That's not a proper fix, is it?
18· ·A.· · · Not knowing about codes and standard of
19· ·care, sure.
20· ·Q.· · · And did you tell Mr. Kahn or Mr. O'Brien,
21· ·Hey, there's been multiple engineers out here in
22· ·2014 that have looked at this?
23· ·A.· · · No.
24· ·Q.· · · Did you tell them there had been a single
25· ·engineer out there to look at it?
Page 87
·1· ·A.· · · I told them that they should contact Eric
·2· ·Herron with Stream because he was in charge of
·3· ·doing work on the garage regarding the cable
·4· ·barrier system.
·5· ·Q.· · · So by telling them that, you assumed then
·6· ·that Stream would indicate the engineer had been
·7· ·out there and give Mr. Kahn details?
·8· ·A.· · · To be specific, I would assume that they
·9· ·bought a parking asset, and anything regarding the
10· ·structural assessment of that asset or any work
11· ·performed would have been in the due diligence
12· ·materials of the parking garage.
13· ·Q.· · · So did you just assume Mr. Kahn and
14· ·Mr. O'Brien had done due diligence and discovered
15· ·the fact that the engineers and/or Curtis Brown
16· ·had done repairs?
17· ·A.· · · I didn't assume that.· I told them that
18· ·they should contact Eric Herron, that that's what
19· ·my -- my first phone call would have been if I
20· ·were them.
21· ·Q.· · · Other than telling them to contact Eric
22· ·Herron, did you give them any details at all?
23· ·A.· · · No.· I don't -- I wasn't aware of the
24· ·specifics because we didn't perform the work.
25· ·Q.· · · Well, you knew Mr. Brown had done it,
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
86 to 89
Page 88
·1· ·right?
·2· ·A.· · · I knew Curtis was an employee of a company
·3· ·that did work on the garage.
·4· ·Q.· · · Did you tell Mr. Kahn or Mr. O'Brien they
·5· ·ought to call Curtis Brown, he's the one that did
·6· ·work on the cable barrier system?
·7· ·A.· · · I did not.
·8· ·Q.· · · Why not?
·9· ·A.· · · Because Eric Herron was the project
10· ·manager, and I thought that would be the best
11· ·person to -- to contact regarding it.
12· ·Q.· · · Did you tell --
13· ·A.· · · Eric -- Stream contracted with Curtis
14· ·Brown.· I thought Stream would have more specific
15· ·knowledge.· And considering the transaction took
16· ·place between those two parties, that would have
17· ·been my first call.
18· ·Q.· · · Do you know if Mr. Kahn called Eric Herron
19· ·or Stream?
20· ·A.· · · I do not.
21· ·Q.· · · Do you know if Mr. O'Brien did?
22· ·A.· · · I do not.
23· ·Q.· · · Did you ever follow up with them to ask
24· ·that?
25· ·A.· · · I don't believe so.
Page 89
·1· ·Q.· · · Did anybody from Premier?
·2· ·A.· · · No.· I don't believe so.
·3· ·Q.· · · Did you know that within days of the
·4· ·O'Connor incident, an engineer indicated to the
·5· ·owner that the entire cable system should be
·6· ·inspected?
·7· ·A.· · · I do not.· Which engineer?
·8· ·Q.· · · I'm asking you if you knew that.
·9· ·A.· · · I don't, so...
10· ·Q.· · · All right.· Was it ever made aware to you
11· ·that an engineer had indicated to the owner that
12· ·the entire cable system should be inspected after
13· ·Mr. O'Connor's incident?
14· ·A.· · · I don't recall.
15· ·Q.· · · Did you ever indicate that to Mr. Kahn?
16· ·A.· · · No.
17· ·Q.· · · Why not?
18· ·A.· · · Because I'm not -- I don't know the answer
19· ·to that.
20· ·Q.· · · You don't know whether the system should
21· ·be inspected?
22· ·A.· · · I don't know whether the entire system
23· ·should be inspected.
24· ·Q.· · · What would be the reason you wouldn't want
25· ·to inspect the entire system?
YVer1f
 Ryan Hunt
January 09, 2019
Page 90
·1· ·A.· · · I don't know.
·2· ·Q.· · · Can you think of a good one?
·3· ·A.· · · I don't know.
·4· ·Q.· · · Can you think of a good reason to inspect
·5· ·the cable system after a car goes through it?
·6· ·A.· · · I think that -- I don't know.· I mean,
·7· ·I -- I don't know.
·8· ·Q.· · · How about for safety reasons so another
·9· ·car doesn't go through it?· Would that be a good
10· ·reason?
11· ·A.· · · Sure.
12· ·Q.· · · Did you ever think of recommending that to
13· ·Mr. Kahn?
14· ·A.· · · I think I said previously that I
15· ·recommended they reach out to Walker
16· ·Consultants -- and I provided an introduction --
17· ·for a third-party structural assessment of the
18· ·garage.
19· ·Q.· · · Does Premier Parking have, as part of its
20· ·corporate system and culture, a code of ethics?
21· ·A.· · · We have an employee handbook that has
22· ·certain requirements about how to conduct
23· ·yourself.
24· ·Q.· · · Is there anything in Premier's handbook
25· ·that indicates what Premier should do when it's
Page 91
·1· ·working as a property manager for a facility and
·2· ·the property owner isn't making proper repairs for
·3· ·the facility to make it safe?
·4· ·A.· · · I don't know.
·5· ·Q.· · · Who would know that at Premier?
·6· ·A.· · · I don't know.· Our HR team would know
·7· ·who -- what's in our employee handbook and what's
·8· ·not.
·9· ·Q.· · · As president of Premier, if it came to
10· ·your attention that a property owner for which you
11· ·managed a garage was engaging in practices that
12· ·were causing unreasonable danger, what would
13· ·Premier do?
14· ·A.· · · I would talk to our general counsel first.
15· ·Q.· · · And?
16· ·A.· · · Get his feedback on the situations,
17· ·determine what the next steps would be.
18· ·Q.· · · Did that ever occur in the Littlefield
19· ·garage instances?
20· ·A.· · · It did not.
21· ·Q.· · · Who was the general counsel in 2014 for
22· ·Premier?
23· ·A.· · · We were either using Hank Abbott as our
24· ·outside consultant on -- Butler Snow and Robert
25· ·Holland or we were -- or Hunter was employed with
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
90 to 93
Page 92
·1· ·us.· I don't remember when Hunter started.
·2· ·Q.· · · Did you ever discuss with either Stream or
·3· ·GTT the concept of using temporary protective
·4· ·barriers on the edge of the open-air garage wall
·5· ·while the wire strands were inspected or repaired?
·6· ·A.· · · I don't think so.
·7· ·Q.· · · Why not?
·8· ·A.· · · That's not -- that wasn't our job, to do
·9· ·that.
10· ·Q.· · · Whose job was that?
11· ·A.· · · I don't know.
12· ·Q.· · · Well, if it's not Premier's job, who does
13· ·that leave?
14· ·A.· · · When you say -- it wasn't my job to do
15· ·that.
16· ·Q.· · · Your job as what?· President of Premier?
17· ·A.· · · Or vice president at the time.
18· ·Q.· · · Whose job at Premier would it have been?
19· ·A.· · · I don't know.
20· ·Q.· · · Has there been an instance where Premier
21· ·has facilitated the implementation of temporary
22· ·barriers on an open-air garage to try to help keep
23· ·cars from going off the edge?
24· ·A.· · · I don't think so.
25· ·Q.· · · Did Premier facilitate or help with that
Page 93
·1· ·in the Littlefield garage?
·2· ·A.· · · I don't know.
·3· ·Q.· · · Do you know whether they did it after the
·4· ·O'Connor incident?
·5· ·A.· · · We did not.
·6· ·Q.· · · Do you know whether Premier helped do that
·7· ·after the Bowmer incident?
·8· ·A.· · · By temporary barriers, do you mean -- we
·9· ·put up cones where the incident took place to
10· ·ensure that nobody would park there.
11· ·Q.· · · I mean, temporary as in water-filled
12· ·barriers, typically orange and white, that are
13· ·sort of rectangular.
14· ·A.· · · No.
15· ·Q.· · · Did you know those were put up in the
16· ·garage?
17· ·A.· · · I was not aware.
18· ·Q.· · · Do you know what involvement, if any,
19· ·Premier had with that?
20· ·A.· · · I'm sure we coordinated the logistics of
21· ·it if it was done because that would be our job
22· ·and responsibility.
23· ·Q.· · · Typically if an owner asked Premier to
24· ·walk the building and look for loose or broken
25· ·cables, what would be the process Premier would go
YVer1f
 Ryan Hunt
January 09, 2019
Page 94
·1· ·through to accomplish that?
·2· ·A.· · · We would walk the garage and make an
·3· ·inventory, provide that inventory to the ownership
·4· ·group if they asked us to do that.
·5· ·Q.· · · And if Premier found broken or missing
·6· ·cables, what was the procedure then?
·7· ·A.· · · To inform the landlord.
·8· ·Q.· · · And then what?
·9· ·A.· · · Wait for additional responsibilities from
10· ·the landlord.
11· ·Q.· · · And what if the landlord didn't do
12· ·anything about it?
13· ·A.· · · I don't know.
14· ·Q.· · · What would the procedure at Premier be to
15· ·handle that scenario?
16· ·A.· · · I don't know.
17· ·Q.· · · Who would know that?
18· ·A.· · · I'm not sure.
19· ·Q.· · · Can you think of anybody at Premier that
20· ·would be in the position to know the answer to
21· ·that question for the jury?
22· ·A.· · · I don't.
23· ·Q.· · · Don't you agree that that's a fundamental
24· ·question of safety?· That is, if the property
25· ·owner is neglecting or refusing to do things to
Page 95
·1· ·make the garage reasonably safe, what the property
·2· ·manager should do?
·3· ·A.· · · It's not our responsibility to tell them
·4· ·what to do.· We make recommendations.· Whether
·5· ·they do it or not is up to the landlord.
·6· ·Q.· · · And would Premier simply continue then in
·7· ·that scenario to collect its share of the profits
·8· ·from people who are parking in that dangerous
·9· ·garage?
10· ·A.· · · I'm not sure Premier is qualified to know
11· ·the degrees or levels of safeties or dangers with
12· ·the structure.
13· ·Q.· · · Well, Bob Chapman certainly would be,
14· ·wouldn't he?
15· ·A.· · · I don't know.
16· ·Q.· · · Well, hasn't he written a textbook on it?
17· ·A.· · · I know he's written a chapter on parking
18· ·demand and utilization, but not on safety and
19· ·structure.
20· ·Q.· · · Does it take an engineer to know that you
21· ·shouldn't have a multilevel garage that doesn't
22· ·have restraint systems?
23· ·A.· · · If you don't have any restraint systems,
24· ·it doesn't.
25· ·Q.· · · Okay.· So if a garage owner asks Premier
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
94 to 97
Page 96
·1· ·to operate a multilevel garage that didn't have
·2· ·any restraint systems on it, what would Premier
·3· ·do?
·4· ·A.· · · If it was just open air --
·5· ·Q.· · · Right?
·6· ·A.· · · -- and you could just drive right out with
·7· ·no restraint systems --
·8· ·Q.· · · Right.
·9· ·A.· · · -- we would not operate it.
10· ·Q.· · · Why?
11· ·A.· · · Because it's dangerous.
12· ·Q.· · · And what would Premier do?
13· ·A.· · · We wouldn't operate it.
14· ·Q.· · · Just leave the scenario?
15· ·A.· · · We've never been in a scenario like that.
16· ·Q.· · · Is there some procedure in place for
17· ·Premier on what they should do if an owner is
18· ·effectively proposing that?
19· ·A.· · · No.
20· ·Q.· · · That type of scenario would be outrageous,
21· ·wouldn't it?
22· ·A.· · · A garage with no vehicle barrier system at
23· ·all?
24· ·Q.· · · Right.
25· ·A.· · · I would think so.
Page 97
·1· ·Q.· · · That would be an extreme degree of risk
·2· ·for the customer, wouldn't it?
·3· ·A.· · · I've never seen one, so --
·4· ·Q.· · · Well, just --
·5· ·A.· · · Never seen a garage without a barrier
·6· ·system.· So I would assume it -- it doesn't exist.
·7· ·Q.· · · From a common sense perspective, if it
·8· ·didn't have a barrier system on it, that would be
·9· ·an extreme degree of risk to a user, wouldn't it?
10· ·A.· · · Yes.
11· ·Q.· · · And the magnitude of the harm that could
12· ·occur to a user is significant, isn't it?
13· ·A.· · · Yes.
14· ·Q.· · · In fact, the likelihood of an injury if
15· ·there were to be an incident is almost certain on
16· ·a multilevel garage if there's no restraint
17· ·system; isn't that true?
18· ·A.· · · To any roadway or anything of any heights
19· ·without a barrier system would be a concern.
20· ·Q.· · · I didn't ask you if it was a concern.
21· ·A.· · · Well, it would be -- yeah.· Yeah.
22· ·Q.· · · So the answer to my question --
23· ·A.· · · Yes.· Sorry.
24· ·Q.· · · That's all right.· Mr. Kahn testified in
25· ·his deposition that his understanding was based on
YVer1f
 Ryan Hunt
January 09, 2019
Page 98
·1· ·his meeting with you that Premier was going to
·2· ·operate and manage the -- the garage using the
·3· ·required eyes and ears on a daily basis to look
·4· ·for safety issues.· Do you have any reason to
·5· ·dispute that you gave that impression to him?
·6· ·A.· · · I don't recall.
·7· ·Q.· · · Mr. Kahn testified that he was on the
·8· ·understanding that in order to do that and to
·9· ·protect the safety of the people using the garage,
10· ·Premier was going to be doing a daily inspection.
11· ·Do you have any reason to dispute that?
12· ·A.· · · We do daily inspections.· But the term
13· ·"inspection" is trash pickup, light bulbs that are
14· ·out.· If a piece of concrete falls through the
15· ·garage, we're going to notify somebody, so --
16· ·Q.· · · So do you have any reason to dispute what
17· ·I just represented to you is Mr. Kahn's testimony?
18· ·A.· · · Say that again.
19· ·Q.· · · That in order to protect safety of people
20· ·using the garage, Premier was going to conduct a
21· ·daily inspection.
22· ·A.· · · We conducted daily inspections.
23· ·Q.· · · And that you indicated that to Mr. Kahn?
24· ·A.· · · I don't remember.
25· ·Q.· · · Do you dispute that you did?
Page 99
·1· ·A.· · · I don't recall.
·2· ·Q.· · · And that GTT indicated it was going to
·3· ·rely on Premier for those inspections.· Do you
·4· ·dispute that?
·5· ·A.· · · I don't remember.
·6· ·Q.· · · Do you dispute that there are instances
·7· ·where Premier would find a problem and repair it
·8· ·and then it would be reported at the end of the
·9· ·month on the expense sheet?
10· ·A.· · · What type of repair?
11· ·Q.· · · Mr. Kahn didn't necessarily indicate it.
12· ·He said generally.
13· ·A.· · · I'd need to know what type of repair.
14· ·Q.· · · Well, is that a general procedure that was
15· ·contemplated, is what Premier would do?
16· ·A.· · · Repair when changing light bulbs and
17· ·general type of janitorial work, yes.
18· ·Q.· · · Okay.· Is inspecting for broken cables
19· ·janitorial?
20· ·A.· · · No.
21· ·Q.· · · But Premier did that, right?
22· ·A.· · · We were asked to identify broken cables, I
23· ·believe, and we did, provided an inventory.
24· ·Q.· · · That's not janitorial, is it?
25· ·A.· · · No.· It's not janitorial.
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
98 to 101
Page 100
·1· ·Q.· · · That's safety related, isn't it?
·2· ·A.· · · Sure.
·3· ·Q.· · · And Premier knew that Mr. Kahn and GTT was
·4· ·relying on Premier to do that, didn't they?
·5· ·A.· · · I don't know.
·6· ·Q.· · · If Mr. Kahn says that, do you have any
·7· ·reason to dispute it?
·8· ·A.· · · I don't.
·9· ·Q.· · · Did you visit with Mr. Kahn or Mr. O'Brien
10· ·about what GTT's plan was to inspect or fix the
11· ·premises after Mr. O'Connor went off?
12· ·A.· · · I don't think so.
13· ·Q.· · · Did you participate in the decision to
14· ·make a claim against Mr. O'Connor?
15· ·A.· · · No.
16· ·Q.· · · Did you know that GTT was doing that?
17· ·A.· · · I don't remember.
18· ·Q.· · · Do you know that a Premier representative,
19· ·Christina Murray, was spearheading the effort to
20· ·make a claim against Mr. O'Connor for damages
21· ·related to him going through the vehicle restraint
22· ·barrier?
23· ·A.· · · I don't.
24· ·Q.· · · Do you know that as you sit here now?
25· ·A.· · · If you just told me, yes.
Page 101
·1· ·Q.· · · That's the first you've heard of it?
·2· ·A.· · · What was the claim and what was spear --
·3· ·well, who was she spearheading it with?· Was it
·4· ·with Orange, Premier's insurance carrier?
·5· ·Q.· · · No.· It was against Mr. O'Connor's
·6· ·insurance carrier.· Okay.· So --
·7· ·A.· · · I'm -- I'm not aware that she was
·8· ·spearheading an insurance claim that wasn't our
·9· ·insurance.
10· ·Q.· · · Yeah.· It was partially, I suppose,
11· ·Premier's.· Because if lost profits for lack of
12· ·parking spaces were recovered, Premier would be
13· ·entitled to a portion of that, would it not?
14· ·A.· · · Did Premier file a claim?
15· ·Q.· · · Premier filed a claim on behalf of GTT.
16· ·Did you not know that?
17· ·A.· · · I did not.· I don't recall.
18· ·Q.· · · That claim included a claim for physical
19· ·property damage and for lost profits.· Okay?
20· ·A.· · · I don't -- yeah.· I don't know.
21· ·Q.· · · Well, did Ms. Murray clear that with
22· ·anybody at Premier or was that within her purview
23· ·to do?
24· ·A.· · · I don't know.
25· ·Q.· · · Who would know that?
YVer1f
 Ryan Hunt
January 09, 2019
Page 102
·1· ·A.· · · I don't know.
·2· ·Q.· · · What is your impression, as you sit here
·3· ·now, of Premier profiting from a claim made
·4· ·against Mr. O'Connor for going off of the vehicle
·5· ·restraint system and the ninth floor of the
·6· ·building?
·7· ·A.· · · I don't know the details.
·8· ·Q.· · · Well, I just gave them to you.
·9· ·A.· · · I still don't know all the details.· So
10· ·I'd like to know before I make a comment.
11· ·Q.· · · Okay.· What would you like to know?
12· ·A.· · · The specifics.
13· ·Q.· · · Well, you know Mr. O'Connor went off,
14· ·right?
15· ·A.· · · Yes.· Specifics about the claim, who was
16· ·involved.· I just don't recall any of that.
17· ·Q.· · · You know that when he went off, his car
18· ·was caught by cables, right?
19· ·A.· · · I know about the incident.· Yes.
20· ·Q.· · · And you know that the garage, at least in
21· ·an area related to where he went off, had to be
22· ·restricted from use, did you not?
23· ·A.· · · I assume so.
24· ·Q.· · · And did you know that Premier, on behalf
25· ·of GTT, made a claim against Mr. O'Connor for lost
Page 103
·1· ·profits from restricting the use where his car
·2· ·went off the ninth floor?
·3· ·A.· · · I don't.· I don't recall.
·4· ·Q.· · · What is your impression of that?
·5· ·A.· · · I don't have one right now.
·6· ·Q.· · · Does that sound like an appropriate thing
·7· ·to do?
·8· ·A.· · · I don't know.
·9· ·Q.· · · Does that sound like something that a
10· ·reasonable ethical company would do?
11· ·A.· · · I don't know.
12· ·Q.· · · Does profiting from somebody going through
13· ·a vehicle restraint system sound like something
14· ·that's within the corporate culture of Premier?
15· ·A.· · · I don't know.
16· ·Q.· · · Who would know that at Premier?
17· ·A.· · · I'm not sure.
18· ·Q.· · · Does it surprise you that Premier would
19· ·participate in making a claim against somebody
20· ·that went through the vehicle restraint system?
21· ·A.· · · Did Premier make the claim?
22· ·Q.· · · Premier made it on behalf of GTT.· I said
23· ·"participate."
24· ·A.· · · Okay.· I'm sorry.· I don't know the
25· ·specifics, so --
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
102 to 105
Page 104
·1· ·Q.· · · I understand you don't know the specifics.
·2· ·I'm asking you a different question -- is does it
·3· ·surprise you that Premier would participate in
·4· ·making a claim against somebody that went through
·5· ·the vehicle restraint system like Mr. O'Connor
·6· ·did?
·7· ·A.· · · I don't know.
·8· ·Q.· · · What did you do to satisfy yourself after
·9· ·the O'Connor incident that the garage was safe?
10· ·A.· · · I made representations to the landlord
11· ·about what next steps should be and trusted that
12· ·our team would work together with them to ensure
13· ·that happened.
14· ·Q.· · · What team was going to be working with the
15· ·landlord to ensure that it was made safe?
16· ·A.· · · Christina Murray and any of her local
17· ·account management team that worked directly with
18· ·David and Sean.
19· ·Q.· · · Did the Premier team work with the
20· ·landlord after the O'Connor incident to make the
21· ·garage safe?
22· ·A.· · · We -- I don't know.
23· ·Q.· · · Well --
24· ·A.· · · I would assume we coordinated logistics
25· ·for work to be done on the garage.
Page 105
·1· ·Q.· · · Do you know if that occurred?
·2· ·A.· · · I don't know.
·3· ·Q.· · · Do you know what work occurred, if any?
·4· ·A.· · · I don't.
·5· ·Q.· · · Do you know whether the work that occurred
·6· ·was approved?
·7· ·A.· · · I don't.
·8· ·Q.· · · Do you know whether the owner asked the
·9· ·City of Austin for a permit?
10· ·A.· · · I don't.
11· ·Q.· · · Do you know whether the City of Austin
12· ·granted a permit?
13· ·A.· · · I don't.
14· ·Q.· · · Do you know whether the work that was done
15· ·was approved by an engineer?
16· ·A.· · · I don't.
17· ·Q.· · · Do you know what levels' work was done
18· ·after the O'Connor incident?
19· ·A.· · · I do not.
20· ·Q.· · · Do you know what efforts the Premier team
21· ·made with the owner to make sure the other levels
22· ·other than nine were safe after the O'Connor
23· ·incident?
24· ·A.· · · I don't.
25· ·Q.· · · Who was it at Premier that should have
YVer1f
 Ryan Hunt
January 09, 2019
Page 106
·1· ·been doing that?· Christina Murray?
·2· ·A.· · · Doing what?
·3· ·Q.· · · Working with the owner to make sure the
·4· ·rest of the levels were safe.
·5· ·A.· · · Christina Murray should have been working
·6· ·with the owner in the day-to-day capacity that
·7· ·we're required to do.
·8· ·Q.· · · And who was Ms. Murray's direct report at
·9· ·that time?
10· ·A.· · · She was reporting directly to me, I
11· ·believe, at the time, if not William Clay. I
12· ·don't know the details.
13· ·Q.· · · Do you know that nothing was done in the
14· ·levels below Garage 9 to fix the problems that
15· ·existed with the vehicle restraint system after
16· ·Mr. O'Connor went off?
17· ·A.· · · I did not.
18· ·Q.· · · Have you seen the documents from the City
19· ·that essentially indicated the system was out of
20· ·code and dangerous and needed to be fixed after
21· ·Ms. Bowmer went off?
22· ·A.· · · I have not seen that.
23· ·Q.· · · Who at Premier got those documents?
24· ·A.· · · I don't know.
25· ·Q.· · · It would have been, at the time,
Page 107
·1· ·Ms. Murray's purview, would it not, to have those
·2· ·documents?
·3· ·A.· · · I'm not sure.
·4· ·Q.· · · Well, it was either you or Ms. Murray that
·5· ·was the primary interface at the garage, right?
·6· ·A.· · · Yes.
·7· ·Q.· · · And you don't have any of them, do you?
·8· ·A.· · · I don't.
·9· ·Q.· · · And you don't know anything about it, do
10· ·you?
11· ·A.· · · I don't recall.
12· ·Q.· · · So Ms. Murray would be the next logical
13· ·person that would have or -- have knowledge of
14· ·that?
15· ·A.· · · Knowledge of documents?
16· ·Q.· · · Yes, sir.· Of what the --
17· ·A.· · · From the City of Austin?
18· ·Q.· · · Yes, sir.· What the City was indicating to
19· ·the garage, the problems, what needed to be done.
20· ·A.· · · I don't know.
21· ·Q.· · · Did you know that a fully engineered
22· ·replaced system was put in on the garage after the
23· ·Bowmer incident?
24· ·A.· · · I believe so.· I believe I was aware.
25· ·Q.· · · Do you feel better about the garage now?
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
106 to 109
Page 108
·1· ·A.· · · Yes.
·2· ·Q.· · · Why?
·3· ·A.· · · Because the fully engineered system was
·4· ·installed.
·5· ·Q.· · · Do you know now that there wasn't an
·6· ·engineered system on the premises at the time
·7· ·Ms. Bowmer went off the garage?
·8· ·A.· · · I don't know.
·9· ·Q.· · · There should have been, shouldn't there?
10· ·A.· · · I don't know.
11· ·Q.· · · Well, as an operator of 400 garages, sir,
12· ·just common sense and your experience tells you
13· ·that the restraint system on a multilevel garage
14· ·should be approved by an engineer, should it not?
15· ·A.· · · Yes.
16· ·Q.· · · And the procedures of putting it in should
17· ·be supervised and implemented by somebody with
18· ·engineering experience, right?
19· ·A.· · · Yes.
20· ·Q.· · · Do you know whether Curtis Brown had that?
21· ·A.· · · I don't.
22· ·Q.· · · Are you aware that Mr. Kahn testified that
23· ·as the owner of GTT, he -- he expected that
24· ·Premier would have come to him at some point prior
25· ·to Ms. Bowmer's incident and told him about the
Page 109
·1· ·past issues with the vehicle restraint system?
·2· ·A.· · · I don't.
·3· ·Q.· · · Do you have any reason to doubt that as
·4· ·the owner he would have wanted to know about the
·5· ·problems that had occurred in the past?
·6· ·A.· · · I would think as an owner you would want
·7· ·to know that when you're buying a parking garage.
·8· ·Q.· · · Well, certainly when you're buying it.
·9· ·But if an incident occurs after you buy it and you
10· ·still don't know, you would expect the owner to
11· ·find that out, wouldn't you?
12· ·A.· · · Yes.
13· ·Q.· · · Well, why didn't you-all tell him?
14· ·A.· · · Tell him what?
15· ·Q.· · · Tell him that there had been previous
16· ·problems and previous work done on the vehicle
17· ·restraint system.
18· ·A.· · · I told him to contact Eric Herron at
19· ·Stream who conducted and was the project
20· ·management of any work that was done on the cable
21· ·barrier system.· So I did.
22· ·Q.· · · Okay.· Did you give him any reason why?
23· ·Like, Hey, Mr. Kahn, we had multiple engineers
24· ·tell us it was out of code and/or not up to the
25· ·standard of care?
YVer1f
 Ryan Hunt
January 09, 2019
Page 110
·1· ·A.· · · No.· Because no -- multiple engineers did
·2· ·not tell me that.
·3· ·Q.· · · Okay.· Did you tell him, Mr. Kahn, we
·4· ·hired this guy, Curtis Brown.· I don't know if he
·5· ·was an engineer or if he has engineering
·6· ·background, but he did some work on the cables?
·7· ·A.· · · We did not.· I don't think Premier hired
·8· ·Curtis Brown.
·9· ·Q.· · · I didn't suggest that you hired him.· I'm
10· ·asking you if you told Mr. Kahn that.
11· ·A.· · · No.· I didn't tell him that we hired him
12· ·because we didn't.
13· ·Q.· · · You just told Mr. Kahn, Hey, you ought to
14· ·contact Eric Herron?
15· ·A.· · · I said Eric Herron handled the project
16· ·management of the cable barrier system at
17· ·Littlefield, repairs that were done, and that he
18· ·would be the first point of contact.· That's what
19· ·I would have done, and that's what I told him --
20· ·he should reach out to Stream, because Stream was
21· ·the previous landlord.
22· ·Q.· · · Were you concerned or contemplating that
23· ·Curtis Brown and his company had liability for
24· ·Mr. O'Connor going off the garage?
25· ·A.· · · Was I concerned?
Page 111
·1· ·Q.· · · Yes, sir.
·2· ·A.· · · I don't know.
·3· ·Q.· · · Do you recall seeing the e-mail you sent
·4· ·where you said that you were, for liability
·5· ·purposes, giving information regarding Mr. Brown
·6· ·or his company to the owner?
·7· ·A.· · · As -- an e-mail --
·8· ·Q.· · · Yes, sir.
·9· ·A.· · · -- that I sent?
10· ·Q.· · · Yes, sir.
11· ·A.· · · I'd have to look at it.
12· ·Q.· · · Sure.· Let me see if I can put my hands on
13· ·it.
14· ·A.· · · Yeah.· That would be great.
15· ·Q.· · · Would you look at Exhibit 18 in your book
16· ·with me?
17· ·A.· · · Sure.· Okay.
18· ·Q.· · · Okay.· On Exhibit 18 -- you had indicated
19· ·to me that you told either Mr. Kahn or Mr. O'Brien
20· ·that they should contact Eric Herron.
21· · · · · · Do you see at the bottom of the page on
22· ·Exhibit 18 where you ask Mr. O'Brien if he wants
23· ·you to reach out to Stream to get the details on
24· ·the cabling work they performed in early 2015?
25· ·A.· · · Yes.
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
110 to 113
Page 112
·1· ·Q.· · · It says, "I believe it was performed by
·2· ·someone Eric Herron knew well and had worked with
·3· ·before"?
·4· ·A.· · · Yes.
·5· ·Q.· · · So you were volunteering to reach out to
·6· ·Stream on behalf of GTT to get the details of
·7· ·Curtis Brown's cabling work, right?
·8· ·A.· · · Okay.· Yeah.
·9· ·Q.· · · And did you do that?
10· ·A.· · · I don't think so.
11· ·Q.· · · And why not?
12· ·A.· · · I believe I asked a question -- because I
13· ·didn't know if they wanted me to handle that or
14· ·they wanted to handle that themselves.
15· ·Q.· · · Well, did you clarify with them who was
16· ·going to handle it?
17· ·A.· · · No.· I did not.
18· ·Q.· · · Did you follow up with them after asking
19· ·if they wanted you to reach out to get the details
20· ·on the cabling work?
21· ·A.· · · Not by e-mail.
22· ·Q.· · · Did you do that orally?
23· ·A.· · · I don't know.· I can't remember, but --
24· ·Q.· · · You should have, right?
25· ·A.· · · We had a lot of discussions at that point.
Page 113
·1· ·So I believe it was discussed on a couple
·2· ·different calls, but I can't recall specifics.
·3· ·Q.· · · All right.· So in terms of whether you
·4· ·followed up with Sean O'Brien to reach out to
·5· ·Stream to get the details, as you sit here now,
·6· ·you just don't remember if that occurred, true?
·7· ·A.· · · True.
·8· ·Q.· · · Then a little bit -- in the -- in the
·9· ·Stream right above it, on September 15th at
10· ·8:41 a.m., Christina Murray indicates to you,
11· ·"Ryan, just as an FYI, the work is -- repair is
12· ·scheduled for Monday."· Do you see that?
13· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
14· ·Q.· · · And you say, "Thanks, Christina.· I am
15· ·more concerned from a liability perspective on who
16· ·completed the work previously," right?
17· ·A.· · · Right.
18· ·Q.· · · What was your concern from a liability
19· ·perspective in September of 2016?
20· ·A.· · · My concern for the landlord was that the
21· ·work wasn't completed properly.
22· ·Q.· · · Did you indicate that to the landlord?
23· ·A.· · · Not in this e-mail.
24· ·Q.· · · Did you do that orally?
25· ·A.· · · What I remember is telling them that they
YVer1f
 Ryan Hunt
January 09, 2019
Page 114
·1· ·should contact Eric and Stream to find out more
·2· ·details about the work.
·3· ·Q.· · · What was it about what had happened that
·4· ·concerned you that the work wasn't done properly?
·5· ·A.· · · Because somebody drove through the cable
·6· ·barrier system.
·7· ·Q.· · · In and of itself, that was enough to give
·8· ·you concern, wasn't it?
·9· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
10· ·Q.· · · That gave you the impetus to indicate to
11· ·the owner, You need to investigate this, right?
12· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
13· ·Q.· · · And that didn't just mean the ninth floor?
14· ·That meant the garage, right?
15· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
16· ·Q.· · · And what did you do at Premier to assure
17· ·that the owner looked into what you saw as a
18· ·liability problem?
19· ·A.· · · Other than the e-mails and conversations
20· ·that I had, that was the gist of it.
21· ·Q.· · · So from September of 2016 through the time
22· ·of Ms. Bowmer's unfortunate incident where she,
23· ·too, passed through the vehicle restraint system,
24· ·other than a call or the e-mails that you were
25· ·telling me about, is there anything else Premier
Page 115
·1· ·did to satisfy its concern about the liability of
·2· ·the prior repairs not being done correctly?
·3· ·A.· · · I don't know.
·4· ·Q.· · · Who would know that?
·5· ·A.· · · I don't know.
·6· ·Q.· · · Is there anything else you did to satisfy
·7· ·that liability concern?
·8· ·A.· · · I don't think so.
·9· ·Q.· · · When you heard that Ms. Bowmer's car had
10· ·likewise gone through the vehicle restraint
11· ·system, were you even more concerned from a
12· ·liability perspective?
13· ·A.· · · I was more concerned.
14· ·Q.· · · Why?
15· ·A.· · · Because it happened again.
16· ·Q.· · · And nothing had been done in the interim?
17· ·A.· · · I didn't know if anything had been done in
18· ·the interim.
19· ·Q.· · · As you sit here now, do you know if
20· ·anything had been done?
21· ·A.· · · I don't.
22· ·Q.· · · You would expect that something would have
23· ·been done, right?
24· ·A.· · · Well, the cable system was repaired on the
25· ·ninth floor, but I don't know about the others,
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
114 to 117
Page 116
·1· ·so...
·2· ·Q.· · · You would have expected that if a
·3· ·professional engineer gave advice to have the
·4· ·cables inspected, the owner would have followed
·5· ·that?
·6· ·A.· · · Not all owners follow the recommendations
·7· ·of engineers and structural engineers.
·8· ·Q.· · · So that's typical then for what you see in
·9· ·owners?
10· ·A.· · · It depends on the capital required to fix
11· ·the garage, so...
12· ·Q.· · · So in some instances that you've seen,
13· ·what an owner will do is instead of implementing
14· ·repairs that are recommended by an engineer to
15· ·bring something up to code or the standard of care
16· ·that are expensive, an owner will do a cheaper
17· ·fix, right?
18· ·A.· · · I didn't say that.
19· ·Q.· · · Well, isn't that the gist of what you're
20· ·saying?
21· ·A.· · · No.
22· ·Q.· · · Okay.· Well, isn't that exactly what
23· ·happened here?
24· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection.· Form.
25· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· I don't know.
Page 117
·1· ·BY MR. BREEN:
·2· ·Q.· · · Well, when Stream was the property manager
·3· ·for -- pardon me.· When Premier was the property
·4· ·manager for Stream Realty, are you aware that at
·5· ·least two engineers gave recommendations to Stream
·6· ·that they needed to bring the garage up to code or
·7· ·up to the standard of care to have those engineers
·8· ·work on the project?
·9· ·A.· · · I was not.
10· ·Q.· · · Knowing that now, does it surprise you
11· ·that Stream wouldn't follow the advice of
12· ·professionals in that regard?
13· ·A.· · · I don't know if I'm surprised or not.
14· ·Q.· · · Have you seen that typically with owners?
15· ·A.· · · I've seen owners make determinations about
16· ·how to spend capital dollars on their parking
17· ·structures in a number of ways.
18· ·Q.· · · And one phrase for that is putting profits
19· ·over safety, isn't it?
20· ·A.· · · I don't know.
21· ·Q.· · · Well, if an owner deliberately decides not
22· ·to implement costly repairs that would make a
23· ·garage safe because they want to save money,
24· ·that's putting profits over safety, isn't it?
25· ·A.· · · You're assuming that the reason they don't
YVer1f
 Ryan Hunt
January 09, 2019
Page 118
·1· ·want to spend the money is to save it.· I don't
·2· ·know.
·3· ·Q.· · · What other reason would somebody have to
·4· ·not spend money if it's not to save it?
·5· ·A.· · · They don't have it.
·6· ·Q.· · · Did Stream Realty have a shortage of cash?
·7· ·A.· · · I don't know.
·8· ·Q.· · · Weren't they making a profit off the
·9· ·garage?
10· ·A.· · · I don't know if Stream was the only owner
11· ·of the garage.
12· ·Q.· · · Well, put it this way:· Premier made a net
13· ·profit every month it worked for Stream in the
14· ·garage, right?
15· ·A.· · · It did.
16· ·Q.· · · That would indicate the owner or owner
17· ·affiliates were making a net profit, right?
18· ·A.· · · I don't know.
19· ·Q.· · · Well, how could Premier make it and not
20· ·the owner?
21· ·A.· · · Debt service coverage.· A number of other
22· ·things.
23· ·Q.· · · Did you ever talk about that with Stream?
24· ·A.· · · We did not.
25· ·Q.· · · How about with GTT?· Was there ever any
Page 119
·1· ·indication given to you by GTT that they didn't
·2· ·have the money to do necessary repairs?
·3· ·A.· · · No.
·4· ·Q.· · · Is there any indication to you between the
·5· ·O'Connor incident and the Bowmer incident GTT
·6· ·didn't have the money to do the right thing and
·7· ·make the garage safe?
·8· ·A.· · · There was never any determinations of not
·9· ·having money to do anything.· No.
10· ·Q.· · · What did you do, if anything, Mr. Hunt, to
11· ·satisfy your liability concerns after the
12· ·September 15th, 2016 e-mail?
13· ·A.· · · Other than what I already said?
14· ·Q.· · · Yes, sir.
15· ·A.· · · I don't know.
16· ·Q.· · · Can you list anything for me?
17· ·A.· · · I don't recall all the specifics.
18· ·Q.· · · Where were you when you heard Ms. Bowmer
19· ·had gone through the vehicle restraint system?
20· ·A.· · · I don't remember.
21· ·Q.· · · Who told you?
22· ·A.· · · Christina Murray.
23· ·Q.· · · What was your first impression?
24· ·A.· · · Shocked.
25· ·Q.· · · How long did it take for you to think
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
118 to 121
Page 120
·1· ·about Mr. O'Connor's incident?
·2· ·A.· · · Half a second.
·3· ·Q.· · · Why?
·4· ·A.· · · It's the same incident.
·5· ·Q.· · · Do you agree with me that Ms. Bowmer's
·6· ·incident was preventable?
·7· ·A.· · · I don't know.
·8· ·Q.· · · Do you have any reason to indicate that if
·9· ·there had been an adequate vehicle barrier there,
10· ·that Ms. Bowmer wouldn't have gone off the seventh
11· ·floor?
12· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection.· Form.
13· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· I don't know.
14· ·BY MR. BREEN:
15· ·Q.· · · Do you agree with me that there should
16· ·have been an adequate barrier on the seventh floor
17· ·the day that she was there?
18· ·A.· · · I don't know.
19· ·Q.· · · You don't know if there should have been
20· ·an adequate barrier?
21· ·A.· · · I don't know if it was inadequate or
22· ·adequate.
23· ·Q.· · · I'm asking --
24· ·A.· · · And so I don't know if it should have
25· ·been.
Page 121
·1· ·Q.· · · Well, I'm asking you, sir, as president of
·2· ·Premier, is it really your testimony to the jury
·3· ·that you don't know if there should have been an
·4· ·adequate barrier on the seventh floor edge where
·5· ·she went off?
·6· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection.· Form.
·7· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· I don't know how to
·8· ·answer that.
·9· ·BY MR. BREEN:
10· ·Q.· · · Was no barrier acceptable?
11· ·A.· · · Of course not.
12· ·Q.· · · Was a partial barrier that's inadequate
13· ·acceptable?
14· ·A.· · · I don't know if it was partial or not.
15· ·Q.· · · I'm not --
16· ·A.· · · But it's not --
17· ·Q.· · · I'm asking you --
18· ·A.· · · Okay.
19· ·Q.· · · -- in the --
20· ·A.· · · Understood.
21· ·Q.· · · -- concept.· Yes, sir.
22· ·A.· · · No.· A partial barrier would be
23· ·inadequate.
24· ·Q.· · · Do you agree with the City's conclusion
25· ·that the barrier system in the building was
YVer1f
 Ryan Hunt
January 09, 2019
Page 122
·1· ·dangerous at the time Ms. Bowmer went off?
·2· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection.· Form.
·3· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· I haven't seen the
·4· ·City's conclusion.
·5· ·BY MR. BREEN:
·6· ·Q.· · · Well, it is.· I'm representing to you they
·7· ·concluded that.
·8· ·A.· · · Yeah.
·9· ·Q.· · · Do you have any reason to disagree with
10· ·that?
11· ·A.· · · I have no reason to disagree with the City
12· ·of Austin.
13· ·Q.· · · Were you involved in any of the
14· ·discussions with -- strike that.
15· · · · · · Were you involved with any discussions
16· ·with GTT, Mr. Kahn or Mr. O'Brien about the Bowmer
17· ·incident?
18· ·A.· · · I believe so.
19· ·Q.· · · Tell me what you recall about those,
20· ·please.
21· ·A.· · · I don't recall a lot.
22· ·Q.· · · Whatever you recall, please share with me.
23· ·A.· · · I don't, other than phone calls.· And
24· ·there's -- of course, my client was distraught
25· ·that it happened again.· I think there was just --
Page 123
·1· ·Q.· · · In -- in what sense?
·2· ·A.· · · The conversation was -- there's just a
·3· ·general -- a general disbelief and that it had
·4· ·happened.
·5· ·Q.· · · Anything else?
·6· ·A.· · · I don't remember.
·7· ·Q.· · · Were you involved with the statement that
·8· ·was issued by GTT following the Bowmer incident?
·9· ·A.· · · I don't know.
10· ·Q.· · · Do you recall whether you talked with or
11· ·gave information to Mr. Kahn or Mr. O'Brien to put
12· ·into the statement?
13· ·A.· · · I believe so.
14· ·Q.· · · What do you recall about that?
15· ·A.· · · I just recall wanting to get a statement
16· ·out.· I don't remember the specifics.
17· ·Q.· · · And is it you who wanted to get a
18· ·statement out?
19· ·A.· · · Well, they were putting a statement out,
20· ·and they wanted a statement from Premier.
21· ·Q.· · · And what -- what was the purpose for you
22· ·putting a statement out?
23· ·A.· · · The request of our client.
24· ·Q.· · · Have you ever been involved with Premier
25· ·for prosecuting and trespass action against
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
122 to 125
Page 124
·1· ·somebody that used one of their friend's or
·2· ·acquaintance's cards to park in a garage?
·3· ·A.· · · I don't know.
·4· ·Q.· · · Do you know anybody at Premier that has?
·5· ·A.· · · I don't know.
·6· ·Q.· · · Who would know that at Premier?
·7· ·A.· · · I don't know.
·8· ·Q.· · · Is that some type of pervasive problem
·9· ·that Premier sees, that is, a friend loaning a
10· ·card to somebody else?
11· ·A.· · · We see a lot of different issues with
12· ·parking people taking advantage of certain parking
13· ·situations.
14· ·Q.· · · My question to you wasn't that.· It was,
15· ·is that a pervasive problem that you see?
16· ·A.· · · I don't know.
17· ·Q.· · · Can you think of a single instance where
18· ·Premier has ever sent an e-mail or a letter or a
19· ·warning of any type to a user that says, Hey, you
20· ·can't lend your card to your friend?
21· ·A.· · · I believe it's part of our parking
22· ·agreement that you're not allowed to do that.
23· ·Q.· · · Well, it's part of some of your
24· ·agreements.· Would you agree with that?
25· ·A.· · · Some of our monthly parking agreements.
Page 125
·1· ·Yes.
·2· ·Q.· · · Okay.· But it's not a part of all of your
·3· ·agreements, is it?
·4· ·A.· · · I don't know.
·5· ·Q.· · · Well, I'm representing to you it's not
·6· ·rather than go through all of them.· I've got them
·7· ·marked.
·8· ·A.· · · Okay.
·9· ·Q.· · · We can if you want to, but it's not in all
10· ·of your agreements.
11· ·A.· · · Okay.
12· ·Q.· · · Okay.· So would that indicate to you that
13· ·on some garages, Premier doesn't have agreements
14· ·that say that and some it does?
15· ·A.· · · In surface parking lots there -- with no
16· ·gated access control system, people don't have
17· ·cards.· So it wouldn't be in the agreement.
18· ·Q.· · · Okay.· Now, let me ask you this:· Does
19· ·Premier put a sign up at the facility at
20· ·Littlefield that says, Hey, if you've borrowed a
21· ·friend's card or they loaned it to you, you're not
22· ·to enter or use this?
23· ·A.· · · I don't know.
24· ·Q.· · · How would the person who had the card lent
25· ·to them know Premier didn't approve of that?
YVer1f
 Ryan Hunt
January 09, 2019
Page 126
·1· ·A.· · · I don't know.
·2· ·Q.· · · There wouldn't be anything there at the
·3· ·facility to indicate they were doing anything
·4· ·improper, would there?
·5· ·A.· · · I don't know.
·6· ·Q.· · · Now, in the instance of a friend loaning
·7· ·their card to somebody to use, as long as both of
·8· ·them don't have their cars in there at the same
·9· ·time, there's no actual loss of a profit to
10· ·Premier, is there?
11· ·A.· · · I don't know.
12· ·Q.· · · Well, what would be the difference between
13· ·a friend that has a card borrowing somebody else's
14· ·car and using it that day and loaning their card
15· ·to somebody for that person to use the space that
16· ·day?
17· ·A.· · · Can I use a comparable situation?
18· ·Q.· · · Well, answer my question first and then
19· ·you can.
20· ·A.· · · It's the best way to answer it.
21· ·Q.· · · Okay.· Go for it.
22· ·A.· · · So I'm not allowed to loan my gym
23· ·membership to somebody else to use, and so -- even
24· ·though the gym is not losing revenue if a friend
25· ·borrows their membership.
Page 127
·1· · · · · · It's kind of like the same premise.· So
·2· ·if you don't show up that day to that work, we
·3· ·could resell that space, because we're not selling
·4· ·parking spaces.· We're selling access to the
·5· ·garage.· So it's a misconception sometimes that
·6· ·we're selling an actual space.
·7· ·Q.· · · Okay.· So --
·8· ·A.· · · So there could be lost revenue.
·9· ·Q.· · · All right.· Then I assume then there's
10· ·some type of effort Premier makes against people
11· ·loaning their cards to their friends?
12· ·A.· · · It's hard to determine if they ever loan
13· ·the card to their friend.· It's not something that
14· ·we would be able to figure out.
15· ·Q.· · · Is it honestly even a real concern at
16· ·Premier?
17· ·A.· · · It depends.· If it's -- we have real
18· ·concerns where -- at certain parking locations
19· ·where it's excessive.· If people are doing it all
20· ·the time, then we have concerns.
21· · · · · · And then we also address it -- if it's a
22· ·big concern of the landlord, then it's a big
23· ·concern of ours.
24· ·Q.· · · Did you ever have any kind of meetings
25· ·with Stream or GTT about that being a big concern
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
126 to 129
Page 128
·1· ·at Littlefield?
·2· ·A.· · · I don't think so.
·3· ·Q.· · · Did you ever have any indications from GTT
·4· ·or Stream that they were concerned about friends
·5· ·loaning a card to another friend at that facility?
·6· ·A.· · · I don't think so.
·7· ·Q.· · · Did you ever have a single instance where
·8· ·anybody ever complained regarding the Littlefield
·9· ·garage about friends loaning a card to another
10· ·friend so that they could park there?
11· ·A.· · · I don't know.
12· ·Q.· · · Does Premier feel like when a friend has
13· ·borrowed a friend's card, then somehow the garage
14· ·doesn't have to be safe for the person who's --
15· ·the friend who's using the garage?
16· ·A.· · · I don't.
17· ·Q.· · · It should still be safe, right?
18· ·A.· · · All customers are the same.
19· ·Q.· · · Whether you have the card, whether you
20· ·pull a ticket, whether you're one of these
21· ·customers who may pull in and pull out, I
22· ·assume -- well, let me ask you this:· Is there a
23· ·time allocation that Premier had on the lot that
24· ·if you go in but you leave within five or ten or
25· ·fifteen minutes, you don't have to pay?
Page 129
·1· ·A.· · · Yes.
·2· ·Q.· · · How long is that?
·3· ·A.· · · I think it's ten minutes, but I don't
·4· ·know.
·5· ·Q.· · · Do you -- do you know how long it was
·6· ·between when Ms. Bowmer entered the garage and
·7· ·when she exited?
·8· ·A.· · · I don't.
·9· ·Q.· · · Do you think it was less than ten minutes?
10· ·A.· · · I don't know.
11· ·Q.· · · If it had been less than ten minutes, then
12· ·she wouldn't have needed to pay or wouldn't have
13· ·needed a card, right?
14· ·A.· · · If the grace period is ten minutes, yes.
15· ·Q.· · · Do you believe that Premier somehow owed
16· ·any less effort or safety to Ms. Bowmer because
17· ·she was using a friend's card that day?
18· ·A.· · · No.
19· ·Q.· · · Do you believe that GTT owed any less
20· ·safety or level of effort to protect Ms. Bowmer
21· ·because she was using a friend's card?
22· ·A.· · · No.
23· ·Q.· · · Do you have any reason to know why
24· ·Ms. Bowmer would have known about some kind of
25· ·language in her friend's parking agreement that
YVer1f
 Ryan Hunt
January 09, 2019
Page 130
·1· ·would have prevented him from lending her the
·2· ·card?
·3· ·A.· · · I don't know.
·4· ·Q.· · · Have you ever loaned a card to a friend to
·5· ·use?
·6· ·A.· · · I have not.
·7· ·Q.· · · Have you ever had somebody borrow one from
·8· ·you?
·9· ·A.· · · No.
10· ·Q.· · · Do you, as president of Premier, have the
11· ·ability to give cards out to people to use?
12· ·A.· · · Not everywhere.· No.· I mean, it's my --
13· ·it's our client's money.
14· ·Q.· · · You do some places?
15· ·A.· · · Well, if we have a master lease where --
16· ·where -- where we control all the revenue, then we
17· ·have that ability.· When you own a parking
18· ·company, a lot of people ask you for free parking,
19· ·friends and not friends.
20· ·Q.· · · It's the same when you're a lawyer,
21· ·especially your family.· All of my brothers and
22· ·sisters, who are doctors, constantly call me for
23· ·advice.· Before, they bashed lawyers.
24· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· Let's take a quick break.
25· ·I just have a few more exhibits.· Let me get them
Page 131
·1· ·together, and I may get efficient.· Okay?
·2· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Okay.
·3· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· Thank.
·4· · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Off the record at
·5· ·11:09 a.m.
·6· · · · · · ·(Recess, 11:09 to 11:25 a.m.)
·7· · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Returning to the
·8· ·record.· The time is 11:25 a.m.
·9· ·BY MR. BREEN:
10· ·Q.· · · All right, Mr. Hunter.· We're back on the
11· ·record.· I have a few more questions.· Are you
12· ·ready to proceed?
13· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
14· · · · · ·(Document marked Exhibit No. 50.)
15· ·BY MR. BREEN:
16· ·Q.· · · I'll show you Exhibit 50.
17· ·A.· · · Thank you.
18· ·Q.· · · You bet.· If you could tell me what
19· ·Exhibit 50 is, please.· Sorry.
20· ·A.· · · It's a management report to -- from
21· ·Premier to ownership, I believe.
22· ·Q.· · · Okay.· And this would be for the owner;
23· ·that's GTT?
24· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
25· ·Q.· · · And it has some information that's
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
130 to 133
Page 132
·1· ·included with it behind the summary of the figures
·2· ·on the front page.· Do you see it?· Bar graphs.
·3· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
·4· ·Q.· · · Different graphs.· What is this for?
·5· ·A.· · · This is for the report for the owner.
·6· ·Q.· · · Okay.· And in it, it has -- on GTT 1862,
·7· ·for example, there's a line item for the repairs
·8· ·and maintenance expenses.
·9· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
10· ·Q.· · · Do you see that?· The same as on 1863. I
11· ·take it that that would be where, for instance,
12· ·some of the things you and I had looked at -- if
13· ·Premier implements some type of item in the
14· ·garage, some work in the garage for which they
15· ·incur an expense, they then pass it through to the
16· ·owner?
17· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
18· ·Q.· · · And there could be various purposes and
19· ·items that are booked as a maintenance expense,
20· ·true?
21· ·A.· · · True.
22· · · · · ·(Document marked Exhibit No. 51.)
23· ·BY MR. BREEN:
24· ·Q.· · · I'll show you Exhibit 51.· What is Exhibit
25· ·51?
Page 133
·1· ·A.· · · The management report for the
·2· ·Littlefield --
·3· ·Q.· · · Okay.
·4· ·A.· · · -- parking garage.
·5· ·Q.· · · Basically the same type of document.· May
·6· ·even be the same one.
·7· ·A.· · · I think it is the same one.
·8· ·Q.· · · Okay.· Great.· Then let me show you 52.
·9· · · · · · (Document marked Exhibit No. 52.)
10· ·BY MR. BREEN:
11· ·Q.· · · 52 is a summary that I did of the sheets
12· ·that have been produced, the accounting summary
13· ·sheets, 1592 through 15 -- or excuse me.· 1592
14· ·through 1954, from January 2015 through November
15· ·2018.
16· · · · · · The -- and then I have -- I just tried to
17· ·do the math on what the fee was as a percentage of
18· ·total revenue.· And, of course, I'm not an
19· ·accountant, and I'm not representing that this is
20· ·somehow the actual -- anything other than a
21· ·mathematical percentage.
22· · · · · · I just did it to see what -- what it
23· ·looks like.· So my question for you is:· What was
24· ·the percentage of total revenue that Premier was
25· ·taking on the garage under the GTT agreement?
YVer1f
 Ryan Hunt
January 09, 2019
Page 134
·1· ·A.· · · Our management fee is a percentage of net
·2· ·operating income.
·3· ·Q.· · · Okay.· What was it as a percentage of net
·4· ·operating income?· Do you remember?
·5· ·A.· · · There's two.· 3 percent up to a specific
·6· ·threshold and then 5 percent for anything that
·7· ·exceeds that threshold.
·8· ·Q.· · · And then there was an incentive fee that's
·9· ·also able to be attained by Premier; is that
10· ·right?
11· ·A.· · · No.
12· ·Q.· · · No incentive fee?
13· ·A.· · · No.
14· ·Q.· · · What -- what --
15· ·A.· · · The 5 percent is calculated annually.
16· ·Q.· · · Okay.
17· ·A.· · · So the 3 percent is calculated over the
18· ·term of the contract, which is done on a fiscal
19· ·year.· And then anything in excess of a certain
20· ·threshold is calculated at 5 percent.· So you take
21· ·the difference of 5 percent and 3 percent, and
22· ·that's how you calculate the annual payment.
23· ·Q.· · · Is there a title for that annual payment?
24· ·A.· · · No.
25· ·Q.· · · So if somebody somewhere refers to it as
Page 135
·1· ·an annual incentive fee, that's not Premier's
·2· ·vernacular?
·3· ·A.· · · Not for this contract.· It's just a
·4· ·percentage threshold.· It's just paid out
·5· ·annually.· It could be paid out and accrued for
·6· ·monthly.· It's just not how this contract is done.
·7· ·Q.· · · Got it.· Thank you.· Now -- thank you.
·8· ·I'm done with that one.
·9· ·A.· · · Okay.
10· ·Q.· · · I just have a few more questions for you.
11· ·So when was it that Premier initially became
12· ·involved with the Littlefield garage with Stream?
13· ·A.· · · I believe it's August or September of 2013
14· ·or '14.· I can't remember.
15· ·Q.· · · Okay.· There's a service contract between
16· ·Stream and Premier that's -- that is on or about
17· ·August 20th of -- strike that.
18· · · · · · There's a service contract that actually
19· ·is for 10/2013 through September of 2014.· Was
20· ·there any type of written contract between Stream
21· ·and Premier before that service contract?
22· ·A.· · · No.
23· ·Q.· · · Was it just an oral contract?
24· ·A.· · · We weren't operating the garage before
25· ·then, I don't believe.
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
134 to 137
Page 136
·1· ·Q.· · · All right.· So when did Premier start
·2· ·operating the garage?
·3· ·A.· · · I believe it was October 1st of 2013.
·4· ·Q.· · · And were you involved with that?· How did
·5· ·you --
·6· ·A.· · · At a high level.
·7· ·Q.· · · How did Premier get the account?
·8· ·A.· · · Through a relationship with the ownership
·9· ·group.
10· ·Q.· · · Who?
11· ·A.· · · Well, Stream was the partner, but our
12· ·relationship came through a company called
13· ·Magellan out of Chicago.
14· ·Q.· · · And so did Premier -- your understanding
15· ·is Premier started in October of 2013 managing the
16· ·garage?
17· ·A.· · · I believe so.
18· ·Q.· · · And when it started managing the garage,
19· ·does it do a walk-through?
20· ·A.· · · We do a lot of things.
21· ·Q.· · · Well, I asked you about a walk-through.
22· ·A.· · · I don't know if we did.
23· ·Q.· · · Okay.· Is that typical procedure?
24· ·A.· · · You would want to know -- yes.· You would
25· ·want to -- you would drive in and out of the
Page 137
·1· ·garage.· You would know what's -- how many spaces,
·2· ·how many levels.
·3· ·Q.· · · Would you want to look and see if it had a
·4· ·vehicle restraint system if it was a multilevel
·5· ·open-air garage?
·6· ·A.· · · Yes.
·7· ·Q.· · · And would you want to look and see if the
·8· ·cables were missing, rusted, rotten, dilapidated?
·9· ·A.· · · It wouldn't be on a checklist.· But if we
10· ·saw that something was happening, we might point
11· ·that out.
12· ·Q.· · · And you should point that out, right?
13· ·A.· · · I would expect our account managers to
14· ·point out anything that they think is of a concern
15· ·to the landlord.
16· ·Q.· · · And if there's a rotten or missing or
17· ·damaged vehicle restraint cable, that would be
18· ·something you would expect your managers to point
19· ·out to the owner, right?
20· ·A.· · · They see a cable system that's missing,
21· ·they would point that out.
22· ·Q.· · · Okay.· How about if they see one that's
23· ·obviously rotten?
24· ·A.· · · Rotten?
25· ·Q.· · · Rotten.· You know what rotten is, don't
YVer1f
 Ryan Hunt
January 09, 2019
Page 138
·1· ·you?
·2· ·A.· · · Yeah.· But I don't --
·3· ·Q.· · · Have you ever seen --
·4· ·A.· · · -- know -- can a cable --
·5· ·Q.· · · Yeah.· Oh, yeah.· A cable system can rot.
·6· ·A.· · · Okay.
·7· ·Q.· · · Have you ever seen one?
·8· ·A.· · · I don't know.
·9· ·Q.· · · Corroded.· It's orange.· It's frayed.
10· ·A.· · · Sure.· Sure.
11· ·Q.· · · If your manager saw something like that,
12· ·you would expect that red flag to be reported,
13· ·right?
14· ·A.· · · I don't know.· Certain specifics, they
15· ·should -- anything that looks out of the ordinary,
16· ·they would need to let the landlord know.
17· ·Q.· · · And does Premier take pictures of the
18· ·premises when it's doing a walk-through like that?
19· ·A.· · · Sometimes.
20· ·Q.· · · Is there standard operating procedure that
21· ·would indicate pictures should be taken?
22· ·A.· · · No.
23· ·Q.· · · Just whether the person decides to take
24· ·them or not?
25· ·A.· · · If there's anything that's called out,
Page 139
·1· ·they might want to take it -- to send to somebody
·2· ·to take a look at.
·3· ·Q.· · · Now, you and I have looked at generally
·4· ·today -- you've been very kind to go through with
·5· ·me the time frame of the summer of 2014 where --
·6· ·you've seen the documents that two engineering
·7· ·groups at least came in to inspect the cable
·8· ·system in the garage, right?
·9· ·A.· · · Uh-huh.
10· ·Q.· · · Yes?
11· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
12· ·Q.· · · And that there are e-mails that indicate
13· ·that those engineering groups recommended that
14· ·they couldn't do any work on the garage unless the
15· ·garage was brought up to code or to the standard
16· ·of care.· You've seen that?
17· ·A.· · · I've seen those e-mails.· Yes.
18· ·Q.· · · And you personally were familiar with the
19· ·owner deciding not to do that, and instead, to use
20· ·Curtis Brown, right?
21· ·A.· · · He decided to use Curtis Brown, the
22· ·ownership group.· Yes.
23· ·Q.· · · Okay.· Didn't use an engineering group
24· ·that we looked at, either Maritech or VLS, right?
25· ·A.· · · They were not used.· Correct.
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
138 to 141
Page 140
·1· ·Q.· · · You didn't know anything about Curtis
·2· ·Brown's credentials or whether he was an engineer
·3· ·or what he was doing, true?
·4· ·A.· · · I did not.
·5· ·Q.· · · And then you had the O'Connor incident
·6· ·that occurred on September 9th of 2016 where a
·7· ·vehicle went through the cable system, right?
·8· ·A.· · · Yes.
·9· ·Q.· · · And that was extremely concerning to you
10· ·at Premier, was it not?
11· ·A.· · · Yes.
12· ·Q.· · · And one of the things that was of concern
13· ·was the potential liability of somebody going off
14· ·the garage, right?
15· ·A.· · · Yes.· For the landlord.
16· ·Q.· · · And you saw the e-mail where you
17· ·volunteered to reach out to the former owner to
18· ·get information about the repairs done by
19· ·Mr. Brown?
20· ·A.· · · Yes.
21· ·Q.· · · And you don't have any recollection of you
22· ·actually doing that and following up and giving
23· ·that information to Mr. Kahn, right?
24· ·A.· · · I did not.
25· ·Q.· · · And do you know of anybody else at Premier
Page 141
·1· ·that followed up on your volunteering to reach out
·2· ·to Stream to get that information about Mr. Brown
·3· ·and what he did and give it to Mr. Kahn?
·4· ·A.· · · We would not.
·5· ·Q.· · · And at the time, you didn't tell Mr. Kahn
·6· ·anything about the fact that two at least previous
·7· ·engineering inspections had been done and
·8· ·recommended?
·9· ·A.· · · I didn't know at the time.
10· ·Q.· · · Okay.· So if you didn't know, you didn't
11· ·tell him about that, right?
12· ·A.· · · Correct.
13· ·Q.· · · You've seen, though, that at a minimum,
14· ·Mr. Chapman and Ms. Wright knew of at least one
15· ·engineering group that had come in and said, If
16· ·you don't bring it up to code, we're not doing
17· ·this?
18· ·A.· · · I don't know if they knew that they were
19· ·touring an engineering group, and I don't know if
20· ·they knew that they were actually a party to that
21· ·information being transmitted.
22· ·Q.· · · Do you expect that Mr. Chapman and Ms.
23· ·Wright both together would tour the building with
24· ·somebody and not know what they were doing?
25· ·A.· · · We don't always know.
YVer1f
 Ryan Hunt
January 09, 2019
Page 142
·1· ·Q.· · · Isn't it more likely than not that if both
·2· ·Mr. Chapman and Ms. Wright were touring with a
·3· ·person, they would know what the person was doing?
·4· ·A.· · · I don't know, but I also don't think they
·5· ·made their determination on-site based on their
·6· ·assessment.
·7· ·Q.· · · Well, based on the e-mail you and I
·8· ·reviewed, it took ten minutes for the other
·9· ·engineer to figure out that this was a
10· ·dilapidated, dangerous system, didn't it?
11· ·A.· · · I believe -- I believe that's what the
12· ·e-mail said.
13· ·Q.· · · You can't even walk the whole garage in
14· ·ten minutes, can you?
15· ·A.· · · I don't know.· Maybe.· Maybe not.
16· ·Q.· · · You'd have to hustle, right?
17· ·A.· · · Probably.
18· ·Q.· · · So if he hustled, he saw the whole garage
19· ·and determined that it was dilapidated --
20· ·A.· · · Yeah.
21· ·Q.· · · -- and dangerous, right?
22· ·A.· · · I don't know if he informed our team about
23· ·it.
24· ·Q.· · · Well, with that background, then having
25· ·the O'Connor incident, having your person,
Page 143
·1· ·Ms. Murray, making a claim for GTT against
·2· ·Mr. O'Connor, do you know if Premier had any
·3· ·indication that repairs were being done anywhere
·4· ·else in the building after Mr. O'Connor's incident
·5· ·and before Ms. Bowmer?
·6· ·A.· · · I don't know.
·7· · · · · · (Document marked Exhibit No. 48.)
·8· ·BY MR. BREEN:
·9· ·Q.· · · Okay.· Let me show you Exhibit 48.
10· ·A.· · · Thank you.
11· ·Q.· · · See -- if you turn to the second page of
12· ·Exhibit 48, you'll see an e-mail from Ms. Murray
13· ·on March 23rd of 2017.· Do you see that?
14· ·A.· · · I do.
15· ·Q.· · · Now, March 23rd of 2017, that's after
16· ·Mr. O'Connor's incident, but four months before
17· ·Ms. Bowmer's incident, right?
18· ·A.· · · Okay.
19· ·Q.· · · And do you remember what floor Ms. Bowmer
20· ·went off of?
21· ·A.· · · Level 9.
22· ·Q.· · · Level 7?
23· ·A.· · · Level 7.
24· ·Q.· · · Mr. O'Connor went off Level 9.
25· ·A.· · · Okay.· Sorry.
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
142 to 145
Page 144
·1· ·Q.· · · All right.· That's all right.· And you see
·2· ·on Page 2 there, Christina Murray, on March 23rd
·3· ·of 2017, in e-mailing to this Brian person says,
·4· ·"In addition to the level we spoke of previously,
·5· ·Level 7 up now also has wide cabling out. I
·6· ·called your office, but the [sic] suggested I
·7· ·reach out to you."
·8· · · · · · And it had a couple typos in there.· But
·9· ·the obvious gist of it is, is that Ms. Murray has
10· ·recognized that there are multiple levels with
11· ·cabling out in the garage, true?
12· ·A.· · · True.
13· ·Q.· · · And then Mr. Bonniwell from Blue
14· ·Construction replies back on March 24th at about
15· ·7:30 in the morning and replies to everybody and
16· ·calls them the team, right?· Do you see that?
17· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
18· ·Q.· · · And indicates that they had been asked to
19· ·repair two more cables where the retrofit assembly
20· ·has come apart.· Do you see that?
21· ·A.· · · Yes.
22· ·Q.· · · Now, that retrofit assembly, sir, was the
23· ·assembly that Curtis Brown did on the building,
24· ·wasn't it?
25· ·A.· · · I don't know.
Page 145
·1· ·Q.· · · Well, do you know of any other retrofit
·2· ·that was done out there?
·3· ·A.· · · I don't.
·4· ·Q.· · · You do know that Curtis Brown was doing a
·5· ·retrofit, right?
·6· ·A.· · · I know that he was repairing some cables.
·7· ·Yes.
·8· ·Q.· · · Okay.· And here it is -- that it is March
·9· ·of 2017 and Blue Construction is indicating to the
10· ·team, which is also Ms. Murray, that not only have
11· ·they been having to repair some of Curtis Brown's
12· ·work that had come apart, but there was also at
13· ·least two other levels, including Level 7, that
14· ·Ms. Murray noted the cabling was out, right?
15· ·A.· · · Yes.
16· ·Q.· · · Now, this is a major red flag, isn't it,
17· ·sir?
18· ·A.· · · Yes.
19· ·Q.· · · It's a major red flag that indicates that
20· ·after two engineers had told Stream that they
21· ·wouldn't participate in a retrofit and after
22· ·Stream got some guy named Curtis Brown to do the
23· ·retrofit, within a short relatively period of
24· ·time, his retrofit was coming apart on multiple
25· ·levels in the garage, right?
YVer1f
 Ryan Hunt
January 09, 2019
Page 146
·1· · · · · · · · MR. RHODES:· Objection.· Form.· Go
·2· ·ahead.
·3· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· I don't know if it was
·4· ·Curtis Brown's retrofit that was coming apart or
·5· ·if there had been retrofitting done before. I
·6· ·don't know.
·7· ·BY MR. BREEN:
·8· ·Q.· · · Well, have you ever seen a single piece of
·9· ·paper that indicated, other than Mr. Brown,
10· ·anybody worked on the cable barrier system while
11· ·Premier was involved?
12· ·A.· · · Not while Premier was involved.· No.
13· ·Q.· · · Okay.· Do you know of any piece of paper
14· ·that indicates any retrofit was done on the
15· ·parking garage before Curtis Brown did it?
16· ·A.· · · I don't know of one.
17· ·Q.· · · Have you seen the newspaper articles
18· ·following Mr. O'Connor's incident where it was
19· ·widely publicized that the wiring at issue that
20· ·failed was in some parts at least 30-plus years
21· ·old?
22· ·A.· · · I have not seen that.
23· ·Q.· · · Did you not read those articles when --
24· ·A.· · · I read bits and pieces of it.· I don't
25· ·recall reading --
Page 147
·1· ·Q.· · · Didn't notice --
·2· ·A.· · · -- specifics.
·3· ·Q.· · · -- anything about that?
·4· ·A.· · · I don't recall reading specifics.
·5· ·Q.· · · Would it have added to your level of
·6· ·concern if you knew that there were still
·7· ·30-plus-year-old wires on that garage at the time
·8· ·after --
·9· ·A.· · · I don't know.
10· ·Q.· · · You don't know?
11· ·A.· · · I don't know the life span of cables.
12· ·Q.· · · Now, so Gib Jones from Blue Construction
13· ·asks who the contract will be written to.· And
14· ·then the response up at the top is, "Repair will
15· ·be written to Premier Parking Littlefield Garage."
16· ·Do you see that?
17· ·A.· · · I do.
18· ·Q.· · · Were you aware that Premier was involved
19· ·with and was on the team of doing repairs to the
20· ·retrofit that had come apart?
21· ·A.· · · I don't know.
22· ·Q.· · · Well, you see it on this piece of paper.
23· ·What do you mean you don't know?
24· ·A.· · · I don't consider this being on the team of
25· ·doing the repairs.
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
146 to 149
Page 148
·1· ·Q.· · · Oh.· When he says "team," you don't think
·2· ·that included Premier?
·3· ·A.· · · We're not copied on the e-mail.
·4· ·Q.· · · When it says, "Repair will be written to
·5· ·Premier Parking Littlefield Garage," you don't
·6· ·consider that to be part of the team?
·7· ·A.· · · I don't see anyone from Premier confirming
·8· ·that or entering into that contract.
·9· ·Q.· · · When -- now, Ms. Murray was at the
10· ·facility when Mr. Brown was doing his retrofit
11· ·work, right?
12· ·A.· · · I don't know.· That might have been before
13· ·her time.
14· ·Q.· · · So it may have been Ms. Wright at the
15· ·time?
16· ·A.· · · Could have been.
17· ·Q.· · · Did you ever share with Ms. Murray the
18· ·fact that Mr. Brown had done work on the cabling
19· ·system?
20· ·A.· · · I don't know.
21· ·Q.· · · Why wouldn't you have done that?
22· ·A.· · · I don't know.
23· ·Q.· · · Well, you volunteered to reach out to
24· ·Stream for -- for Mr. O'Brien.· Would you not have
25· ·told your direct underling, Hey, you know what?
Page 149
·1· ·In 2014, they had this guy, Curtis Brown, out here
·2· ·to do cable work.· We ought to look into that?
·3· ·A.· · · I don't know.
·4· ·Q.· · · When the cable started failing, did
·5· ·Ms. Murray come to you and say, Brian, you know,
·6· ·there's cables failing in the garage.· We've
·7· ·already had one guy go off.· We really ought to do
·8· ·something?
·9· ·A.· · · I don't recall.
10· ·Q.· · · Wouldn't you expect a property manager
11· ·that's your direct underling to come to you and
12· ·indicate to you that there was this serious of a
13· ·red flag?
14· ·A.· · · I don't know.
15· ·Q.· · · Well, what do you train people to do at
16· ·Premier when they're acting as a property manager
17· ·and they have safety red flags that come to their
18· ·attention?· What should they do?
19· ·A.· · · I believe she made the landlord aware.
20· ·Q.· · · Okay.· Internally, she should -- should
21· ·she not also notify somebody like you or
22· ·Mr. Chapman, who's an engineer, about it?
23· ·A.· · · She might have.· I just don't recall.
24· ·Q.· · · Well, given the fact that Ms. Bowmer's
25· ·incident occurred months after this and this
YVer1f
 Ryan Hunt
January 09, 2019
Page 150
·1· ·references the exact same level, don't you think
·2· ·that would jog your memory that she brought it to
·3· ·your attention?
·4· ·A.· · · I don't know.
·5· · · · · ·(Document marked Exhibit No. 49.)
·6· ·BY MR. BREEN:
·7· ·Q.· · · Let me show you Exhibit 49.· Exhibit 49 is
·8· ·June of 2017 e-mail exchange.· Do you see that?
·9· ·A.· · · Yes.
10· ·Q.· · · That also is a time period that's after
11· ·Mr. O'Connor's plunge and before Ms. Bowmer's,
12· ·right?
13· ·A.· · · I believe so.
14· ·Q.· · · And it's after Exhibit 48, the March 2017
15· ·e-mail, is it not?
16· ·A.· · · It appears so.
17· ·Q.· · · All right.· And in this e-mail, Ms. Murray
18· ·is e-mailing Mr. O'Brien, and she indicates she
19· ·followed up with Brian at Blue yesterday about the
20· ·cable wire repairs here at LF.· That would be
21· ·Littlefield, right?
22· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
23· ·Q.· · · And she indicates, "He," meaning Brian at
24· ·Blue, "said I should reach out to you, Sean
25· ·O'Brien, to see if the repairs are approved,"
Page 151
·1· ·right?
·2· ·A.· · · Right.
·3· ·Q.· · · And Mr. O'Brien asks Ms. Murray for a
·4· ·refresher, does he not?
·5· ·A.· · · He does.
·6· ·Q.· · · And Ms. Murray says, "We have two levels
·7· ·with wire cables out of the walls."· Did you know
·8· ·that?
·9· ·A.· · · I did not.
10· ·Q.· · · Did you know that in addition to in March
11· ·where they were working on repairs to the
12· ·retrofit, to the cables, that now, in June,
13· ·they're also having at least two levels with wire
14· ·cables out of the walls?
15· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Object to the form.
16· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· I don't know.
17· ·BY MR. BREEN:
18· ·Q.· · · Well, you see that in Exhibit 49, right?
19· ·A.· · · Yes, sir.
20· ·Q.· · · Nobody brought that to your attention, did
21· ·they?
22· ·A.· · · I don't know.
23· ·Q.· · · Well, if they had brought that to your
24· ·attention, given the fact you were so concerned
25· ·when Mr. O'Connor went off the garage about
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
150 to 153
Page 152
·1· ·liability, you certainly would have been even more
·2· ·concerned in June of 2017 about potential
·3· ·liability if there are multiple levels with cables
·4· ·out of the walls, right?
·5· ·A.· · · I don't know.
·6· ·Q.· · · You don't know that?
·7· ·A.· · · No.
·8· ·Q.· · · Well, what would it -- that would have
·9· ·made your concern about liability better after
10· ·Mr. O'Connor's incident if you didn't know if
11· ·repairs were done, you didn't know if there was an
12· ·engineer involved, you didn't follow up with the
13· ·previous owner and you're now getting e-mails that
14· ·say there's multiple levels with cables out?· Why
15· ·would you feel better about liability?
16· ·A.· · · I wouldn't.
17· ·Q.· · · You'd feel worse, wouldn't you?
18· ·A.· · · I don't know.
19· ·Q.· · · Well, this is clearly --
20· ·A.· · · Wouldn't feel better.
21· ·Q.· · · This is clearly a more dangerous
22· ·situation, isn't it?
23· ·A.· · · I don't know.
24· ·Q.· · · Well, is it a good thing to have multiple
25· ·levels with wire cables out of the walls?
Page 153
·1· ·A.· · · I don't know, but I would assume not.
·2· ·Q.· · · Probably using common sense, that's not a
·3· ·good thing, right?
·4· ·A.· · · Sure.
·5· ·Q.· · · That's not a safe thing, right?
·6· ·A.· · · Sure.
·7· ·Q.· · · That's something that needs to be
·8· ·addressed, isn't it?
·9· ·A.· · · I don't know.
10· ·Q.· · · You don't know if wires out of the wall
11· ·needs to be addressed?
12· ·A.· · · I would think the landlord would want to
13· ·address that.
14· ·Q.· · · Now, do you know what the assessment was
15· ·that Ms. Murray was referring to where she
16· ·indicates that Brian had brought someone out to
17· ·assess and quote the damage for repair?
18· ·A.· · · I don't.
19· ·Q.· · · Do you know if Ms. Murray followed up with
20· ·Brian to send that information to the landlord so
21· ·that the landlord could assess that?
22· ·A.· · · I don't.
23· ·Q.· · · Now, if you had been included in this
24· ·loop, Mr. Hunt, isn't it fair to say that seeing
25· ·yet another red flag like this, you would have
YVer1f
 Ryan Hunt
January 09, 2019
Page 154
·1· ·brought this to the attention of the landlord and
·2· ·said to him, you know, we really need to follow up
·3· ·about the repairs that Stream did to see if they
·4· ·were adequate?
·5· ·A.· · · I can't say what I would have done. I
·6· ·think -- from what I'm reading, I think we're
·7· ·making it very clear that work needs to be done
·8· ·and that -- or helping assist with that.
·9· ·Q.· · · Okay.· And in the meantime, don't you
10· ·agree with me that it would be reasonable and
11· ·prudent to have some type of protections to
12· ·safeguard people that are using the facility?
13· ·A.· · · I don't know.
14· ·Q.· · · Well, if there are wires out and there's
15· ·a risk that people could plunge from the garage
16· ·like happened to Mr. O'Connor, don't you think
17· ·that a prudent approach would be to have some type
18· ·of temporary barrier put up while you figure out
19· ·the extent and nature of the problem?
20· · · · · · · · MR. RHODES:· Objection to form.· You
21· ·can answer.
22· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· I don't know.
23· ·BY MR. BREEN:
24· ·Q.· · · What do you mean you don't know?
25· · · · · · · · MR. RHODES:· Objection to form.
Page 155
·1· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· I don't know.· We're
·2· ·not responsible for closing down specific spaces
·3· ·or not unless asked to.
·4· ·BY MR. BREEN:
·5· ·Q.· · · Well, setting aside whose responsibility
·6· ·it is, just from a common sense -- common sense
·7· ·human perspective of not wanting somebody to get
·8· ·hurt, don't you think it's a prudent thing to do
·9· ·in a circumstance like this that we're looking at
10· ·in Exhibit 49 with this being the tail end, the
11· ·caboose, of everything you and I have reviewed
12· ·from 2014 'til then?
13· ·A.· · · I don't know what would constitute
14· ·shutting down those spaces.
15· ·Q.· · · Well, what type of efforts to protect the
16· ·users do you think should have been made?
17· ·A.· · · I don't know.
18· ·Q.· · · You do think something should have been
19· ·done, right?
20· ·A.· · · I don't know.
21· ·Q.· · · Do you think it was okay to not do
22· ·anything?
23· ·A.· · · I don't know.
24· ·Q.· · · But that's what happened, isn't it?
25· ·A.· · · Again, I don't know what was done and what
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
1-800-567-8757
154 to 157
Page 156
·1· ·wasn't done.
·2· ·Q.· · · Do you know of anything that was done to
·3· ·help keep Ms. Bowmer from going off the seventh
·4· ·floor in the time period between 2014 to this
·5· ·Exhibit 49?
·6· ·A.· · · I don't.
·7· ·Q.· · · Do you know anything from Exhibit 49's
·8· ·date of June 2017 to the time Christi Bowmer fell
·9· ·seven-plus stories that was done to make that
10· ·garage safe?
11· ·A.· · · I don't.
12· ·Q.· · · What you do know is Exhibit 49 is another
13· ·red flag, isn't it?
14· · · · · · · · MR. RHODES:· Objection.· Form.
15· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· I know that the cables
16· ·being out was a concern.
17· ·BY MR. BREEN:
18· ·Q.· · · That, before you agreed with me, is a red
19· ·flag?
20· ·A.· · · Yeah.· Fair.
21· ·Q.· · · The last couple questions I have for you,
22· ·Mr. Hunt, are because even though we have a video,
23· ·we have a booklet, too.· Through my demeanor here
24· ·today, have I caused you to answer questions other
25· ·than you wanted?
Page 157
·1· ·A.· · · I don't think so.
·2· ·Q.· · · Have I been courteous to you?
·3· ·A.· · · Sure.
·4· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· I'll reserve the rest of
·5· ·my questions.
·6· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Thank you.
·7· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· I'll reserve my
·8· ·questions for the time of trial.
·9· · · · · · · · MR. KURHAJEC:· I have none.
10· · · · · · · · MR. RHODES:· Reserve questions until
11· ·trial.
12· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· Thank you.· We're
13· ·concluded.
14· · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Okay.· That
15· ·concludes the video deposition of Ryan Hunt.
16· ·We're off the record at 11:52 a.m.
17· · · · ·(Proceedings adjourned at 11:52 a.m.)
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
 Ryan Hunt
January 09, 2019 158
Page 158
·1· · · · · · · · ·C E R T I F I C A T E
·2
·3· · · · · · I, Rhonda Nicholson, Registered Court
·4· ·Reporter and Notary Public, State of Tennessee at
·5· ·Large, do hereby certify that I recorded to the
·6· ·best of my skill and ability by machine shorthand
·7· ·the proceedings contained herein, that same was
·8· ·reduced to computer transcription by myself, and
·9· ·that the foregoing is a true, accurate, and
10· ·complete transcript of the proceedings heard in
11· ·this cause.
12· · · · · · I further certify that I am not an
13· ·attorney or counsel of any of the parties, nor a
14· ·relative or employee of any attorney or counsel
15· ·connected with the action, nor financially
16· ·interested in the action
17· · · · · · This 21st day of January, 2019.
18
19
20
21· · · · · · · · · · ·___________________________
· · · · · · · · · · · ·Rhonda Nicholson
22· · · · · · · · · · ·LCR No. 160, Exp:· 6/30/20
23· ·My Commission Expires:
24· ·5/2/2022
25

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

1-800-567-8757
Exhibit V
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sheldon David Kahn on 06/19/2018 ·

·1· · · · · · · · · CAUSE NO. D-1-GN-17-004456

·2· CHRISTI J. BOWMER,· · · · · ) IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · )
·3· · · · · · Plaintiff,· · · · )
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · )
·4· VS.· · · · · · · · · · · · ·) TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · )
·5· GTT PARKING, LP, SHELDON· · )
· · DAVID KAHN, PREMIER· · · · ·)
·6· PARKING OF TENNESSEE,· · · ·) 353RD JUDICIAL DISTRICT
· · LLC, and WEITZMAN· · · · · ·)
·7· MANAGEMENT CORPORATION,· · ·)
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · )
·8· · · · · · Defendants.· · · ·)

·9

10

11

12· · · · · · · ORAL AND VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF

· · · · · · · · · · · · SHELDON DAVID KAHN
13· · · · · · · · · · · · ·JUNE 19, 2018
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·VOLUME 1
14

15

16

17

18· · · · · · ORAL AND VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF SHELDON DAVID

· · KAHN, produced as a witness at the instance of the
19· Plaintiff and duly sworn, was taken in the above styled
· · and numbered cause on Tuesday, June 19, 2018, from
20· 4:22 p.m. to 5:44 p.m., before TAMARA CHAPMAN, CSR, RPR,
· · CCR in and for the State of Texas, reported by
21· computerized stenotype machine, at the offices of
· · Thompson, Coe, Cousins & Irons, LLP, 701 Brazos Street,
22· Austin, Texas, pursuant to the Texas Rules of Civil
· · Procedure and the provisions stated on the record herein.
23

24

25· Job No. 205436

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sheldon David Kahn on 06/19/2018 Pages 2..5
Page 2 Page 4
·1· · · · · · · · · · ·A P P E A R A N C E S ·1· · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· This is the videotaped
·2· FOR THE PLAINTIFF:
· · · · ·Sean Breen ·2· oral deposition of Sheldon David Kahn.· Today's date is
·3· · · ·Chris Lavorato ·3· June 19th, 2018.· The approximate time, 4:22 p.m.· We're
· · · · ·HOWRY BREEN & HERMAN, L.L.P.
·4· · · ·1900 Pearl Street ·4· recording and on record.
· · · · ·Austin, Texas 78705-5408
·5· · · · · · · · · · · SHELDON DAVID KAHN,
·5· · · ·sbreen@howrybreen.com
· · · · ·clavorato@howrybreen.com ·6· having been first duly sworn, testified as follows:
·6
·7
·7· · · · · · · · · · · · · EXAMINATION
· · FOR THE DEFENDANT GTT PARKING, LP AND SHELDON DAVID KAHN: ·8· BY MR. BREEN:
·8· · · ·Tasha L. Barnes
· · · · ·THOMPSON COE COUSINS & IRONS, LLP ·9· · · ·Q.· Would you state your name for the record, please.
·9· · · ·701 Brazos Street, Suite 1500 10· · · ·A.· Sheldon David Kahn.
· · · · ·Austin, Texas 78701
10· · · ·tbarnes@thompsoncoe.com 11· · · ·Q.· Mr. Kahn, my name is Sean Breen, along with my
11 12· partner, Chris Lavorato.· I represent Christi Bowmer.
12· FOR THE DEFENDANT PREMIER PARKING OF TENNESSEE, LLC:
· · · · ·Christopher L. Rhodes 13· · · · · · · · Do you understand who I am and who I
13· · · ·AYIK & ASSOCIATES 14· represent?
· · · · ·9601 McAllister Freeway, Suite 910
14· · · ·San Antonio, Texas 78216 15· · · ·A.· Yes.
· · · · ·crhodes2@travelers.com
15
16· · · ·Q.· You are a party to a lawsuit that has been filed
16 17· as a result of injuries she suffered on July the 13th of
· · FOR THE DEFENDANT WEITZMAN MANAGEMENT CORPORATION:
17· · · ·Curtis J. Kurhajec 18· 2017, when her vehicle left the seventh floor of the
· · · · ·NAMAN, HOWELL, SMITH & LEE, PLLC 19· Littlefield Garage.· Do you understand that?
18· · · ·8310 N. Capital of Texas Highway, Suite 490
· · · · ·Austin, Texas 78731 20· · · ·A.· Yes.
19· · · ·ckurhajec@namanhowell.com 21· · · ·Q.· Have you ever given a deposition before?
20
21· ALSO PRESENT: 22· · · ·A.· Yes.
· · · · ·Brent Kirby, Videographer 23· · · ·Q.· How many times?
22
23 24· · · ·A.· Over a dozen times.
24
25
25· · · ·Q.· For what reasons?

Page 3 Page 5
·1· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·I N D E X ·1· · · ·A.· Commercial litigations.
·2
·2· · · ·Q.· As the plaintiff or the defendant?
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · PAGE
·3
·3· · · ·A.· Both.
·4 ·4· · · ·Q.· When's the most recent?
· · · · ·SHELDON DAVID KAHN ·5· · · ·A.· Deposition?
·5
·6· · · ·Q.· Yes, sir.
· · ·EXAMINATION
·6· · · ·By Mr. Breen...........................· · 4
·7· · · ·A.· It was in the summer of 2016.
·7 ·8· · · ·Q.· Over what?
· · ·CORRECTION PAGE............................· ·75 ·9· · · ·A.· A dispute with the homeowners' association.
·8· ·SIGNATURE PAGE.............................· ·76 10· · · ·Q.· Where?
· · ·REPORTER'S CERTIFICATION...................· ·77
11· · · ·A.· Austin, Texas.
·9
10 12· · · ·Q.· What was the name of the homeowners' association?
11· · · · · · · · · · · · E X H I B I T S 13· · · ·A.· Stratford Hills Homeowners' Association.
12· ·NO.· · · · · ·DESCRIPTION· · · · · · · · · ·PAGE 14· · · ·Q.· And was it in your individual capacity you were
· · ·Exhibit 23· · Certificate of Occupancy
15· in this dispute?
13· · · · · · · · ·(No Bates - 2 pages)· · · · · · 28
14 16· · · ·A.· Yes.
15 17· · · ·Q.· Who represented you?
16 18· · · ·A.· You mean my counsel?
17
19· · · ·Q.· Correct.
18
19 20· · · ·A.· Mitchell Savrick.
20 21· · · ·Q.· And did you give a deposition in that?
21 22· · · ·A.· Yes.
22
23· · · ·Q.· Do you know what a deposition is, in terms of the
23
24
24· rules, how it works, that it's under oath, those things?
25 25· · · ·A.· Yes.

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sheldon David Kahn on 06/19/2018 Pages 6..9
Page 6 Page 8
·1· · · ·Q.· I'm assuming since you've given 12, I don't need ·1· · · ·Q.· All right.· Have you seen this exhibit,
·2· to go through those? ·2· Exhibit 1, before now?
·3· · · ·A.· Yes. ·3· · · ·A.· I don't recall if I've seen this particular piece
·4· · · ·Q.· One thing, since it's a booklet and a video, ·4· of paper.
·5· Mr. Kahn, if through my demeanor you find that I'm being ·5· · · ·Q.· What have you done to prepare yourself to be able
·6· rude to you or causing you to answer in some way other ·6· to answer questions on behalf of GTT Parking, LP here
·7· than you want to, will you let me know at the time? ·7· today?
·8· · · ·A.· Yes. ·8· · · ·A.· Well, I reviewed the documents, and I'm here to
·9· · · ·Q.· Then I can fix that, because I don't intend to do ·9· answer the questions as best I recall.
10· that.· And then we won't have to guess at the end of 10· · · ·Q.· What documents?
11· deposition as to what you understood or what I did.· We'll 11· · · ·A.· I brought with me my -- my files, and I'll be
12· know, because you'll alert me.· Okay? 12· willing to look into them to have a more accurate
13· · · ·A.· Yes, sir. 13· recollection.
14· · · ·Q.· Are you here today, you understand, in your 14· · · ·Q.· Thank you, sir.· What files did you bring with
15· capacity as the corporate representative for GTT Parking, 15· you here today?
16· LP? 16· · · ·A.· I brought my laptop.
17· · · ·A.· Both in that capacity, and from what I 17· · · ·Q.· And what files do you have on your laptop?
18· understand, Mr. Breen, you have chosen to sue me 18· · · ·A.· The ones that we submitted to you guys as the
19· personally. 19· plaintiffs -- as the defendants' production.
20· · · ·Q.· I have? 20· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So the documents that were submitted to
21· · · ·A.· Your client has chosen to sue me personally. 21· us?
22· · · ·Q.· That's correct.· You're very correct in that, but 22· · · ·A.· Yes.
23· you're not here in your personal capacity today.· You're 23· · · ·Q.· Anything in addition to that?
24· here and have been noticed in your capacity as somebody 24· · · ·A.· No.
25· representing GTT Parking, LP.· Do you understand that? 25· · · ·Q.· And so did you review just the documents that you

Page 7 Page 9
·1· · · ·A.· I was summoned here to -- to respond to the ·1· submitted to us to prepare yourself, or other documents as
·2· deposition. ·2· well?
·3· · · ·Q.· Right. ·3· · · ·A.· Just the documents that we submitted to you guys.
·4· · · ·A.· I don't know if this is on my personal capacity ·4· · · ·Q.· Anything else that you reviewed in order to
·5· or on my corporate capacity. ·5· prepare yourself to testify on behalf of the company?
·6· · · ·Q.· Fair enough.· Do you see Exhibit 1 in front of -- ·6· · · ·A.· No.
·7· · · ·A.· But my answers would probably be the same. ·7· · · ·Q.· Did you -- besides visiting with your lawyer, did
·8· · · ·Q.· Thank you, sir.· I appreciate that. ·8· you visit with any other people about or to prepare
·9· · · · · · · · Do you see the notice there in front of you? ·9· yourself for the testimony on behalf of GTT Parking?
10· · · ·A.· Yes, sir. 10· · · ·A.· Well, I work on a daily basis with Mr. O'Brien,
11· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· It says "Plaintiff's Notice of 11· who just got deposed.
12· Oral Deposition of GTT Parking, LP." 12· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So did you visit with Mr. O'Brien about
13· · · ·A.· Yes. 13· information to help you answer these questions?
14· · · ·Q.· And then do you see that -- if you look at Page 4 14· · · ·A.· Not to help me answer these questions, but we
15· of 6, 5 of 6, and 6 of 6, it has different categories of 15· visited on a regular basis.
16· information that are to be the subject of questions here 16· · · ·Q.· So my question to you was if you visited with
17· today. 17· anybody to prepare yourself to answer the questions on
18· · · ·A.· The exhibit, definitions, topics.· Definitions 18· behalf of GTT Parking.· And it sounds like the answer is
19· and topics. 19· no.· It's just you visited with him in general because you
20· · · ·Q.· Right. 20· do so on a daily basis?
21· · · ·A.· Yeah. 21· · · ·A.· That's correct.
22· · · ·Q.· Topics. 22· · · ·Q.· So other than Mr. O'Brien, and not counting your
23· · · ·A.· Yeah. 23· lawyers, was there anybody else, Mr. Kahn, that you
24· · · ·Q.· Do you see that? 24· visited with in order to prepare yourself to testify on
25· · · ·A.· Yeah. 25· behalf of GTT Parking, LP?

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sheldon David Kahn on 06/19/2018 Pages 10..13
Page 10 Page 12
·1· · · ·A.· Not to prepare for the -- for this deposition. ·1· LP, are there any other limited partners of GTT Parking,
·2· But I have run or had meetings with people from GTT ·2· LP?
·3· Parking. ·3· · · ·A.· There are no other limited partners.
·4· · · ·Q.· Who? ·4· · · ·Q.· Is there a general partner?
·5· · · ·A.· Ms. Christina Murray and Mr. Ryan -- Mr. Ryan ·5· · · ·A.· Yes.
·6· Hunt. ·6· · · ·Q.· Who is that?
·7· · · ·Q.· Is Ms. Christina Murray with GTT Parking? ·7· · · ·A.· It's called OUP Management, Inc.
·8· · · ·A.· No. ·8· · · ·Q.· Is that incorporated in Texas?
·9· · · ·Q.· She's with who? ·9· · · ·A.· Yes, sir.
10· · · ·A.· She's employed by Premier Parking. 10· · · ·Q.· And who are members of OUP Management, Inc.?
11· · · ·Q.· How about Mr. Hunt? 11· · · ·A.· Corporations don't have members.
12· · · ·A.· He's employed by Premier Parking. 12· · · ·Q.· Some do.
13· · · ·Q.· Other than yourself and Mr. O'Brien, are there 13· · · ·A.· Not that I know of.· They're called stockholders.
14· any other human beings affiliated with, employed by, or in 14· · · ·Q.· Okay, Mr. Kahn.· Who is a shareholder in OUP
15· the partnership of GTT Parking, LP? 15· Management, Inc.?
16· · · ·A.· GTT Parking, LP has no employees. 16· · · ·A.· Myself.
17· · · ·Q.· So can you please explain to the jury the 17· · · ·Q.· Anybody else?
18· structure of GTT Parking, LP? 18· · · ·A.· No.
19· · · ·A.· Yeah.· It's a limited partnership that is -- is 19· · · ·Q.· So when it comes to the operation of GTT Parking,
20· incorporated in the State of Texas.· It's what is called a 20· LP, essentially you, through OUP Management, Inc., are the
21· single-entity organization and -- and the fact that it 21· general partner of GTT Parking, LP.· Is that accurate?
22· only owns one real estate property and that its entire 22· · · ·A.· Yes.
23· activity is to own and to rent out that particular real 23· · · ·Q.· And do you have partnership meetings for GTT
24· estate asset. 24· Parking, LP?
25· · · ·Q.· And that asset would be the Littlefield Garage? 25· · · ·A.· We have an annual partnership meeting.

Page 11 Page 13
·1· · · ·A.· Yes. ·1· · · ·Q.· Has that been held since the inception of GTT
·2· · · ·Q.· And who are the limited partners? ·2· Parking, LP?
·3· · · ·A.· The limited partners are the Polar Bear Trust and ·3· · · ·A.· Yes.
·4· Noctua Investments, LP. ·4· · · ·Q.· Where?
·5· · · ·Q.· No Two Investments? ·5· · · ·A.· At our corporate offices.
·6· · · ·A.· Noctua, N-O-C -- N-O-C-T-U-A. ·6· · · ·Q.· Where is that?
·7· · · ·Q.· Noctua Investments, LP? ·7· · · ·A.· 804 Congress, Suite 300.
·8· · · ·A.· Yes. ·8· · · ·Q.· And do you keep records of that meeting?
·9· · · ·Q.· Any other limited partners in GTT Parking, LP? ·9· · · ·A.· No.
10· · · ·A.· No. 10· · · ·Q.· Do you keep any records of any of the meetings of
11· · · ·Q.· Is Polar Bear Trust one of your family trusts? 11· GTT Parking, LP?
12· · · ·A.· I am the trustee, the sole trustee.· Currently 12· · · ·A.· No.
13· sole trustee of the Polar Bear Trust. 13· · · ·Q.· Does GTT Parking, LP have a safety officer of any
14· · · ·Q.· And who are the beneficiaries? 14· type?
15· · · ·A.· My heirs.· It's what -- it's commonly known as a 15· · · ·A.· A safety officer?
16· generation-skipping transfer trust. 16· · · ·Q.· Yes, sir.
17· · · ·Q.· Thank you, sir.· And the Noctua Investments, LP, 17· · · ·A.· No.
18· who are limited partners or members of that? 18· · · ·Q.· Does GTT Parking, LP have any written policies
19· · · ·A.· Noctua. 19· and procedures?
20· · · ·Q.· Noctua. 20· · · ·A.· No.
21· · · ·A.· I don't know that information. 21· · · ·Q.· Does GTT Parking, LP have a risk management plan?
22· · · ·Q.· Is it related to you or is it other people? 22· · · ·A.· No.
23· · · ·A.· It's other people.· They have a person who is in 23· · · ·Q.· Does GTT Parking, LP have any type of proactive
24· charge of that -- of that trust. 24· risk assessment plan or policies or procedures?
25· · · ·Q.· Besides Polar Bear Trust and Noctua Investments, 25· · · ·A.· Proactive risk assessment management policies.

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sheldon David Kahn on 06/19/2018 Pages 14..17
Page 14 Page 16
·1· · · ·Q.· Proactive risk management assessment? ·1· and -- however, we would be responsible for the cost of
·2· · · ·A.· Well, what we do is we engage with our insurance ·2· any repairs or the cost of any items that they felt that
·3· company to insure the operations in the property.· And we ·3· we had to -- to, you know, do in order to operate the
·4· engage with, you know, a qualified property manager, ·4· garage properly.
·5· property management companies, to actually operate the ·5· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· "They" being Premier?
·6· properties on behalf of the partnership. ·6· · · ·A.· Yes.
·7· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So you understand, as the general partner ·7· · · ·Q.· Okay.
·8· or in the entity that acts as the general partner for GTT ·8· · · ·A.· So we would be responsible for the costs.
·9· Parking, LP, that it's important for GTT Parking, LP to ·9· · · ·Q.· For instance, the Littlefield Garage has
10· have appropriate safety policies and procedures regarding 10· approximately how many?· Seven levels that have open or
11· the property that it owns and manages.· Right? 11· exposed levels to the alley where the O'Connor and the
12· · · ·A.· For that respect we hire what we consider to be 12· Bowmer incident happened?
13· top-of-the-line experienced operators who operate multiple 13· · · ·A.· Well, I see how you are confused, Mr. -- Sean,
14· properties, and we rely on them to, you know, ensure the 14· and the reason is because the floors of the garage are not
15· safe -- safe operation of the properties.· In addition, we 15· numbered consecutively.· So the elevator goes all the way
16· expect all our properties to be insured. 16· to the ninth floor.
17· · · ·Q.· So my question was a little different. 17· · · ·Q.· Okay.· How many level are exposed?
18· · · · · · · · It was, do you understand at GTT Parking, 18· · · ·A.· But not all floors have parking.
19· LP, that it's important for the company to have policies 19· · · ·Q.· How many levels?
20· and procedures in place for the safe operation of the 20· · · ·A.· I believe it's seven.
21· property, that is, the Littlefield Garage? 21· · · ·Q.· Isn't that what I said?· Didn't I say to you that
22· · · ·A.· We rely on third parties to have those 22· it was seven levels?
23· procedures. 23· · · · · · · · (Discussion off the written record.)
24· · · ·Q.· Yeah.· I didn't ask you who you relied on, 24· · · · · · · · (The requested material was read.)
25· Mr. Kahn. 25· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Yes.· That's what he said.

Page 15 Page 17
·1· · · · · · · · What I'm asking you is, do you understand, ·1· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· So even though it has nine
·2· as a company, that it's important -- safety and the ·2· floors, there's only actually seven levels that are
·3· operation of the building is important? ·3· exposed.· Right?
·4· · · ·A.· The operation of the building is important. ·4· · · ·A.· Yes, sir.
·5· · · ·Q.· Not the operation.· Safety. ·5· · · ·Q.· So knowing that there's seven levels that are
·6· · · ·A.· Safety in the building is important. ·6· exposed, including Levels 9, 8, 7, et cetera, what was it
·7· · · ·Q.· And the safe operation of the building.· Right? ·7· that GTT Parking did to ensure at the time of Ms. Bowmer's
·8· · · ·A.· Safe operation of the building. ·8· accident or just prior to it that those upper levels were
·9· · · ·Q.· If I understand what you're telling me, Mr. Kahn, ·9· safely protected so that vehicles couldn't go off the
10· it is that, as opposed to having the knowledge or the 10· building?
11· behavior or the policies to do it itself, GTT Parking 11· · · ·A.· Well, first of all, I've -- business of the
12· relies on third parties to operate the Littlefield Garage 12· community, we rely on building codes that are specified
13· safely. 13· for each of the properties that are built, and those codes
14· · · ·A.· Yeah. 14· are promulgated by the International Building Code in
15· · · ·Q.· Is that accurate? 15· order to ensure safety.
16· · · ·A.· Yeah. 16· · · · · · · · Our first reliance is on the -- you know,
17· · · ·Q.· And that third party would be Premier Parking? 17· all the engineers and all the workmen and all the City
18· · · ·A.· Yeah. 18· officers that were present at the time that the building
19· · · ·Q.· And did GTT Parking rely on Premier Parking to 19· was built in order to give the building its initial
20· safely operate, install, design, make sure there was a 20· certificate of occupancy.
21· vehicle restraint system on the floors of the parking 21· · · · · · · · So if you start from the beginning, when a
22· garage? 22· property receives a certificate of occupancy, it's
23· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 23· certified by the City that it's, you know, complied with
24· You can answer 24· all the safety rules and regulation.
25· · · ·A.· We would rely on them to operate the garage 25· · · · · · · · And -- and then, when we purchase a

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sheldon David Kahn on 06/19/2018 Pages 18..21
Page 18 Page 20
·1· property, we see -- we try to see if there's a -- if -- ·1· · · ·Q.· Were any of them parking garages?
·2· you know, if the garage has a certificate of occupancy, ·2· · · ·A.· No.
·3· you know, from the City. ·3· · · ·Q.· So 2015 and the Littlefield building was the
·4· · · · · · · · Second of all, what we did is -- the ·4· first time you personally had any type of exposure or
·5· previous owner was very professional, very well-known ·5· experience as an owner to a multilevel parking garage.· Is
·6· multiple-property owner, which is Stream, and they manage ·6· that accurate?
·7· multiple properties.· And they, you know, told us that the ·7· · · ·A.· To a multilevel garage, yes.
·8· property was, you know, in good working order. ·8· · · ·Q.· And I would assume that, in 2015, you had no idea
·9· · · · · · · · And then the next step was we talk to the ·9· personally what type of requirements there were for a
10· people from Premier Parking who had been managing for 10· reasonably prudent parking garage owner in terms of a
11· several years the -- the property and, you know, they 11· vehicle restraint system to keep vehicles from leaving the
12· didn't indicate at the time any issues with the property. 12· side of the premises on the upper floors?
13· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· Object as not responsive. 13· · · ·A.· Do I personally have that information?
14· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· When did you, through GTT 14· · · ·Q.· Yes, sir.
15· Parking, LP, purchase the building, sir? 15· · · ·A.· No.
16· · · ·A.· I believe we bought the buildings in 2015. 16· · · ·Q.· And in 2015, when you bought the building, you
17· · · ·Q.· In 2015, what did GTT Parking do when -- or at 17· personally didn't have the ability to make any type of
18· the time it was buying the building to ensure that the 18· assessment as to the adequacy of whether or not there was
19· cable system, the vehicle restraint system, on the 19· such a restraint system.· Is that true?
20· building was safe and not dangerous? 20· · · ·A.· I'm not an engineer.· So I technically can't make
21· · · ·A.· At the time of purchase? 21· that assessment.· However, I do look at the work produced
22· · · ·Q.· Yes, sir. 22· by other people and -- you know, and I interview people to
23· · · ·A.· At the time of purchase, there was no indication 23· see if they have a concern, and I'm relying on their -- on
24· otherwise.· We as -- GTT Parking does not have the ability 24· their expertise.
25· itself to see if a property is safe or not.· We rely on 25· · · ·Q.· For instance, even though you hadn't operated a

Page 19 Page 21
·1· the property managers that we hire to do that. ·1· parking garage before, Mr. Kahn, you certainly knew that
·2· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Well, before you hire a property manager ·2· it was foreseeable that vehicle accidents can occur in a
·3· when you bought the building in 2015, did you do an ·3· parking garage?
·4· inspection of the building? ·4· · · ·A.· Vehicle accidents can happen anywhere.· Yes.
·5· · · ·A.· In 2015? ·5· · · ·Q.· Anywhere would include a parking garage?
·6· · · ·Q.· Yes, sir. ·6· · · ·A.· Anywhere would include anywhere.
·7· · · ·A.· I don't recall. ·7· · · ·Q.· My question to you was parking garage and you
·8· · · ·Q.· Did Mr. O'Brien do an inspection for GTT Parking? ·8· added anywhere.· I'd like to keep it at parking garage.
·9· · · ·A.· He's not a property inspector, but he did look at ·9· · · · · · · · Do you agree that, when you bought the
10· the property. 10· building in 2015, you knew that vehicle accidents could
11· · · ·Q.· Did he do it on behalf of GTT Parking? 11· occur in the parking garage?
12· · · ·A.· Yes. 12· · · ·A.· Of course.
13· · · ·Q.· Did you? 13· · · ·Q.· And that could be a single-car accident or a
14· · · ·A.· Yes. 14· multi-car accident.· Right?
15· · · ·Q.· Had you ever operated a parking garage before? 15· · · ·A.· Yes.
16· · · ·A.· No. 16· · · ·Q.· And that it was important for the safety of the
17· · · ·Q.· Had you ever operated a multilevel building 17· patrons for the parking garage to have protections to keep
18· before that had exposed areas like the west side of the 18· vehicles from leaving or falling out of the parking garage
19· garage in 2015? 19· if they had an accident.· Right?
20· · · ·A.· Well, let me rephrase the previous answer. 20· · · ·A.· Well, you're taking a leap of -- from one
21· · · ·Q.· Okay. 21· question to the other.· Whether accidents would happen or
22· · · ·A.· We did operate properties that had parking 22· not doesn't necessarily mean that it's the responsibility
23· garages, but none of them were parking garages where the 23· of the parking garage itself.
24· customers were charged for parking, and they were 24· · · · · · · · The parking garage is a nonmovable object
25· certainly not multilevel parking garages. 25· and -- and the cars, the vehicles, are moving objects that

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sheldon David Kahn on 06/19/2018 Pages 22..25
Page 22 Page 24
·1· are driven by people who are -- you know, they could have ·1· be a car accident.
·2· an accident. ·2· · · ·Q.· And that could be a multi- or a single-vehicle
·3· · · ·Q.· Right. ·3· accident.· Right?
·4· · · · · · · · People make mistakes, don't they? ·4· · · ·A.· Of course.
·5· · · ·A.· That's -- yes.· People do make mistakes.· I -- I ·5· · · ·Q.· And that, if it's a multistory building, it's
·6· can see where you're thinking that -- where we're going ·6· important that the building be equipped with safeguards,
·7· with that. ·7· that, if there is an accident, to keep the car from going
·8· · · ·Q.· Here's what I'd suggest. ·8· out of the building.· Right?
·9· · · ·A.· But -- ·9· · · ·A.· The building is equipped with the safety
10· · · ·Q.· Like I tell my wife, don't try to tell me or 10· equipment that the International Building Code required at
11· think about where I'm thinking of going because it's 11· the time of construction.
12· probably not true because I'm not sure I even know. 12· · · ·Q.· That's not what I asked you.
13· · · · · · · · So let's just keep it at question and 13· · · ·A.· That's what's important.
14· answer.· Okay, Mr. Kahn? 14· · · ·Q.· That's not what I asked you.
15· · · ·A.· Yeah. 15· · · ·A.· Then, I don't understand your question.· Please
16· · · ·Q.· So my question to you was, it certainly was 16· repeat your question.
17· foreseeable as the owner of the garage when you first 17· · · ·Q.· Sure.
18· bought it that there could be vehicle accidents in the 18· · · · · · · · As an owner, when you bought the building in
19· garage.· Right? 19· 2015, did you understand that it was important that the
20· · · ·A.· Yes.· And I will wait like you asked your wife, 20· building, the Littlefield Garage, as a multilevel garage,
21· but I'm also trying not to be led to the answers that you 21· have safeguards to prevent people in accidents from flying
22· want to -- or the words that you want to put in my mouth. 22· out of the building?
23· I'm trying to just give you information that I have so we 23· · · ·A.· It's important that it meet the building codes
24· can determine what happened here. 24· that specify what safety measures it has to be.· We're
25· · · ·Q.· Right. 25· relying on the building codes to figure out what safety

Page 23 Page 25
·1· · · · · · · · What I'd like you to do is just concentrate ·1· measures there are.
·2· on my question, not to try to figure out what you think ·2· · · ·Q.· Did you look at the building code when you bought
·3· I'm asking or what you think I want you to say.· What I'd ·3· the building?
·4· like you to tell is the truth, like you swore to do. ·4· · · ·A.· No.
·5· · · · · · · · You got that? ·5· · · ·Q.· Well, then, you weren't relying on it, were you?
·6· · · ·A.· Yes, sir.· As long as you're not trying to lead ·6· · · ·A.· I am relying on it because there's a certificate
·7· me, I will do that. ·7· of occupancy and there are people that are doing the work
·8· · · ·Q.· Well, you just -- if I'm upsetting you or putting ·8· to certify that it is up to that code.
·9· words in your mouth that you don't like, then don't let me ·9· · · · · · · · So I don't have to read the code in order to
10· do it.· Tell me no and I'll rephrase it like you and I 10· know that -- you know, or -- or expect it to have been
11· agreed upon.· Okay? 11· built under a certain code.
12· · · ·A.· Thank you.· I appreciate that. 12· · · · · · · · On the other hand, there are elevators,
13· · · ·Q.· No problem. 13· also.· There could be accidents in elevators.· I don't
14· · · · · · · · Now back to my question.· When you bought 14· know what code is for an elevator, but I'm expecting, you
15· the building, wasn't it foreseeable, sir, that there could 15· know, the elevators to be up to code.
16· be accidents in the building? 16· · · ·Q.· Is it your opinion that the elevator that's in
17· · · ·A.· It's foreseeable in any property. 17· the Littlefield building could be operated now under the
18· · · ·Q.· I'm not talking about any property.· I'm talking 18· same code as in 1978, when the building was built?
19· about the building that you bought and were going to run. 19· · · ·A.· So the -- the elevator and the building are two
20· · · ·A.· I'm answering that it's foreseeable on any 20· separate systems.
21· property, that there could be an accident on any property. 21· · · ·Q.· Well, I asked you about the elevator.
22· Yes. 22· · · ·A.· You -- you were trying to make an analogy between
23· · · ·Q.· A car accident on any property? 23· the elevator and the --
24· · · ·A.· Yes.· There could be an accident on any property, 24· · · ·Q.· No, I'm not.· I'm just asking you questions.
25· a car accident.· Any property that has cars, there could 25· · · ·A.· -- and the garage.· So if you would allow me to

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sheldon David Kahn on 06/19/2018 Pages 26..29
Page 26 Page 28
·1· answer the question, maybe I can try to -- ·1· · · · · · · · And we did a -- you know, on profess --
·2· · · ·Q.· I did.· I asked you about the elevator. ·2· on -- on -- we're not professionals, but we did a visual
·3· · · ·A.· Well, you're interrupting me.· I'm telling you ·3· inspection of the property.
·4· I'm going to talk to about -- to you about -- specifically ·4· · · ·Q.· What was it you relied upon in the certificate of
·5· what I know about the elevator. ·5· occupancy?
·6· · · · · · · · So the elevator had certain codes and ·6· · · ·A.· That the building had a certificate of occupancy
·7· throughout time society and the City has decided that the ·7· to operate.
·8· elevators need to be inspected and permitted and upgraded ·8· · · ·Q.· And -- and what did that apparently tell you as
·9· in code. ·9· owner of the building?
10· · · · · · · · So the elevators have been inspected. 10· · · ·A.· That the different components of the building
11· There's a department in the State of Texas.· And they are 11· have met the requirements of the City of Austin's codes at
12· inspecting elevators because they consider them dangerous. 12· the time that they were installed, being that different
13· · · · · · · · And we have passed laws to require updates 13· items in the building have different codes and different
14· on codes on items that we feel, as a society, that need to 14· items in the building -- the codes get updated and certain
15· be updated in codes, such as elevators. 15· items do not require updates.
16· · · ·Q.· And so the answer to the question is? 16· · · · · · · · (Exhibit 23 was marked.)
17· · · ·A.· That was my answer.· Did you not understand it? 17· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· I'm going to show you Exhibit 23,
18· · · ·Q.· No, because it wasn't even... 18· please, sir.
19· · · ·A.· Okay.· Then, let's try it again. 19· · · ·A.· Uh-huh.
20· · · ·Q.· Okay. 20· · · ·Q.· Have you seen that before?
21· · · ·A.· Go ahead and ask it again -- 21· · · ·A.· I haven't seen it, but you're showing it to me.
22· · · ·Q.· Sure. 22· · · ·Q.· Do you recognize it says in big, bold letters
23· · · ·A.· -- and I'll try to explain it again. 23· "Certificate of Occupancy"?
24· · · ·Q.· Is it your testimony to the jury that the 24· · · ·A.· It does say that.
25· elevator in the Littlefield Garage right now can be 25· · · ·Q.· And is it -- do you recognize for the address

Page 27 Page 29
·1· operated under the code that was in existence in 1978 that ·1· that you've just testified that you relied upon the
·2· applied to the elevator? ·2· certificate of occupancy for the reasons you stated?
·3· · · ·A.· The -- the elevator? ·3· · · ·A.· Yes.
·4· · · ·Q.· Yes, sir. ·4· · · ·Q.· And can you show the jury in here where the
·5· · · ·A.· I'm not an expert in codes. ·5· certificate of occupancy says that the building is up to
·6· · · ·Q.· Are you an expert in any type of codes, elevator ·6· code?
·7· or building? ·7· · · ·A.· There is a certificate of occupancy and it says,
·8· · · ·A.· I rely on the certifications that are required by ·8· the building "was inspected at the time of the original
·9· the State. ·9· date for compliance with the requirements" of the City of
10· · · ·Q.· Does that mean, no, you're not an expert? 10· Austin code for its use.
11· · · ·A.· I rely by the -- you know, I'm not an expert. 11· · · ·Q.· All right.
12· · · ·Q.· And did you do anything when you bought the 12· · · ·A.· So the City of Austin has certain, you know,
13· Littlefield Garage building to determine whether it was 13· building standards and they were met.· This is a document
14· within code at the time in terms of the parking garage? 14· from 1981.
15· · · ·A.· We looked at the certificates of occupancy -- 15· · · ·Q.· So --
16· · · ·Q.· So you looked at the -- 16· · · ·A.· 1979.· I'm sorry.
17· · · ·A.· -- and we interviewed -- 17· · · ·Q.· All right.· So your testimony --
18· · · ·Q.· Go ahead.· I'm sorry. 18· · · ·A.· There's two documents.· One is dated 1981 and one
19· · · ·A.· Can I finish my answer? 19· is dated 1979.
20· · · ·Q.· Yes, sir. 20· · · ·Q.· Right.
21· · · ·A.· Thank you.· Because if you let me finish, I will 21· · · · · · · · The first one is the certificate of
22· be -- it will be better. 22· occupancy and the second is the reissued certificate.
23· · · · · · · · We relied on the certificates of occupancy. 23· Right?
24· We relied on the garage operator's opinion.· We relied on 24· · · ·A.· I'm not an expert on certificates of occupancy.
25· the previous owner's representations. 25· · · ·Q.· Well, I understand.

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sheldon David Kahn on 06/19/2018 Pages 30..33
Page 30 Page 32
·1· · · · · · · · But you just got through swearing under oath ·1· · · ·A.· All it says here is that the City does not assume
·2· to the jury that you relied upon the certificate for very ·2· responsibility.
·3· specific things. ·3· · · ·Q.· Do you understand that as the owner of the
·4· · · · · · · · Have you ever seen the certificate before? ·4· Littlefield Garage, your company had a responsibility to
·5· · · ·A.· When we purchase a property, there is a lot of ·5· make sure the premises was safe?
·6· people that review a lot of documents.· This could have ·6· · · ·A.· Yes.
·7· been reviewed by our counsel at the time. ·7· · · ·Q.· To make sure there was no unreasonable danger?
·8· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Well, have you, Mr. Kahn, reviewed the ·8· · · ·A.· Yes.
·9· certificate of occupancy before I showed it to you? ·9· · · ·Q.· To make sure that none of the patrons or people
10· · · ·A.· I hadn't seen this particular piece of paper. 10· using the garage were exposed to unreasonable dangers?
11· · · ·Q.· All right. 11· · · ·A.· Unreasonable, yes.
12· · · ·A.· But I was relying on our counsel. 12· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And is it your testimony that when
13· · · ·Q.· So what you meant to say was -- is that your -- 13· Mr. O'Connor, for instance, went off the building --
14· your company, the LP, when it bought the property had a 14· · · ·A.· Yes.
15· lawyer that looked at the certificate of occupancy for 15· · · ·Q.· -- a year before Ms. Bowmer, that that was a
16· you, but you didn't actually look at it.· Right? 16· reasonable danger on the ninth floor?
17· · · ·A.· Yes. 17· · · ·A.· The garage is not dangerous so I don't -- I don't
18· · · ·Q.· Do you see on the first page of the certificate 18· agree with your question.
19· where it says, "Neither the issuance of this certificate 19· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So your testimony to the jury is, is that
20· nor the inspections made shall lessen the responsibility 20· at the time Mr. O'Connor went off the garage in 2016, that
21· or liability of any person, firm, or corporation"? 21· the garage -- that condition was not dangerous?
22· · · ·A.· Yes. 22· · · ·A.· That's right.
23· · · ·Q.· Do you see where it says "The City of Austin does 23· · · ·Q.· And is it your testimony to the jury that at the
24· not assume any responsibility or liability by reason of 24· time Ms. Bowmer went off the garage in 2017, that the
25· the inspection or reinspection of the premise"? 25· garage was not dangerous?

Page 31 Page 33
·1· · · ·A.· Yes. ·1· · · ·A.· That's right.
·2· · · ·Q.· "By reason of the issuance of the certificate of ·2· · · ·Q.· Are you aware that -- that shortly after
·3· occupancy"? ·3· Ms. Bowmer went off the garage in 2017, the City made a
·4· · · ·A.· Yes. ·4· determination that the garage was dangerous?
·5· · · ·Q.· Did you see anything in there that indicates the ·5· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
·6· certificate gives the owner some type of imprimatur or ·6· · · ·A.· That's -- that's not -- that -- that's not
·7· excuse that the owner doesn't have to on its own determine ·7· exactly what happened.
·8· that the premises is safe? ·8· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Did they or did they not?
·9· · · ·A.· What it says here -- ·9· · · ·A.· When you mean "the City," what -- what do you
10· · · ·Q.· That's not my question. 10· mean by "the City"?
11· · · ·A.· What it says here -- 11· · · ·Q.· I mean, did you get a registered letter from the
12· · · ·Q.· That's not my -- 12· City that included a citation that had other things in it
13· · · ·A.· I'm trying to explain to you how I see it. 13· that included "we find that your garage is dangerous"?
14· · · ·Q.· How about just answering my question and then you 14· · · ·A.· You are misunderstanding what a citation is.· We
15· can explain -- 15· got a citation, but a citation is -- was issued that same
16· · · ·A.· Ask your question again. 16· day stating that the condition -- there was a dangerous
17· · · ·Q.· Sure.· Do you see anything in the first page of 17· condition.· The condition was the broken cables, that that
18· the certificate of occupancy that says it relieves the 18· condition, the dangerous condition was caused by
19· owner of the obligation of its own responsibility to make 19· Ms. Bowmer.
20· sure the premises is safe? 20· · · ·Q.· Is that your understanding of what your company
21· · · ·A.· I don't see that. 21· was cited for?
22· · · ·Q.· Do you understand as an owner of the building, 22· · · ·A.· Yes.
23· the Littlefield Garage, that regardless of the certificate 23· · · ·Q.· Okay.
24· of occupancy, your company had an obligation to make sure 24· · · ·A.· And then -- and then -- and then afterwards,
25· the premises was safe? 25· subsequent to that, the City made a determination that

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sheldon David Kahn on 06/19/2018 Pages 34..37
Page 34 Page 36
·1· they wanted us to update the code. ·1· · · ·Q.· Was it your understanding that the code under
·2· · · ·Q.· Well, did the City -- did you specifically ask ·2· which the garage was built at the time it was built didn't
·3· the City for a clarification of the citation and they sent ·3· even require a vehicle restraint system?
·4· you one indicating that it was the entire parking ·4· · · ·A.· That's apparent from this whole --
·5· structure in terms of the restraint system that they were ·5· · · ·Q.· And you think that's safe?
·6· talking about, not just the area that Ms. Bowmer went off? ·6· · · ·A.· I -- I think that a lot of people agree with me
·7· · · ·A.· It's not the City.· It's one employee of the City ·7· that it is safe.
·8· who I don't know what his qualification are.· So when you ·8· · · ·Q.· Who?
·9· say "the City," you're meaning -- you're trying to make it ·9· · · ·A.· Uh.
10· sound as, you know, the entire agency has thoroughly 10· · · ·Q.· So you do think it's safe --
11· investigated something.· They didn't thoroughly 11· · · ·A.· Yes.
12· investigate when they issued the citation.· The citation 12· · · ·Q.· -- to not have a vehicle restraint system on a
13· is the beginning of an investigation. 13· multilevel garage?
14· · · ·Q.· And the revised citation that they sent you in 14· · · ·A.· There is --
15· August of 2017, do you consider them to-- the City to not 15· · · ·Q.· Is that accurate?
16· have thoroughly investigated by the time they sent you the 16· · · ·A.· There is the State legislature, there is the
17· revised citation? 17· Texas Department of Licensing and Regulations and there is
18· · · ·A.· They determined that they wanted to have us bring 18· the City of Austin that -- that supervises buildings in
19· the building up to code, up to the newer code, the 2012 19· Austin.· All those three institutions apparently agree
20· code. 20· that the code is safe.· Otherwise, they would require
21· · · ·Q.· Because why? 21· every garage built under the code of 19 --
22· · · ·A.· Because, in their opinion, we had to bring it up 22· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· What is it, '76?· 1976.
23· to the 2012 code. 23· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· (Nods.)
24· · · ·Q.· And why was that? 24· · · ·A.· They have not required all of the garages in the
25· · · ·A.· Why would the City want us to bring it to the 25· city or the state to be upgraded.· So, apparently, there

Page 35 Page 37
·1· 2012 code? ·1· is a lot of people that that agree that is a safe -- safe
·2· · · ·Q.· Right. ·2· condition for garages.
·3· · · ·A.· That's a question that you'd have to ask the City ·3· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· I'll object as nonresponsive.
·4· because they haven't asked every garage in the city to ·4· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Just so we have a clear record.
·5· come to the 2012 code.· So there are other garages in the ·5· Is it your testimony to the jury that you think it's safe
·6· city that are operating under different codes and in the ·6· for the Littlefield Garage to not have a vehicle restraint
·7· state, neither has the State Department of Licensing and ·7· system?
·8· Regulation, nor the City of Austin asked all garages to be ·8· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
·9· brought up to the 2012 code. ·9· · · · · · · · You can answer.
10· · · ·Q.· Did it upset you when the City required you to 10· · · ·A.· I'm going to try to answer your question again.
11· bring your garage to the 2012 code? 11· My -- I'm not an expert and, you know, we have, as a
12· · · ·A.· Did it upset me? 12· society, hired people to make laws and rules and the
13· · · ·Q.· Yes, sir. 13· people who make the laws and rules have not determined
14· · · ·A.· No. 14· that that code is unsafe.· So I'm not -- I -- I don't know
15· · · ·Q.· Did it -- did it make you feel like that the 15· more than they do.
16· garage was becoming less safe somehow? 16· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· Object as nonresponsive.
17· · · ·A.· No. 17· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Do you believe, as the operator
18· · · ·Q.· Did it indicate to you that it was a good idea to 18· of the Littlefield Garage, that it's safe to operate that
19· a make the garage safe by complying with that code? 19· garage without a vehicle restraint system?
20· · · ·A.· What it indicates to me is that the garages built 20· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
21· on the previous codes are still considered safe and, 21· · · · · · · · You can answer.
22· therefore, the -- neither the legislature, nor the Texas 22· · · ·A.· Your question is, with all due respect, a little
23· Department of Regulations, not the City of Austin have 23· bit ridiculous because they always have a vehicle
24· made a determination that all garages that are built under 24· restraint system.· Even the -- the 1976 code has one.· The
25· that code need to be brought up. 25· newer code has a different one, but they all have -- they

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sheldon David Kahn on 06/19/2018 Pages 38..41
Page 38 Page 40
·1· all have, you know, barriers.· I think the original code ·1· · · ·A.· I'm sure there are and we will find that
·2· was intended to hold people. ·2· information for you.
·3· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· People aren't vehicles, are they? ·3· · · ·Q.· Thank you.
·4· · · ·A.· I'm not an expert on the code. ·4· · · · · · · · What would be the dangers of operating a
·5· · · ·Q.· Well, can you tell the difference between a ·5· multilevel garage without a vehicle restraint system?
·6· vehicle and a person? ·6· · · ·A.· What would be the dangers?
·7· · · ·A.· Let me think about that.· Yes. ·7· · · ·Q.· Yes, sir.· You agree that would be dangerous,
·8· · · ·Q.· All right.· So your testimony just a minute ago ·8· wouldn't you?
·9· under oath was that the code under which this building was ·9· · · ·A.· I didn't -- I didn't agree it was dangerous.
10· built didn't even require a vehicle restraint system. 10· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So your testimony to the jury is it's not
11· Isn't that accurate? 11· dangerous to operate a multilevel garage without a vehicle
12· · · ·A.· The -- I'm not an expert on the code, and as I 12· restraint system?
13· told you before, the building was built to the code at the 13· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
14· time that it was built. 14· · · ·A.· The garage operated for 37 years without an
15· · · ·Q.· And did that code require a vehicle restraint 15· incident -- a vehicle or incident going over the -- the
16· system? 16· restraints.· Whether the restraints are for people or for
17· · · ·A.· I'm not an expert on the code. 17· cars, that's a point that is very specific to -- to the
18· · · ·Q.· Well, would it surprise you that your partner, 18· code and I don't know that.
19· Mr. O'Brien, just testified that it didn't? 19· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Did I ask you that?
20· · · ·A.· It wouldn't surprise me.· I'm not an expert on 20· · · ·A.· But -- yes, you did.
21· the code. 21· · · ·Q.· No, I didn't.
22· · · ·Q.· Would it surprise you that your partner, 22· · · ·A.· Okay.· Then I didn't understand what you asked
23· Mr. O'Brien, just testified that the building didn't have 23· me.
24· a vehicle restraint system on it when you bought it, that, 24· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Here is my question to you, would you
25· in fact, that was a pedestrian restraint system? 25· agree that it is dangerous as an operator of a parking

Page 39 Page 41
·1· · · ·A.· That was what -- what was required in all garages ·1· garage to operate a multilevel parking garage with no
·2· and there are a lot of garages that are still operating ·2· vehicle restraint system to keep a vehicle from going over
·3· under that code. ·3· the edge?
·4· · · ·Q.· Can you name for the jury another garage in ·4· · · ·A.· We --
·5· Austin that has multi levels and that has no vehicle ·5· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
·6· restraint system on one of the upper levels? ·6· · · ·A.· We -- we operate a garage up to code.
·7· · · ·A.· I can do the research.· I don't -- I can't call ·7· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· I didn't ask you that.
·8· them off -- off top of mind, but I can get you that ·8· · · ·A.· That's my answer.
·9· information. ·9· · · ·Q.· And so you can't tell the jury whether it's
10· · · ·Q.· That would be great. 10· dangerous or not to operate a multilevel garage without a
11· · · ·A.· I'm sure -- I'm sure there is a lot of garages 11· vehicle restraint system?
12· that are operating with older codes. 12· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
13· · · ·Q.· I'm going to leave a blank here in your 13· · · ·A.· What I'm repeating my answer is a garage needs to
14· deposition and I'd like you to put in the address of every 14· be operated to what the safety codes are promulgated by
15· garage in Austin that's a multilevel garage that's 15· the people who are in charge of safety codes.
16· operating without a vehicle restraint system.· Okay? 16· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Why?
17· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· I'm going object to that.· It's 17· · · ·A.· Why?· Because.
18· beyond the scope of proper discovery. 18· · · ·Q.· Oh, okay.· Because why?
19· · · · · · · · Go ahead. 19· · · ·A.· Because.
20· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Okay.· Do you understand? 20· · · ·Q.· What would be the point, sir, as an operator of a
21· · · ·A.· My deposition is to answer the questions the best 21· building like you are to operate your building according
22· I can and I don't have the answer to that at this time. 22· to the safety code?
23· · · ·Q.· So the answer is you don't know of a single 23· · · ·A.· The -- we are operating the garages that -- that
24· garage that's multilevel in Austin that doesn't have a 24· were built and comply with the codes that were set by the
25· vehicle restraint system.· Right? 25· City and the international building codes.

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sheldon David Kahn on 06/19/2018 Pages 42..45
Page 42 Page 44
·1· · · ·Q.· I understand.· You keep saying that.· My question ·1· · · ·A.· To comply with the code?
·2· to you is different.· My question is, why?· Why do you ·2· · · ·Q.· Yes, sir.
·3· need to do that?· Why is that important? ·3· · · ·A.· Yes.
·4· · · ·A.· Why do I operate to the -- to the standards of ·4· · · ·Q.· And do you know what the 2012 code requires of a
·5· the code? ·5· building like yours in terms of vehicle restraint systems?
·6· · · ·Q.· Right. ·6· · · ·A.· I'm not an expert on the code.
·7· · · ·A.· Because that -- that code is what tells us what ·7· · · ·Q.· Do you have any idea?
·8· risks are acceptable and what risks are unacceptable in ·8· · · ·A.· I'm not an expert on the code, and I'm afraid
·9· the operation of a -- of a property. ·9· that if I tell you, you're going to say I'm going in a
10· · · ·Q.· What does -- 10· soliloquy.· So, you know.
11· · · ·A.· Because no property is free of -- free of a -- of 11· · · ·Q.· My question is, do you have any idea?· That's not
12· risks, like you said. 12· a soliloquy.· That's my question --
13· · · ·Q.· What does the 2012 code indicate is acceptable or 13· · · ·A.· Do I have any idea?
14· unacceptable with regard to vehicle restraint systems on a 14· · · ·Q.· Yeah.
15· building like yours? 15· · · ·A.· Yeah.
16· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 16· · · ·Q.· What is it?
17· · · ·A.· From what I understand, the -- the codes get 17· · · ·A.· From what I have been told by the people who do
18· reviewed every few years and, you know, they respond to 18· know the code is that in -- the spacing has been changed
19· experience and they respond to new technologies. 19· for the cables between 9 inches to 4 inches.
20· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· I didn't ask you that. 20· · · ·Q.· Anything else?
21· · · ·A.· And -- no, but you're interrupting me my answer. 21· · · ·A.· That's what I know that has been changed.· I'm
22· · · ·Q.· Well, it's not an answer.· You see, that's the 22· not a code expert.
23· problem.· It's not an answer because it's just a soliloquy 23· · · ·Q.· When is the first time you ever actually thought
24· if it's not responsive to my question. 24· about the vehicle restraint system on the building there
25· · · · · · · · My question to you is very specific -- 25· at Littlefield?

Page 43 Page 45
·1· · · ·A.· If you don't like the answer that -- that you ·1· · · ·A.· After we had the first incident.
·2· get, then you -- you call it "nonresponsive." I ·2· · · ·Q.· So after Mr. O'Connor went off the ninth floor
·3· understand that. ·3· was the first time you ever gave any consideration to the
·4· · · ·Q.· Is that what you learned in law school? ·4· vehicle restraint system at Littlefield.· Is that right?
·5· · · ·A.· I understand that.· I didn't go to law school. ·5· · · ·A.· So on a personal basis, yes, but as a company, we
·6· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Please listen to my question and answer my ·6· were relying on the property managers that we had hired
·7· question.· That enables us to communicate and have an ·7· and the, you know, representations and warranties of the
·8· actual relevant, responsive deposition as opposed to ·8· previous owners.
·9· soliloquies.· Okay? ·9· · · ·Q.· What representations and warranties did the
10· · · · · · · · My question to you was, what is the purpose 10· previous owner make to you?
11· for an owner like you to comply with the safety building 11· · · ·A.· That the building was up to code.
12· codes? 12· · · ·Q.· Anything else?
13· · · ·A.· What is the purpose for an owner to comply with 13· · · ·A.· We'd have to look at the contract which was four
14· the code? 14· years ago.
15· · · ·Q.· Yes. 15· · · ·Q.· All right.· I haven't seen the contract.· Do you
16· · · ·A.· The purpose is to comply with the code so you can 16· have it?
17· continue to operate. 17· · · ·A.· Not with me.
18· · · ·Q.· Any other purpose you can think of to tell the 18· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Was there some representation in the
19· jury? 19· contract to -- to your company about the fitness of the
20· · · ·A.· I mean, so that, you know, people can use the 20· property from a safety perspective?
21· garage and, you know, park their cars in a reasonable 21· · · ·A.· I don't know.
22· manner. 22· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Is there a specific representation that
23· · · ·Q.· And not get hurt? 23· you can give to the jury right now that you believe the
24· · · ·A.· That's right. 24· seller of the property made to you about the fitness of
25· · · ·Q.· So it's important for safety reasons? 25· the property from a safety perspective?

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sheldon David Kahn on 06/19/2018 Pages 46..49
Page 46 Page 48
·1· · · ·A.· Yes. ·1· system, the vehicle restraint system.
·2· · · ·Q.· And what was it? ·2· · · ·A.· Well, they manage more garages than I do.· So I'm
·3· · · ·A.· That the buildings were up to code. ·3· assuming that they are managing -- they know -- they've
·4· · · ·Q.· Okay.· What code? ·4· acquired experience on how to manage garages in a
·5· · · ·A.· The code that was at the time of construction and ·5· professional manner, which would, first and foremost,
·6· that had not been required to be -- in that -- and that ·6· comply with current code, and all rules and regulations.
·7· there were no requirements that it get updated to the ·7· · · ·Q.· So you were relying on Premier to ensure that
·8· particular code and those particular systems.· So, for ·8· your property complied with the current code and all the
·9· instance, the elevators have had legislation passed that ·9· regulations?
10· they have to be brought up to code and so they relied -- 10· · · ·A.· Yes.
11· the -- the rep and warranty was that that -- those -- that 11· · · ·Q.· And you understand that at the time of
12· all the systems would be up to the code that is required 12· Ms. Bowmer's incident, your property there at Littlefield
13· to be at the time it was purchased. 13· did not comply with the current code and all the
14· · · ·Q.· And was that made to you orally or in writing? 14· regulations.· Isn't that true?
15· · · ·A.· In writing. 15· · · ·A.· No, that's not true.
16· · · ·Q.· By whom? 16· · · ·Q.· So your testimony to the jury is that it did
17· · · ·A.· By the sellers. 17· comply with the current code and all the regulations?
18· · · ·Q.· And that would be in the closing documents? 18· · · ·A.· We believe it did.
19· · · ·A.· Yeah. 19· · · ·Q.· Did the City believe it did?
20· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And where would I look in the closing 20· · · ·A.· The City did not require us to update after the
21· documents to find the specific warranties about that that 21· first incident, and there was one inspector who came in
22· were made by the sellers? 22· afterwards and, you know, was worried about, you know, the
23· · · ·A.· We will have to look those up and provide them to 23· future of the garage, and he made a determination that we
24· you. 24· should update to the -- to the 2012 code, subsequent to
25· · · ·Q.· Was there some specific oral or written 25· the second event.

Page 47 Page 49
·1· representation made by the seller about the fitness of the ·1· · · · · · · · But we had a City -- from the -- the City
·2· vehicle restraint system, if any? ·2· property -- I don't know what his name is, where he's --
·3· · · ·A.· The restraint system in particular, no. ·3· a -- that came in and did not -- the City -- the City was
·4· · · ·Q.· What did you rely upon from Premier to -- ·4· aware of the first incident and the City did not require
·5· specifically, to have a safe vehicle restraint system at ·5· us to update the code after the first incident.
·6· Littlefield? ·6· · · ·Q.· Do you remember what my question was?
·7· · · ·A.· Well, a -- we basically have the same contract ·7· · · ·A.· Can you repeat your question?
·8· with Premier that the previous owners had, and there is a ·8· · · ·Q.· I'm going to ask you a different question.
·9· section that Premier will help us to stay current in all ·9· · · ·A.· I'm sorry.
10· laws and regulations. 10· · · ·Q.· That's all right.
11· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So you relied on Premier to help you stay 11· · · ·A.· I was trying my best.
12· current to all laws and regulations? 12· · · ·Q.· You said that one of the City people was worried
13· · · ·A.· Yes.· And then if there was items that, you know, 13· about the future of the garage.· Is that what you said?
14· had to be fixed or something, those would be our -- at our 14· · · ·A.· After the second incident.
15· expense. 15· · · ·Q.· What the City was worried about was the future of
16· · · ·Q.· Anything else? 16· people using the garage.· Right?
17· · · ·A.· Anything else in regards to what? 17· · · ·A.· Well, it's not the City, the City inspector.· He
18· · · ·Q.· That you were relying on from Premier to have a 18· was -- he wanted the garage to be brought up to the code,
19· safe vehicle restraint system? 19· to the new code.· Why?· You would have to depose him.
20· · · ·A.· Yeah.· We're relying on them to manage the garage 20· · · ·Q.· Well, we have in Exhibit 16 the reasons why.
21· in a professional manner. 21· Have you read any of Exhibit 16, which is the City file?
22· · · ·Q.· And what would that mean? 22· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· This one.
23· · · ·A.· The -- to rely -- to operate a garage in a 23· · · ·A.· That's the City file?
24· professional manner? 24· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Yes.· Have you ever seen it?
25· · · ·Q.· Yes, sir.· Specifically with regard to the cable 25· · · ·A.· No.

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sheldon David Kahn on 06/19/2018 Pages 50..53
Page 50 Page 52
·1· · · ·Q.· Have you ever read it? ·1· executed it?
·2· · · ·A.· I have people who do that. ·2· · · ·A.· Read and understand it as best I can, yes.
·3· · · ·Q.· You have people that do that? ·3· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And in this contract between your company
·4· · · ·A.· Well, Sean O'Brien did that. ·4· and Premier, do you see Paragraph 2, "Services To Be
·5· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So in terms of knowing what the City was ·5· Performed"?
·6· doing, how many people at the City agreed with it, the ·6· · · ·A.· Yes.
·7· reasoning behind what the City was doing, everything ·7· · · ·Q.· And do you see in Paragraph 2 where it says that
·8· that's contained in Exhibit 16, you've never read it.· You ·8· the services to be performed are set out in Exhibit A?
·9· have people to read it.· Is that right? ·9· · · ·A.· Well, you want to -- you -- I feel like you're
10· · · ·A.· My understanding is that -- well, first of all, 10· picking parts of the contract.· Do you see Section 7?
11· the question is do I have people to read this?· Yes. 11· · · ·Q.· Hold on a second.· Did you even understand my
12· · · ·Q.· Okay.· That was the question.· Thank you. 12· question?
13· · · ·A.· Because you asked, like, three questions in one 13· · · ·A.· I understand your question.
14· sentence, and that's why it's hard to remember what your 14· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Well, do you see in 2, which is what I'm
15· questions are. 15· on, not 7.
16· · · ·Q.· Well, if it confuses you, just let me know.· I'll 16· · · ·A.· Yes.
17· rephrase it.· Now, you were talking to me about Premier. 17· · · ·Q.· In 2 where it says "Services to Be Performed."
18· Did you negotiate the contract with Premier? 18· · · ·A.· Yes.
19· · · ·A.· I signed the contract with Premier, yes. 19· · · ·Q.· It says the "Contractor agrees to perform
20· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Did you read the contract before you 20· contractor services for the Property in accordance with
21· signed it? 21· the schedule and in the manner specified in the
22· · · ·A.· Yes. 22· specifications which are attached hereto as 'Exhibit A'
23· · · ·Q.· Would you look at Exhibit 12 with me, please, 23· and 'Exhibit B.'"
24· sir? 24· · · ·A.· Yes, sir.
25· · · ·A.· Okay. 25· · · ·Q.· Okay.· You go to Exhibit A and what do you see?

Page 51 Page 53
·1· · · ·Q.· Do you have Exhibit 12? ·1· · · ·A.· Nothing.
·2· · · ·A.· Uh-huh. ·2· · · ·Q.· A blank page.
·3· · · ·Q.· Is it titled "Manager/Lender Agreement"? ·3· · · ·A.· Yes.
·4· · · ·A.· Yes. ·4· · · ·Q.· If you go to Exhibit B, what do you see?
·5· · · ·Q.· This is an agreement with Frost Bank.· Is that ·5· Insurance requirements.
·6· right? ·6· · · ·A.· Yes.
·7· · · ·A.· Yes. ·7· · · ·Q.· So do you see anything that sets out in Exhibit A
·8· · · ·Q.· And on this particular manager/lender agreement ·8· or B the services to be performed by Premier?
·9· is one of the attachments the service contract relating to ·9· · · ·A.· Yes.· It's a -- you have to take the whole
10· the garage in question? 10· agreement.· It's as a whole.· That's probably a typo, that
11· · · ·A.· (Pause.) 11· they forgot to put Exhibit C.
12· · · · · · · · So I'm not completely familiar at this point 12· · · ·Q.· It's a typo that they forgot to put Exhibit C.
13· with this manager/lender agreement, but I do see that it's 13· And you didn't notice it when you signed it?
14· an attachment to the service contract from Premier. 14· · · ·A.· But Exhibit C was part of the agreement.
15· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Then let's focus on that. 15· · · ·Q.· So your testimony to the jury is that it's a typo
16· · · ·A.· Okay. 16· under "Services To Be Performed" and you intended
17· · · ·Q.· The attachment, the service contract. 17· Exhibit C to be part of Paragraph 2?
18· · · ·A.· Uh-huh. 18· · · ·A.· I think we all intended.· Yes, sir.
19· · · ·Q.· Is that a true and correct copy, Mr. Kahn, of the 19· · · ·Q.· So you and Premier intended Exhibit C to be part
20· service contract you executed with Premier? 20· of 2, but it was just that everybody missed it?
21· · · ·A.· Yeah, it looks like it. 21· · · ·A.· It sure looks like it.· And then there's an
22· · · ·Q.· All right.· Is that your signature on the 22· Exhibit D, and Exhibit E, and Exhibit F.
23· signature page? 23· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Was that all --
24· · · ·A.· Yes, sir. 24· · · ·A.· It's all part of the agreement.
25· · · ·Q.· Did you read it and understand it before you 25· · · ·Q.· Was it all supposed to be part of Paragraph 2 and

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sheldon David Kahn on 06/19/2018 Pages 54..57
Page 54 Page 56
·1· everybody just missed that? ·1· · · ·A.· Yes.
·2· · · ·A.· Well, it's all part of the agreement.· Whether ·2· · · ·Q.· Are you currently, on behalf of GTT Parking, LP,
·3· it's referred to or not, it's all part of the agreement. ·3· making any kind of demand for indemnity from Premier
·4· Yes.· So it's not referred to here, but it is part of the ·4· Parking?
·5· agreement. ·5· · · ·A.· That's something for our counsel to determine.
·6· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Now, under "Personnel," Paragraph 5. ·6· · · ·Q.· Do you know what indemnity is?
·7· · · ·A.· But you get -- ·7· · · ·A.· I'm not a lawyer.
·8· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· There's no question. ·8· · · ·Q.· I understand you're not a lawyer.· That's not
·9· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Yeah, go ahead.· What do I get, ·9· what I asked you.· I asked you if you know what indemnity
10· brownie points? 10· is.
11· · · ·A.· Yeah, because you found a typo. 11· · · ·A.· Do I know the meaning of the word?· Yes.
12· · · ·Q.· Awesome.· Thank you. 12· · · ·Q.· And what is it?
13· · · ·A.· You're welcome. 13· · · ·A.· To -- if somebody has a damage, to pay for that
14· · · ·Q.· Now, how many people did you have review this 14· damage.
15· before you signed it?· So you have people that do that for 15· · · ·Q.· And are you making that claim of Premier right
16· you.· Right? 16· now, "you" being GTT Parking?
17· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 17· · · ·A.· That's a question for the lawyers.
18· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· How many people reviewed it 18· · · ·Q.· Do you know if you are?
19· before you signed it? 19· · · ·A.· That's a question for the lawyers.
20· · · ·A.· I reviewed it. 20· · · ·Q.· It's actually a question for you, and you need to
21· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So you missed it? 21· say "yes" or "no" --
22· · · ·A.· Yes. 22· · · ·A.· Do I know?
23· · · ·Q.· All right.· Now, under "Personnel" do you see 23· · · ·Q.· -- or "I don't know."
24· where "Contractor shall supply an adequate number of 24· · · ·A.· I don't know.
25· employees who have been trained and are competent to 25· · · ·Q.· Thank you, sir.

Page 55 Page 57
·1· perform the services required"? ·1· · · · · · · · Now, you were saying what?· You wanted me to
·2· · · ·A.· Where is that at? ·2· look at Exhibit C?
·3· · · ·Q.· Under 5, "Personnel." ·3· · · ·A.· I want you to look at the totality of the
·4· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· You guys okay over there? ·4· contract to get a good idea of the contract.
·5· · · · · · · · MR. RHODES:· We're talking about adjourning ·5· · · ·Q.· Is there something in Exhibit C you think sets
·6· for another day, Sean. ·6· out what you claim to be Premier's duties to operate the
·7· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· Okay.· I'll get to a breaking ·7· garage safely for you?
·8· point and that's fine. ·8· · · ·A.· Well, first of all -- yes.
·9· · · · · · · · MR. RHODES:· Because I'm going to have lots ·9· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Where?
10· of questions.· That's exactly what I was asking her. 10· · · ·A.· Okay.· To begin with, it's on Section 7.
11· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· No problem. 11· · · ·Q.· Okay.
12· · · ·A.· So this is an entirety of a contract you're 12· · · ·A.· And then can I refer to my notes --
13· looking at, Section 5. 13· · · ·Q.· Sure.
14· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Yeah.· I'm just asking you about 14· · · ·A.· -- in that contract?
15· 5 right now is all. 15· · · · · · · · (Pause.)
16· · · ·A.· Yeah.· And what's your question? 16· · · · · · · · If you look at Section 5.
17· · · ·Q.· Did you have any kind of discussions with Premier 17· · · ·Q.· Personnel?
18· about what was supposed to be the training or competent 18· · · ·A.· No.· Section 5 of the Exhibit C.
19· people, what services they were to be performing? 19· · · ·Q.· And what notes are you referring to?
20· · · ·A.· They were to be performing the same services they 20· · · ·A.· It's the same contract.
21· were performing before. 21· · · ·Q.· I understand.· But when you said you need to
22· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Anything more specific than that? 22· refer to your notes, what notes are you referring to?
23· · · ·A.· No. 23· · · ·A.· I highlighted sections of the contract.
24· · · ·Q.· Do you see the "Agreement of Indemnity 24· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Just highlights or do you have actual
25· Insurance -- and Insurance," under 8? 25· notes?

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sheldon David Kahn on 06/19/2018 Pages 58..61
Page 58 Page 60
·1· · · ·A.· Highlights. ·1· · · ·A.· Well, it sure seems like it.
·2· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Where are you directing me to look, ·2· · · ·Q.· Well, I'm sorry you get that impression, but I
·3· Section 5 of something? ·3· can assure you I'm not confused.· Crystal clear.
·4· · · ·A.· Section 5 of the -- ·4· · · · · · · · Now, do you see the provision -- well, let
·5· · · ·Q.· Exhibit C? ·5· me ask you this, do you know what "sole responsibility of
·6· · · ·A.· -- "Operating Parameters," Exhibit C. ·6· the owner" means?
·7· · · ·Q.· Yes, sir.· I'm looking there. ·7· · · ·A.· It means that we have to pay for it.
·8· · · ·A.· Okay.· And there it says "Contractor agrees to ·8· · · ·Q.· So it means nobody but the owner.· Right?
·9· use reasonable diligence and care and protection of the ·9· · · ·A.· Nobody but the owner has to pay for it.
10· Property during the term of this Agreement." 10· · · ·Q.· I didn't ask about pay.· I said sole
11· · · ·Q.· All right.· And do you not think Premier used 11· responsibility of the owner.· It doesn't have anything to
12· reasonable diligence in the care and protection of the 12· do with paying.· It has to do with responsibility.
13· property? 13· · · ·A.· That's how I understood it.
14· · · ·A.· I think they did. 14· · · ·Q.· So the provision where it says "Any structural,
15· · · ·Q.· All right.· Is there anything else that you're 15· mechanical, electrical or other installations or any
16· relying on in your notes or your testimony to indicate to 16· alterations required by statutes or regulations pertaining
17· me why you think Premier would have responsibility to have 17· to air quality, environmental protection, provisions for
18· a safe operation of the vehicle restraint system? 18· persons with disabilities or other similar governmental
19· · · ·A.· If they are responsible for the -- can you repeat 19· requirements shall be the sole responsibility of Owner."
20· your question? 20· · · ·A.· Right.
21· · · ·Q.· Sure.· Is there anything else in the contract 21· · · ·Q.· You knew that was in the contract?
22· between Premier and GTT that you're relying upon to 22· · · ·A.· That's what it says, yes.
23· indicate to me that Premier had responsibility for the 23· · · ·Q.· It doesn't say anything about paying, does it?
24· safe operation of the vehicle restraint system? 24· · · ·A.· It says sole responsibility.· It means paying.
25· · · ·A.· Not the vehicle restraint system in particular, 25· · · ·Q.· Does it say the word "pay"?

Page 59 Page 61
·1· but in general we're relying on them to operate the ·1· · · ·A.· That's what it means.
·2· garage. ·2· · · ·Q.· Do you -- does it say "pay"?
·3· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And does that include making sure the ·3· · · ·A.· That's what it means.
·4· garage has a safe vehicle restraint system? ·4· · · ·Q.· What is "responsibility" to you?
·5· · · ·A.· That the garage is safe, yes. ·5· · · ·A.· The ability to pay for something.
·6· · · ·Q.· And does that include having specifically a safe ·6· · · ·Q.· Do you accept any responsibility for Ms. Bowmer's
·7· system to keep vehicles from plunging off the garage? ·7· injuries and accident on your premises?
·8· · · ·A.· I object to your question. ·8· · · ·A.· Do I accept responsibility for them?
·9· · · ·Q.· You object to plunging off the garage? ·9· · · ·Q.· Yes, sir.
10· · · ·A.· I object to the people driving off the garage. 10· · · ·A.· No.· We are contesting that we're not responsible
11· · · ·Q.· Okay.· You object to that.· What does that mean? 11· for that.
12· You don't like it? 12· · · ·Q.· And why are you not responsible?
13· · · ·A.· I this the garage was safe. 13· · · ·A.· Why are we not responsible?
14· · · ·Q.· You think that garage was safe? 14· · · ·Q.· Right.
15· · · ·A.· Yes. 15· · · ·A.· Because, you know, over 37 years thousands of
16· · · ·Q.· So you object to me saying people plunging off 16· drivers park there every day and nobody drove off the
17· the garage because you think it was safe? 17· garage.
18· · · ·A.· Do I object to you saying people plunge -- do 18· · · ·Q.· Anything else?
19· you -- I objected at the time at the -- at your -- at your 19· · · ·A.· Because, you know, the garage was, you know, up
20· statement.· Can you repeat your full statement, not just 20· to code, and she drove off the garage.· I don't understand
21· that part? 21· why she drove off the garage.
22· · · ·Q.· I'm not sure I really can because it was quite a 22· · · ·Q.· Do you think she did it on purpose?
23· while, in terms of words ago.· So let me see if I can -- 23· · · ·A.· I don't know why she did it.
24· · · ·A.· I know.· We're all getting confused here. 24· · · ·Q.· Do you honestly -- sir, can you look at the
25· · · ·Q.· I'm not getting confused. 25· camera and tell the jury that you think Ms. Bowmer drove

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sheldon David Kahn on 06/19/2018 Pages 62..65
Page 62 Page 64
·1· off your garage on purpose? ·1· designed, and that's what the code is, to stop the people
·2· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. ·2· from driving off the garage.
·3· · · ·A.· I don't know if she drove on purpose or not. I ·3· · · ·Q.· So as an owner of the Littlefield Garage, your
·4· would think she didn't. ·4· testimony to the jury is that the parking stopper and the
·5· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Okay. ·5· cable system that was in place at the time of Ms. Bowmer's
·6· · · ·A.· It would be crazy to think that she did, but I ·6· accident was designed to prevent people from driving off
·7· don't know what's going through her mind.· I've never met ·7· the garage?
·8· her. ·8· · · ·A.· That was what was -- the cables and the stoppers
·9· · · ·Q.· Well -- ·9· that were there was what the engineers and the people that
10· · · ·A.· But what is pretty obvious, that she drove off 10· know more than you, and the people that know more than me
11· the garage.· That is pretty obvious, that she accelerated 11· decided that that was what needed to be there.
12· on the accelerator. 12· · · ·Q.· What engineers decided that?
13· · · · · · · · Now, my wife has parked in that garage, and 13· · · ·A.· The engineers who wrote the International
14· I park in that garage, and thousands of people park in 14· Building Code, and the engineers from the City of Austin
15· that garage every day. 15· who decided to adopt the International Building Code at
16· · · ·Q.· And what's your point, sir? 16· the time it was built.
17· · · ·A.· My point is I don't think we are responsible for 17· · · ·Q.· What version of the International Building Code
18· her driving off the garage. 18· includes cables and curb stoppers or parking stoppers as
19· · · ·Q.· So my question to you is in terms of 19· protection to keep a vehicle from going off the edge of a
20· responsibility, do you think that as a prudent operator of 20· building?
21· a garage, you had a responsibility to have a system in 21· · · ·A.· I'm not an expert on the code.
22· place that in case somebody made a mistake or an accident, 22· · · ·Q.· Isn't that what you just told the jury?
23· the vehicle wouldn't go off the garage? 23· · · ·A.· No.· You asked me what was there.
24· · · ·A.· We do have those -- those items -- 24· · · ·Q.· No, I didn't.
25· · · ·Q.· What are they? 25· · · ·A.· You asked me my personal opinion, and now you're

Page 63 Page 65
·1· · · ·A.· -- and -- and -- and people -- people have made ·1· asking me to explain the code.· Those are two different
·2· mistakes in the past, and they have not driven off the ·2· things.
·3· garage like Ms. Bowmer did. ·3· · · ·Q.· Okay.· I didn't ask you either of those, and you
·4· · · ·Q.· What system did your garage have in place that ·4· did it.
·5· was a vehicle restraint system to prevent vehicles like ·5· · · ·A.· Well, I don't know what you're asking me then.
·6· Ms. Bowmer's from going off the garage? ·6· · · ·Q.· Just please --
·7· · · ·A.· Well -- ·7· · · ·A.· Because I'm not smart enough for your -- to
·8· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. ·8· understand your questions.
·9· · · ·A.· -- first off, there is a concrete barrier, you ·9· · · ·Q.· My question to you was is it your testimony to
10· know? 10· the jury that the curb stops or the parking stops, and the
11· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· No, I don't know.· Not at the 11· cable system that was there at the time Ms. Bowmer went
12· location on the west side.· There is not a concrete 12· off the building was specifically designed to keep
13· barrier there. 13· buildings [sic] from going off the building?
14· · · ·A.· There is a stopper.· What do you -- 14· · · ·A.· Okay.
15· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· A parking stop.· He's talking 15· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form.
16· about a parking stop. 16· · · ·A.· First of all, everything here is my testimony to
17· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· A parking stop.· Your testimony 17· the jury.· I feel like you're badgering me by saying in
18· to the jury is -- 18· every question "is it your testimony to the jury."· So
19· · · ·A.· You know, if you'd let me finish a question -- 19· let's make it clear that everything here is my testimony
20· · · ·Q.· It was an answer. 20· to the jury.· Would that satisfy you?
21· · · ·A.· So you asked me what question and you interrupt 21· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· I'll tell you what would satisfy
22· me, which is pretty rude.· So there is a stopper, and that 22· me, Mr. Kahn, is if you would please listen to my question
23· was my first part of the question, and you jumped in to 23· and answer my question.· Okay?· I'm trying to be
24· state that that's the only restraining system.· And then 24· courteous.· Being courteous also is a two-way street, and
25· there is a set of cables, you know, and that's what is 25· that means listening to my question and answering my

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sheldon David Kahn on 06/19/2018 Pages 66..69
Page 66 Page 68
·1· question, not trying to put some other unrelated scripted ·1· · · ·A.· Which specialist that you're referring to?
·2· answer that you have, that you want to give, into whatever ·2· · · ·Q.· He didn't name a specialist.· He said go get a
·3· it is you call an answer. ·3· specialist.
·4· · · ·A.· Okay.· That's a soliloquy, not a question.· Ask ·4· · · ·A.· Which -- who -- who are you referring to?
·5· your question. ·5· What -- what --
·6· · · ·Q.· I just did. ·6· · · ·Q.· That is Exhibit 8.· Mr. Martin, the engineer.
·7· · · ·A.· Please repeat your question. ·7· · · ·A.· Yeah.
·8· · · ·Q.· Okay.· My question is, is it your testimony to ·8· · · ·Q.· Are you familiar with Mr. Martin?
·9· the jury that the parking stop and the cables were ·9· · · ·A.· Yes.
10· specifically designed under the code to prevent vehicles 10· · · ·Q.· Did you know that, among other things, Mr. Martin
11· from going off the edge of that building? 11· specifically advised you and your company that the barrier
12· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. 12· cables should be reviewed more closely by a barrier cable
13· · · ·A.· I'm not an expert on the code and I've tried to 13· installer?
14· explain this -- I've tried to answer this several times. 14· · · ·A.· There were two letters from Mr. Martin, one is in
15· You're not happy with the answer. 15· September 10th and the other one is in September 28.· Is
16· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· There hasn't been an answer. 16· there the other letter?
17· · · ·A.· The answer is the garage was designed as per the 17· · · ·Q.· I don't know.· I asked you a very specific
18· code.· I'm not an expert on the code. 18· question.· I don't know what letter you're talking about.
19· · · ·Q.· So the code, your understanding is, required the 19· My question is very specific to you.· Can you pull out
20· parking stop and the cables, the code it was designed 20· Exhibit 8?
21· under? 21· · · ·A.· Yes.
22· · · ·A.· The code required those things, yes. 22· · · ·Q.· Do you have Exhibit 8 in front of you?
23· · · ·Q.· And it was for vehicles? 23· · · ·A.· Yes.
24· · · ·A.· I'm not -- I don't -- I haven't read the code. 24· · · ·Q.· Do you see it's a September 10th letter from
25· I'm not an expert on the code. 25· Mr. Martin?

Page 67 Page 69
·1· · · ·Q.· And who did you delegate the responsibility to as ·1· · · ·A.· Yes.
·2· the owner to do that, to know the code and make sure your ·2· · · ·Q.· Mr. Martin is a registered professional engineer?
·3· building complied with the code? ·3· · · ·A.· Yes.
·4· · · ·A.· Well -- ·4· · · ·Q.· That you paid to inspect your premises and
·5· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection; form. ·5· provide you advice?
·6· · · ·A.· -- the people who built the building. ·6· · · ·A.· Yes.
·7· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. BREEN)· Anybody else? ·7· · · ·Q.· And that it would have been very prudent and wise
·8· · · ·A.· What was your question? ·8· for you to accept your professional engineer's advice?
·9· · · ·Q.· Anybody else? ·9· · · ·A.· We did.
10· · · ·A.· Anybody else what? 10· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Glad to hear it.
11· · · ·Q.· That you relied upon or delegated the 11· · · · · · · · Then you can confirm for the jury, can you
12· responsibility to make sure the building was up to code. 12· not, that you, as recommended by Mr. Martin, had the
13· · · ·A.· The building was up to code. 13· barrier cable system reviewed more closely by a barrier
14· · · ·Q.· That's not what I asked you. 14· cable installer?
15· · · · · · · · Do you remember the part about anybody else? 15· · · ·A.· That's not what he recommended on the 29th of
16· · · ·A.· You -- Mr. Sean O'Brien. 16· September.
17· · · ·Q.· Is that -- the list complete now? 17· · · ·Q.· I didn't ask you about that.· Are you looking at
18· · · ·A.· And, you know, if that building was not up to 18· Exhibit 8?
19· code, either Premier would have been notified or we would 19· · · ·A.· Yes, but this is previous to September 29.· So we
20· have been notified. 20· followed the recommendations based on the letters of
21· · · ·Q.· Can you explain to the jury why, after 21· September 29.
22· Mr. O'Connor's incident, you hired an engineer who gave 22· · · ·Q.· I'm not asking you about September 29th --
23· your company, GTT Parking, specific advice that it should 23· · · ·A.· You're asking me what I followed.· I followed the
24· have a specialist in the cable system inspect the system, 24· recommendation of September 29.
25· and your company didn't do that? 25· · · ·Q.· You and I are having a hard time communicating.

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sheldon David Kahn on 06/19/2018 Pages 70..73
Page 70 Page 72
·1· · · ·A.· We sure are. ·1· · · ·Q.· Can you look at Exhibit 9 with me?
·2· · · ·Q.· Okay.· What I'd like you to do is work on looking ·2· · · ·A.· Yes, sir.
·3· at what the exhibit is in front of you, Exhibit 8. I ·3· · · ·Q.· Does Exhibit 9, Picture 1, look like a safe cable
·4· could pull it up for you if you want. ·4· barrier system to you?
·5· · · ·A.· And I'm telling you there's two -- those are ·5· · · ·A.· There is a cable that's not fully pulled.
·6· recommendations in a totality and the second letter was ·6· · · ·Q.· Does that look safe?
·7· after the first one.· I relied on the second letter. ·7· · · ·A.· I'm not an expert.
·8· · · ·Q.· That's not what I asked you. ·8· · · ·Q.· You have no idea whether that's safe or not?
·9· · · ·A.· Then what are you asking me? ·9· · · ·A.· I mean, it doesn't look pulled.
10· · · ·Q.· I'll repeat it.· Do you see in Exhibit 8 from 10· · · ·Q.· Doesn't look taut?
11· your -- the professional engineer that you hired -- 11· · · ·A.· Taut.
12· · · ·A.· Uh-huh. 12· · · ·Q.· Does Picture 2 of Exhibit 9 look like a safe
13· · · ·Q.· -- where he recommended that the barrier cable be 13· cable barrier system to you?
14· reviewed more closely by a barrier cable installer? 14· · · ·A.· There is no -- it -- was that barrier for people
15· · · ·A.· That was the initial recommendation, not the 15· or for cars?· I don't know.
16· final.· Yes, I see that. 16· · · ·Q.· It's your garage, sir.· How would I know?· What
17· · · ·Q.· What -- however you want to characterize that 17· is it, for people or for -- or for cars?
18· recommendation, there is one thing we can agree on, you 18· · · ·A.· I don't know the code.
19· didn't follow it.· Right? 19· · · ·Q.· So in terms of what the barrier cables are in
20· · · ·A.· I followed the recommendations of the 20· Picture 2 of Exhibit 9, you have no idea, for the jury,
21· professional engineer. 21· whether that was for people or cars.
22· · · ·Q.· Did you or anybody with GTT Parking, LP get a 22· · · ·A.· I don't.
23· barrier cable installer to review the cables after 23· · · ·Q.· That's your testimony?
24· Mr. O'Connor's incident and before Ms. Bowmer's incident? 24· · · ·A.· Right.
25· · · ·A.· We followed all of the recommendations given to 25· · · ·Q.· Are there a whole lot of people that would be

Page 71 Page 73
·1· us on September 29. ·1· walking in between the parking stops and the edge of the
·2· · · ·Q.· Who is the name of the barrier cable installer ·2· building there?
·3· that GTT Parking hired to inspect the premises after ·3· · · ·A.· There could be.· You know, they're trying to make
·4· Mr. O'Connor's incident and before Ms. Bowmer's? ·4· a straight line to the elevator that those cables would
·5· · · ·A.· That was in Sean O'Brien's deposition. ·5· allow them not to trip.
·6· · · ·Q.· Right.· And you know who he told us the identity ·6· · · ·Q.· The cables "would allow them not to trip."· What
·7· was? ·7· does that mean?
·8· · · ·A.· Uh? ·8· · · ·A.· There is a -- there is a level difference between
·9· · · ·Q.· Nobody. ·9· one ramp and the other and these cables prevent, you know,
10· · · ·A.· Because we followed the recommendations of 10· somebody walking from one ramp to the other.
11· September 29. 11· · · ·Q.· So it's some type of fall protection?
12· · · ·Q.· He actually admitted under oath to the jury, sir, 12· · · ·A.· For people, yes.
13· that you all didn't follow that recommendation.· Does that 13· · · ·Q.· Okay.· How about Picture 3 of Exhibit 9, does
14· surprise you? 14· that look like a safe cable barrier system to you?
15· · · ·A.· You did his deposition.· You're asking me -- 15· · · ·A.· I don't know what's on the other side.· I mean,
16· asking me a question about something that I know. 16· it looks like there is a cable missing.
17· · · ·Q.· I did.· I just brought up your partner, 17· · · ·Q.· Is that acceptable to you as the owner of the
18· Mr. O'Brien, because you brought him up -- 18· Littlefield Garage, GTT Parking, LP?
19· · · ·A.· Sure. 19· · · ·A.· No.
20· · · ·Q.· -- and I'm asking you, are you surprised that he 20· · · ·Q.· How about Picture 4, does that loose cable look
21· admitted the truth under oath that you didn't follow that 21· safe to you?
22· recommendation. 22· · · ·A.· I don't think somebody would walk through that.
23· · · ·A.· I believe we followed that recommendation. 23· · · ·Q.· So it's fine?
24· · · ·Q.· Can you explain why he believes otherwise? 24· · · ·A.· I -- if it's -- if that's a barrier for people
25· · · ·A.· You would have to ask him. 25· like which I believe it's a -- then it would be fine.

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco YVer1f
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sheldon David Kahn on 06/19/2018 Pages 74..77
Page 74 Page 76
·1· · · ·Q.· Okay.· How about Picture 5, does that look like a ·1· · · · · · · · · · · · SIGNATURE PAGE
·2
·2· safe system and fine to you as the owner of the garage? · · · · ·I, SHELDON DAVID KAHN, have read the foregoing
·3· · · ·A.· No. ·3· deposition and hereby affix my signature that same is true
· · and correct, except as noted on the correction page.
·4· · · ·Q.· Why not? ·4
·5· · · ·A.· Because somebody could trip with that cable. ·5
· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·____________________________
·6· · · ·Q.· So whose responsibility would it be to make sure ·6· · · · · · · · · · · · ·SHELDON DAVID KAHN
·7· that cable system, as depicted in Exhibit 5, was actually ·7
·8
·8· safe as opposed to the way in which it looks? ·9· THE STATE OF TEXAS· · · )
·9· · · ·A.· Whose responsibility is it? · · COUNTY OF _____________ )
10
10· · · ·Q.· Yes, sir.
11· · · ·Before me ____________________ on this day personally
11· · · ·A.· I mean, it's the management team of the garage · · appeared _____________________ known to me [or proved to
12· me on the oath of __________________ or through
12· and -- and the ownership team of the garage.
· · _____________________ (description of identity card or
13· · · ·Q.· And who is that? 13· other document)] to be the person whose name is subscribed
14· · · ·A.· The management team is Premier and the ownership · · to the foregoing instrument and acknowledged to me that
14· he/she executed the same for the purposes and
15· is GTT Parking. · · consideration therein expressed.
16· · · ·Q.· So it would be some type of joint responsibility? 15· · · ·Given under my hand and seal of office this ______
· · day of _______________, 2018.
17· · · ·A.· Yeah. 16
18· · · · · · · · MR. BREEN:· I think, sir, we probably need 17
· · · · · · · · · · · __________________________________
19· to break for the day at this point. 18· · · · · · · · · · NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR
20· · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· We're off the record, · · · · · · · · · · · THE STATE OF T E X A S
19
21· 5:44. 20· My Commission Expires:
22· · · · · · · · (The deposition adjourned at 5:44 p.m.) · · _______________________
21
23 22
24 23
24
25 25

Page 75 Page 77
·1· · · · · · · · · · · · CORRECTION PAGE ·1· · · · · · · · · CAUSE NO. D-1-GN-17-004456
·2· CHRISTI J. BOWMER,· · · · · ) IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF
·2· WITNESS NAME:· SHELDON DAVID KAHN· · · ·DATE:· 06/19/2018 · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · )
·3· · · · · · Plaintiff,· · · · )
·3· PAGE· LINE· CHANGE· · · · · · · ·REASON · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · )
·4· VS.· · · · · · · · · · · · ·) TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS
·4· __________________________________________________________ · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · )
·5· GTT Parking, LP, SHELDON· · )
·5· __________________________________________________________ · · DAVID KAHN, PREMIER· · · · ·)
·6· __________________________________________________________ ·6· PARKING OF TENNESSEE,· · · ·) 353RD JUDICIAL DISTRICT
· · LLC, and WEITZMAN· · · · · ·)
·7· __________________________________________________________ ·7· MANAGEMENT CORPORATION,· · ·)
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · )
·8· __________________________________________________________ ·8· · · · · · Defendants.· · · ·)
·9
·9· __________________________________________________________ · · · · · · · · · · ·REPORTER'S CERTIFICATION
10· · · · · · · ·DEPOSITION OF SHELDON DAVID KAHN
10· __________________________________________________________ · · · · · · · · · · · ·TAKEN JUNE 19, 2018
11
11· __________________________________________________________ · · · · ·I, TAMARA CHAPMAN, Certified Shorthand Reporter and
12· Notary Public in and for the State of Texas, hereby
12· __________________________________________________________ · · certify to the following:
13· · · ·That the witness, SHELDON DAVID KAHN, was duly sworn
13· __________________________________________________________ · · by the officer and that the transcript of the oral
14· __________________________________________________________ 14· deposition is a true record of the testimony given by the
· · witness;
15· __________________________________________________________ 15· · · ·That the deposition transcript was submitted on
· · July 9th, 2018 to the witness or to the attorney for
16· __________________________________________________________ 16· the witness for examination, signature and return to
· · HUSEBY, INC., by July 29th, 2018;
17· __________________________________________________________ 17· · · ·That the amount of time used by each party at the
· · deposition is as follows:
18· __________________________________________________________ 18
· · · · ·SEAN BREEN - 01:22
19· __________________________________________________________ 19
· · · · ·That pursuant to information given to the deposition
20· __________________________________________________________ 20· officer at the time said testimony was taken, the
21· __________________________________________________________ · · following includes counsel for all parties of record:
21
22· __________________________________________________________ · · · · ·SEAN BREEN - ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF
22· · · ·CHRISTOPHER L. RHODES -· ATTORNEY FOR PREMIER PARKING
23· __________________________________________________________ · · · · ·CURTIS J. KURHAJEC - ATTORNEY FOR WEITZMAN MGMT.
23· · · ·TASHA BARNES - ATTORNEY FOR GTT PARKING, LP
24· __________________________________________________________ 24· · · ·I further certify that I am neither counsel for,
· · related to, nor employed by any of the parties in the
25· __________________________________________________________ 25· action in which this proceeding was taken, and further
· · that I am not financially or otherwise interested in the

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco
 CHRISTI J. BOWMER vs. GTT PARKING, LP, ET AL.
Sheldon David Kahn on 06/19/2018 Pages 78..79
Page 78
·1· outcome of the action.
·2· · · ·Further certification requirements pursuant to Rule
· · 203 of TRCP will be certified to after they have occurred.
·3· · · ·Certified to by me this 2nd of July, 2018.
·4
·5
·6
· · · · · · · · · · · _____________________________________
·7· · · · · · · · · · Tamara Chapman, CSR (#7248), CRR, RPR
· · · · · · · · · · · Certification Expires 12/31/18
·8· · · · · · · · · · HUSEBY, INC.
· · · · · · · · · · · 7000 North Mopac Expressway, 2nd Floor
·9· · · · · · · · · · Austin, Texas 78731
· · · · · · · · · · · Identification No. 660
10· · · · · · · · · · (800)333-2082
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

Page 79
·1· · · · · ·FURTHER CERTIFICATION UNDER RULE 203 TRCP
·2
·3· · · ·The original deposition was/was not returned to the
·4· deposition officer on __________________________;
·5· · · ·If returned, the attached Changes and Signature page
·6· contains any changes and the reasons therefor;
·7· · · ·If returned, the original deposition was delivered to
·8· SEAN BREEN, Custodial Attorney;
·9· · · ·That $ ______________ is the deposition officer's
10· charges to Plaintiff for preparing the original deposition
11· transcript and any copies of exhibits;
12· · · ·That the deposition was delivered in accordance with
13· Rule 203.3 and that a copy of this certificate was served
14· on all parties shown herein and filed with the Clerk.
15· · · ·Certified to by me this _______ day of
16· __________________, 2018.
17
18
19· · · · · · · · · · _____________________________________
· · · · · · · · · · · Tamara Chapman, CSR (#7248), CRR, RPR
20· · · · · · · · · · Certification Expires 12/31/18
· · · · · · · · · · · HUSEBY, INC.
21· · · · · · · · · · 7000 North Mopac Expressway, 2nd Floor
· · · · · · · · · · · Austin, Texas 78731
22· · · · · · · · · · Identification No. 660
· · · · · · · · · · · (800)333-2082
23
24
25

www.huseby.com Huseby, Inc.· Regional Centers 800-333-2082

Charlotte ~ Atlanta ~ Washington, DC ~ New York ~ Houston ~ San Francisco
Exhibit W
35-year-old cables played key role in
Austin's 'dangling car' mishap

By Ben W ear - A merican-Statesman Staff

Posted: 1:45 p.m. Tuesday, September 13, 2016

EXHIBIT

i 1-
The steel ,cables in a downtown Austin parking garage most likely had been in
place for 35 years before an SUV broke through them Friday, then improbably
held the vehicle suspended nine stories above an alley for about three hours.

The city, which inspects buildings after construction is complete, has no record
of having inspected those cables since the ,g arage at Brazos and East Sixth
streets was finished in 1'981, city spokeswoman Sylvia Arzola said.

INTERACTIVE: Bystander captures 360-degree view of dangling car

Using multiple strings of high-tension, half-inch cables as a parking lot barrier in

lieu of concrete walls is increasingly common, according to an Austin structural
engineer, and is listed as an acceptable alternative in ,city and international
building standards. But such cables can rust and loosen over time, either of
which could contribute to the barrier failing if hit by enough force, said Jamie
Buchanan with J'Q Engineering's Austin office.

"Those cables will tend to loosen over time, develop some give," Buchanan
said , and that movement increases the chance of the cables breaking in an
impact. "They'll move more before they resist."

The silver Toyota 4Runner driven by William O'Connor, 23, broke through five
½-inch cables that were attached to concrete pylons on the top floor of the
Littlefield Parking Garage, according to Austin police.

Palmer Buck, an Austin Fire Department division chief, said the vehicle then
flipped "end, over end" and would have dropped to the alley below but for a
stroke of good fortune for O'Connor.
Three of the cables, which according to the International Building Code are
each designed to resist a 6,000-pound static load, wrapped around one of the
SUV's front wheels and held the 5,000-pound vehicle dangling outside the
garage's seventh floor. The odd predicament drew instant, widespread play on
the internet.

Firefighters, using two pulley-like devices that Buck described as "giant come-
alongs" chained to columns on the g'a rage's top floor, managed to lower the car
to within .20 feet of the ground. At that point, a wrecker with a tall boom and a
winch took hold of the car and lowered it to the ground.

BE THE FIRST TO KNOW: When big news breaks, we send Breaking

News emails. Click to sign up

The 4Runner, Buck said, had roof d.ents as deep as 3 inches (it smashed
1

against the parking ,garage wall after flippirng), door damage that was later
exacerbated when firefighters had to break in to retrieve materials O'Connor
had left behind, and damage to the wheel and axle.

O'Connor, who accordirng to accounts from the scene had been wearing a seat
belt during the harrowing incident, managed to climb out through a window and
escape to the parking garage uninjured.

O'Connor couldn't be reached for comment.

That leaves unexplained how the vehicle gener:ated enough fiorce to break
through the cable barrier. O'Connor told authorities at the scene that he was
parking the vehicle and tried to stop, but that the car kept going. It is unclear
how fast the SUV was moving when it struck the cables.

Bu.ck said firefighters spoke to him only briefly, afferdetermining he was

uninjured. A police report on the incident. which the American-Statesman
requested from the department. hadn't been released by press time Tuesday.
As for why there had been no follow-up inspections of the garage: "Defects
after construction are handled by Code Department on a complaint basis only,"
c tty spo~eswoman Af"Z!ola wrote in an emaiL

The parking garage, accoliding to Travis Central Appraisal District records, has
been owned for at least the past year by GTT Parking LP. If that company, as is
likely, repairs the damage to the top floor, Arzola said that would require a
building permit and a sign-off from an engineer "certifying the system and the
loading requirements."

Buchanan, the structural engineer, said concrete, precast panels are ''typically
what you see" in parking garag·e design now.

"But the cables are becoming more popular because they open up the parking
garage, makin_g it more airy,.. he said.

Buchanan said the typical design these •days, rather than having five cables as
is the case with the Littlefield garage, usually has seven or eight cables more
closely spaced over 42 inches of height.

That requirement for a 6 ,000-pound: static load, he said, is meant to stop a

2,000-pound passenger vehicle moving at the slower speeds expected when a
vehicle is pulling, into .a parking space.
Exhibit X
MJ STRUCTURES

September 10, 2016

David Kahn
Colina West, Ltd.
804 Congress Avenue, Suite 300
Austin, Texsas 78701

Preliminary Structural Damage Assessment at Littlefield Garage

508 Brazos Street, Austin, Texas

David,

Yesterday afternoon, a Toyota Forerunner was driven through the barrier cables and over the edge of
the 9th floor roof level of the parking garage. The vehicle became tangled in barrier cable which
suspended it in the air. The vehicle was later was lowered to the ground off the building.

The barrier system consists of 5 horizontal half inch steel cables that are anchored into concrete
columns at the south west and north west corners of the building. The end of the top cable was pulled
free from the embedded anchor in the north west column and rested at the next column to the south.
The end of the second cable from the top was pulled free from the embedded anchor in the south west
column and was pulled through the next 2 columns rested in the third column to the north with the
frayed end hanging over the side of the building. The end of the third cable from the top was pulled free
from the external anchor at the south west column and was pulled through the next column and
remained in the second column to the north with a clean cut end hanging along the building edge. The
external anchor on the fourth cable from the top was pulled out of the south west concrete column and
became lodged in the next column to the north with the cable end remaining in the anchor. The bottom
cable remained intact and anchored at both ends. All five cables should be removed and replaced with
new cables and new anchors.

There is a small hairline crack visible in the bottom of the 9th floor concrete slab near midspan at the
edge extending 3 or 4 feet to the interior. This crack appears to be new and was likely created from the
vehicle impact. This crack appears minor and does not significantly reduce the load carrying capacity of
the structure. This crack should be reviewed more closely and then sealed to prevent water intrusion
which could lead to corrosion of reinforcing steel.

On the underside of the 8th floor concrete slab, there are three spots where concrete has spalled from
the bottom surface. This appears to be the slab edge that the vehicle most directly impacted as it swung
over the edge and back toward the building. This slab appears to be generally in satisfactory condition
and does not appear to have reduced load carrying capacity. This should be reviewed more closely for
long term performance and the spalls should be patched with appropriate over head repair mortar.

812 San Antonio Street, Suite 406, Austin, Texas ?8701 512.693.9500 FX 693.9502 mjstructures.com

GTT 064
 Preliminary Structural Damage Assessment at Littlefield Garage
September 10, 2016

None of the columns or beams in the frame appear to have any significant visible damage. A closer
review should be performed to verify long term performance.
The barrier cables at all of the levels below where the vehicle was suspended appear to be intact and
anchored. These should be reviewed more closely by a barrier cable installer and adjusted as needed.

There are spalls around several of the cable penetration holes in the concrete columns that were likely
caused by the vehicle impacting the cables from the exterior as it swung into the building, and the
cables pressing the inside face of the concrete holes. These areas should be patched with an appropriate
concrete repair mortar for long term protection.

Based on my visual assessment yesterday, the parking garage is safe for continued use, except for the
area of the 9th floor where barrier cables are pulled free. As we discussed yesterday, barricades must be
installed to securely prevent vehicles and pedestrians from entering the area of the 9th floor where the
barrier cables have been pulled out.

This report documents my findings of structural damage caused to the parking structure from the
vehicle accident at the Littlefield Garage based on my visual observation from a visit to the building
yesterday and is a follow up from my email summary I sent last night. This evaluation is preliminary in
nature and limited to visual observations. A more thorough investigation should be performed to
identify the full nature of damage and repairs required.

Please contact me with any questions.

Sincerely, "''''''"'''''
.$-"<;_, 0 F r 111
-.::-
,._..._
, \. . •....... •. f'-,J.. 11I
ffvi.· .·· ....,A.,.,. ···:'0' ,,,.
:: * · ~ ·. 1<~
~* .·... .... ... ............ :·.*-~
~ RICHARD ANDRC MARTIN li;
~ . . . .. ······· · · · · ·· · ,!
;,. -o ·. 89384 'fl; !:
t111~· : iv;
~ ··/ /cENS~'v. c,'~:
Richard A. Martin, PE
' • t i. . ONAL "'$-'
,..<'~

4'..-111)1. \\\\"'''''"'
Principal
MJ STRUCTURES, PLLC

Page 2 of 2

GTT 065
Exhibit Y
 City of Austin
P.O. Box 1088, Austin, TX, 787 67

AUSTIN CODE
DEPARTMENT
NOTICE OF VIOLATION
Case Number: CV-2016-112643
via Certified Mail #7015 1520 0002 8668 0399
September 15, 2016

Gtt Parking Lp C/O Colina West Attn : David Kahn

804 Congress Avenue Suite 300
Austin Texas 78701

RE: 508 BRAZOS ST AUSTIN TX 78701

Locally known as 508 BRAZOS ST AUSTIN TX 78701
Legally described as LOT 11&12 BLOCK 056 ORIGINAL CITY {TOTAL SQ FT 15640) PLUS
VAC ALLEY
Zoned as CBD-CURE
Parcel Number 0206030613

Dear Gtt Parking Lp C/O Colina West Attn : David Kahn :

The City of Austin Code Department investigated the property described above. Austin City Code
violations were found that require your immediate attention. A description of the violation(s) and
0 compliance timeframe(s) are provided in the attached violation report.

After receipt of this Notice, and until compliance is attained, the Austin City Code prohibits the sale, lease ,
or transfer of this property unless:

• You provide the buyer, lessee, or other transferee a copy of this Notice of Violation; and
• You provide the name and address of the buyer, lessee, or other transferee to the Code Official.

For additional information , I can be reached at 512-974-9064 or Troy.Collins@austintexas.gov. Please

reference case number CV-2016-112643. Hours of operation are: Monday- Friday, 7:30 a.m. - 4:00
p.m.

Para obtener mas informaci6n , llame al 512-974-9064 o enviar un correo electr6nico a

Troy.Collins@austintexas.gov. Por favor, consulte caso numero CV-2016-112643 . El horario de atenci6n
es: lunes a viernes , 7:30 a.m. - 4:00 p.m.

Sincerely,

Troy Collins , Austin Code Officer

City of Austin Code Department

Bowmer 001500
 VIOLATION REPORT

Date of Notice: September 14, 2016

Code Officer: Troy Collins

Case Number: CV-2016-112643
Property Address: 508 BRAZOS ST AUSTIN TX 78701
Locally known as 508 BRAZOS ST AUST IN TX 78701
Zoned as CBD-CURE

The items listed below are violations of the Austin City Code , and require your immediate attention. If the
violations are not brought into compliance within the timeframes listed in this report, enforcement action
may be taken. Timeframes start from the Date of Notice.

Violation Type: STRUCTURE MAINTENANCE

Austin City Code Section: Unsafe Conditions (§304.1.1)

Description of Violation : The following exterior condition(s) barrier cable systems are unsafe: broken
loose damaged.
Date Observed : 09/14/2016
Timeframe to Comply: 10 Day(s)
Recommended Resolution : Obtain a structural engineer letter and report for the cable system and
concrete slab. Make repairs within 30 days.

Notes: If the corrective action requires a permit or demolition, please contact the Development Services
Department at 512-978-4000. You can also visit http://www.austintexas.gov/department/planning for more

0 information.

In order to close the above code violation(s), an inspection will need to be conducted. Please
contact Austin Code Department Officer Troy Collins at 512-974-9064 or
Troy.Collins@austintexas.gov to schedule an inspection.

Si no puede leer esta notificaci6n en ingles, pida una traducci6n en espaiiol.

Appeal: Any structure maintenance issue indicated in this report may be appealed to the Building and
Standards Commission. The appeal must be filed no later than 20 days after the date of this notice and
contain all of the following information:

• a brief statement as to why the violation is being appealed

• any facts that support the appeal
• a description of the relief sought
• the reasons why the appealed notice or action should be reversed , changed , or set aside
• the name and address of the appellant

An appeal may be delivered in person to our office located at 1520 Rutherford Lane or mailed to:
Building and Standards Commission, c/o Austin Code Department, P.O. Box 1088 Austin, Texas
78767.

u
Bowmer 001501
 IMPORTANT INFORMATION

Failure to Correct
If the violations are not brought into compliance within the timeframes listed in the violation report,
enforcement action may include:

• Criminal charges in the City of Austin Municipal Court subjecting you to fines of up to
$2,000 per violation , per day.
• Civil penalties in an Administrative Hearing subjecting you to fines of up to $1,000 per
violation, per day, along with additional fees .
• Suspension or cancelation of existing site plan, permit or certificate of occupancy. If the
site plan , permit or certificate of occupancy is suspended or revoked, the utility service to
this property may be disconnected.
• Civil injunctions or penalties in State court.
• For dangerous or substandard buildings, the City of Austin may also take action with the
Building and Standards Commission (BSC) to order the vacation, relocation of
occupants , securing , repair, removal or demolition of a building , and civil penalties.

Ownership Information
According to the records of the County, you own the property described in this notice. If this property has
other owners, please provide me with this information . If you no longer own this property, you must
execute an affidavit form provided by our office. This form should state that you no longer own the
property, the name of the new owner, and their last known address. The affidavit must be delivered in
person or by certified mail , with return receipt requested , to the Austin Code Department office no later
than 20 days after you receive this notice. If you do not submit an affidavit, it will be presumed that you

0 own the property described in this notice.

An affidavit form is available at www.austintexas.gov/code-resources, or at the Austin Code Department

office at 1520 Rutherford Lane. The completed affidavit should be mailed to: City of Austin Code
Department, P.O. Box 1088, Austin, Texas 78767 .

You may file a written complaint or commendation regarding an Austin Code Department Officer no later
than 3 days after you receive this notice. Please reference your case number. The complaint or
commendation should be mailed to: City of Austin Code Department, ATTN: Code Official, P.O. Box
1088, Austin , Texas 78767.

u
Bowmer 001502
Exhibit Z
 EXHIBIT
From: Christina Murray christinamurray@ pre mierparking.com #
Subject:
Date:
Re: Littlefield cable work
September 15, 2016 at 9:53 AM
I <i{
To : Ryan Hunt ryanhunt@premierparking .com
Cc: Sean O'Brien seanobri en@colinawest.com , William Clay wclay@premierparking.com

Makes sense to me! Thanks!

Christina Murray
Austin Operations Manager
508 Brazos Street
Austin , TX 78701
Office: (512) 536-1145
Mobile: (615) 339-4937
www.premierparking .com

On Sep 15, 2016, at 9 :52 AM, Ryan Hunt <r','anhunt @premierparking.com> wrote :

Thanks Christina . I am more concerned from a liability perspective on who completed the work
previously.

<image00l.png>
Ryan Hunt/ COO - Partner/ 615-554-7472 / r.v.anhunt@.RremierRarking.com
Premier Parking Office: 615-238-2250
421 Church Street/ Nashville, TN 37219 / www.RremierRarking.com

From: Christina Murray

Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2016 8:41 AM
To: Ryan Hunt <rv.anhunt@gremieq;1arking.com>; Sean O'Brien <seanobrien@colinawest.com>
Cc: William Clay <wclay_@.gremiergarking.com>
Subject: RE: Littlefield cable work

Ryan,

Just as an FYI, the work is repair is scheduled for Monday.

<image002.png>
Christina Murray/ Austin Operations Manager/ 615-339-4937 / christinamurray_@.RremierRarking.com
Premier Parking Office: 512-536-1145
508 Brazos Street/ Austin, TX 78701 / www.wemierRarking.com
<image003.jgg~

From: Ryan Hunt

Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2016 11:49 PM
To: Sean O'Brien <seanobrien@colinawest.com>
Cc: Christina Murray <christinamurray_@.gremiergarking.com>; William Clay
<wclay_@.gremiergarking.com>
Subject: Littlefield cable work

Sean,

Do you want me to reach out to Stream and get the details on the cabling work they performed
in early 2015? I believe it was performed by someone Eric Herron knew well and had worked

GTT054-
 with before .

Ryan

<image001.png>
Ryan Hunt/ COO - Partner/ 615-554-7472 / ryanhunt@.12remier12arking.com
Premier Parking Office: 615-238-2250
421 Church Street/ Nashville, TN 37219 / www.12remier12arking.com

Follow Us On

Linked fm

GTT055
Exhibit AA
 Troy Collins
February 20, 2019 1
Page 1
·1· · · · · · · · · · ·NO. D-1-GN-17-004456

·2· ·CHRISTI J. BOWMER,· · · · ·) IN THE DISTRICT COURT

· · · · ·Plaintiff,· · · · · · ·)
·3· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · )
· · ·VS.· · · · · · · · · · · · ) TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS
·4· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · )
· · ·GTT PARKING, LP, SHELDON· ·)
·5· ·DAVID KAHN, PREMIER· · · · )
· · ·PARKING OF TENNESSEE,· · · )
·6· ·LLC, and WEITZMAN· · · · · )
· · ·MANAGEMENT CORPORATION,· · )
·7· · · ·Defendants.· · · · · · ) 353RD JUDICIAL DISTRICT

·8

·9
· · · · **************************************************
10· · · · · · · ORAL AND VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF

11· · · · · · · · · · · · ·TROY COLLINS

12· · · · · · · · · · · FEBRUARY 20, 2019

· · · · *************************************************
13

14· · · ·ORAL AND VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF TROY COLLINS,

15· ·produced as a witness at the instance of the

16· ·Defendants, and duly sworn, was taken in the

17· ·above-styled and numbered cause on February 20, 2019,

18· ·from 10:12 a.m. to 11:40 a.m., before Kim Seibert, CSR

19· ·in and for the State of Texas, reported by machine

20· ·shorthand, at the law offices of THOMPSON, COE,

21· ·COUSINS & IRONS, LLP, 701 Brazos Street, Suite 1500,

22· ·Austin, Texas, pursuant to the Texas Rules of Civil

23· ·Procedure and the provisions stated on the record or

24· ·attached hereto.

25

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Troy Collins
February 20, 2019 2 to 5
Page 2 Page 4
·1· · · · · · · · · · A P P E A R A N C E S ·1· · · · · · · · · (Exhibit No. 90 marked.)
·2· ·FOR THE PLAINTIFF:
· · · · ·Mr. Sean E. Breen ·2· · · · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Stand by.· This is the
·3· · · ·HOWRY BREEN & HERMAN, LLP
· · · · ·1900 Pearl Street ·3· ·videotaped oral deposition of Troy Collins.· Today's
·4· · · ·Austin, Texas 78705-5408 ·4· ·date, February 20th, 2019.· The approximate time,
· · · · ·(512) 474-7300
·5· · · ·sbreen@howrybreen.com ·5· ·10:12 a.m.· We're recording and on the record.
·6
· · ·FOR THE DEFENDANTS GTT PARKING, LP, SHELDON DAVID KAHN: ·6· · · · · · · · · · · · TROY COLLINS,
·7· · · ·Ms. Tasha Barnes ·7· · ·having been first duly sworn, testified as follows:
· · · · ·THOMPSON, COE, COUSINS & IRONS, LLP
·8· · · ·701 Brazos ·8· · · · · · · · · · · · ·EXAMINATION
· · · · ·Suite 1500
·9· · · ·Austin, Texas 78701 ·9· ·BY MS. BARNES:
· · · · ·(512) 708-8200 10· · · ·Q.· ·Would you please state your full name for the
10· · · ·tbarnes@thompsoncoe.com
11 11· ·record?
· · ·FOR THE DEFENDANT PREMIER PARKING OF TENNESSEE, LLC:
12· · · ·Mr. Paul Byron Starr 12· · · ·A.· ·Troy Collins.
· · · · ·GERMER BEAMAN & BROWN, PLLC 13· · · ·Q.· ·Mr. Collins, I understand that you've given a
13· · · ·301 Congress Avenue
· · · · ·Suite 1700 14· ·deposition before, so you're familiar with why we're
14· · · ·Austin, Texas 78701
· · · · ·(512) 471-0288 15· ·here and the purpose of today's deposition; is that
15· · · ·pstarr@germer-austin.com 16· ·correct?
16
· · ·FOR THE WITNESS: 17· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
17· · · ·Ms. Patricia Link
· · · · ·CITY OF AUSTIN LAW DEPARTMENT 18· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· What do you do for a living?
18· · · ·Assistant City Attorney 19· · · ·A.· ·I am currently an Inspector C.· I do license
· · · · ·301 West 2nd Street
19· · · ·Box 1546 20· ·and registration for hotel/motel.
· · · · ·Austin, Texas 78767-1546
20· · · ·(512) 974-2173 21· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· How long have you been in that
· ·
21
· · ·patricia.link@austintexas.gov
22· ·position?
22· ·ALSO PRESENT: 23· · · ·A.· ·In this position, I've been in it going on a
· · · · ·Brent Kirby - Videographer
23 24· ·year and a half.
24
25
25· · · ·Q.· ·And that's for the City of Austin, correct?

Page 3 Page 5
·1· · · · · · · · · · · · · · INDEX ·1· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·2· · Appearances.....................................· · 2
·3 ·2· · · ·Q.· ·You're an employee of the City of Austin?
·4· ·TROY COLLINS
·3· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·5
· · · Examination by Ms. Barnes.......................· · 4 ·4· · · ·Q.· ·And prior to that position, what was your job?
·6·
· ·
·
·
Examination by Mr. Breen........................·
Examination by Mr. Starr........................·
·30
·57
·5· · · ·A.· ·Same title, Inspector C.· I was a commercial
·7· · Further Examination by Ms. Barnes...............· ·66 ·6· ·inspector for Austin.
· · · Further Examination by Mr. Breen................· ·67
·8· · Further Examination by Mr. Starr................· ·70
·7· · · ·Q.· ·How long were you in that position?
·9· · Witness' Signature Page.........................· ·74 ·8· · · ·A.· ·I was in that position for eight -- about
· · · Reporter's Certificate..........................· ·76
10 ·9· ·eight years.
11 10· · · ·Q.· ·And is that the position you held in September
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·EXHIBITS
12 11· ·of 2016?
· · ·NUMBER· · · · · DESCRIPTION· · · · · · · · · · · · PAGE 12· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
13
· · · Exhibit 90· · ................................· · ·16 13· · · ·Q.· ·And my understanding is, you've been with the
14·
· ·
·
·
· · · ·
· · · ·
· ·
· ·
·
·
Complaint Information Obtained
from City of Austin
14· ·City close to 25 years; is that correct?
15· · Exhibit 91· · ................................· · ·21 15· · · ·A.· ·Close to 23.
16· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Close to 23.· That entire time have you
· · · · · · · · · · E-mails
16· · Exhibit 92· · ................................· · ·25
· · · · · · · · · · E-mail from Witness to 17· ·been an inspector?
17· · · · · · · · · Christina Murray dated
· · · · · · · · · · October 3rd 18· · · ·A.· ·No.
18· · Exhibit 93· · ................................· · ·28 19· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· What other positions have you held with
· · · · · · · · · · Letter from MJ Structures dated
19· · · · · · · · · September 28th, 2016 20· ·the City of Austin?
· · · Exhibit 94· · ................................· · ·20 21· · · ·A.· ·I've worked at solid waste -- solid waste
20· · · · · · · · · Notice of Violation
· · · Exhibit 95· · ................................· · ·30 22· ·services.· I did collections at solid waste services.
21· · · · · · · · · Copy of Witness' File
23· ·I worked at water and wastewater.· And I came back to
22
23 24· ·solid waste services, which is a part of Austin Code
25· ·Department.
24
25

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Troy Collins
February 20, 2019
Page 6
·1· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.
·2· · · ·A.· ·And I've been in Austin Code for 14 years.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· The last 14 years?
·4· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· As an Inspector C commercial
·6· ·inspector, what were your duties?
·7· · · ·A.· ·Our duties are as follows.· Depending on
·8· ·which -- which group you're in -- you move up in the
·9· ·ranks from A, B, C, depending on your certification and
10· ·your experience.
11· · · · · · · · ·I started out in the A position, which
12· ·titled that you do mostly highway trash debris.· You
13· ·move up to a B position, you still do the highways
14· ·trash and debris and you do residential inspections. A
15· ·C position, you mainly are -- become a senior
16· ·inspector.· Your roles are pretty much the same.· You
17· ·handle more of the harder cases versus an Inspector A
18· ·or B would handle.
19· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And as an Inspector C in a
20· ·commercial -- commercial inspector, your role was to
21· ·make sure that commercial buildings comply with code?
22· · · ·A.· ·Under the commercial -- under the commercial
23· ·buildings as long as on-call, like emergency responses;
24· ·and if there was a residential property or a commercial
25· ·property, something happens, I'll respond to it to see
Page 7
·1· ·what the violation or deficiency is.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· So you determine if there's a violation
·3· ·or a deficiency, correct?
·4· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·And then you instruct the owner or property
·6· ·manager on how to remove the violation or fix the
·7· ·violation.· Is that true?
·8· · · ·A.· ·We instruct them on how to -- we instruct them
·9· ·to get permits.· We let them know what -- what we
10· ·found, what violation that we found, and we instruct to
11· ·get required permits to remedy the violation or
12· ·deficiency.
13· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And then what role do you have after
14· ·that?
15· · · ·A.· ·Follow-up.· All our roles are we follow up
16· ·with the case.· Once a permit is secured, that
17· ·basically leaves us out of it until the permit is --
18· ·unless we -- if we require a final on a permit, we
19· ·don't pursue the case if they have an open permit.
20· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And if there's not an open permit, what
21· ·happens?
22· · · ·A.· ·If there's not an open permit, several steps
23· ·that we have to take once we sent out a notice of
24· ·violation for whatever we find.· If we request them to
25· ·get an engineer's letter and report, they have to
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
6 to 9
Page 8
·1· ·provide that.· We request them to get a type of permit,
·2· ·whatever type it is; building mechanical, electrical,
·3· ·they have to get that.· If they don't get that within a
·4· ·certain timeframe, then we issue a citation and take
·5· ·them to basically a building standards commission
·6· ·court.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· What's the difference between a notice
·8· ·of violation and a citation?
·9· · · ·A.· ·A notice of violation is like a courtesy
10· ·warning, letting you know that, "Hey, this is what we
11· ·found on your property.· You have this amount of time
12· ·to remedy the violation," versus a citation, we don't
13· ·give out citations when we first go out and see
14· ·something because we give them opportunity to take care
15· ·of the problem.
16· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· So a citation is issued once you've
17· ·already notified the owner or property manager that
18· ·there's a problem with the property and that owner or
19· ·property manager does not correct the problem.· Is that
20· ·true?
21· · · ·A.· ·Correct, within a certain timeframe.
22· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· All right.· What's your educational
23· ·background?
24· · · ·A.· ·Finished high school, did a semester of
25· ·college.
Page 9
·1· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Where did you go to high school?
·2· · · ·A.· ·Johnston High School.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·Where did you go to college?
·4· · · ·A.· ·Prairie View University in Trinity Valley.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·And I assume that you have special expertise
·6· ·in City of Austin Code.· Is that fair?
·7· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· And you understand that we're here
·9· ·today about an accident that happened at the
10· ·Littlefield Garage, correct?
11· · · ·A.· ·Correct.
12· · · ·Q.· ·And you were actually called out in September
13· ·of 2016 regarding an accident that occurred at the
14· ·Littlefield Garage.· Is that true?
15· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
16· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Tell me, just from your memory, what do
17· ·you remember about being called to the Littlefield
18· ·Garage?
19· · · ·A.· ·It was -- it was an after-hour call, I want to
20· ·say, that a vehicle drove off the ninth -- ninth floor
21· ·of the Littlefield Garage.· Once I made the location,
22· ·identified where the problem was at, which was the
23· ·ninth floor, a vehicle, an SUV, was hanging off the
24· ·side of the building by the cables.· Once it was
25· ·lowered down, then made -- made it to the top,
YVer1f
 Troy Collins
February 20, 2019
Page 10
·1· ·ninth floor, and saw where the vehicle went over and ·1· ·were there.· Do you have any recollection of who they
·2· ·assessed it that we needed to get an engineer's letter
·3· ·and report, talked to the folks that was in charge at
·4· ·the time.· I instructed them what I needed from them.
·5· ·And then we had them secure that area with a chain link
·6· ·fence so no one could park in that area.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Anything else that day?
·8· · · ·A.· ·No, nothing else that day.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· So when you got there, the vehicle
10· ·was still hanging over the ninth floor?
11· · · ·A.· ·Right.
12· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And once the vehicle was lowered down,
13· ·you went up to the ninth floor; is that correct?
14· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
15· · · ·Q.· ·And what did you see?
16· · · ·A.· ·Saw the cables that was pulled from the north
17· ·and south wall.· They wasn't broken in the middle.
18· ·They was just pulled from the walls.· There were still
19· ·some cars on top there.· They wouldn't allow anyone
20· ·access to move the vehicles.
21· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And the -- oh, go ahead.· I'm sorry.
22· · · ·A.· ·Other than that, that was all that was on the
23· ·ninth floor.
24· · · ·Q.· ·How big of a section of the ninth floor was
25· ·damaged by this incident?
Page 11
·1· · · ·A.· ·I'm not too sure how much was damaged, but I
·2· ·had them fence off the ninth floor that's facing the
·3· ·alleyway, so no cars could park in any of those parking
·4· ·spots.· So I would probably guess about 15 parking
·5· ·spots --
·6· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.
·7· · · ·A.· ·-- if not more.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·The actual area where the cables were down,
·9· ·was that 15 parking spots wide?
10· · · ·A.· ·Yes.· It may have been more than 15, but I'm
11· ·lowballing it to 15 --
12· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.
13· · · ·A.· ·-- because basically the cables stretch from,
14· ·like I said, north to south, side to side.· And with
15· ·the cables being broken, if a vehicle pulled up to the
16· ·curb stop and they don't have that extra cable, then
17· ·they may as well go over as well.
18· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Did you look at any area other than the
19· ·area where the vehicle went off?
20· · · ·A.· ·I looked at the ninth floor and I looked at
21· ·the eighth floor.
22· · · ·Q.· ·And did you find any deficiencies other than
23· ·where the car went off?
24· · · ·A.· ·No.
25· · · ·Q.· ·You said that you talked with the folks who
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
10 to 13
Page 12
·2· ·were?
·3· · · ·A.· ·The managers of the Littlefield.· They worked
·4· ·for the Littlefield Garage and property area.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Does the name Premier Parking ring a
·6· ·bell?
·7· · · ·A.· ·Premier Parking?· Not really.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· You said that you determined that an
·9· ·engineer's letter report was necessary, correct?
10· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
11· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Tell me what about that particular
12· ·event caused you to say, "We need an engineer's
13· ·letter."
14· · · ·A.· ·Typically when we find a structure that we
15· ·really don't have knowledge or enough information about
16· ·that we have ourselves, we -- we require someone with
17· ·expertise to deem it safe or hazardous.· And they can
18· ·remedy -- tell the property owners or management
19· ·company how to fix the problem.
20· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.
21· · · ·A.· ·And they take responsibility and liability of
22· ·telling them how to fix the problem.
23· · · ·Q.· ·The engineer does?
24· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
25· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And it's reasonable for an owner of a
Page 13
·1· ·parking garage to rely upon a structural engineer for
·2· ·advice and recommendations on what should be done in a
·3· ·situation like this.· Is that true?
·4· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·Is there anything else you told them to do
·6· ·other than, I mean, obviously, fix the problem and get
·7· ·an engineer's letter and report?
·8· · · ·A.· ·I did ask them to secure the area, which they
·9· ·did.· I did ask them to get a building permit, which
10· ·they didn't.· And I closed my case out in an error
11· ·stating they did get a building permit, which they
12· ·didn't get one because they had an engineer's letter
13· ·and report.
14· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Who normally gets a building permit?
15· ·Would that be a contractor performing repairs?
16· · · ·A.· ·A contractor or a property owner.
17· · · ·Q.· ·Do you know who you specifically told to get a
18· ·building permit?
19· · · ·A.· ·No.· It went out on our notice of violations.
20· ·It goes whatever address is on TCAD file.
21· · · ·Q.· ·So it was actually specifically in the notice
22· ·of violation that a permit needed to be pulled?
23· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
24· · · ·Q.· ·And that goes to the owner?· Is that what you
25· ·said?
YVer1f
 Troy Collins
February 20, 2019
Page 14
·1· · · ·A.· ·Right.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·All right.
·3· · · ·A.· ·Whoever's name is on the TCAD, Travis County
·4· ·Appraisal District.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·In terms of the conversations that you had at
·6· ·the garage on the day of that event, did you
·7· ·specifically have a conversation where you told them
·8· ·they needed to pull a permit?
·9· · · ·A.· ·Right, yes.
10· · · ·Q.· ·Uh-huh.· What happens after that visit?· Did
11· ·you ever -- let me back up.· Did you ever go back to
12· ·the garage after that day?
13· · · ·A.· ·I did.
14· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· When was that?
15· · · ·A.· ·It was -- I can't remember the date.· I did go
16· ·back to the garage.· They had fenced it off so no one
17· ·actually could park there.
18· · · ·Q.· ·Was that a day or two later or longer than
19· ·that?
20· · · ·A.· ·No, it was a day or two later.
21· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Were you just there to check to see if
22· ·they had fenced it off?
23· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
24· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Any other visits to the garage after
25· ·that?
Page 15
·1· · · ·A.· ·Once they obtained the letter and report, I
·2· ·verified that they did obtain a letter and report and
·3· ·they did remove the fencing, and my case was closed
·4· ·after that.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·So did you physically go back to the garage in
·6· ·order to verify the letter and report?
·7· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· All right.· Do you know when that was?
·9· · · ·A.· ·I do not.
10· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And we can look at the documents in a
11· ·minute, but you -- what did you do whenever you went
12· ·back in order to verify that it was fixed?
13· · · ·A.· ·Since I'm not an expert on the cabling,
14· ·there's really nothing I could do.· I just make sure
15· ·that it's back intact so it is fixed.
16· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And at that time when you went back to
17· ·the garage did you notice any other code violations?
18· · · ·A.· ·No.
19· · · ·Q.· ·And at that time after you verified that it
20· ·was -- the cables were intact, you closed the file and
21· ·told them they could reopen the garage?
22· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
23· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· And you brought documents with you
24· ·today, can you kind of give me a summary of what you
25· ·brought with you?
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
14 to 17
Page 16
·1· · · ·A.· ·Yeah, photos from the accident, from the
·2· ·ninth floor showing just the cable system, how the
·3· ·cable system shows, the brakes of the cable system,
·4· ·vehicles that was hanging from the ninth floor.· I'm
·5· ·not sure if you guys had this in your files or not.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·I believe we do.· I just --
·7· · · ·A.· ·Okay.· The notice of violation that I sent,
·8· ·the engineer's letter that I requested.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·Is this -- the notice of violation that you
10· ·brought today, is that the one that was issued after
11· ·the September 2016 event?
12· · · ·A.· ·Yes, this is the one that I issued.
13· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And where in there does it say that
14· ·they're required to get a permit?
15· · · ·A.· ·It's said on Page No. 2.· Actually, it states,
16· ·"Obtain -- recommended resolution, obtain structural
17· ·engineer letter and report for the cable system,
18· ·concrete slab.· Make repairs within 30 days."
19· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· So it doesn't say --
20· · · ·A.· ·So it doesn't say get -- obtain a building
21· ·permit, no.
22· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· All right.· I have marked as Exhibit 90
23· ·the complaint information that we obtained from the
24· ·City of Austin.
25· · · ·A.· ·Okay.
Page 17
·1· · · ·Q.· ·And I don't know if that's something you
·2· ·brought with you today or not.
·3· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·4· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· So if anything looks
·5· ·different from what you have, if you would let me know,
·6· ·I would appreciate that.
·7· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Thank you.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MS. BARNES)· Is this a summary of how the
·9· ·event is handled?
10· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
11· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And it looks like, starting with the
12· ·inspection information, it shows that you were assigned
13· ·on September 14th, 2016; is that correct?
14· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
15· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And then do you enter these notes
16· ·yourself?
17· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
18· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And there's a note on 9-14-2016 that
19· ·says, "I made the location on 9-9" -- what does that
20· ·mean, 9-9-16?
21· · · ·A.· ·It actually takes out a lot of our slashes.
22· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· I thought this event was on 9-14 and
23· ·that's saying 9-9-16.· That's why I was asking.
24· · · ·A.· ·It's going to be -- it should be 9-14-16.
25· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· "And found a vehicle hanging on side of
YVer1f
 Troy Collins
February 20, 2019
Page 18
·1· ·the building due to a vehicle running off the roof of a
·2· ·parking garage breaking the barrier cable system"; is
·3· ·that correct?
·4· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Then it looks like there's an entry on
·6· ·9-14-2016 that's just blank.· Well, actually, it says,
·7· ·"Send CV notice."
·8· · · ·A.· ·"Send CV notice."
·9· · · ·Q.· ·What does that mean, CV --
10· · · ·A.· ·That means I sent the notice of violation to
11· ·make the repairs.
12· · · ·Q.· ·Code violation?
13· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
14· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And then the final entry, it looks
15· ·like, from you is on 10-27-2016; is that correct?
16· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
17· · · ·Q.· ·And it says, "Closed due to voluntary
18· ·compliance," right?
19· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
20· · · ·Q.· ·It also says, "Permit was pulled under
21· ·Littlefield address with a letter from an engineer."
22· · · ·A.· ·That was -- and I explained to my upper
23· ·management, that was a typo.· Permit was not pulled --
24· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.
25· · · ·A.· ·-- due to an engineer's letter and report.
Page 19
·1· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· "Since there was an engineer letter and
·2· ·report it was not necessary for permit to be pulled";
·3· ·is that correct?
·4· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·And then the remainder of this talks about the
·6· ·violation that was sent, is that correct, the structure
·7· ·maintenance at the bottom?
·8· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And the violation says, "The following
10· ·exterior conditions; barrier cable systems are unsafe,
11· ·broken loose, damaged," correct?
12· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
13· · · ·Q.· ·And you're specifically referring to that
14· ·one section where the vehicle went off; is that
15· ·correct?
16· · · ·A.· ·Yes, ma'am.
17· · · ·Q.· ·There were no other violations found at that
18· ·time, correct?
19· · · ·A.· ·Correct.
20· · · ·Q.· ·Do you mind if I mark this copy of the --
21· · · ·A.· ·No, go ahead.
22· · · ·Q.· ·-- notice of violation, because I'm not seeing
23· ·that I have that.· And we'll mark that as Exhibit --
24· ·oh --
25· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· There's a couple of them.
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
18 to 21
Page 20
·1· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Okay.· Thank you.· I'm going
·2· ·to mark that as Exhibit 94.
·3· · · · · · · · · (Exhibit No. 94 marked.)
·4· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MS. BARNES)· And on Exhibit 94, Page 3 is
·5· ·the actual violation report, correct?
·6· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·And it specifically sets forth the items that
·8· ·need to be corrected, right?
·9· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
10· · · ·Q.· ·And, again, it's specific.· The actual
11· ·violation is specific to the area where the vehicle
12· ·went off, correct?
13· · · ·A.· ·Correct.
14· · · ·Q.· ·And they have ten days to comply, correct?
15· · · ·A.· ·Right.· And that's the -- they have ten days
16· ·and then 30 days to make the correction.
17· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· What's the difference between the
18· ·ten --
19· · · ·A.· ·The ten -- the ten days is basically for a
20· ·secured area, to make it secure.
21· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.
22· · · ·A.· ·And then they have 30 days to make the
23· ·repairs.
24· · · ·Q.· ·Understood.· And recommended resolution, that
25· ·was your recommended resolution, correct?
Page 21
·1· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·And it says, "Obtain a structural engineer
·3· ·letter and report for the cable system and concrete
·4· ·slab.· Make repairs within 30 days."· Is that correct?
·5· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·And it says below that, "In order to close the
·7· ·above code violation an inspection will need to be
·8· ·conducted," right?
·9· · · ·A.· ·Follow-up inspection.
10· · · ·Q.· ·And you did that?
11· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
12· · · ·Q.· ·And you closed it out after that?
13· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
14· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· I've also marked some e-mails as
15· ·Exhibit 91 to your deposition.
16· · · · · · · · · (Exhibit No. 91 marked.)
17· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MS. BARNES)· It looks like chronologically
18· ·they start on the front page.
19· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh.
20· · · ·Q.· ·Do you recall a lady by the name of
21· ·Christina Murray?
22· · · ·A.· ·I do.
23· · · ·Q.· ·You --
24· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· I'm sorry.· Do or don't?
25· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I do.
YVer1f
 Troy Collins
February 20, 2019 22 to 25
Page 22 Page 24
·1· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Do.· Okay.· Thanks. ·1· · · ·Q.· ·Yeah, right here.· She's saying, "Just left
·2· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MS. BARNES)· Okay.· All right.· Is she the ·2· ·you a message."
·3· ·main person that you interfaced with concerning this ·3· · · ·A.· ·"Just left you a message," yes.
·4· ·event and the repair to Littlefield Garage? ·4· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And then you reply -- oh, wait.· Let's
·5· · · ·A.· ·I believe she's one of the ladies that I met ·5· ·start -- let's start over.
·6· ·the day of the accident. ·6· · · · · · · · ·So at the bottom of GTT-102 there's an
·7· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Do you recall who else you met the day ·7· ·e-mail from Christina Murray to you saying, "Please see
·8· ·of the accident? ·8· ·the attached letter certifying our garage repairs."
·9· · · ·A.· ·It was another -- it was two young ladies that ·9· · · ·A.· ·Correct.
10· ·I met. 10· · · ·Q.· ·"Please let us know when you're available to
11· · · ·Q.· ·Do you remember anything about the other young 11· ·stop by."
12· ·lady? 12· · · ·A.· ·And on the following page, I replied, "From
13· · · ·A.· ·I do not. 13· ·Troy, the fence can be removed and the spaces can be
14· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· All right.· Well, these are not in the 14· ·used for parking and this case will be closed."
15· ·easiest order, but if you flip to the second page, you 15· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· I think we got out of order.· So the
16· ·see the September 27th e-mail from Christina Murray to 16· ·reply on -- to the one that she sent is -- from you
17· ·you.· Do you see that at the top? 17· ·says, "Thank you."· Do you see that?
18· · · ·A.· ·Yes. 18· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
19· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And she's writing to you, "Regarding 19· · · ·Q.· ·September 28th?· Okay.· And then the one that
20· ·the rooftop repairs at the Littlefield Garage from the 20· ·you were referring to is your reply to the one we
21· ·9-9-16 incident, we expect to have a full report from 21· ·talked about previously where Christina Murray says, "I
22· ·the structural engineer tomorrow.· Would you be 22· ·just left you a message.· I want to see if you can come
23· ·available to come by and inspect the repairs tomorrow?" 23· ·by to check out the property."· Do you see that?
24· · · · · · · · ·And she goes on to say that they're ready 24· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
25· ·to have it fully repaired and let the public know our 25· · · ·Q.· ·And you say on October 3rd, 2016, "The fence

Page 23
·1· ·garage is safe.· Do you see that?
·2· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· I'm trying to find your response to
·4· ·that.
·5· · · ·A.· ·The following page.· Maybe -- let's see --
·6· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· I think it's on GTT-62, which
·7· ·is the third page.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MS. BARNES)· I see another -- it starts
·9· ·with Troy and "available to stop by to check repairs,"
10· ·but I don't see anything from Troy.
11· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· It's up on the top of that,
12· ·on 62, the third page of your exhibit.· Oh, I see what
13· ·you're saying.· That's Troy's response, isn't it?· My
14· ·apologies.
15· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Yeah.
16· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MS. BARNES)· I -- the next message I see
17· ·is from Christina again on Page 4, September 30th,
18· ·saying, "Troy, I just left you a message.· Wanted to
19· ·see if you've been by to check out the property so we
20· ·can remove the fencing."
21· · · · · · · · ·Do you see that?
22· · · ·A.· ·Which page number are you looking at?
23· · · ·Q.· ·4.· It's actually -- if you look at the
24· ·bottom, it's 102.
25· · · ·A.· ·GTT-102?
Page 25
·1· ·can be removed and the spaces can be used for parking
·2· ·and this case will be closed"?
·3· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· It looks like it starts to say "we," so
·5· ·maybe part of that was cut off.· Do you see what I'm
·6· ·saying?
·7· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh.· It just stops at "we."
·8· · · · · · · · · (Exhibit No. 92 marked.)
·9· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MS. BARNES)· Okay.· You know what?· I have
10· ·a cleaner copy of that e-mail, which I've marked as 92.
11· ·There you go.
12· · · ·A.· ·Okay.
13· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Thank you.
14· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MS. BARNES)· I guess the rest of that
15· ·e-mail is, "We don't send out any information stating
16· ·the case will be closed."
17· · · · · · · · ·Did I read that correctly?
18· · · ·A.· ·Correct.
19· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And that's your e-mail to
20· ·Christina Murray --
21· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
22· · · ·Q.· ·-- on October 3rd?
23· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
24· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Is that the day that you did that final
25· ·inspection?

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Troy Collins
February 20, 2019 26 to 29
Page 26 Page 28
·1· · · ·A.· ·It may have been before that.· I'm the only ·1· ·me --
·2· ·person doing commercial inspection throughout Austin, ·2· · · ·A.· ·Okay.
·3· ·so I'm everywhere. ·3· · · ·Q.· ·Look again.· Yeah, here we go.· Okay.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·Okay. ·4· · · · · · · · · ·(Exhibit No. 93 marked.)
·5· · · ·A.· ·Not -- not just at one place at one time. ·5· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MS. BARNES)· I've marked as Exhibit 93 a
·6· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· In looking at those e-mails, does ·6· ·letter from MJ Structures --
·7· ·that refresh your recollection that your primary point ·7· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·8· ·of contact with regard to the repair after this ·8· · · ·Q.· ·-- dated September 28th, 2016.
·9· ·accident was Christina Murray? ·9· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Thank you.
10· · · ·A.· ·Yes. 10· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MS. BARNES)· Is this the engineering
11· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Before today, have you talked with any 11· ·report that you received concerning the Littlefield
12· ·of the lawyers involved in the Christi Bowmer lawsuit? 12· ·Garage after the accident back in September of 2016?
13· · · ·A.· ·I have not talked to any lawyers. 13· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
14· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Did you get called out to the garage 14· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And based upon this engineer certifying
15· ·again for the July 2017 accident? 15· ·that the repair had been made properly and that the
16· · · ·A.· ·No. 16· ·garage was safe, you decided to close your file.· You
17· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Did you ever go back to Littlefield 17· ·reinspected and closed your file, correct?
18· ·Garage again for any reason after your final 18· · · ·A.· ·Correct.· I take -- all my engineer letters
19· ·inspection? 19· ·and report I get I take back to my supervisor, we look
20· · · ·A.· ·No. 20· ·at it, and we typically agree or disagree on if -- if
21· · · ·Q.· ·What does the City of Austin, the property 21· ·this letter -- if a letter will cover what we are
22· ·maintenance code, say with respect to property managers 22· ·requesting.
23· ·who manage commercial properties in terms of notice of 23· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Who's your supervisor?
24· ·violations and repairs? 24· · · ·A.· ·At that time my supervisor was
25· · · ·A.· ·Say that one more time. 25· ·Matthew Noriega.

Page 27
·1· · · ·Q.· ·What duties does a property manager have under
·2· ·the City of Austin property maintenance code?
·3· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Object to form.
·4· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· What duties does property
·5· ·managers have?
·6· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MS. BARNES)· Uh-huh.
·7· · · ·A.· ·Well, the property managers, they represent
·8· ·the property owners.· The property owner has to take
·9· ·care of their property at all times regardless what
10· ·violation is on a property.· The property manager
11· ·instructs the property maintenance folks what they need
12· ·to do to the property.· The property managers contact
13· ·the owners to give permission to do what needs to be
14· ·done.
15· · · ·Q.· ·Is it common --
16· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· I'm going to object to the
17· ·form of that question.
18· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MS. BARNES)· Is it common in the
19· ·commercial setting for you to be interacting with
20· ·property managers in lieu of the owners?
21· · · ·A.· ·It's common.
22· · · ·Q.· ·And in this case you were provided the
23· ·engineering report, correct?
24· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
25· · · ·Q.· ·I thought I had already marked that, but let
Page 29
·1· · · ·Q.· ·Is Matthew Noriega still with the City?
·2· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·So this letter would have been taken to
·4· ·Matthew Noriega, and you two would have looked it over
·5· ·together and confirmed that all the information that
·6· ·you needed was there?
·7· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And in terms of your involvement with
·9· ·the owner of the garage and the parking manager of the
10· ·Littlefield Garage, they did everything that you asked
11· ·them to do with regard to the repairs for this
12· ·accident; is that correct?
13· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Objection, form.
14· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Objection, form.
15· · · · · · · · ·THE REPORTER:· What's your answer?
16· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Yes.
17· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MS. BARNES)· They did it in a timely
18· ·manner as well, correct?
19· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
20· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· That's all the questions I have?
21· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Pass the witness.
22· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Will you pass me the
23· ·documents that you brought with you today?
24· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Yeah.
25· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Let's go off the record for a

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Troy Collins
February 20, 2019
Page 30
·1· ·second.
·2· · · · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· We're off at 10:44.
·3· · · · · ·(Recess from 10:44 a.m. to 10:50 a.m.)
·4· · · · · · · · · ·(Exhibit No. 95 marked.)
·5· · · · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Stand by.· This is
·6· ·Segment No. 2.· We're back on the record, 10:50.
·7· · · · · · · · · · · · ·EXAMINATION
·8· ·BY MR. BREEN:
·9· · · ·Q.· ·Mr. Collins, my name is Sean Breen. I
10· ·represent Christi Bowmer.· Ms. Bowmer was injured when 10· · · ·Q.· ·All right.
11· ·her car went off the seventh floor of the Littlefield
12· ·Garage.· Do you understand who I am and who I
13· ·represent?
14· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
15· · · ·Q.· ·You've given a deposition before and the
16· ·attorney for the owner of the garage has asked you some
17· ·questions.· I just have some follow-ups for you.· Okay?
18· · · ·A.· ·Okay.
19· · · ·Q.· ·You were kind enough to bring with you today
20· ·in response to the subpoena a copy of your file; is
21· ·that right?
22· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
23· · · ·Q.· ·And we've put a sticker on it and marked it as
24· ·Exhibit 95, have we not?
25· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
Page 31
·1· · · ·Q.· ·And I take it that in the subpoena you were
·2· ·asked to bring some documents with you, and you were
·3· ·kind enough to put those together and bring them as
·4· ·Exhibit 95; is that right?
·5· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·And it includes some pictures.· And are these
·7· ·pictures that you took?
·8· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·Have you ever before 2016 been involved in a
10· ·case where a vehicle penetrated a vehicle barrier
11· ·system, was not restrained, and left the floor of a
12· ·multilevel parking garage?
13· · · ·A.· ·Prior to the Littlefield I responded to one at
14· ·Brackenridge.· I can't remember if it was before or
15· ·after the Littlefield incident.
16· · · ·Q.· ·And what incident was that?
17· · · ·A.· ·A vehicle had drove off the -- drove through
18· ·the barrier, crashed through the barrier at the
19· ·Brackenridge -- the old Brackenridge emergency area
20· ·where the ambulances park at.
21· · · ·Q.· ·And what happened?
22· · · ·A.· ·The -- it was watertight barriers.· The
23· ·barriers stopped the car from going over, and so they
24· ·just had to repair and replace the barriers.
25· · · ·Q.· ·Was the person in that incident injured?
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
30 to 33
Page 32
·1· · · ·A.· ·I'm not sure.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Was it reported to you that the person
·3· ·was injured?
·4· · · ·A.· ·No.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·So in that incident at Brackenridge, it was a
·6· ·parking garage that was a multi-level garage, and the
·7· ·restraint system being used were watertight barriers?
·8· · · ·A.· ·Correct.· It wasn't a parking garage.· It was
·9· ·a parking ramp, basically a ramp --
11· · · ·A.· ·-- that led from the parking garage.
12· · · ·Q.· ·So it was a ramp that came out of or into the
13· ·parking garage?
14· · · ·A.· ·Out of the parking garage.
15· · · ·Q.· ·And as part of that system, they used a
16· ·barrier that was, as people are typically familiar
17· ·with, one of those water-filled -- they usually are
18· ·either yellow or orange and white?
19· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
20· · · ·Q.· ·They look sort of like a thin rectangle, and
21· ·they're filled with water so that if a car hits them it
22· ·doesn't go off of whatever it's protecting?
23· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
24· · · ·Q.· ·And you understand that to be the basic, very
25· ·common sense perspective of a vehicle restraint system,
Page 33
·1· ·right?
·2· · · ·A.· ·I know for a -- commercial-type barriers that
·3· ·they use and for commercial properties, street barriers
·4· ·when they're doing street work.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Do you happen to know the specs that
·6· ·the building code requires; that is, the amount of
·7· ·weight, force, et cetera, that a vehicle restraint or a
·8· ·barrier is supposed to hold?
·9· · · ·A.· ·No, I do not.
10· · · ·Q.· ·That's not within your expertise?
11· · · ·A.· ·No.
12· · · ·Q.· ·So, for instance, if you're looking at a
13· ·barrier on a parking garage, you would have no idea
14· ·within your job description or qualifications whether
15· ·that barrier actually meets the building code unless
16· ·there's something obviously wrong with it?
17· · · ·A.· ·Correct.
18· · · ·Q.· ·For instance, like when you said you looked at
19· ·the cables on the eighth floor of the Littlefield
20· ·Garage, how long did you spend looking at those cables?
21· · · ·A.· ·I spent -- I walked each side probably
22· ·20 minutes, if not less.
23· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· So in 20 minutes or less, though, you
24· ·had no expertise to be able to tell whether those
25· ·cables had been, for instance, installed properly,
YVer1f
 Troy Collins
February 20, 2019
Page 34
·1· ·true?
·2· · · ·A.· ·True.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·You had no ability to tell whether, for
·4· ·instance, those cables would actually restrain a
·5· ·vehicle that impacted them, right?
·6· · · ·A.· ·True.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·In that scenario you were looking for what, in
·8· ·your experience, you considered to be some type of
·9· ·obvious defect like you had seen up on the ninth floor?
10· · · ·A.· ·Correct.
11· · · ·Q.· ·Now, in terms of a vehicle restraint system,
12· ·although you don't know the actual specs that are
13· ·required by the building code, be it incorporated
14· ·through the city or the code itself, you do understand
15· ·the general purpose of a vehicle restraint system,
16· ·don't you?
17· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
18· · · ·Q.· ·And in a multilevel garage, it is really
19· ·common sense that you need to have a restraint system
20· ·that's going to restrain vehicles?
21· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
22· · · ·Q.· ·Because you know through your personal
23· ·experience, for instance, like the Brackenridge case
24· ·that accidents happen in garages?
25· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
34 to 37
Page 36
·1· ·understand what the building code is and what they need
·2· ·to have on their garages to protect the people that use
·3· ·them or the people that are on the street below?
·4· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Objection, form.
·5· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· It's -- it's part of what
·6· ·they submit in their site plan.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· That's right.· Whether the
·8· ·owner himself or herself knows it, the City, through
·9· ·the laws, charges them with knowing the building code.
10· ·They have to know it and comply with it.· They can
11· ·either do it themselves or they can go hire an
12· ·engineer, right?
13· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Objection, form.
14· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Right.
15· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MS. BARNES)· I mean, is it an excuse when
16· ·a building owner comes and tells you, "Gee,
17· ·Mr. Collins, I just didn't know what the building code
18· ·was"?
19· · · ·A.· ·No, it's -- it's not an excuse.· But when
20· ·they -- when they submit plans, the building officials,
21· ·the site plan reviewers, they look at the specs and
22· ·they look at what they -- they're constructing, they
23· ·tell them what they can and can't have.
24· · · ·Q.· ·Right.
25· · · ·A.· ·And that's up to the site -- commercial site

Page 35 Page 37
·1· · · ·Q.· ·And what you don't want is an accident that ·1· ·plan or residential site plan folks to look at.
·2· ·would be a low impact accident with a barrier to turn ·2· · · ·Q.· ·That's part of the permitting process, isn't
·3· ·into a high impact death or serious injury if the ·3· ·it?
·4· ·vehicle leaves a multistory building, right? ·4· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·5· · · ·A.· ·Right. ·5· · · ·Q.· ·That's why it's important for owners to get a
·6· · · ·Q.· ·And that's the purpose of having a barrier, ·6· ·permit, isn't it?
·7· ·right? ·7· · · ·A.· ·Correct.
·8· · · ·A.· ·Yes. ·8· · · ·Q.· ·That part of the permitting process also has
·9· · · ·Q.· ·And that you understand that any reasonable ·9· ·imbedded in it public safety; that is, the City,
10· ·owner and/or property manager would know they need to 10· ·through some means, is looking at what the owner is
11· ·make sure the barriers they have on multilevel garages 11· ·going to do to the property?
12· ·are safe.· Isn't that true? 12· · · ·A.· ·Correct.
13· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Objection, form. 13· · · ·Q.· ·And that's why it's important and prudent for
14· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· It's true. 14· ·an owner to make sure that if he or she does repairs or
15· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· That's not your job, per se, 15· ·changes on their property they get a permit to do that?
16· ·to make sure the owner and the property manager are 16· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
17· ·following the law and doing what they're supposed to 17· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· If it's required.
18· ·do, is it? 18· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· And whether or not it's
19· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form. 19· ·required sometimes can be complicated, true?
20· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· No. 20· · · ·A.· ·True.
21· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· That's the owner and the 21· · · ·Q.· ·And whether or not it's required is not
22· ·property manager's responsibility, isn't it? 22· ·typically a day-to-day activity that you specialize in;
23· · · ·A.· ·Yes. 23· ·isn't that true?
24· · · ·Q.· ·And at the City, do you expect that reasonably 24· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
25· ·prudent owners and property managers are going to 25· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· We -- properties that we

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Troy Collins
February 20, 2019
Page 38
·1· ·look at, they may have permits, they may not have
·2· ·permits.· Depending on when the structure was built
·3· ·requires if they have permits in the system.· Sometimes
·4· ·you won't find permits due to when a building or
·5· ·parking garage was constructed.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Okay.· Fair enough.· So
·7· ·sometimes it's an old building and there may not be a
·8· ·building permit for when it was constructed, right?
·9· · · ·A.· ·True.
10· · · ·Q.· ·But if an owner is going to take an old
11· ·building and make repairs, modifications, structural
12· ·changes to it, typically that requires a permit,
13· ·doesn't it?
14· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
15· · · ·Q.· ·Why is that?
16· · · ·A.· ·The codes change from year to year.· So within
17· ·a certain period of time or a certain period of years
18· ·they would have to -- if they make changes they would
19· ·have to go out -- if the new code requires permits they
20· ·have to go out and get permits for what they have
21· ·already constructed to what they want to construct it
22· ·to.
23· · · ·Q.· ·Now, there's a division and people in the City
24· ·that aren't you that will answer questions about
25· ·whether permits are required; isn't that true?
Page 39
·1· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·That if I'm an owner and I have an issue --
·3· ·let's say I had a building that was built in 1978 or
·4· ·'79 --
·5· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·-- and I'm going to make changes to it, if I'm
·7· ·not sure whether a permit is required, I can call the
·8· ·City, let's say, in 2016 when I'm making changes --
·9· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh.
10· · · ·Q.· ·-- and say, "City, I've got a building from
11· ·1979.· I'm making changes.· Do I need to get a permit?"
12· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
13· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
14· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· And the City will tell me
15· ·usually, if it is a period like that, like you just
16· ·discussed, '78 is when it was built, 2016 is when it's
17· ·being changed, modified, or repaired, you know the City
18· ·is going to tell me, "You need to get a permit because
19· ·you're going to have to build it according to the code
20· ·today" --
21· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
22· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Objection, form.
23· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· -- right?
24· · · ·A.· ·Correct.
25· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Now, did you know that this Littlefield
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
38 to 41
Page 40
·1· ·Garage was built in 1978, 1979?
·2· · · ·A.· ·No.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·Did anybody from the owner or the owner's
·4· ·representative ever tell you, "We know this building
·5· ·was built in '79"?
·6· · · ·A.· ·No.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·Did anybody from the owner's representative,
·8· ·Premier, or the owner ever tell you any of the history
·9· ·they knew about with the Littlefield Garage?
10· · · ·A.· ·No.
11· · · ·Q.· ·Did any of the owner's representatives,
12· ·Premier, or the owner ever tell you about the history
13· ·they knew about with the vehicle restraint system that
14· ·didn't hold Mr. O'Connor's vehicle?
15· · · ·A.· ·No.
16· · · ·Q.· ·Did any of the owner reps or the owner ever
17· ·tell you that they had had multiple people in 2014 tell
18· ·them that their vehicle restraint system violated the
19· ·building code and violated the standard of care?
20· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
21· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· No.
22· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Were any of the people that
23· ·you dealt with from Premier or the owners ever candid
24· ·enough to tell you that they had letters and e-mails
25· ·from engineers and other professionals that advised
Page 41
·1· ·them that if they were going to make repairs that
·2· ·weren't up to the standard of care or the code, the
·3· ·engineers were refusing to participate in those
·4· ·repairs?
·5· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
·6· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· No.
·7· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Objection, form.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Have you heard of that before;
·9· ·that is, when an engineer for ethical reasons tells an
10· ·owner, "What you're doing doesn't meet safety
11· ·requirements; therefore, I can't be involved in it"?
12· · · ·A.· ·I've heard it before.
13· · · ·Q.· ·In what context?
14· · · ·A.· ·I've just -- I've -- several properties that
15· ·I've worked on.· And not just garages, but structural
16· ·properties that I've worked on, some engineers refuse
17· ·to sign off on unethical work that didn't meet their
18· ·criteria.
19· · · ·Q.· ·Now, when you were out there in 2016
20· ·inspecting the failure of the barrier on the top floor
21· ·of the garage, at any time during your interaction with
22· ·the owner's representative from Premier and the owner,
23· ·did they mention to you that they were going to make a
24· ·claim against the young man that went off of the
25· ·garage?
YVer1f
 Troy Collins
February 20, 2019 42 to 45
Page 42 Page 44
·1· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form. ·1· ·please contact the development services department,"
·2· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· No. ·2· ·and it gives a phone number.· Do you see that?
·3· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Did at any time the owner or ·3· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·4· ·the owner's representative tell you about other letters ·4· · · ·Q.· ·It's under "Notes" under "Violation Type"?
·5· ·they had gotten from an engineer that they didn't ·5· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·6· ·provide to you? ·6· · · ·Q.· ·Now, in your testimony earlier you testified
·7· · · ·A.· ·No. ·7· ·that you orally indicated to the owner's
·8· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form. ·8· ·representative, Premier, that a permit was going to be
·9· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Did the owner's rep or the ·9· ·required in order to do repairs.· Do you recall that
10· ·owner tell you that they had been specifically advised 10· ·testimony?
11· ·by a structural engineer that they needed to hire a 11· · · ·A.· ·I do.
12· ·barrier cable specialist to inspect all of the cables 12· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Objection, form.
13· ·in the building? 13· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Your paperwork doesn't say,
14· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form. 14· ·per se, a permit is required.· It says, "If the
15· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· No. 15· ·corrective action requires a permit," true?
16· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· If they had told you that, 16· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
17· ·would you have expected that the owner would have done 17· · · ·Q.· ·Now, based on what you are telling me; that
18· ·what that engineer told him to? 18· ·is, if you have a building built in 1979, you've had a
19· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form. 19· ·massive failure of the restraint system that requires
20· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Yes. 20· ·the type of repairs that were required on the
21· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Didn't you tell Ms. Barnes, 21· ·ninth floor, isn't it true that that's going to require
22· ·the fine attorney for the owner, that it was important 22· ·a building permit from the City?
23· ·for the owner to do what the engineer advised? 23· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
24· · · ·A.· ·Yes. 24· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Objection, form.
25· · · ·Q.· ·And isn't that, in part, why you closed your 25· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Now -- at -- at the point

Page 43
·1· ·file, is because you felt like this owner and the
·2· ·owner's representative had represented to you, as an
·3· ·officer of the City of Austin, that they had done what
·4· ·the engineer said to make the garage safe?
·5· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·6· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Objection, form.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· If you had known that the
·8· ·owner and the owner's representative specifically
·9· ·disregarded the advice of a structural engineer about
10· ·inspection of the cables and inspection of the entire
11· ·building, would you have cleared your file?
12· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Objection, form.
13· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
14· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· No.
15· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Why not?
16· · · ·A.· ·It would have -- it would have put us in more
17· ·of an in-depth inspection of the building, the parking
18· ·garage itself, floor to floor.
19· · · ·Q.· ·Now, I was looking at your file, and in the
20· ·letter, the notice of violation that was sent, there's
21· ·an admonition that says something to the effect of --
22· ·and let me give you your file back.· It's on the cover
23· ·letter.· It says -- I think it's under the -- I'm not
24· ·sure what page you have there, but it says, "If the
25· ·corrective action requires a permit or demolition,
Page 45
·1· ·of my inspection, it was told that a permit was not
·2· ·required.· After the fact a permit was required.· After
·3· ·the case was closed, then a permit was required.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Okay.· And why is that?
·5· · · ·A.· ·I guess the building officials deemed that
·6· ·prior to this last incident that a permit should have
·7· ·been required from the first incident.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·So somebody at the City who looked at this
·9· ·scenario agreed with your oral admonition to the people
10· ·they needed to have a building permit; is that right?
11· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
12· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Objection, form.
13· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Correct.
14· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· But when you closed the file,
15· ·it sounds like you testified that for some reason you
16· ·had an error that indicated a permit wasn't necessary?
17· · · ·A.· ·Correct.· I testified that in my notes I put
18· ·"a permit was obtained."· It should have been "a permit
19· ·was not obtained due to structural engineer's letter
20· ·and report."
21· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· So if I get the sequence correct,
22· ·it's that when you were at the scene at some point you
23· ·orally indicated to the owner's representative, "You're
24· ·going to need a permit"?
25· · · ·A.· ·Correct.

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Troy Collins
February 20, 2019 46 to 49
Page 46 Page 48
·1· · · ·Q.· ·But when you closed your file you made an ·1· · · ·Q.· ·It says, "No inspection sticker on elevator.
·2· ·accidental mistake and indicated that a permit wasn't ·2· ·Elevator is broken, causing a hazard, Littlefield
·3· ·needed because you had an engineer's letter? ·3· ·Garage.· They are unwilling to replace the doors.
·4· · · ·A.· ·Correct.· And -- ·4· ·Jessica Wright, (615) 339-4937 GM."
·5· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form. ·5· · · · · · · · ·Did I read that correctly?
·6· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Go ahead. ·6· · · ·A.· ·Right.· That's the complaint information.
·7· · · ·A.· ·-- our department at the time accepted ·7· · · ·Q.· ·And so you actually, it reflects, on the 17th
·8· ·third-party engineer's letters and reports and did not ·8· ·of October were involved from the City on that
·9· ·have to get a building permit for it. ·9· ·complaint.· Is that accurate?
10· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Now, regardless of whether or not a 10· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
11· ·permit was required, clearly the owner needed to comply 11· · · ·Q.· ·Now, when you were out there in 2014, did
12· ·with the building code? 12· ·anybody from either Premier Parking, Ms. Wright, or the
13· · · ·A.· ·Yes. 13· ·owner at the time, did they indicate to you that they
14· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Objection, form. 14· ·had undertaken extensive repairs on the vehicle barrier
15· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· And regardless of whether or 15· ·system at the summertime leading up to the time you
16· ·not orally or in writing you indicated to the owner 16· ·were out there for the elevator?
17· ·that a permit was required, at a minimum you can agree 17· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Objection, form.
18· ·that the owner should have complied with the building 18· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· No.
19· ·code? 19· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· And you weren't out there to
20· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form. 20· ·inspect whatever it is they did; isn't that true?
21· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Yes. 21· · · ·A.· ·True.
22· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· And I think also you can agree 22· · · ·Q.· ·You had no idea the extent, the expertise, the
23· ·that the owner needed to comply with whatever the 23· ·lack of expertise, the revisions, whatever it is they
24· ·structural engineer was indicating should be done to 24· ·had done.· In 2014 nobody told you about that, did
25· ·make sure the premises was safe? 25· ·they?

Page 47
·1· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·Now, I noticed in the City file that a couple
·3· ·years before the O'Connor incident; that is, in 2014,
·4· ·you actually were out at the Littlefield Garage for
·5· ·some type of complaint investigation regarding the
·6· ·elevator.· Do you remember that?
·7· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·What was that about?
·9· · · ·A.· ·The elevator -- we don't inspect elevators.
10· ·That's a state inspection.· We get -- we get complaints
11· ·and we have to go out to look at a complaint.· We have
12· ·no knowledge or information about elevators, but I had
13· ·to make the location.
14· · · ·Q.· ·And in the records it indicates you dealt with
15· ·the owner's representative, a woman named
16· ·Jessica Wright.· Do you remember that?
17· · · ·A.· ·The name doesn't ring -- ring a bell.
18· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· If we looked at, for instance, the City
19· ·records in the exhibit book that's there in front of
20· ·you and it has a note from you that says -- it's on
21· ·Page 1475.· Actually, it's 1479.· See 1479 there?
22· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
23· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· That's October of 2014, October 10th of
24· ·2014.· Do you see that?
25· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
Page 49
·1· · · ·A.· ·No.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·And even though you were on the premises as a
·3· ·code person for the City of Austin, that wasn't part of
·4· ·what you were inspecting or looking for, is it?
·5· · · ·A.· ·Correct.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·That would be an example of the City of Austin
·7· ·and you, Mr. Collins, relying upon an owner to do
·8· ·what's right, to follow the law and the code; isn't
·9· ·that true?
10· · · ·A.· ·True.
11· · · ·Q.· ·Now, even then after Mr. O'Connor's incident,
12· ·did anybody ever indicate to you that being from
13· ·Premier or from the owner that they had gotten an
14· ·unqualified, unlicensed cable dock guy from Lake Travis
15· ·to do modifications to the vehicle barrier system in
16· ·2014?
17· · · ·A.· ·No.
18· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
19· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Objection, form.
20· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· If they had been honest and
21· ·told you that, what would you have done?
22· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection form.
23· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Objection, form.
24· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· We mainly would have asked
25· ·basic qualifications, for one.· And once it got signed

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Troy Collins
February 20, 2019
Page 50
·1· ·off from the engineer, you know, did they meet all the ·1· ·right?
·2· ·criterias that was necessary from the engineer?
·3· · · ·Q.· ·What if they told you, Mr. Collins, that they
·4· ·didn't get an engineer to do the repairs in 2014?· Is
·5· ·that a red flag to you?
·6· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·Why?
·8· · · ·A.· ·Basically you're falsifying documentation.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·In what way?
10· · · ·A.· ·You've -- you have a sealed letter from an
11· ·engineer that's been stamped by an engineer that they
12· ·went out -- that this particular engineer went out and
13· ·did a thorough inspection.· If that engineer did not do
14· ·a thorough inspection and they just forged his name or
15· ·signed off on it, then that engineer is still liable
16· ·and can be held responsible and probably even their
17· ·license get -- get pulled.
18· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Object to the
19· ·nonresponsiveness.
20· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Object to the nonresponsive
21· ·portion.
22· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· What engineer's letter are you
23· ·referring to that's stamped, the one that was given to
24· ·you in 2016?
25· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
Page 51
·1· · · ·Q.· ·When that was given to you, what was
·2· ·represented to you in your understanding by that
·3· ·letter?
·4· · · ·A.· ·That the company had done everything that
·5· ·needed to be done by the engineer, the engineer passed
·6· ·off, signed it, and okayed it.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And let me show you what we've marked
·8· ·in this case as a previous exhibit.· Okay?· And it is
·9· ·Exhibit 28.· All right?· And I'm putting it up here on
10· ·the board for you.· All right?
11· · · · · · · · ·The engineer -- hold on.· Stand by.· Let
12· ·me get -- it's a different exhibit.
13· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Let's go off the record for
14· ·one second.
15· · · · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· We're off at 11:14.
16· · · · · · · · · · · (Off the record.)
17· · · · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Back on the record,
18· ·11:16.
19· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Now, in your documents that
20· ·you brought with you today, you and I have been
21· ·visiting about the engineer's letter that was provided
22· ·to you, right?
23· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
24· · · ·Q.· ·And that based on that letter your testimony
25· ·is, you closed the file without any further action,
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
50 to 53
Page 52
·2· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·And that letter is on the letterhead of
·4· ·MJ Structures, is it not?
·5· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·And it's stamped by a professional engineer?
·7· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·And that was important to you, wasn't it?
·9· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
10· · · ·Q.· ·Why?
11· · · ·A.· ·The stamp itself seals that this engineer
12· ·actually went out and did the inspection.
13· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And what else were you understanding
14· ·that that was representing to you?
15· · · ·A.· ·That everything came back -- the engineer
16· ·stated that everything came back and cleared everything
17· ·and everything was fine.
18· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· Now, let me show you what we've
19· ·marked as Exhibit 8 in this case.· I have it up on the
20· ·screen.· You see that that's a letter from
21· ·MJ Structures --
22· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
23· · · ·Q.· ·-- that's dated September 10th of 2016?
24· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
25· · · ·Q.· ·This letter wasn't provided to you, was it?
Page 53
·1· · · ·A.· ·No.
·2· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· This letter was never orally
·4· ·told to you, like nobody from the owner's rep or the
·5· ·owner ever said, "Hey, you know, we got another stamped
·6· ·letter regarding the garage that we haven't provided to
·7· ·you"?
·8· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
·9· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· No.
10· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· You would expect that they
11· ·would have given it to you to be fair and honest,
12· ·wouldn't you, sir?
13· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
14· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I would expect the engineer
15· ·letter, that they present to me that -- what was done
16· ·correctly.
17· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Okay.· Now, for instance, if
18· ·we look at Exhibit 8, okay, you see on Exhibit 8 where
19· ·it says, "The barrier cables at all of the levels below
20· ·where the vehicle was suspended appear to be intact and
21· ·anchored.· These should be reviewed more closely by a
22· ·barrier cable installer and adjusted as needed."
23· · · · · · · · ·Do you see that?
24· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
25· · · ·Q.· ·Did the owner or owner's rep ever tell you
YVer1f
 Troy Collins
February 20, 2019
Page 54
·1· ·that the engineer had told them they needed to do that; ·1· ·investigation should be performed to identify the full
·2· ·that is, review the cables more closely? ·2· ·nature of damage and repairs required"?
·3· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Objection, form.
·4· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Form.
·5· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· No.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Do you know what back
·7· ·stressing is?
·8· · · ·A.· ·No.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· So, for instance, even if you had
10· ·looked at the cables given your job description and
11· ·level of expertise, you would have no idea to look to
12· ·whether or not the cables, for instance, had been back
13· ·stressed?
14· · · ·A.· ·Correct.
15· · · ·Q.· ·I mean, you would agree that it's important
16· ·for the cables to be able to hold a vehicle to the
17· ·standard of care and the code, right?
18· · · ·A.· ·Right.
19· · · ·Q.· ·Certain amount of force, they need to hold
20· ·that vehicle?
21· · · ·A.· ·Correct.
22· · · ·Q.· ·Now, whether or not those cables that didn't
23· ·hold Mr. O'Conner's vehicle were up to code or not, you
24· ·never made a determination of, did you?
25· · · ·A.· ·No.
Page 55
·1· · · ·Q.· ·You relied on the engineer and the owner to do
·2· ·that?
·3· · · ·A.· ·Correct.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·And the engineer and the owner should have
·5· ·been the ones to determine not only those cables, but
·6· ·the other cables in the garage, met the law and the
·7· ·standard of care?
·8· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
·9· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Objection, form.
10· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Correct.
11· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Now, let me show you another
12· ·portion of the letter that wasn't given to you.
13· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
14· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Third time is a charm here,
15· ·Mr. Collins.· Taking bets on whether I can cull it out.
16· ·Here we go.
17· · · · · · · · ·Let me show you another portion,
18· ·Mr. Collins, of the leather that wasn't given to you.
19· ·Do you see where it says, "This evaluation is
20· ·preliminary in nature and limited to visual
21· ·observations"?
22· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
23· · · ·Q.· ·Was that ever disclosed to you?
24· · · ·A.· ·No.
25· · · ·Q.· ·Do you see where it says, "A more thorough
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
54 to 57
Page 56
·3· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·Was that ever disclosed to you?
·5· · · ·A.· ·No.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·Was it ever disclosed to you that the owner
·7· ·didn't actually do a more thorough investigation of the
·8· ·cable barrier system until after Ms. Bowmer was hurt?
·9· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
10· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· No.
11· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Now, you have been involved in
12· ·the code department in Austin for about 14 years; is
13· ·that right?
14· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
15· · · ·Q.· ·Have you ever had another instance where an
16· ·owner and an owner's representative had multiple
17· ·engineering letters, but only a partial portion of the
18· ·letter was given to you?
19· · · ·A.· ·No.
20· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
21· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Objection, form.
22· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· I'm sorry.· What was your
23· ·answer?
24· · · ·A.· ·No.
25· · · ·Q.· ·Now, as part of your response to the O'Conner
Page 57
·1· ·incident in 2016, did you do an inspection of the
·2· ·entire cable barrier system to see if it met the code?
·3· · · ·A.· ·No.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·Mr. Collins, thank you for the time.· That's
·5· ·all the questions I have for right now.
·6· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· I get to go last,
·7· ·Mr. Collins.
·8· · · · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Let's get a
·9· ·microphone.
10· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Oh, sorry.
11· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· See if I can do this without
12· ·looking.· Hey, can you help me?
13· · · · · · · · · · · · ·EXAMINATION
14· ·BY MR. STARR:
15· · · ·Q.· ·My name is Paul Starr.· I represent Premier
16· ·Parking.· I have just a few questions for you.· You
17· ·mentioned that the name Christina Murray sounded
18· ·familiar to you and you think you met with her,
19· ·correct?
20· · · ·A.· ·Correct.
21· · · ·Q.· ·Do you recall any conversations you had with
22· ·Ms. Murray, anything she said to you or you said to
23· ·her?
24· · · ·A.· ·Not really, not in depth.
25· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Did you meet with anyone else whom you
YVer1f
 Troy Collins
February 20, 2019
Page 58
·1· ·believe was employed by Premier Parking as far as you ·1· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Object to form.
·2· ·know?
·3· · · ·A.· ·The one -- when I made the location I met
·4· ·two females that represented the property, and I spoke
·5· ·with Ms. Murray in e-mail prior to the vehicle
·6· ·collision through the barrier.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·But as I understand it, whoever the second
·8· ·female is, you don't know her name and don't know who
·9· ·she was employed by, correct?
10· · · ·A.· ·Correct.
11· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Do you know Christina Murray's
12· ·educational background?
13· · · ·A.· ·No.
14· · · ·Q.· ·Or her training or experience?
15· · · ·A.· ·No.
16· · · ·Q.· ·As a City of Austin code compliance officer
17· ·for 14 years, you've testified you had no expertise in
18· ·determining whether the restraint system at the
19· ·Littlefield Garage met the applicable building codes,
20· ·correct?
21· · · ·A.· ·Correct.
22· · · ·Q.· ·In fact, as an Austin code compliance officer,
23· ·you weren't even sure exactly which building codes
24· ·would have applied to it, whether it was the 1976
25· ·building code when it was built or the newer ones
58 to 61
Page 60
·2· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Correct.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. STARR)· And as part of your job as an
·4· ·Austin code compliance officer, is it correct that the
·5· ·City of Austin does not have to wait until a complaint
·6· ·is made by some third party to go check out a
·7· ·commercial building or a commercial parking garage?
·8· · · ·A.· ·Say that one more time.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·Yes, sir.· You have the ability as an Austin
10· ·code compliance officer to go look at a commercial
11· ·building or a commercial parking garage even without
12· ·some third party making a complaint, correct?
13· · · ·A.· ·We typically don't unless there is a
14· ·complaint.
15· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· But you have the ability to do so if
16· ·you want to?
17· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
18· · · ·Q.· ·If you saw something dangerous or that you
19· ·believed was a safety violation, you have the ability,
20· ·and perhaps even the duty, to go investigate that,
21· ·correct?
22· · · ·A.· ·Correct.
23· · · ·Q.· ·And it's a correct statement that at no time
24· ·from 2014 up until the time of the September 2016
25· ·accident did the City of Austin code compliance folks

Page 59 Page 61
·1· ·today, right? ·1· ·ever go to the Littlefield building and notice there
·2· · · ·A.· ·Correct. ·2· ·was anything dangerous with the cable barrier system,
·3· · · ·Q.· ·And you have no reason to believe that ·3· ·correct?
·4· ·Christina Murray, or anyone from Premier Parking, had ·4· · · ·A.· ·My first location for that building was the
·5· ·any greater knowledge about building codes than you did ·5· ·elevator, not -- not the parking garage itself, just
·6· ·as a City of Austin code compliance officer, correct? ·6· ·the elevator.
·7· · · ·A.· ·Correct. ·7· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Was it the elevator within the parking
·8· · · ·Q.· ·You also testified that during any of your ·8· ·garage?
·9· ·numerous inspections in September and October of 2016, ·9· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
10· ·you did not see any dangerous conditions at the 10· · · ·Q.· ·And certainly if you had seen cables, whether
11· ·Littlefield Garage other than on the ninth floor where 11· ·internal cables or external cables, lying around or
12· ·the cables were sprawled out because a vehicle had 12· ·that looked loose or looked dangerous, even though
13· ·actually driven through it, correct? 13· ·that's not why you were there, you probably would have
14· · · ·A.· ·Correct. 14· ·noticed it and said something, right?
15· · · ·Q.· ·And that's something you were looking for as a 15· · · ·A.· ·Correct.
16· ·code compliance officer, were other dangerous 16· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Object to form.
17· ·conditions that you could write up and have them 17· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. STARR)· And you didn't, right?
18· ·correct, right? 18· · · ·A.· ·Correct.
19· · · ·A.· ·Correct. 19· · · ·Q.· ·Similarly, I think you testified in September,
20· · · ·Q.· ·Mr. Breen asked you a question before about 20· ·October 2016 that you -- you only looked at the
21· ·it's not your duty to make property owners comply with 21· ·eighth floor and the ninth floor, correct?
22· ·the law.· But, in fact, as a code compliance officer, 22· · · ·A.· ·Correct.
23· ·isn't that your -- your whole job, is to make sure 23· · · ·Q.· ·Do you recall, as we sit here today, when you
24· ·commercial business owners are in compliance with 24· ·would go to the eighth floor or the ninth floor, did
25· ·applicable building codes and standards of care? 25· ·you drive your vehicle up there?

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Troy Collins
February 20, 2019 62 to 65
Page 62 Page 64
·1· · · ·A.· ·I drove up -- I drove up to the ninth floor. ·1· · · ·A.· ·"Based on my visual assessment yesterday, the
·2· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And that was just not on one occasion, ·2· ·parking garage is safe for continued use except for
·3· ·but on numerous occasions, correct? ·3· ·area of ninth floor where barrier cables are pulled
·4· · · ·A.· ·I drove -- correct. ·4· ·free."
·5· · · ·Q.· ·And so each day that you conducted an ·5· · · ·Q.· ·And so basically, based upon that, is it your
·6· ·inspection you were driving basically, as I understand ·6· ·understanding that this structural engineer, who has
·7· ·it, the perimeter of this parking garage up Floors 1, ·7· ·observed the entire garage, much like you had, did not
·8· ·2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 to get to the top, correct? ·8· ·see any safety violations on Floors 1 through 8.
·9· · · ·A.· ·Yes. ·9· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Object to form.
10· · · ·Q.· ·And at no time during any of those 10· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Correct.
11· ·drive-alongs on your numerous inspections did you see 11· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. STARR)· Okay.· And that's similar to
12· ·anything else other than the ninth floor cables that 12· ·what you thought at the time, correct?
13· ·you believed appeared dangerous or a safety violation, 13· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
14· ·correct? 14· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Objection, form.
15· · · ·A.· ·Correct. 15· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. STARR)· Talk briefly about the permit
16· · · ·Q.· ·And the ninth floor cables were only in that 16· ·issue.· I believe you've testified several times that
17· ·manner because a car had driven through them and they 17· ·because there was an engineer's letter and an
18· ·were waiting to get repaired, right? 18· ·inspection performed by a structural engineer, the City
19· · · ·A.· ·Correct. 19· ·of Austin did not require a building permit for these
20· · · ·Q.· ·And, again, if you had seen, whether they were 20· ·repairs to the ninth floor of the Littlefield Garage,
21· ·internal cables or external cables, that you deemed 21· ·correct?
22· ·were loose or hanging down or, for some reason, not 22· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Object to form, object to
23· ·safe during any of those drive-throughs, you had the 23· ·sidebar.
24· ·ability, and even the duty, to say something, right? 24· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Correct.
25· · · ·A.· ·Correct. 25· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. STARR)· And your belief in that regard

Page 63
·1· · · ·Q.· ·And nobody from the owner or from Premier ever
·2· ·prohibited you from inspecting any floor of the parking
·3· ·garage you wanted to, right?
·4· · · ·A.· ·Right.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·Were you present during any of the inspections
·6· ·made by the structural engineer, MJ Structures?
·7· · · ·A.· ·No.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·I guess -- I assume you did not in any way
·9· ·limit MJ Structures' inspection of the garage to just
10· ·the ninth floor, right?
11· · · ·A.· ·Correct.
12· · · ·Q.· ·And you're not aware of anything done by the
13· ·owner or by Premier which would have limited the
14· ·engineer's inspection to just the ninth floor, correct?
15· · · ·A.· ·Correct.
16· · · ·Q.· ·And Mr. Breen showed you -- I think it was
17· ·Exhibit 8, which is a September 10th, 2016 letter from
18· ·MJ Structures.
19· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
20· · · ·Q.· ·And he pointed out various sentences in there
21· ·and highlighted them.· Do you remember that?
22· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
23· · · ·Q.· ·Could you read on Page 2 of 2 the first
24· ·sentence of the third paragraph here, beginning with
25· ·the word "based"?
Page 65
·1· ·that no permit was necessary because there was an
·2· ·engineering letter is based upon your 14 years of
·3· ·experience working for the City of Austin code
·4· ·compliance department, correct?
·5· · · ·A.· ·Correct.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·That's the way, at least for 14 years, that
·7· ·the City of Austin did it, right?
·8· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Object to form.
·9· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Correct.
10· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. STARR)· If there is an engineering
11· ·letter and inspection by a structural engineer, no
12· ·permit was necessary, right?
13· · · ·A.· ·Correct.
14· · · ·Q.· ·And you can argue about whether or not the
15· ·building permit should have been pulled because it
16· ·might have been a good idea, but you're saying there
17· ·was no legal requirement from the City of Austin that a
18· ·building permit be pulled for these repairs, correct?
19· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Object to form.
20· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Correct.
21· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Okay.· I will pass the
22· ·witness.
23· · · · · · · · ·Thank you, sir.
24· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· I just have a couple more,
25· ·if you can give me the mic.

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Troy Collins
February 20, 2019
Page 66
·1· · · · · · · · · · ·FURTHER EXAMINATION
·2· ·BY MS. BARNES:
·3· · · ·Q.· ·Mr. Collins, I want to clarify your testimony.
·4· ·This is Exhibit 90 where you talked about you made an
·5· ·error on the entry on October 27th, 2016.· And do you
·6· ·recall the testimony about your error?
·7· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And my understanding was, it says,
·9· ·"Permit was pulled."· And the error that you made was
10· ·it should have said, "Permit was not pulled"; is that
11· ·correct?
12· · · ·A.· ·Correct.
13· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· With regard to the engineering report
14· ·that was required in order to close this violation, you
15· ·specifically asked for the repair to the damaged area
16· ·to be certified by an engineer, correct?
17· · · ·A.· ·Correct.
18· · · ·Q.· ·And that's all you asked for, right?
19· · · ·A.· ·Correct.
20· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· So this letter -- I'm not sure what we
21· ·marked it as -- the September 28th, 2016, letter from
22· ·Richard Martin --
23· · · ·A.· ·Uh-huh.
24· · · ·Q.· ·-- at MJ Structures --
25· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
Page 67
·1· · · ·Q.· ·-- this letter is very specific and says,
·2· ·"Contractor was hired.· We replaced the cables and
·3· ·anchors.· I'm a licensed engineer.· I certify that this
·4· ·was done in accordance with the requirements of the
·5· ·structural specifications and meets the requirements of
·6· ·the applicable laws, building codes, and ordinances,"
·7· ·correct?
·8· · · ·A.· ·Correct.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·That's what you asked for, right?
10· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
11· · · ·Q.· ·You didn't ask for an entire structural
12· ·assessment of the entire garage.· Is that true?
13· · · ·A.· ·Correct.
14· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· That's all I have.· Thank you.
15· · · · · · · · · · ·FURTHER EXAMINATION
16· ·BY MR. BREEN:
17· · · ·Q.· ·Let me show you from Exhibit 61, Mr. Collins,
18· ·the repairs that were done to the garage in 2014 before
19· ·you were out there that weren't disclosed to you, there
20· ·was a communication to the people at Premier, the
21· ·representative of the owner, from a group, including an
22· ·engineer that they walked the premises with, to inspect
23· ·the cable barrier system.· Okay?
24· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
25· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Objection, form.
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
66 to 69
Page 68
·1· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· 61 was a note that Structural
·2· ·Technologies, VSL, sent back to -- do you see up there
·3· ·Jessica Wright at Premier Parking --
·4· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·-- copied Bob at Premier?
·6· · · ·A.· ·That's not being shown.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.
·8· · · ·A.· ·All right.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·Do you see it there?
10· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.
11· · · ·Q.· ·Bob at Premier?· And then Mr. Sees is an
12· ·engineer from Structural Technologies.· This note here,
13· ·Exhibit 61, in it where these experts tell the owner's
14· ·representative that the current condition of the cable
15· ·system wouldn't comply with today's standards, did
16· ·anybody from Premier ever indicate to you that that had
17· ·been told to them in 2014?
18· · · ·A.· ·No.
19· · · ·Q.· ·It says, "In order to repair only those cables
20· ·that are laying on the ground or missing altogether,
21· ·modifications would need to be made."
22· · · · · · · · ·Now, you saw cables laying on the ground
23· ·after Mr. O'Conner's incident or laying off the side of
24· ·the garage, right?
25· · · ·A.· ·Correct.
Page 69
·1· · · ·Q.· ·So modifications were going to have to be
·2· ·made?
·3· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·Now, in this note, it says, "Modifications
·5· ·cannot be made to a system out of compliance without
·6· ·bringing the whole system up to code."
·7· · · · · · · · ·That's your understanding, and what you
·8· ·indicated to the jury earlier in your experience is, in
·9· ·an older building if you're making modifications,
10· ·safety and compliance with the code means you've got to
11· ·bring it up to the code that's in effect at the time?
12· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Objection, form.
13· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Correct.
14· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· And did anybody from Premier
15· ·ever indicate to you that they knew that as of 2014?
16· · · ·A.· ·No.
17· · · ·Q.· ·Would you have expected them to be honest and
18· ·tell you that they knew they needed to bring it up to
19· ·code?
20· · · ·A.· ·If --
21· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Objection, form.
22· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· If they knew, yes.
23· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Now, it says, "Knowing the
24· ·severity of the garage current condition, VSL will not
25· ·be able to perform your requested modifications.
YVer1f
 Troy Collins
February 20, 2019
Page 70
·1· ·Should you and your team reconsider bringing the
·2· ·barrier cable system up to code, in turn, making your
·3· ·garage safe, please let us know."
·4· · · · · · · · ·Did anybody from Premier ever indicate to
·5· ·you that they had been specifically advised they needed
·6· ·to bring the garage up to code in order to make it
·7· ·safe?
·8· · · ·A.· ·No.
·9· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Objection, form.
10· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Would you have expected in
11· ·your interactions with them, given the fact that
12· ·Mr. O'Conner narrowly escaped death when the cable
13· ·system failed, that they would have told you, "You know
14· ·what?· We know this from 2014"?
15· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Objection, form.
16· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Yes.
17· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Thank you, Mr. Collins.
18· ·That's all I have.
19· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· I have a quick question.
20· · · · · · · · · · ·FURTHER EXAMINATION
21· ·BY MR. STARR:
22· · · ·Q.· ·There was some discussion about modifications.
23· ·When modifications or changes are made to an older
24· ·building, then it's your understanding it needs to be
25· ·brought up to current code, correct?
70 to 73
Page 72
·1· · · ·Q.· ·And is it your understanding, based upon the
·2· ·September 28th, 2016 letter from MJ Structures, that
·3· ·they were certifying the ninth floor section had been
·4· ·brought up to code?
·5· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Is it a true statement that -- let's
·7· ·assume a building is built in 1978.· Building codes
·8· ·change every couple years, correct?
·9· · · ·A.· ·Correct.
10· · · ·Q.· ·It is not a requirement, as you understand it,
11· ·that once a building is constructed that every
12· ·two years when a new building code comes out, the owner
13· ·of that building has to go make structural renovations
14· ·to its building simply because a new building code came
15· ·out, correct?
16· · · ·A.· ·Correct.
17· · · ·Q.· ·Instead, the building code you have to meet is
18· ·typically the one that was in effect at the time you
19· ·originally constructed your building.· Is that your
20· ·understanding?
21· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Object to form.
22· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Yes.
23· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Okay.· All right, sir.
24· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Nothing further.
25· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Thank you so much,

Page 71 Page 73
·1· · · ·A.· ·Yes. ·1· ·Mr. Collins, for your time.· That's it.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·As far as you know, are there situations where ·2· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Thank you.
·3· ·repairs are made to an older building -- and I'm using ·3· · · · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· We're off the record,
·4· ·that word differently than modifications, but repairs ·4· ·11:40.
·5· ·are being made where it is okay to basically use the ·5· · · · · · (Proceedings concluded at 11:40 a.m.)
·6· ·code that was in effect at the time of original ·6
·7· ·construction, or do you know? ·7
·8· · · ·A.· ·Yes.· From my experience, you -- they have -- ·8
·9· ·folks have repaired the section that was damaged ·9
10· ·instead of a whole portion of a -- of a structure to 10
11· ·bring that up to code. 11
12· · · ·Q.· ·I'm not sure I understand that.· So if you are 12
13· ·simply repairing a small section -- 13
14· · · ·A.· ·Right. 14
15· · · ·Q.· ·-- is it -- is it your understanding that you 15
16· ·do not have to bring the entire structure up to current 16
17· ·day code? 17
18· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Object to form. 18
19· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· You would have to bring 19
20· ·that section that you're repairing up to code. 20
21· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. STARR)· Okay. 21
22· · · ·A.· ·You -- you don't have to -- if the other 22
23· ·sections aren't damaged, you don't -- and you're not 23
24· ·repairing those, you don't have to bring that to code. 24
25· ·But you do have to bring that portion up to code. 25

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Troy Collins
February 20, 2019
Page 74
·1· · · · · · · · · · CHANGES AND SIGNATURE
· · ·WITNESS NAME: TROY COLLINS
·2· ·DATE OF DEPOSITION: FEBRUARY 20, 2019
·3· ·PAGE· ·LINE· · · · · · ·CHANGE· · · · · · REASON
·4· ·_______________________________________________________
·5· ·_______________________________________________________
·6· ·_______________________________________________________
·7· ·_______________________________________________________
·8· ·_______________________________________________________
·9· ·_______________________________________________________
10· ·_______________________________________________________
11· ·_______________________________________________________
12· ·_______________________________________________________
13· ·_______________________________________________________
14· ·_______________________________________________________
15· ·_______________________________________________________
16· ·_______________________________________________________
17· ·_______________________________________________________
18· ·_______________________________________________________
19· ·_______________________________________________________
20· ·_______________________________________________________
21· ·_______________________________________________________
22· ·_______________________________________________________
23· ·_______________________________________________________
24· ·_______________________________________________________
25· ·_______________________________________________________
Page 75
·1· ·_______________________________________________________
·2· ·_______________________________________________________
·3· ·_______________________________________________________
·4· · · · · · I, TROY COLLINS, have read the foregoing
· · ·deposition and hereby affix my signature that same is
·5· ·true and correct, except as noted above.
·6
·7
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·_______________________________
·8· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·TROY COLLINS
·9
10· ·THE STATE OF __________)
· · ·COUNTY OF _____________)
11
12· · · ·Before me, ___________________________, on this day
13· ·personally appeared TROY COLLINS, known to me (or
14· ·proved to me under oath or through
15· ·___________________________) (description of identity
16· ·card or other document) to be the person whose name is
17· ·subscribed to the foregoing instrument and acknowledged
18· ·to me that they executed the same for the purposes and
19· ·consideration therein expressed.
20· · · ·Given under my hand and seal of office this
21· ·__________ day of ________________________, __________.
22
23
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·_______________________________
24· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·THE STATE OF___________________
25· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·COMMISSION EXPIRES:____________
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
74 to 77
Page 76
·1· · · · · · · · · · ·NO. D-1-GN-17-004456
·2· ·CHRISTI J. BOWMER,· · · · ·) IN THE DISTRICT COURT
· · · · ·Plaintiff,· · · · · · ·)
·3· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · )
· · ·VS.· · · · · · · · · · · · ) TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS
·4· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · )
· · ·GTT PARKING, LP, SHELDON· ·)
·5· ·DAVID KAHN, PREMIER· · · · )
· · ·PARKING OF TENNESSEE,· · · )
·6· ·LLC, and WEITZMAN· · · · · )
· · ·MANAGEMENT CORPORATION,· · )
·7· · · ·Defendants.· · · · · · ) 353RD JUDICIAL DISTRICT
·8
· · · · · · · · · · ·REPORTER'S CERTIFICATION
·9· · · · · · · ORAL AND VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF
· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·TROY COLLINS
10· · · · · · · · · · · FEBRUARY 20, 2019
11· · · ·I, KIM SEIBERT, Certified Shorthand Reporter in and
12· ·for the State of Texas, hereby certify to the
13· ·following:
14· · · ·That the witness, TROY COLLINS, was duly sworn by
15· ·the officer and that the transcript of the oral
16· ·deposition is a true record of the testimony given by
17· ·the witness;
18· · · ·That the deposition transcript was submitted on
19· ·_______________, 2019, to the witness or to the
20· ·attorney for the witness for examination, signature and
21· ·return to me by _________________, 2019;
22· · · ·That the amount of time used by each party at the
23· ·deposition is as follows:
24
25
Page 77
·1· · · ·Mr. Sean E. Breen - 33 min.
· · · · ·Ms. Tasha Barnes - 34 min.
·2· · · ·Mr. Paul B. Starr - 13 min.
· · · · ·Ms. Patricia Link -
·3
·4· · · ·That pursuant to information given to the
·5· ·deposition officer at the time said testimony was
·6· ·taken, the following includes counsel for all parties
·7· ·of record:
·8· · · ·Mr. Sean E. Breen, Attorney for Plaintiff;
· · · · ·Ms. Tasha Barnes, Attorney for Defendants GTT
·9· ·Parking, LP, Sheldon David Kahn;
· · · · ·Mr. Paul B. Starr, Attorney for Defendant Premier
10· ·Parking of Tennessee, LLC;
· · · · ·Ms. Patricia Link, Attorney for Witness.
11
12· · · ·I further certify that I am neither counsel for,
13· ·related to, nor employed by any of the parties or
14· ·attorneys in the action in which this proceeding was
15· ·taken, and further that I am not financially or
16· ·otherwise interested in the outcome of the action.
17· · · ·Further certification requirements pursuant to Rule
18· ·203 of TRCP will be certified to after they have
19· ·occurred.
20
21
22
23
24
25
 Troy Collins
February 20, 2019 78 to 79
Page 78
·1· · · ·Certified to by me this ______ of _____________,
·2· ·2019.
·3
·4
·5
·6
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · Kim Seibert, Texas CSR 4589
·7· · · · · · · · · · · · · Expiration Date 12-31-2021
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · U.S. Legal Support, Inc.
·8· · · · · · · · · · · · · 701 Brazos, Suite 380
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · Austin, Texas· 78701
·9· · · · · · · · · · · · · Firm Registration 10558
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · Expiration Date 12-31-2021
10
11· ·Job No. 4-AUSTIN 285637 KS
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

Page 79
·1· · · · · FURTHER CERTIFICATION UNDER RULE 203 TRCP
·2· · · ·The original deposition was/was not returned to the
·3· ·deposition officer on _________________________;
·4· · · ·If returned, the attached Changes and Signature
·5· ·page contains any changes and the reasons therefor;
·6· · · ·If returned, the original deposition was delivered
·7· ·to Ms. Tasha Barnes, Custodial Attorney;
·8· · · ·That $__________ is the deposition officer's
·9· ·charges to the Defendants for preparing the original
10· ·deposition transcript and any copies of exhibits;
11· · · ·That the deposition was delivered in accordance
12· ·with Rule 203.3, and that a copy of this certificate
13· ·was served on all parties shown herein on and filed
14· ·with the Clerk.
15· · · ·Certified to by me this __________ day of
16· ·____________________, 2019.
17
18
19
· · · · · · · · · ·Kim Seibert, Texas CSR 4589
20· · · · · · · · ·Expiration Date 12-31-2021
· · · · · · · · · ·U.S. Legal Support, Inc.
21· · · · · · · · ·701 Brazos, Suite 380
· · · · · · · · · ·Austin, Texas· 78701
22· · · · · · · · ·Firm Registration 10558
· · · · · · · · · ·Expiration Date 12-31-2021
23
24
· · ·Job No. 4-AUSTIN 285637 KS
25

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100
Exhibit BB
 John Hale
February 20, 2019 1
Page 1
·1· · · · · · · · · · ·NO. D-1-GN-17-004456

·2· ·CHRISTI J. BOWMER,· · · · ·) IN THE DISTRICT COURT

· · · · ·Plaintiff,· · · · · · ·)
·3· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · )
· · ·VS.· · · · · · · · · · · · ) TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS
·4· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · )
· · ·GTT PARKING, LP, SHELDON· ·)
·5· ·DAVID KAHN, PREMIER· · · · )
· · ·PARKING OF TENNESSEE,· · · )
·6· ·LLC, and WEITZMAN· · · · · )
· · ·MANAGEMENT CORPORATION,· · )
·7· · · ·Defendants.· · · · · · ) 353RD JUDICIAL DISTRICT

·8

·9
· · · · **************************************************
10· · · · · · · ORAL AND VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF

11· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·JOHN HALE

12· · · · · · · · · · · FEBRUARY 20, 2019

· · · · *************************************************
13

14· · · ·ORAL AND VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF JOHN HALE,

15· ·produced as a witness at the instance of the Plaintiff,

16· ·and duly sworn, was taken in the above-styled and

17· ·numbered cause on February 20, 2019, from 1:22 p.m. to

18· ·3:26 p.m., before Kim Seibert, CSR in and for the State

19· ·of Texas, reported by machine shorthand, at the law

20· ·offices of THOMPSON, COE, COUSINS & IRONS, LLP,

21· ·701 Brazos Street, Suite 1500, Austin, Texas, pursuant

22· ·to the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure and the

23· ·provisions stated on the record or attached hereto.

24

25

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100
 John Hale
February 20, 2019 2 to 5
Page 2 Page 4
·1· · · · · · · · · · A P P E A R A N C E S ·1· · · · · · · · · · · · · · INDEX
·2 ·2· · Appearances.....................................· · 2
·3· ·FOR THE PLAINTIFF: ·3
· · · · ·Mr. Sean E. Breen
·4· ·JOHN HALE
·4· · · ·HOWRY BREEN & HERMAN, LLP
· · · · ·1900 Pearl Street ·5
·5· · · ·Austin, Texas 78705-5408 · · · Examination by Mr. Breen........................· · 5
· · · · ·(512) 474-7300 ·6· · Examination by Ms. Barnes.......................· ·84
·6· · · ·sbreen@howrybreen.com · · · Examination by Mr. Starr........................· ·91
·7 ·7· · Further Examination by Mr. Breen................· ·98
· · ·FOR THE DEFENDANTS GTT PARKING, LP, SHELDON DAVID KAHN:
· · · Further Examination by Ms. Barnes...............· 102
·8· · · ·Ms. Tasha Barnes
· · · · ·THOMPSON, COE, COUSINS & IRONS, LLP ·8
·9· · · ·701 Brazos · · · Witness' Signature Page.........................· 105
· · · · ·Suite 1500 ·9· · Reporter's Certificate..........................· 107
10· · · ·Austin, Texas 78701 10
· · · · ·(512) 708-8200 11· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·EXHIBITS
11· · · ·tbarnes@thompsoncoe.com
12· ·NUMBER· · · · · DESCRIPTION· · · · · · · · · · · · PAGE
12
· · ·FOR THE DEFENDANT PREMIER PARKING OF TENNESSEE, LLC: 13· · Exhibit 96· · ................................· · ·13
13· · · ·Mr. Paul Byron Starr · · · · · · · · · · Printout from the Code
· · · · ·GERMER BEAMAN & BROWN, PLLC 14· · · · · · · · · Department Website as
14· · · ·301 Congress Avenue · · · · · · · · · · of June of 2018
· · · · ·Suite 1700 15· · Exhibit 97· · ................................· · ·26
15· · · ·Austin, Texas 78701
· · · · · · · · · · Case Documentation
· · · · ·(512) 471-0288
16· · · ·pstarr@germer-austin.com 16· · Exhibit 98· · ................................· · ·26
17 · · · · · · · · · · Correspondence
· · ·FOR THE WITNESS: 17· · Exhibit 99· · ................................· · ·35
18· · · ·Mr. Brandon W. Carr · · · · · · · · · · Notice of Violation Letters
· · · · ·CITY OF AUSTIN LAW DEPARTMENT 18· · · · · · · · · With Regard to the
19· · · ·Assistant City Attorney
· · · · · · · · · · Littlefield Garage from
· · · · ·301 West 2nd Street
20· · · ·Box 1546 19· · · · · · · · · September 15 of 2016
· · · · ·Austin, Texas 78767-1546 · · · · · · · · · · through the Bowmer
21· · · ·(512) 974-2181 20· · · · · · · · · Incident
· · · · ·brandon.carr@austintexas.gov 21
22 22
23· ·ALSO PRESENT:
23
· · · · ·Brent Kirby - Videographer
24 24
25 25

Page 3 Page 5
·1· ·REPORTED BY: ·1· · · · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Stand by.· This is the
· · · · ·Kim Seibert, CSR, RPR
·2· ·videotaped oral deposition of John Hale.· Today's date,
·2· · · ·U.S. Legal Support, Inc.
·3· ·February 20th, 2019.· Approximate time, 1:22 p.m.
· · · · ·Austin Centre
·3· · · ·701 Brazos, Suite 380
·4· ·We're recording and on the record.
· · · · ·Austin, Texas· 78701 ·5· · · · · · · · · · · · ·JOHN HALE,
·4· · · ·KimBowenCSR@yahoo.com ·6· · ·having been first duly sworn, testified as follows:
· · · · ·(512) 788-8627 ·7· · · · · · · · · · · · ·EXAMINATION
·5
·8· ·BY MR. BREEN:
·6
·9· · · ·Q.· ·Would you state your name for the record, sir?
·7
·8
10· · · ·A.· ·John Hale, H-a-l-e.
·9 11· · · ·Q.· ·Mr. Hale, thank you for coming here today.· My
10 12· ·name is Sean Breen.· I represent Christi Bowmer
11 13· · · ·A.· ·Okay.
12 14· · · ·Q.· ·Ms. Bowmer was injured when her car went off
15· ·the seventh floor of the Littlefield Garage and she has
13
14
16· ·a lawsuit pending here in Travis County.
15
16 17· · · ·A.· ·Okay.
17 18· · · ·Q.· ·Do you understand who I am and who I
18 19· ·represent?
19 20· · · ·A.· ·Yeah, yeah.· Yes, sir.
20
21· · · ·Q.· ·Before today in this deposition you and I have
21
22· ·never visited before.· Is that true?
22
23
23· · · ·A.· ·Well, yes.· We've never met.
24 24· · · ·Q.· ·Yeah, exactly.
25 25· · · ·A.· ·Okay.

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 John Hale
February 20, 2019
Page 6
·1· · · ·Q.· ·In other words, the first time you and I met
·2· ·is when you sat down here to give your depo?
·3· · · ·A.· ·That is correct.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·And I haven't visited with you and -- you may
·5· ·have visited with other people, but it wasn't me?
·6· · · ·A.· ·Yeah, I have not visited with you.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·The deposition process is one in which you've
·8· ·got to let the person who's asking the question finish,
·9· ·and then we let you answer.· Okay?
10· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
11· · · ·Q.· ·And if you have a need for a break at any
12· ·time, just let us know.· We can take a break.
13· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.
14· · · ·Q.· ·If you don't understand a question, will you
15· ·let us know at the time, and then we can --
16· · · ·A.· ·Oh, yeah.
17· · · ·Q.· ·-- re-ask it?
18· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.
19· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· It takes a little practice, but if you
20· ·just let us finish first and then start your answer,
21· ·what happens is, then Kim has a really clean book --
22· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.
23· · · ·Q.· ·-- and we don't have interruptions in it.
24· ·Okay?
25· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.· That's what they actually mentioned.
Page 7
·1· ·They said, "Make sure you don't talk over people so she
·2· ·can" --
·3· · · ·Q.· ·Exactly.· She's really good, but it makes it
·4· ·hard for her.· Okay?
·5· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·After a few minutes you'll get the hang of it.
·7· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·Can you start by letting the jury know a
·9· ·little bit about your personal background, where you
10· ·grew up, and what your educational background is?
11· · · ·A.· ·My educational background is just of -- out of
12· ·high school in Leander.· I grew up in a military
13· ·family, so we lived in several different states and
14· ·cities and so forth.
15· · · ·Q.· ·And went to high school in Leander?
16· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.· Yes, sir.
17· · · ·Q.· ·Which high school out there?
18· · · ·A.· ·Well, at the time it was the only one, Leander
19· ·High School.
20· · · ·Q.· ·And what year was that?
21· · · ·A.· ·1994.
22· · · ·Q.· ·And then do you have any formal education
23· ·after high school?
24· · · ·A.· ·Just work-related training.
25· · · ·Q.· ·And when -- take me just through briefly from
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
6 to 9
Page 8
·1· ·'94 when you graduated up until you started with the
·2· ·City of Austin.
·3· · · ·A.· ·Well, right after I graduated high school I
·4· ·worked for a short time at MacFrugal's, which is now
·5· ·Big Lots over off of 183, and then I started working
·6· ·for the City of Cedar Park in February 1995.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·And what did you do for the City of Cedar
·8· ·Park?
·9· · · ·A.· ·I did animal control until June 2000.
10· · · ·Q.· ·And then in June of 2000, what did you do?
11· · · ·A.· ·I started working for the City of Round Rock.
12· ·And I did animal control for my first six months, and
13· ·then the remaining 2-1/2 years was for code
14· ·enforcement.
15· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· So from about 2000 to --
16· · · ·A.· ·2003.
17· · · ·Q.· ·-- 2003 -- remember, just practice a little
18· ·bit on the first few minutes of letting me finish
19· ·before you start answering, and then you'll get the
20· ·hang of it.· Okay?
21· · · ·A.· ·Right.
22· · · ·Q.· ·So from about 2000 to 2003 you were with the
23· ·City of Round Rock?
24· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
25· · · ·Q.· ·And for approximately two years of that, that
Page 9
·1· ·was in code enforcement?
·2· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·And what is code enforcement?
·4· · · ·A.· ·It's the enforcement of municipal codes. I
·5· ·guess -- for laymans, I guess it would be the codes
·6· ·that aren't necessarily enforced by the police
·7· ·department or another specific division, like animal
·8· ·control and so forth.· Kind of, I guess, more of a
·9· ·catchall building codes, sanitation codes.· It actually
10· ·will vary depending on the jurisdiction you work for.
11· ·With Austin, it's primarily structure maintenance,
12· ·zoning, and sanitation.
13· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· Now, back to the Round Rock
14· ·timeframe, did you receive some kind of training from
15· ·the City of Round Rock in code enforcement?
16· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.· It was field training and also just
17· ·various conferences and training.· A lot of it was more
18· ·environmental geared.· That's because -- like I said,
19· ·depending on the jurisdiction is, you know, the type of
20· ·training you would receive because it's the type of
21· ·code you would enforce.
22· · · ·Q.· ·Then after you left the City of Round Rock in
23· ·code enforcement, what was your next position of
24· ·employment?
25· · · ·A.· ·It was the City of Georgetown just following
YVer1f
 John Hale
February 20, 2019 10 to 13
Page 10 Page 12
·1· ·in late 2003. ·1· · · ·A.· ·-- of training to learn how Austin does --
·2· · · ·Q.· ·And what did you do for the City of ·2· ·does everything.
·3· ·Georgetown? ·3· · · ·Q.· ·So when you began with Austin in December
·4· · · ·A.· ·The first, I would like to say, 3-1/2 years I ·4· ·of 2013, there was an approximate month to two months
·5· ·did animal control.· And then the remainder of the ·5· ·of training that you did?
·6· ·ten years I did code enforcement. ·6· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.· Yes, sir.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· So the first -- how long from 2003 were ·7· · · ·Q.· ·And what title did you have, Mr. Hale, when
·8· ·you in animal control? ·8· ·you started?
·9· · · ·A.· ·About 3-1/2 years. ·9· · · ·A.· ·Code Enforcement Officer C.
10· · · ·Q.· ·So to some timeframe around the 2006 10· · · ·Q.· ·And then after 2013, when you began to work
11· ·timeframe? 11· ·for the City of Austin, what titles have you held other
12· · · ·A.· ·Yeah, and then the remainder being code 12· ·than Officer C?
13· ·enforcement. 13· · · ·A.· ·In, I would like to say, July 2014 -- it may
14· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· And then how long were you with 14· ·be June, but I'm pretty sure it was July 2014, I was
15· ·the City of Georgetown in code enforcement? 15· ·promoted to investigator.
16· · · ·A.· ·Until December of 2013, when I started here 16· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.
17· ·with the City of Austin. 17· · · ·A.· ·Which is a, I guess, more lead-type role.
18· · · ·Q.· ·So from approximately 2006 to December of 2013 18· ·It's nonsupervisory, but it's more of a lead, someone
19· ·you were with the City of Georgetown doing code 19· ·that has a little bit more expertise and could help
20· ·enforcement? 20· ·train newer employees.
21· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir. 21· · · ·Q.· ·And have you had any other promotions or are
22· · · ·Q.· ·And then you began with the City of Austin in 22· ·you currently an investigator?
23· ·code enforcement in December of 2013? 23· · · ·A.· ·I'm currently an investigator.· For 18 months
24· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir. 24· ·I was an acting supervisor.· It was an interim role.
25· · · ·Q.· ·Did you receive any kind of training from the 25· · · ·Q.· ·What 18 months were those?

Page 11
·1· ·City of Austin that was specific to code enforcement in
·2· ·Austin?
·3· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.· I mean, we have monthly safety meetings
·4· ·that are usually related to the job, more safety
·5· ·geared.· And a lot of the other training is mainly
·6· ·field training.· Went to a few conferences, but folks
·7· ·that already have certain certifications, they're not
·8· ·in training as much because of their experience.· So
·9· ·the training isn't commensurate with your -- or -- so
10· ·the longer you're there or have done code enforcement,
11· ·I guess, the less training would be required, I guess,
12· ·is how it's perceived.· Or at least that's how I
13· ·perceive it, so --
14· · · ·Q.· ·And then did you have a certain amount of
15· ·specific training you had to do when you started for
16· ·the City of Austin, or was it just commensurate with
17· ·your experience of having done it for over a decade?
18· · · ·A.· ·Well, my entry position was based on my
19· ·previous experience.· We do have a training academy,
20· ·which I couldn't tell you exactly how long it was at
21· ·the time, because it used to be full time, now it's
22· ·changed to part-time.· But I believe it was somewhere
23· ·in -- it was -- it was more than a month that I can
24· ·testify to.· But it was a month to two months --
25· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.
Page 13
·1· · · ·A.· ·I believe it was -- it was '15 to '16. I
·2· ·couldn't tell you probably the exact months.· I would
·3· ·have to look at my resume.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.
·5· · · · · · · · · (Exhibit No. 96 marked.)
·6· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· So sometime in the years 2015
·7· ·to 2016 for an 18-month period you were an acting
·8· ·supervisor?
·9· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
10· · · ·Q.· ·And how did your role differ there than an
11· ·investigator?
12· · · ·A.· ·Really, I -- since we were shorthanded, it was
13· ·kind of a dual role.· I mean, I did employee
14· ·evaluations and a little bit more budget things, time
15· ·sheets, performance monitoring, and so forth.
16· · · ·Q.· ·Let me show what I've marked as Exhibit 96 to
17· ·your deposition.· This is something that I just printed
18· ·off of the code department website as of June of 2018.
19· ·Have you seen something like this before?
20· · · ·A.· ·Yes.· I've seen it in a different format.
21· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.
22· · · ·A.· ·We see it before it goes to the website.
23· · · ·Q.· ·I understand.· Just to ease your reference, I
24· ·think if you go to the fourth page of the document, the
25· ·Austin Code Department Licensing and Registration

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 John Hale
February 20, 2019
Page 14
·1· ·Enforcement Division, Chart E?
·2· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·Do you see that?
·4· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·In that particular page I see that, among
·6· ·other things, it lists under "Code Inspector C"
·7· ·Mr. Troy Collins.· Mr. Collins was here and kind enough
·8· ·this morning to get deposed.· I assume you know
·9· ·Mr. Collins?
10· · · ·A.· ·Yes.· Yes.
11· · · ·Q.· ·Have you had a chance to visit with
12· ·Mr. Collins about, for instance, the Littlefield Garage
13· ·and the events that we're all here about today?
14· · · ·A.· ·Mainly the only discussion was before I went
15· ·out there on the 13th.· And then when I was reading my
16· ·subpoena, I reminded him that he might have to bring
17· ·some documents --
18· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.
19· · · ·A.· ·-- yesterday.· But that -- that's the extent
20· ·of it.
21· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· So the two times you really recall
22· ·visiting with him about the Littlefield Garage would
23· ·have been back at the time in 2017 --
24· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.
25· · · ·Q.· ·-- when the Bowmer incident occurred?
Page 15
·1· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·And then just some housekeeping about bringing
·3· ·documents yesterday?
·4· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.· And, like I said, around the time when
·5· ·the case first started, because I had known that he had
·6· ·gone on a case before, I may have asked him for some
·7· ·contacts if he had someone.· But -- but as you'll see
·8· ·in the case history, the people provided me with
·9· ·contacts, so --
10· · · ·Q.· ·Yes, sir.· And what do you recall about your
11· ·conversation with him at the time of the incident back
12· ·on the 13th in 2017?· That would be the 13th of July?
13· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.· Well, that morning I was actually
14· ·running late, so there wasn't really too much
15· ·discussion.· I had called my supervisor and told him I
16· ·would be late.· So when I came in, I was told I needed
17· ·to go to the Littlefield Garage because there had been
18· ·someone that drove off of it again.
19· · · · · · · · ·And I was assigned to actually a
20· ·neighborhood district at the time, so I asked, you
21· ·know, "Why do I have to go," because it's a commercial
22· ·property.· And our assistant director just said, "Well,
23· ·you know, you have some of the best documentation, so
24· ·we want you to work it."
25· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And who was the assistant director?
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
14 to 17
Page 16
·1· · · ·A.· ·Paul Tomasovic.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·Is Mr. Tomasovic still with the City?
·3· · · ·A.· ·No, he retired about a year ago.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·Do you know how to spell his last name?
·5· · · ·A.· ·It's -- well, I have it in my phone.· Is it
·6· ·okay if I --
·7· · · ·Q.· ·Sure.· It just makes Kim's life easier.
·8· · · ·A.· ·Well, sometimes just saying it out loud, I
·9· ·don't want to say it wrong.· And, see, I would have
10· ·said it wrong.· T-o-m-a-s-o-v-i-c.
11· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· So Mr. Tomasovic was in some
12· ·supervisory capacity and assigned you to go investigate
13· ·the incident involving Ms. Bowmer and her car not being
14· ·restrained on the garage?
15· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
16· · · ·Q.· ·Now, you said -- you mentioned that you had
17· ·talked with Mr. Collins.· What did you visit about with
18· ·Mr. Collins?
19· · · ·A.· ·I think it was a similar conversation, because
20· ·it was actually -- I believe Troy Collins -- one of the
21· ·assistant division managers, Robert Moore, and I
22· ·believe a couple other employees -- I just can't recall
23· ·them exactly.· It was like about three or four people
24· ·standing there.· And it was a similar question like,
25· ·"Well, why do I have to go?"· So -- not to chuck
Page 17
·1· ·responsibility, but it --
·2· · · ·Q.· ·Of course.
·3· · · ·A.· ·I worked neighborhoods, so it was just a
·4· ·question, which was answered by Robert Moore.· And
·5· ·that's when we kind of discussed contacts and so forth
·6· ·or did -- and I also asked, "Did you already go out?"
·7· ·Because I can't remember when I came in.· I was like
·8· ·two hours late.· I can't remember the exact reason.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·Uh-huh.
10· · · ·A.· ·I just know that like right when I came in,
11· ·that's when I was --
12· · · ·Q.· ·Did you know that approximately a little over
13· ·a year earlier somebody else had gone off of the
14· ·Littlefield Garage?
15· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
16· · · ·Q.· ·Were you involved in the investigation of
17· ·that?· We refer to that as the O'Conner incident.
18· ·That's the name of the individual that went off.
19· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.· No, sir.
20· · · ·Q.· ·At the time Mr. O'Conner's vehicle left the
21· ·garage or in any of the months afterwards where the
22· ·City was involved, did you have any involvement with
23· ·that investigation?
24· · · ·A.· ·No, sir.
25· · · ·Q.· ·Did you visit with Mr. Collins about his
YVer1f
 John Hale
February 20, 2019
Page 18
·1· ·handling in any way of that investigation?
·2· · · ·A.· ·Not directly.· It was more in the context of,
·3· ·like I said, when I got the case it -- and I said, "Is
·4· ·that the same garage," because, I mean, what are the
·5· ·odds?· So that's -- that was basically the context of
·6· ·the conversation.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·And as an investigator, what did that, if
·8· ·anything, indicate to you that within a year-and-a-half
·9· ·period two vehicles had failed to be restrained by a
10· ·restraint system on a garage?
11· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
12· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Same.
13· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· You can answer.
14· · · ·A.· ·So I can answer?
15· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Yes.
16· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Yeah, you can.· Unless
17· ·somebody -- unless your lawyer tells you not to.
18· · · ·A.· ·All right.
19· · · ·Q.· ·It's just for the record.· These fine lawyers
20· ·have objections, and we take them --
21· · · ·A.· ·Oh, okay.· Well, y'all said it really soft, so
22· ·I was expecting a little more --
23· · · ·Q.· ·They're very courteous.
24· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· She just has to write it
25· ·down.· That's it.
Page 19
·1· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Oh, okay.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Yeah, these are some of the
·3· ·best, so they don't need to yell.· Nobody here needs
·4· ·to yell.
·5· · · ·A.· ·Oh, okay.· Could you repeat the question?
·6· · · ·Q.· ·Of course.· The -- when you heard that a
·7· ·second vehicle had failed to be restrained; that is,
·8· ·Ms. Bowmer's vehicle had gone off, knowing that
·9· ·Mr. O'Conner's had also been not restrained, did that
10· ·indicate anything to you?
11· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
12· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Sorry.
13· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Same deal on each time that
14· ·happens, yeah.· That's just going to be a few times
15· ·today.
16· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.· Okay.· I mean, it did make me kind of
17· ·suspicious, just the initial thought, because, like I
18· ·said, me personally, I always think about odds.· What's
19· ·the likelihood of something happening again?· So, I
20· ·mean, it -- it did raise eyebrows for me.
21· · · · · · · · ·It didn't really change really, I guess,
22· ·my response or -- or speed of response, or anything
23· ·like that, if that's what you mean.
24· · · ·Q.· ·Now, I'm back to the chart exhibit that you
25· ·and I were looking at.· What number we did we put on
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
18 to 21
Page 20
·1· ·that?
·2· · · ·A.· ·96.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·Thank you.· 96.· On the very last page it has
·4· ·"Commercial and Repeat Offender Enforcement."
·5· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·And I see your list under there "John Hale,
·7· ·Code Investigator."
·8· · · ·A.· ·Yes, yes.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·And is that the department that you were in at
10· ·the time of the Bowmer incident in 2017?
11· · · ·A.· ·No, sir.
12· · · ·Q.· ·Which department were you in?
13· · · ·A.· ·I was in the same department, the division --
14· ·and I guess to make it, I guess, make more sense, our
15· ·whole entire department did a complete reorganization
16· ·in October 2017, so nearly the whole entire department
17· ·shifted divisions.· And we also redrew what I -- I
18· ·formerly was in the neighborhood west district, but it
19· ·no longer exists --
20· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.
21· · · ·A.· ·-- in that form.
22· · · ·Q.· ·Who was your direct supervisor at the time of
23· ·the Bowmer incident?
24· · · ·A.· ·It was John Christophe.
25· · · ·Q.· ·And who was Mr. Christophe's supervisor --
Page 21
·1· · · ·A.· ·Let me --
·2· · · ·Q.· ·-- do you remember?
·3· · · ·A.· ·I'm trying to think, because the division
·4· ·manager at the time -- I just can't remember if he
·5· ·retired right -- he retired pretty close around the
·6· ·incident.· I would have to double-check that.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Let's try it a different direction.
·8· ·Who was at the top of the food chain there back in the
·9· ·time of the Bowmer incident at the code department?
10· · · ·A.· ·I believe that was actually the transition. I
11· ·believe Carl Smart was the departing director and
12· ·Cora Wright was the incoming director.
13· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.
14· · · ·A.· ·I believe it was during their transition
15· ·period.
16· · · ·Q.· ·And then Mr. Jose Roig or Roig -- how do you
17· ·say his name?
18· · · ·A.· ·Roig.
19· · · ·Q.· ·Roig?· Mr. Roig, where was he in relation to
20· ·you back at the time of the Bowmer incident?
21· · · ·A.· ·He was the building official for the City of
22· ·Austin.
23· · · ·Q.· ·So a few supervisors above you?
24· · · ·A.· ·No, he actually worked for the development
25· ·services department.· It's akin to right below an
YVer1f
 John Hale
February 20, 2019
Page 22
·1· ·assistant director position.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·Gotcha.· Can you tell us in 2017 -- just
·3· ·explain for the jury what your job description was sort
·4· ·of on a daily, weekly, monthly basis.
·5· · · ·A.· ·My primary duties were performing inspections
·6· ·and investigations, violations of the City code.
·7· ·Several secondary job duties.· It was more of like kind
·8· ·of monitoring Inspector A through C's work, training
·9· ·those inspectors, doing -- providing ride-alongs and
10· ·trying to develop them as -- as inspectors.
11· · · ·Q.· ·What is the city code or the building code
12· ·that you've been referring to?
13· · · ·A.· ·Well, it's actually several.· The City of
14· ·Austin has a land development code, which is pretty
15· ·much what we primarily enforce, because there's several
16· ·model codes, the different building codes, fire codes,
17· ·property maintenance codes that fall under that through
18· ·adoption.
19· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· So -- but just generally speaking for
20· ·the jury, what is the city code or the building code
21· ·that you're talking about?
22· · · ·A.· ·Well, the building codes are the -- the model
23· ·codes published by the International Code Council that
24· ·are adopted by local governments to enforce the minimum 24· ·you say "a city permit," what is that?
25· ·standards, safety standards for buildings.
Page 23
·1· · · ·Q.· ·Are they optional; that is, can an owner of a
·2· ·building choose to not follow a code?
·3· · · ·A.· ·Only if they are located out of the city
·4· ·limits.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·So somebody, for instance, that had a parking
·6· ·garage within the city limits in 2015, 2016, 2017, were
·7· ·they required to follow the building code?
·8· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·And why is that?
10· · · ·A.· ·Inside a jurisdiction, the local government
11· ·code allows -- or actually gives cities the ability to
12· ·enforce standards on the local end, and part of that is
13· ·building codes, sanitation codes.· There's different
14· ·processes and so forth that are in it.
15· · · · · · · · ·The building codes, in particular, a lot
16· ·of the processes in there are actually laid out in the
17· ·document, like the building officials' authority and so
18· ·forth.· The enforcement building departments or
19· ·development services departments typically don't have,
20· ·I guess, quote, unquote, enforcers, so usually that's
21· ·done by a code enforcement department or division,
22· ·depending on the type of city.
23· · · ·Q.· ·Are there criminal penalties for not following
24· ·the building code?
25· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
22 to 25
Page 24
·1· · · ·Q.· ·What are those, generally speaking?
·2· · · ·A.· ·It's a Class C misdemeanor.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·Does somebody who's been cited or warned about
·4· ·not following building codes or being in violation, do
·5· ·they have the right to contest that if they choose to?
·6· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·How?
·8· · · ·A.· ·It would actually kind of depend.· If it was a
·9· ·determination or if it involved a permit, it would be
10· ·via the building official.· And then they can appeal
11· ·his decision through the -- I always get it backwards.
12· ·I think it's the fire and building board or code board.
13· ·I always get it backwards.
14· · · ·Q.· ·No problem.
15· · · ·A.· ·And then if it's actually a citation, then it
16· ·would be through a municipal court judge and then
17· ·through district court.· And then if it's the Building
18· ·and Standards Commission, then they would present in
19· ·the Building and Standards Commission's meeting.· They
20· ·would basically say their case as to why it's not a
21· ·violation.
22· · · ·Q.· ·You made reference to a permit or a permitting
23· ·process.· What are you talking about?· What is -- when
25· · · ·A.· ·It's essentially permission to do work under
Page 25
·1· ·the scope of the adopted building code.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·And why is that important that people obtain
·3· ·permits to do work?
·4· · · ·A.· ·It's to ensure whatever is built, repaired,
·5· ·or -- or what have you, or constructed, is done within
·6· ·the building code, which meets the minimum safety
·7· ·standards.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·I see that you brought with you today a couple
·9· ·of Redwelds that had some documents in them.· Could you
10· ·just tell me what it is.· I think you have them in
11· ·two different stacks in front of you.· Could you tell
12· ·me what you brought with you here today?
13· · · ·A.· ·Yes.· On the one to my left, it's the case
14· ·history, all the photographs that I took, all the
15· ·attachments that were in the -- the case file.· To the
16· ·right of me are all the e-mails involved in the case.
17· ·Some of them were attachments, but I didn't want to
18· ·redundantly make copies, so I separated between case
19· ·and attachment and all e-mails.
20· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.
21· · · ·A.· ·That way it would be easier for y'all to
22· ·cipher through between the two of them.
23· · · ·Q.· ·You bet.· What I'm going to ask you to do is,
24· ·the one that's on your left -- it's your left hand
25· ·there, I'm going to put a sticker on that that we've
YVer1f
 John Hale
February 20, 2019 26 to 29
Page 26 Page 28
·1· ·identified that stack as Exhibit 97, right? ·1· ·the building were smaller, so a lot of ours were
·2· · · ·A.· ·Okay. ·2· ·vehicles driving into buildings.
·3· · · · · · · · · (Exhibit No. 97 marked.) ·3· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Now, back at the time of the Bowmer
·4· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· And how do you want to ·4· ·incident, were you aware of what a vehicle restraint
·5· ·shorthand that stack?· What do you want to call it? ·5· ·system was for?
·6· · · ·A.· ·I guess that would be, I guess, case ·6· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.· Yes.
·7· ·documentation. ·7· · · ·Q.· ·And what was that?
·8· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· And then I'm going to -- ·8· · · ·A.· ·It was to prevent vehicles from going to the
·9· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Thank you, Tasha. ·9· ·outside, or at least to prevent accidental driving off
10· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· I'm going to stick No. 98 on 10· ·the side of a parking garage or deck, or what have you.
11· ·the stack that's on the right of you.· How do you want 11· · · ·Q.· ·Now, did you understand at the beginning of
12· ·to identify that? 12· ·the investigation that the purpose -- or one of the
13· · · ·A.· ·Correspondence. 13· ·purposes of a vehicle restraint system was to keep what
14· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Great. 14· ·is generally a low-speed collision from becoming a
15· · · · · · · · · (Exhibit No. 98 marked.) 15· ·catastrophic injury?
16· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· And you brought Redwelds, and 16· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.· That would be accurate.
17· ·we'll just stick them in the Redwelds and have them 17· · · ·Q.· ·That is, a car that would hit a barrier at
18· ·marked for the court reporter. 18· ·ten miles per hour versus a car that would fall nine or
19· · · ·A.· ·Okay. 19· ·eight or seven stories?
20· · · ·Q.· ·That way we have what you brought with you 20· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
21· ·here today. 21· · · ·Q.· ·And you understand that it was very important
22· · · · · · · · ·All right.· I want to focus your 22· ·to have a system in place to prevent a small accident
23· ·attention to back at the timeframe that this Bowmer 23· ·from being a catastrophic accident?
24· ·incident occurred in the Littlefield Garage.· Okay? 24· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
25· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir. 25· · · ·Q.· ·And did you understand at the outset of

Page 27
·1· · · ·Q.· ·Are you with me on the timeframe?
·2· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·When did you first hear about it?
·4· · · ·A.· ·It was the morning of the 13th of July 2017.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·How was it reported to you?
·6· · · ·A.· ·In person by an assistant division manager,
·7· ·Robert Moore.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·Before the Bowmer incident, had you ever
·9· ·investigated an incident where a vehicle restraint
10· ·system had failed in a parking garage?
11· · · ·A.· ·Not that I recall.
12· · · ·Q.· ·Had you ever seen or been made aware of
13· ·instances where a vehicle restraint system had failed
14· ·in a parking garage?
15· · · ·A.· ·I've been to parking garages to where I saw
16· ·that something ran into one of the concrete barricades
17· ·and it's broken, but that's more of just going to
18· ·parking garages.
19· · · ·Q.· ·Had you ever been involved with investigating
20· ·an incident where a vehicle left the building; that is,
21· ·fell off of a building, because a vehicle restraint
22· ·system didn't hold it on the inside?
23· · · ·A.· ·No, sir.· The cities I worked for were
24· ·smaller, so shorter -- shorter buildings.· So I may
25· ·have a lot of code enforcement experience.· It just --
Page 29
·1· ·investigating the Bowmer incident that the restraint
·2· ·system on the Littlefield Garage had not kept
·3· ·Mr. O'Conner's 4Runner from leaving the garage?
·4· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.· I -- I saw that on the news.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·Had you seen the pictures of it?
·6· · · ·A.· ·Like I said, I saw the news story. I
·7· ·didn't -- I didn't necessarily investigate that
·8· ·specific case because I didn't at the time think there
·9· ·was actually anything that would be in the case that
10· ·would be different than the video of the car hanging
11· ·down.
12· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Did you think at that time or the
13· ·beginning of the Bowmer incident that the designed
14· ·purpose of the vehicle restraint system was to let the
15· ·vehicle leave the building and have cables wrap around
16· ·the axle or some other part of the vehicle and then
17· ·keep it from falling to the ground?
18· · · ·A.· ·No, I've never believed that was the intended
19· ·design.
20· · · ·Q.· ·It was clear from the moment you heard about
21· ·the O'Conner incident that that vehicle restraint
22· ·system didn't perform as designed, right?
23· · · ·A.· ·It gave that appearance.· Like I said, I --
24· ·without speeds and engineer reports, I couldn't testify
25· ·to that as a fact.

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 John Hale
February 20, 2019
Page 30
·1· · · ·Q.· ·Did the City ever investigate, to your
·2· ·knowledge, any speeds involved in O'Conner?
·3· · · ·A.· ·I don't -- I don't believe so.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·Did the City ever investigate, for instance,
·5· ·force or mass or velocity or acceleration in the
·6· ·O'Conner incident?
·7· · · ·A.· ·I don't believe so.· I believe any information
·8· ·was based on a third-party engineer.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Was the City ever made aware of the
10· ·owner or any representative of the owner performing
11· ·such an investigation about the O'Conner incident?
12· · · ·A.· ·No, sir, I don't believe so.
13· · · ·Q.· ·Now, what did you do -- back to the Bowmer
14· ·incident, what did you do after you were informed,
15· ·"Hey, this is going to be yours.· You need to be the
16· ·person from the compliance office in charge," what did
17· ·you do next?
18· · · ·A.· ·I basically tried to do an overall assessment.
19· ·What was the area impacted, were there any columns that 19· ·which is where the property maintenance code comes in,
20· ·were visibly broken to where it would be an imminent
21· ·danger to just the public at large.· That was the first
22· ·thing I did.· So basically where the car drove off of,
23· ·which -- and then, obviously, since it hit the building
24· ·across the -- the street, we were looking at that.· And
25· ·we didn't see that any bricks had even moved.· We saw a
30 to 33
Page 32
·1· ·But that's also why I called in the building official
·2· ·because of two failures, or apparent failures.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·Do you mean Mr. Roig?
·4· · · ·A.· ·Jose Roig, yeah.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·Yeah, Roig.· Sorry.
·6· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· Okay.· So tell me what, in your
·8· ·estimation, the difference between the building code
·9· ·for when the building was built and the property
10· ·maintenance code is, not specifically yet on the
11· ·garage, but just in general.
12· · · ·A.· ·Really the difference is -- when a building is
13· ·built, it falls under the purview of the code for which
14· ·it was built.· I think the garage -- I would have to
15· ·double-check.· It was built in the late '70s.
16· · · ·Q.· ·Correct.
17· · · ·A.· ·So it would have been under that building code
18· ·at the time.· And it would be the duty of the owner,
20· ·to maintain it to that same standard.
21· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And are there instances in which the
22· ·property owner or the owner's representatives do things
23· ·to the property that then imposes a duty on the owner
24· ·to bring the property under the current building code?
25· · · ·A.· ·In -- in certain instances there's an existing

Page 31 Page 33
·1· ·little bit of the, I guess -- I'm assuming it's the ·1· ·building code that actually gives the building official
·2· ·bumper, some sort of paint of the car that rubbed up ·2· ·leeway to -- well, I hate to say leeway.· It gives him
·3· ·against a wall. ·3· ·the ability to make the decision on whether or not they
·4· · · · · · · · ·And then once we kind of did an ·4· ·would have to bring a portion of whatever is being
·5· ·assessment, we taped the area off, which we knew would ·5· ·repaired up to code or the entirety of it.
·6· ·only be effective while we were actually standing there ·6· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.
·7· ·to -- at the time.· So we actually -- I actually called ·7· · · ·A.· ·And it's usually based on unsafe conditions.
·8· ·our city contractor to fence the area to prevent people ·8· · · ·Q.· ·Now, in this case dealing with the Littlefield
·9· ·from just walking up or looking over the edge and ·9· ·Garage, was a determination made by the City that due
10· ·falling over. 10· ·to unsafe conditions, meaning a dangerous vehicle
11· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Now, at the time in 2017, did the city 11· ·restraint system, the owner needed to bring the garage
12· ·code require parking garages that were multilevel like 12· ·up to the current code in 2017?
13· ·that to have a vehicle restraint system? 13· · · ·A.· ·When I met with the building official and the
14· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.· The -- and I guess we could 14· ·city engineer -- and I'll have to find to spell her
15· ·differentiate the building code for which it was built 15· ·name, but it's Jennifer Verhulst.· I can't say her name
16· ·and then the property maintenance code, which we also 16· ·very well.· I just call her Jennifer.
17· ·enforce.· So it's to be maintained for its intended 17· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.
18· ·purposes under the property maintenance code. 18· · · ·A.· ·I can -- let me pull up how to spell her name
19· · · · · · · · ·So we -- I was looking more under the 19· ·real quick.
20· ·property maintenance code rather than the building 20· · · ·Q.· ·That sounds great.· And then we'll call her
21· ·code.· They do go hand in hand.· I just happen to know, 21· ·Jennifer V.
22· ·just through my experience, that during that time the 22· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.· Yeah, I think that might be the -- it
23· ·intermediate spacing wasn't four inches like it is 23· ·is V-e-r-h-u-l-s-t.
24· ·today.· It was, I believe -- I want to say nine inches. 24· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· So Jennifer V. was the city engineer?
25· ·I have to check my notes.· But I knew it was larger. 25· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 John Hale
February 20, 2019
Page 34
·1· · · ·Q.· ·And you met with Mr. Roig and Jennifer V.
·2· ·about this issue we were talking about, whether a
·3· ·portion or all of it needed to be brought up to code?
·4· · · ·A.· ·On site.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And what was the conclusion?
·6· · · ·A.· ·The conclusion by both myself and the building
·7· ·official was that there were repairs that were made,
·8· ·and you could see the different patina on the metal and
·9· ·fixtures and so forth that repairs had been made.· And
10· ·we took measurements of the intermediates on all the
11· ·levels, and we found variations of up to almost
12· ·two inches that didn't comply with actually the
13· ·1978 code for which it was built.
14· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And what was the conclusion then?
15· · · ·A.· ·That with the two previous incidents and the
16· ·repairs that were made without a permit, that we would
17· ·actually require all of the guards or vehicle barriers
18· ·to be brought up to the current code or the code when
19· ·they would have to apply for a permit to do the
20· ·repairs.
21· · · ·Q.· ·And is that because the team considered the
22· ·garage to be dangerous in the condition it was in when
23· ·you inspected it after the Bowmer incident?
24· · · ·A.· ·I think that would be accurate.· It was more
25· ·unsafe, which in our -- in our line of work, dangerous
Page 35
·1· ·is like a little bit more imminent than unsafe.· So it
·2· ·was more generally unsafe, I guess would probably be
·3· ·more accurate to say.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·What did the citation or the notice of
·5· ·violation use, generally unsafe or dangerous?
·6· · · ·A.· ·Let me see.· On the first notice we just
·7· ·wrote -- it's under a general section of the
·8· ·International Property Maintenance Code called
·9· ·Handrails and Guards to where they -- they must be
10· ·maintained.
11· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.
12· · · ·A.· ·And then the follow-up notice.· I made
13· ·two copies of that.· Sorry.· It looks like we cited the
14· ·handrails and guards on all three notices that were
15· ·sent.
16· · · · · · · · · (Exhibit No. 99 marked.)
17· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Let me hand you what I've
18· ·marked as Exhibit 99, which is just to make matters a
19· ·little easier, more expeditious.· It's just a
20· ·compilation out of the City file of the different
21· ·notice of violation letters that went out with regard
22· ·to the Littlefield Garage from September 15 of 2016
23· ·through the Bowmer incident.· Okay?
24· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
25· · · ·Q.· ·Now, I understand from your testimony here
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
34 to 37
Page 36
·1· ·today that in terms of the O'Conner incident, which is
·2· ·September of 2016, that you were not involved in any
·3· ·way with the code department's actions regarding the
·4· ·O'Conner incident; is that right?
·5· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.· I don't -- I don't recall any dealing
·6· ·with it during the time.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· So then the first notice of
·8· ·violation that you would have been involved with from
·9· ·the Austin code department would have been the
10· ·July 18th, 2017 notice that went out?
11· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
12· · · ·Q.· ·And that starts in Exhibit 99 at Page 1647 on
13· ·the bottom, right?
14· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
15· · · ·Q.· ·And is that -- "John Hale," that's your
16· ·signature down there?
17· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
18· · · ·Q.· ·And in it on the second page, 1648, of that
19· ·particular notice of violation, it says, "The items
20· ·listed below are violations of the Austin City Code and
21· ·require your -- the owner's immediate attention"; is
22· ·that right?
23· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
24· · · ·Q.· ·And then the letter says, "If they're not
25· ·brought into compliance within timeframes listed in the
Page 37
·1· ·report, then enforcement action might be taken against
·2· ·the owner."
·3· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·And I take it in that process there's a
·5· ·certain give and take; that is, with any owner you have
·6· ·a dialogue with the owner and you work out, if you can,
·7· ·by an agreement a timeframe for which the owner to
·8· ·bring the building into compliance?
·9· · · ·A.· ·That's correct.· Sometimes -- it's mainly
10· ·money and logistics that -- that cause the delays.
11· · · ·Q.· ·In other words, the owner coming up with the
12· ·money and the time and the manpower to actually get the
13· ·things done to make the building safe?
14· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.· Or insurance also plays in a
15· ·factor.
16· · · ·Q.· ·And I take it that like other cases this
17· ·Littlefield Garage from your involvement beginning in
18· ·July of 2017 was the same; that is, you attempted to
19· ·work with the owner to have the owner bring the
20· ·building into compliance, and you extended time for
21· ·which the owner to do that?
22· · · ·A.· ·Yeah, there were stipulations like the water
23· ·barriers that we required them to put up, because,
24· ·otherwise, if they were not going to put any
25· ·supplemental vehicle barriers, we wouldn't have
YVer1f
 John Hale
February 20, 2019
Page 38
·1· ·actually allowed them to leave the garage open.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·Now, in the original July 18, 2017 notice, the
·3· ·first violation type was emergency board and secure.
·4· ·You saw that?
·5· · · ·A.· ·That was for the fencing.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·That's what you described, which was to have
·7· ·fencing up to restrict the access, right?
·8· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·Now, you would agree with me that a building
10· ·that didn't have a vehicle restraint system, a parking
11· ·garage that was a multistory garage, that would be
12· ·dangerous?
13· · · ·A.· ·Oh, if it wasn't secured?
14· · · ·Q.· ·If it had no vehicle restraint system.
15· · · ·A.· ·Oh, yeah, that's correct.
16· · · ·Q.· ·For instance, if the owner decided, you know,
17· ·"I'm going to put up something that's good for
18· ·pedestrians, but not vehicles," that would be
19· ·dangerous?
20· · · ·A.· ·That's correct, because if it is a parking
21· ·garage, it has to have vehicle barriers that can
22· ·withstand a certain amount of force.
23· · · ·Q.· ·And have you ever seen a multistory parking
24· ·garage built in any day that didn't have vehicle
25· ·restraint systems on it?
Page 39
·1· · · ·A.· ·I don't believe I've ever seen one.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·If you did, that would be dangerous, wouldn't
·3· ·it?
·4· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.· I've seen various designs, but nothing
·5· ·that -- where it just completely lacked, you know --
·6· · · ·Q.· ·Have you ever seen one where it was only a
·7· ·pedestrian barrier, not a vehicle barrier?
·8· · · ·A.· ·I've been in many, so I can't really say with
·9· ·100 percent certainty, but none -- none that I can
10· ·recall.
11· · · ·Q.· ·If you had, you would have known that would be
12· ·a violation?
13· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
14· · · ·Q.· ·Because you can't have a parking garage open
15· ·air multilevel without an adequate vehicle restraint
16· ·system, right?
17· · · ·A.· ·Well, that -- yeah, that's correct.
18· · · ·Q.· ·Now, the second notice of violation in
19· ·Exhibit 99 is a July 26, 2017 one.· Do you see that?
20· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
21· · · ·Q.· ·And what prompted you to send a second notice
22· ·of violation report?
23· · · ·A.· ·This was actually a discussion with my
24· ·superiors, which is our executive staff, and also the
25· ·property owner.· They said that it wasn't necessarily
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
38 to 41
Page 40
·1· ·clear what they needed to actually do.· So it's the
·2· ·same violation in greater detail spelling it -- I guess
·3· ·spelling it out a little more, I guess, if you will.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·Sure.· So if I understand what you're saying,
·5· ·your team and the superiors at the City said that the
·6· ·first letter you sent out wasn't exactly clear what was
·7· ·expected, so now a second letter was going out?
·8· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.· They said that it was clear of our
·9· ·intent and what we wanted to have happen, but they said
10· ·that a little bit greater detail would -- would be
11· ·warranted.· And, actually, it was also by a request
12· ·of -- I believe it was the owner's representative. I
13· ·don't think it was the owner directly.
14· · · ·Q.· ·Do you remember who the owner's representative
15· ·was that you were dealing with?
16· · · ·A.· ·It was Sean O'Brien.· That's who I dealt with
17· ·for the most part.· There were some that I -- on the
18· ·initial time that it happened.· But throughout the --
19· ·the case it's been Sean O'Brien.
20· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And so did -- after the first violation
21· ·report, before the second one, Mr. O'Brien asked for
22· ·another letter that had more specificity of what the
23· ·City wanted the owner to do with the garage?
24· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.· The -- the way it -- and I guess --
25· ·I don't know if I explained it correctly.· The original
Page 41
·1· ·notice, just a general explanation that there needed to
·2· ·be repairs made.· And then we gave them the detail
·3· ·following that it has to be brought up to the 2012 code
·4· ·and so forth.
·5· · · · · · · · ·And they requested -- it's like, "Can we
·6· ·get that in the letter?"· And speaking with the
·7· ·executive staff, there was nothing unreasonable about
·8· ·the request, so we -- we updated the notice to provide
·9· ·the exact detail of the -- the 1976 UBC, which is when
10· ·it was built, and then the current code requirements,
11· ·2012 -- or well, the current at the time, because we do
12· ·have a new code right now.
13· · · ·Q.· ·I understand.· And why was the decision made
14· ·that the building needed to be brought up to current
15· ·code?
16· · · ·A.· ·Like we discussed earlier, when we met with
17· ·the building official, since, like I said, there were
18· ·other repair -- it looked -- it appeared that there
19· ·were other repairs made without permits, the
20· ·two incidents, the measurements, the unequal
21· ·measurements, and, you know, when you can move the
22· ·cables with your hand with ease, then you don't
23· ·necessarily have to be an engineer to know that there
24· ·is a little bit less tensile strength on it.
25· · · ·Q.· ·And what -- what does that tell you?
YVer1f
 John Hale
February 20, 2019
Page 42
·1· · · ·A.· ·That they probably were not maintained to the ·1· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.
·2· ·specifications when they were installed.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·And how long did it take you to make this
·4· ·determination?
·5· · · ·A.· ·I believe we were on site for -- I mean, we
·6· ·have AVLs.· You can check that specifically through
·7· ·open records, but I believe we were out there a total
·8· ·for about an hour.· The -- it was actually four of us.
·9· ·Tony Hernandez, one of the managers at development
10· ·services, was there also.
11· · · ·Q.· ·So within probably an hour or so of your city
12· ·team being on the premises, you were able, through
13· ·inspection, to determine there had been previous
14· ·un-permitted repairs made that were violations even of
15· ·the 1978 or earlier code?
16· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
17· · · ·Q.· ·There was a lack of maintenance that allowed
18· ·you with your hand to physically demonstrate a lack of
19· ·tension and support in the restraint system, and the
20· ·conclusion was made that it needed to be brought up to
21· ·code?
22· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Objection; form, leading.
23· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Is that accurate?
24· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Go ahead.
25· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Oh.· I didn't hear what he
Page 43
·1· ·said.· Sorry.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· He said, "Objection; form,
·3· ·leading."
·4· · · ·A.· ·Oh, okay.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·It's okay.
·6· · · ·A.· ·Can you repeat the question?· Sorry.· That
·7· ·throws me off.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·Yeah.· That's all right.
·9· · · ·A.· ·If he yelled it, it probably would be better.
10· · · · · · · · ·THE REPORTER:· Start yelling.
11· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· How about this?· I'll -- I'll
12· ·repeat my objection to your question, assuming it's the
13· ·same, and then you can --
14· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Okay.· Sorry.
15· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· -- ask it.
16· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· That's okay.· No problem.
17· · · ·A.· ·Because the stage is real silent over here, so
18· ·when y'all say something it makes me turn.· Sorry.
19· · · ·Q.· ·That's okay.· I understand.· He's doing his
20· ·job.· It's not a problem.
21· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.
22· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· So here we go.
23· · · ·A.· ·It's not a complaint.· I was just saying that
24· ·it throws me off.
25· · · ·Q.· ·Here's my question.
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
42 to 45
Page 44
·2· · · ·Q.· ·Within an hour of the code team being on the
·3· ·premises and inspecting, y'all were able to determine
·4· ·there had been previous unpermitted repairs made, there
·5· ·was at least one violation of the building code that
·6· ·would have been in existence in 1978 when the building
·7· ·was built that it didn't comply with, there was the
·8· ·ability to move the cables with your hand that
·9· ·demonstrated a physical lack of tension and improper
10· ·maintenance and, therefore, it needed to be brought up
11· ·to code?
12· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Same objections.
13· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· That is correct in -- but
14· ·the -- there was discussion following with the building
15· ·official, because we waited for it to actually be in
16· ·writing.· I mean, on the scene you can say whatever,
17· ·you know, you feel is appropriate, but until we got it
18· ·in writing from the building official who actually can
19· ·make the determination.· So I would have to look at the
20· ·e-mails when he actually sent that e-mail.· But it was
21· ·within a day or two of the incident, yeah.
22· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· All right.· But certainly
23· ·within the 60 minutes, that was the conclusion.
24· ·Whether it was papered up later, you knew and the team
25· ·knew within 60 minutes this was not a safe vehicle
Page 45
·1· ·restraint system; isn't that true?
·2· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
·3· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Objection, form.
·4· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I would say that is -- that
·5· ·is correct.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Now, at the time you were out
·7· ·there either on that visit or any other visit, did the
·8· ·owner or the owner's representative ever discuss with
·9· ·you the previous un-permitted repairs that have been
10· ·made to the vehicle restraint system?
11· · · ·A.· ·The conversation was more in that he believed
12· ·that whatever Troy had done on the previous case meant
13· ·they were good.· There wasn't, I guess, a real heavy
14· ·discussion on that incident because it had already
15· ·happened.· And then with our determination that it was
16· ·going to have to be redone, it wasn't really a point of
17· ·contention, I guess, would be the best way to describe
18· ·it.· So --
19· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· My question is a little different.
20· ·It's not whether there was a contention about the
21· ·repairs done after Mr. O'Conner's incident.· It was,
22· ·did the owner or owner's representative tell you about
23· ·any other un-permitted repairs that had been done to
24· ·the building's restraint system, even repairs before
25· ·Mr. O'Conner's system?
YVer1f
 John Hale
February 20, 2019
Page 46
·1· · · ·A.· ·Well, we walked the property with him, and he
·2· ·did not dispute when we pointed out at areas that we
·3· ·believed work was done without a permit.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Like, for instance, what areas would
·5· ·that be?
·6· · · ·A.· ·A lot of it would be where it fastened to the
·7· ·concrete.· As you know, it's brittle, so you can tell
·8· ·when things were moved or -- I mean, there would be a
·9· ·hole and then a new hole, so you can tell that it was
10· ·actually moved.· I would have to look at my pictures to
11· ·tell you how -- how many and --
12· · · ·Q.· ·This was clearly on levels other than Level 9
13· ·or 7, right?
14· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.· Yes, sir.
15· · · ·Q.· ·It's on almost every open level on the west
16· ·side?
17· · · ·A.· ·It -- it varied quite a bit to where it was
18· ·interior cables, exterior cables.· And when I say
19· ·"interior," it's the interior walls or barriers versus
20· ·the exterior that goes to the outside.
21· · · · · · · · ·It varied.· Even when we did our
22· ·measurements it varied.· It would be on the same level
23· ·to where some of the intermediates -- because the way
24· ·the code reads is to not allow a -- a sphere of a
25· ·certain size to pass through.· So that's to mean that
Page 47
·1· ·the tension should not allow a sphere to be pushed
·2· ·through.
·3· · · · · · · · ·So even if, say, relaxed it measured
·4· ·nine inches, if you pushed a nine-inch sphere right
·5· ·through it and, you know, with -- being able to move it
·6· ·like that, that's where we made that determination.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·And nine inches would have been the space
·8· ·between the cables that was the minimum requirement
·9· ·from the 1976 code, right?
10· · · ·A.· ·That's correct.
11· · · ·Q.· ·So what you're saying is, is that with the
12· ·owner's representative present, you actually on
13· ·multiple floors pointed out where the barrier system
14· ·actually violated even the 1976 code?
15· · · ·A.· ·He wasn't on every floor with us, but it was
16· ·brought up during the discussion, yes.
17· · · ·Q.· ·And did the owner's representative dispute
18· ·that?
19· · · ·A.· ·I don't recall him saying we were wrong or
20· ·were giving him incorrect information.
21· · · ·Q.· ·Did the owner or the owner's representative
22· ·ever dispute to you that it was safe and proper to
23· ·bring the garage to the current code; that is, the code
24· ·in existence in 2017?
25· · · ·A.· ·I believe he concurred that it would be best
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
46 to 49
Page 48
·1· ·for everyone if it was brought up to the current code.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·Now, there was some discussion with
·3· ·Mr. Collins a little earlier on today in another
·4· ·deposition about what he did and didn't do --
·5· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·-- out at the scene when the O'Conner incident
·7· ·occurred.· You've made a reference to un-permitted
·8· ·repairs.· Is it your understanding from your
·9· ·investigation that the owner conducted repairs on the
10· ·ninth floor of the garage after Mr. O'Conner's incident
11· ·and did so without a permit?
12· · · ·A.· ·Based on our records, yes, sir.
13· · · ·Q.· ·And should the owner have gotten a permit to
14· ·do those repairs?
15· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
16· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Yes, sir.
17· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Why?
18· · · ·A.· ·It's to ensure they're inspected and they meet
19· ·the code for which they were built.· Like, say, for
20· ·instance, with the nine-inch spacing, if that could be
21· ·maintain and repaired.· And now -- and inspections like
22· ·that when it involves thousands of pounds of
23· ·tensioning, there's a third-party engineer that
24· ·actually does the inspection, provides the letter to
25· ·the building official, which he accepts as an
Page 49
·1· ·inspection, you know.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Now, the inspection and the letter by
·3· ·the engineer is not in place of a permit; it's in
·4· ·addition to a permit, correct?
·5· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
·6· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Same objection.
·7· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· That's -- that is correct.
·8· ·The way we, as the code department, generally accept
·9· ·engineer letters are to prove that something that
10· ·appears to be unstable or imminent danger is not.· Or
11· ·something that may be cosmetic, but it gives the
12· ·appearance that it may be dangerous, an engineer may
13· ·say, you know, it's structurally sound and it may just
14· ·need to be resurfaced.· So it's -- it's for clarity and
15· ·it's to, I guess, reaffirm or go against whatever
16· ·action -- like boarding it up or not allowing someone
17· ·to occupy a structure because it was dangerous.
18· ·Because if an engineer says 200 people can stand on the
19· ·second floor, just an example, then 200 people can
20· ·stand on the floor.· Now, 201, that might be an issue.
21· ·So --
22· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Now, did the owner or owner's
23· ·representative ever indicate to you that -- somehow
24· ·that he either had gotten a permit from the City of
25· ·Austin for the O'Conner incident repairs or somebody
YVer1f
 John Hale
February 20, 2019
Page 50
·1· ·had told them they didn't need a permit?
·2· · · ·A.· ·I'm not entirely clear on that.· I know what
·3· ·actually happened, which they provided an engineer
·4· ·report and a permit was not pulled.· But I -- I can't
·5· ·remember either Troy or the owner's representative
·6· ·really opining on like the logistics of the permitting
·7· ·process.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·Whose ultimate responsibility is it to get a
·9· ·permit if the law requires a permit?
10· · · ·A.· ·The property owner.
11· · · ·Q.· ·And is there anything in the code or the
12· ·City's policies that indicate that if a permit is
13· ·required that some inspector or confusion can waive the
14· ·requirement of a permit?
15· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
16· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· No, sir.
17· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Did the owner ever indicate to
18· ·you when you discussed the previous un-permitted
19· ·repairs regarding O'Conner that they believed no permit
20· ·was necessary?
21· · · ·A.· ·I believe they presented it to me that they
22· ·were unaware they needed a permit because of what was 22· · · ·Q.· ·Why?
23· ·accepted by the previous inspector.
24· · · ·Q.· ·And when you told the owner they should have
25· ·gotten a permit, was that contested in any way?
Page 51
·1· · · ·A.· ·No.· He did know that he was going to have to
·2· ·get a permit for the repairs and he did inquire if he
·3· ·made the current repairs could he cover the other
·4· ·repairs.· And we -- and then that's when, like I said,
·5· ·there was a two-day delay before the building official
·6· ·officially put out that it would have to be brought up
·7· ·to code even though we made that determination.
·8· · · · · · · · ·So -- but we kind of hinted that, "You're
·9· ·going to have to replace the whole entire system."· So
10· ·it would actually -- it just wouldn't make much sense
11· ·to permit work that is going to be completely removed
12· ·and just included as a -- more of a finished product of
13· ·the new system.
14· · · ·Q.· ·Did the owner or the owner's representative
15· ·ever indicate or tell you or admit to you that in 2014
16· ·at least one engineer had advised the owner and the
17· ·owner's representative in 2014 that the vehicle barrier
18· ·system did not meet the code or the standard of care?
19· · · ·A.· ·I don't recall.
20· · · ·Q.· ·That would be significant information to you,
21· ·wouldn't it?
22· · · ·A.· ·Yes, yes.· That's what I'm saying is, I
23· ·don't -- I don't recall if something like that came up
24· ·after the fact.
25· · · ·Q.· ·If, in fact, the owner had disclosed to you,
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
50 to 53
Page 52
·1· ·"You know what?· In 2014 an engineer or more told us
·2· ·that this building was out of code and out of the
·3· ·standard of care," it's likely you would have put that
·4· ·down in your file, right?
·5· · · ·A.· ·Yes, yes.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·And it's not in your file anywhere that I've
·7· ·seen, is it?
·8· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.· Like I said, I don't -- I don't recall.
·9· ·Several conversations, several visits to the garage,
10· ·could it have been said in passing?· I mean, it -- I --
11· ·I don't --
12· · · ·Q.· ·If it was said to you, you likely would have
13· ·put it into your file?
14· · · ·A.· ·Yes, yes.· I would have actually asked for a
15· ·copy of said report.
16· · · ·Q.· ·Did -- when you "said report," you mean the
17· ·documents that would show from the engineer, "Hey, the
18· ·engineer is telling the owner, 'This isn't to code,
19· ·this isn't to standard of care'"?
20· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.· If they would have said that they had
21· ·that review, I would have asked for that report.
23· · · ·A.· ·Just to put that in the -- the case
24· ·documentation because not only do we seek compliance,
25· ·we do have to escalate to enforcement as an
Page 53
·1· ·eventuality.· So we collect evidence just in general,
·2· ·because, like I said, with this particular incident
·3· ·knowing that they were going to have to bring the whole
·4· ·entire garage into compliance, its relevance wasn't for
·5· ·the repairs; its relevance was for, say, if they failed
·6· ·to do the repairs or get proper permits and so forth.
·7· ·So --
·8· · · ·Q.· ·And why would that be relevant?
·9· · · ·A.· ·It would just show a history of not taking
10· ·responsibility with -- or the property owner taking
11· ·responsibility.
12· · · ·Q.· ·It would show a history of a conscious
13· ·disregard for safety rules like the code and the
14· ·standard of care, wouldn't it?
15· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Objection, form.
16· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
17· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· That would be in similar
18· ·context of which we would use it and how we collect
19· ·evidence.
20· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· I mean, in other words, if you
21· ·have a property owner -- say you're investigating a
22· ·case --
23· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.
24· · · ·Q.· ·-- and you found out that two years before an
25· ·accident an engineer or an engineering group
YVer1f
 John Hale
February 20, 2019
Page 54
·1· ·specifically told the owner that their restraint system
·2· ·didn't meet the standard of care or the code and they
·3· ·didn't bring it up to the standard of care or the code,
·4· ·that would show you a conscious disregard for safety,
·5· ·wouldn't it?
·6· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
·7· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Objection, form.
·8· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· It would show us that they
·9· ·neglected to do the repairs previously, which in the
10· ·context you're asking, essentially, yes.
11· · · · · · · · ·Do you mind if I get some water?
12· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· No, we don't mind.· Let's
13· ·take a short break.
14· · · · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· We're off at 2:20.
15· · · · · · ·(Recess from 2:20 p.m. to 2:25 p.m.)
16· · · · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Stand by.· This is
17· ·Segment No. 2.· Back on the record, 2:25.
18· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Mr. Hale, we were looking at
19· ·Exhibit 99, and we had just finished looking at the
20· ·July 18th letter in that packet.· And now I want to ask
21· ·you a few questions about the July 26th letter also
22· ·that starts at 1651.
23· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
24· · · ·Q.· ·This, I understand from your testimony, was a
25· ·letter, notice of violation, sent out that had more
Page 55
·1· ·detail for the owner about what the owner needed to do
·2· ·at the garage, although the owner had been told that
·3· ·orally previously, both the owner and the City thought
·4· ·it better to put more detail in this letter?
·5· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·And I take it that in addition to you,
·7· ·Mr. Roig was heavily involved in drafting the violation
·8· ·types and the other information that was to go out in
·9· ·the letter?
10· · · ·A.· ·He provided the reference code.· We -- we
11· ·always defer to the development services department
12· ·when it comes to codes that aren't currently under --
13· ·adopted.· For instance, I guess, this would be the 1976
14· ·code.· They have actually like archives and specific
15· ·code requirements for common things, such as guards,
16· ·vehicle barriers, porch heights, and so forth, like
17· ·quick reference and so forth.
18· · · ·Q.· ·So Mr. Roig was essentially primarily
19· ·responsible for coming up with the code provisions that
20· ·went into the notice letters?
21· · · ·A.· ·He -- he basically affirmed the requirements
22· ·to which -- when it was built and also how it would
23· ·have to be repaired to current code.· The code sections
24· ·that are actually cited are actually -- are -- or the
25· ·sections that are notated in the NOV are actually from
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
54 to 57
Page 56
·1· ·the International Property Maintenance Code.· But the
·2· ·language in there is extremely vague in that, you know,
·3· ·you must maintain in a safe condition and so forth.
·4· · · · · · · · ·So to expand on that, when we send a
·5· ·notation of violation, that's where we provide the
·6· ·greater detail.· And I guess they wanted -- and, like I
·7· ·said, we didn't contest.· It was rare that someone
·8· ·would ask for more detail in a more commanding notice
·9· ·of violation.· That would be the only unique part of
10· ·it.
11· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And then the final page there, 1689, is
12· ·an August 21st, 2017 notice of violation supplement?
13· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
14· · · ·Q.· ·And it's signed by you?
15· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
16· · · ·Q.· ·And why was this supplement issued?· Did
17· ·somebody ask for a supplement?· Did the owner ask for a
18· ·supplement or the department decide to give one, or
19· ·what was the genesis of this?
20· · · ·A.· ·I believe -- this was, I believe, from the --
21· ·the property owner himself, not -- not the
22· ·representative.
23· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And that the property owner had asked
24· ·for clarification as to whether or not the system
25· ·needed to be brought up to the then current building
Page 57
·1· ·code, which is the 2012 International Building Code, or
·2· ·IBC, and whether that needed to be done in the entire
·3· ·building or just the seventh floor; is that right?
·4· · · ·A.· ·That is correct.· That is correct.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·And the response from the City was that the
·6· ·garage should be in compliance with the 2012
·7· ·International Building Code.· And that was the entire
·8· ·garage, not --
·9· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
10· · · ·Q.· ·-- just the seventh floor?
11· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
12· · · ·Q.· ·And did the owner contest that in any way?
13· · · ·A.· ·No, sir.
14· · · ·Q.· ·Did the owner dispute that in any way?
15· · · ·A.· ·No, sir.
16· · · ·Q.· ·You also indicate in that August 21, 2017
17· ·letter that the work required a permit and an
18· ·engineer's report.
19· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
20· · · ·Q.· ·And that was consistent with the policy at the
21· ·City that you've already testified about?
22· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.· Yes, sir.
23· · · ·Q.· ·In the report it references that, "In the
24· ·violation report there's reference to the determination
25· ·by the building official that dangerous conditions
YVer1f
 John Hale
February 20, 2019 58 to 61
Page 58 Page 60
·1· ·exist relating to vehicle barriers (guards)." ·1· ·binder on top of your two stacks, if you want.
·2· · · · · · · · ·Do you see that? ·2· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.· Well, I guess let me put these back in
·3· · · ·A.· ·Yes. ·3· ·here.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·That would have been the team that you have ·4· · · ·Q.· ·Sure.
·5· ·discussed earlier that included yourself, Mr. Roig, and ·5· · · ·A.· ·And then for some reason there's something
·6· ·others? ·6· ·that I think might be missing.
·7· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir. ·7· · · ·Q.· ·Sounds good.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·So here in this letter of August 21, you're ·8· · · ·A.· ·Our case files aren't exactly easy to print.
·9· ·indicating to the owner of the Littlefield Garage that ·9· ·And the 99 was yours?
10· ·based on your team's assessment there were dangerous 10· · · ·Q.· ·Yes, sir.· That one can just stay there and
11· ·conditions in the garage? 11· ·Ms. Kim will take care of that for us.
12· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir. 12· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.· I'll just put these here
13· · · ·Q.· ·And they related to the vehicle barriers; that 13· ·temporarily.· I just don't want to knock that over.
14· ·is, the cables used as vehicle barriers? 14· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· I appreciate that.
15· · · ·A.· ·That is correct. 15· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Thompson Coe has an unlimited
16· · · ·Q.· ·And those are the conditions that you've 16· ·Coke policy here except for Paul.· He's limited to two.
17· ·already discussed with me in your deposition, true? 17· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· All right.· So you have in
18· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir. 18· ·front of you there the Deposition Exhibit 16, right?
19· · · ·Q.· ·Did the owner or owner's representative ever 19· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
20· ·contest that those conditions were dangerous? 20· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And in this exhibit, if you'll go to --
21· · · ·A.· ·I'm just thinking the many conversations.· It 21· ·see the page numbers on the bottom right corner?
22· ·definite -- I don't believe it was documented.· I'm 22· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
23· ·just trying to think so I can give you an accurate 23· · · ·Q.· ·If you go to 1504.· 1504 is the cover sheet
24· ·answer. 24· ·that starts the section of the City file that is
25· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· Well, let me ask you a different 25· ·responsive to requests regarding the Bowmer incident.

Page 59
·1· ·way.· Is there any documentation in your file that
·2· ·indicates the owner ever disputed that those were
·3· ·dangerous conditions?
·4· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
·5· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I don't believe they --
·6· ·they made that statement.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Okay.· Do you recall separate
·8· ·and apart from written things in your file that somehow
·9· ·the owner ever disputed that those conditions you've
10· ·told us about were dangerous?
11· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
12· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· No, sir.· I think it was
13· ·more in the context of thinking they were okay from the
14· ·previous inspection.· I believe that is -- and it
15· ·wasn't really a contention.· It was more of matter of
16· ·fact.· So I guess that would be my -- my answer.
17· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Now, if you would be so kind,
18· ·I'm going to ask you -- you can refer to your file, if
19· ·you want, but I also have a copy of your file that
20· ·we've marked as Exhibit 16 here.
21· · · ·A.· ·Oh, okay.
22· · · ·Q.· ·And it has page numbers on it, and so it makes
23· ·it a little easier --
24· · · ·A.· ·Oh, okay.
25· · · ·Q.· ·-- for us to use.· You can even just set this
Page 61
·1· ·All right?
·2· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·So if you look, for instance, at the next
·4· ·page, at 1505, do you recognize that as the beginning
·5· ·of the complaint information and inspection information
·6· ·section of your file?
·7· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·Now, it looked to me like what basically this
·9· ·is is some type of running log organized
10· ·chronologically of events that you were logging for
11· ·this particular incident; that is, the Bowmer incident.
12· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
13· · · ·Q.· ·And is that basically what the inspection
14· ·information is?· It's a log like that?
15· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.· Essentially it's summaries of what
16· ·happened.· Sometimes there's direct quotes or direct
17· ·copy and paste of e-mails.· It just doesn't make sense
18· ·to write the same thing twice.
19· · · ·Q.· ·Yes, sir.· And are you the primary author of
20· ·the information that's in the inspection information?
21· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
22· · · ·Q.· ·And so you would have done this on your
23· ·computer or a computer at or near the time the entries
24· ·are dated?
25· · · ·A.· ·Yeah, they're -- I mean, with vacations and

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 John Hale
February 20, 2019 62 to 65
Page 62 Page 64
·1· ·stuff, there -- that's why some of the dates may not ·1· · · ·A.· ·It sounded more of like site management or
·2· ·match. ·2· ·maybe collection of fees, like she didn't really imply
·3· · · ·Q.· ·I understand. ·3· ·that she had any sort of ownership, physical ownership.
·4· · · ·A.· ·That's why I actually put the date at the ·4· · · ·Q.· ·Right.· More that she was an agent?
·5· ·beginning, because the computer system can change.· So ·5· · · ·A.· ·Essentially, or a subcontractor in a sense.
·6· ·that's why I put 7-13, you know, and -- or whatever the ·6· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Did Ms. Murray disclose to you that her
·7· ·date is at the beginning. ·7· ·company, Premier Parking, had been involved in the
·8· · · ·Q.· ·Yeah.· For instance, like on Page 1505 under ·8· ·operation of the garage for several years?
·9· ·the second entry, it says, "7-13-17 I met with property ·9· · · ·A.· ·Like I said, I don't believe she actually
10· ·manager Carla Salas, with Weitzman, and with parking 10· ·spelled it out like -- like a resume or anything.· I --
11· ·manager, Christina Murray -- Christina Murray at 11· ·I guess with the knowledge of the previous incident, I
12· ·Premier Parking -- with Premier Parking." 12· ·mean, it was logic -- logic to assume that it's been a
13· · · · · · · · ·Do you see that? 13· ·year.· I mean --
14· · · ·A.· ·Yes. 14· · · ·Q.· ·Well, did she --
15· · · ·Q.· ·And so those were some of the property manager 15· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Objection, nonresponsive.
16· ·or owner agents that you were dealing with on this 16· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Did Ms. Murray disclose to you
17· ·matter? 17· ·that as far back as 2014 her company, Premier Parking,
18· · · ·A.· ·Initially -- it's my understanding that -- I 18· ·had been involved in the operation of the garage?
19· ·believe that Christina Murray actually officed in 19· · · ·A.· ·Like I said, I don't believe any specific
20· ·that -- I guess, the first level where they have like 20· ·dates were given to me that I recall.
21· ·the -- the office, for lack of a better description. 21· · · ·Q.· ·Did Ms. Murray disclose to you that in the
22· · · ·Q.· ·Did you ever visit with Christina Murray about 22· ·summer of 2014 her company, including executives at the
23· ·what her personal knowledge of, say, for instance, 23· ·vice president and president level of her company, were
24· ·previous actions in the garage had been? 24· ·involved in decisions about repairs to be made to the
25· · · ·A.· ·I don't believe we talked in too much detail. 25· ·vehicle restraint system?

Page 63 Page 65
·1· ·I think at that time the -- the main concern was ·1· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Objection, form.
·2· ·securing the -- the opening. ·2· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I don't -- like I said, I
·3· · · ·Q.· ·Did Ms. Murray, from Premier Parking, ever ·3· ·don't recall our conversation really being that in
·4· ·disclose to you that Premier Parking was not only the ·4· ·depth.· Like I said, when -- during my correspondence
·5· ·parking managing agent for the current owner of the ·5· ·with them, it was in person, and the biggest concern
·6· ·property in 2017, but that Premier Parking had been the ·6· ·was -- and even myself was on the phone trying to get
·7· ·parking manager for the previous owner as well? ·7· ·our contractor out there, because I told them that it's
·8· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Objection, form. ·8· ·going to be secured regardless.· So that was the focus.
·9· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I'm note quite sure she ·9· ·And some of the secondary conversations I probably --
10· ·said in detail like when -- when they started managing 10· ·may not remember in that great of detail, but I don't
11· ·the company.· She did present it that they did manage 11· ·recall a discussion of dates and -- and some of the
12· ·the parking there. 12· ·details that you're asking.
13· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· What was -- 13· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Okay.· I just am asking you
14· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Objection, nonresponsive. 14· ·because it shows that from the very get-go that you
15· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· What was Ms. Murray's 15· ·advised Ms. Murray, among others, that there was going
16· ·representation to you about what her company's role was 16· ·to be an engineer's report required and that there may
17· ·at the garage? 17· ·be other reports before permits and repairs were going
18· · · ·A.· ·I'm assuming -- I mean, the way I took it was 18· ·to be required.· Do you see that?
19· ·to kind of oversee basic operations of the parking 19· · · ·A.· ·Yes, yes, yes.
20· ·garage. 20· · · ·Q.· ·And that was without question from the
21· · · ·Q.· ·And what was it -- 21· ·two incidents.· You knew that was going to happen?
22· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Objection, nonresponsive. 22· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.· If a vehicle really strikes any sort
23· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· -- the best you recall that 23· ·of -- any building to where there's like an obvious
24· ·she told you about how they oversee the basic 24· ·load-bearing structure as in like a column, I mean,
25· ·operations? 25· ·there's just no way to just know that just because it

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 John Hale
February 20, 2019
Page 66
·1· ·looks okay that it is okay.· So --
·2· · · ·Q.· ·Now, you also note in that very initial visit
·3· ·with Ms. Murray that you discussed the O'Conner
·4· ·incident, which you described as a similar incident,
·5· ·that occurred in September of 2016?
·6· · · ·A.· ·Yeah, yeah.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·And did Ms. Murray disclose to you that a
·8· ·structural engineer had advised the owner or owner's
·9· ·group of the garage that they needed to have all of the
10· ·cables inspected on every floor after the O'Conner
11· ·incident, but they chose not to do that?
12· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
13· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Objection, form.
14· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· That -- I don't believe --
15· ·I think I would have notated -- notated that.
16· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· That would have been a
17· ·significant piece of information to you?
18· · · ·A.· ·Yeah, yeah.
19· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Objection, form.
20· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Again, in terms of context of
21· ·violation, type of violation, level of violation, an
22· ·owner disregarding the advice of a structural engineer
23· ·is something that's significant to you, isn't it?
24· · · ·A.· ·It would -- it would guide some of our
25· ·actions, especially immediate, as far as shutting down
Page 67
·1· ·the garage and so forth.· Like I said, our enforcement
·2· ·path really stays the same regardless of history, so --
·3· ·because we try to provide, you know, fair and equitable
·4· ·enforcement.· So -- not saying we start everything from
·5· ·scratch, but our intent is, you know, obviously to
·6· ·collect evidence.· And just like any criminal
·7· ·investigation or even civil suit, you gather as much
·8· ·information as you can to prove your case.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·Now, just to respect your time and be
10· ·efficient with you, I'm not going to go through every
11· ·single entry you have here.· I'm going to ask you
12· ·questions about a few of them.· Will you turn to
13· ·Page 1507 with me?
14· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
15· · · ·Q.· ·1507, in the middle of the page, it has a
16· ·July 19th, 2017 entry that I believe you've already
17· ·talked a little bit about where you met with building
18· ·official, Jose Roig; program manager, Tony Hernandez;
19· ·and engineer, Jennifer V. --
20· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
21· · · ·Q.· ·-- right?· And then you list what you found
22· ·from the property?
23· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
24· · · ·Q.· ·And it included, one, you found that the cable
25· ·system had been repaired on three floors without
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
66 to 69
Page 68
·1· ·obtaining a permit?
·2· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·And that's just from what you visually
·4· ·inspected, right?
·5· · · ·A.· ·Well, that's also based on -- since there was
·6· ·a previous incident, before I got out of my truck to
·7· ·look at the property -- because the police had already
·8· ·maintained the scene, so I wasn't reckless on my part.
·9· ·I just want to point that out since it's being
10· ·recorded.· But I checked the -- the permit history for
11· ·the property and I did not see anything after the
12· ·O'Conner incident -- is that the correct name,
13· ·O'Conner?
14· · · ·Q.· ·Correct.
15· · · ·A.· ·Okay -- O'Conner incident showing that a
16· ·permit was received.· I believe there was a few
17· ·electrical permits, I believe, for fixing some lights.
18· ·But I didn't see anything that indicated any -- any
19· ·cable repairs.
20· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· So you didn't see anything that
21· ·indicated, for instance, in 2014 the owner of the
22· ·garage had employed somebody to do extensive, quote,
23· ·unquote, repairs on the cable system?
24· · · ·A.· ·I would have to --
25· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Objection, form.
Page 69
·1· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· -- pull that up to -- to
·2· ·confirm, but I don't -- I don't believe -- I don't
·3· ·believe there was anything in the permit history that
·4· ·showed cable repairs.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· And replacing the cable system
·6· ·on every level of the garage would definitely be
·7· ·something that needed a permit, correct?
·8· · · ·A.· ·Oh, yes, sir.· Yes, sir, absolutely.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·That's without question, true?
10· · · ·A.· ·Replacing any guard.· And that's why there was
11· ·clarity and notice to go back to that, is it's
12· ·technically a guard because there's -- it's a
13· ·pedestrian access also.
14· · · ·Q.· ·Right.
15· · · ·A.· ·They serve as vehicle barriers, so they --
16· ·it's two things that are the same thing.· So there's
17· ·really not a difference between a guard and a vehicle
18· ·barrier.· It's more of the -- the ability for that
19· ·guard to serve as a vehicle barrier.· So -- just for
20· ·clarity sake.
21· · · ·Q.· ·Thank you, sir.
22· · · · · · · · ·And so whether you're replacing it
23· ·because it's a pedestrian guard or a vehicle barrier,
24· ·or both, if you're replacing the system in the garage
25· ·in 2014, 100 percent without doubt, if you comply with
YVer1f
 John Hale
February 20, 2019 70 to 73
Page 70 Page 72
·1· ·the law you get a permit? ·1· ·representative at or near the time in 2017 as well,
·2· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Objection, form. ·2· ·true?
·3· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· That is correct.· Any guard ·3· · · ·A.· ·Yes.· Yes, sir.
·4· ·that's required that is replaced requires a permit. ·4· · · ·Q.· ·In it you note that the garage was originally
·5· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Did anybody ever tell you that ·5· ·built in '79 so that the '76 UBC would have been the
·6· ·the cables had been replaced in the entire garage in ·6· ·building code in effect at the time that it was built;
·7· ·2014 without a permit? ·7· ·is that right?
·8· · · ·A.· ·No, sir. ·8· · · ·A.· ·Well, to clarify, that's actually directly
·9· · · ·Q.· ·Anybody ever tell you that -- ·9· ·from Jose Roig.
10· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Objection, form. 10· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· So this whole provision is from
11· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· -- they selected an 11· ·Mr. Roig?
12· ·unqualified, non-engineer lake contractor to come in 12· · · ·A.· ·That is correct.· That's why I mentioned
13· ·and replace the cables in 2014 without a permit? 13· ·earlier about rather than surmising something he's
14· · · ·A.· ·No, sir.· Like I said, there was evidence that 14· ·actually already surmised, for efficiency purposes and
15· ·work was done without a permit, but I don't believe any 15· ·for reporting purposes, we -- we'll copy and paste the
16· ·dates were specified. 16· ·e-mail.
17· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Objection, form. 17· · · ·Q.· ·I gotcha.
18· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Did anybody ever admit to you 18· · · ·A.· ·So --
19· ·that no engineering plans were done for the replacement 19· · · ·Q.· ·Well, then, we'll ask Mr. Roig about it in
20· ·of the cable barrier systems in 2014? 20· ·detail, but when this was provided to the owner, did
21· · · ·A.· ·No, sir.· I -- like I said, I don't recall 21· ·the owner dispute any of this at all to you?
22· ·really any mention of 2014. 22· · · ·A.· ·I don't recall.
23· · · ·Q.· ·If that happened, that would also be a 23· · · ·Q.· ·And do you recall actually anybody from the
24· ·violation of the city regulations and codes, wouldn't 24· ·ownership group saying, "No, you're just wrong on any
25· ·it, to have a non-engineer perform those type of 25· ·or all of this"?

Page 71 Page 73
·1· ·repairs without a permit? ·1· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
·2· · · ·A.· ·Well, that -- that would be correct, because ·2· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I don't believe so.· And
·3· ·it would be work without a permit and, thus, through ·3· ·that's for -- I'm -- like I said, you would have to
·4· ·our -- what do you call it -- building criteria manual, ·4· ·talk to Jose.· I'm not sure of any e-mails or any
·5· ·it kind of outlines what would require engineer and ·5· ·conversation that he had aside from what I documented.
·6· ·third-party inspections as opposed to something as ·6· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· All right.· And then at the
·7· ·simple as replacing a stair or a step to where you ·7· ·very bottom of that paragraph that you have copied from
·8· ·could, obviously, just measure it and -- and make a ·8· ·Mr. Roig, it says, "All areas that have cable system
·9· ·determination. ·9· ·must be closed for parking."
10· · · ·Q.· ·So if you wanted to replace the cable barrier 10· · · · · · · · ·I assume that that was done because of
11· ·system in 2014 as the owner, the law required that you 11· ·the determination that until repaired properly,
12· ·get a permit, you have engineered plans, and you have a 12· ·permitted, inspected by an engineer it was dangerous?
13· ·qualified person do it, and then it be inspected by the 13· · · ·A.· ·That's correct.
14· ·City, right? 14· · · ·Q.· ·Then it says, "An evaluation must be completed
15· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Objection, form. 15· ·by the engineer on the whole cabling system and all
16· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Yes.· Well, it would be 16· ·repairs must be reviewed and approved for permit by
17· ·inspected by the City and by the City by way of a 17· ·DSD."
18· ·third-party engineer. 18· · · · · · · · ·What is DSD?
19· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Now, will you look with me on 19· · · ·A.· ·It's our -- the City of Austin Development
20· ·Page 1508 of Exhibit 16.· There is a summary of an 20· ·Services Department.
21· ·e-mail from Mr. Roig that you have contained on that 21· · · ·Q.· ·So if the owner had chosen to do a complete --
22· ·page.· Do you see that? 22· ·strike that.
23· · · ·A.· ·Yes, sir. 23· · · · · · · · ·If the owner had done repairs on the
24· · · ·Q.· ·And that was also provided to -- this 24· ·cabling system on every floor in 2014, that owner
25· ·information was provided to the owner or owner 25· ·should have done it by permit with an engineer,

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 John Hale
February 20, 2019
Page 74
·1· ·inspected and reviewed and approved by the DSD? ·1· ·way, just so you know.
·2· · · ·A.· ·That's correct.· That's with any parking
·3· ·garage that's been built since 2014.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·Now, in the meantime, before the ultimate
·5· ·repairs to bring the garage up to code was done, was
·6· ·there anything done in terms of barriers to allow the
·7· ·garage to be reopened?
·8· · · ·A.· ·Yes.· The building official said he would
·9· ·allow, if they put a supplemental system -- it could be
10· ·an engineered system.· They chose the water barriers
11· ·since they're commonly used for construction and so
12· ·forth.· So there -- there wasn't really a compelling
13· ·reason to -- to think that they would -- they wouldn't
14· ·be sufficient.
15· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And did the water barriers cause the
16· ·owner to lose any spaces that the owner reported to
17· ·you?
18· · · ·A.· ·It shortened them, and I know the -- the
19· ·portion that was -- that Ms. -- is it Bowman or Bowman?
20· · · ·Q.· ·Bowmer.
21· · · ·A.· ·Or Bowmer.· Sorry -- that she ended up driving
22· ·through, I believe that actually was fenced off and
23· ·coned off for quite a -- so -- so they did lose, I
24· ·think, that row of parking spaces for a decent amount
25· ·of time.
Page 75
·1· · · ·Q.· ·Did the owner -- strike that.
·2· · · · · · · · ·Did you ever make a determination or
·3· ·investigate anything about the dynamics of the Bowmer
·4· ·incident, how fast she was going, anything like that?
·5· · · ·A.· ·No.· I -- just from what I collected in
·6· ·pictures and what I visually saw, but I'm -- I'm not an
·7· ·expert in collisions.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·Did you ever interview either Ms. Bowmer or
·9· ·Mr. O'Conner?
10· · · ·A.· ·No, sir.
11· · · ·Q.· ·In your file you also have some correspondence
12· ·on Page 1516 dealing with a Mr. Cruickshank,
13· ·C-r-u-i-c-k-s-h-a-n-k.· Do you see that?
14· · · ·A.· ·On 1513 or --
15· · · ·Q.· ·1516.
16· · · ·A.· ·Oh, 1516.· Sorry about that.· And what did you
17· ·say the last name was?
18· · · ·Q.· ·It looks like Cruickshank.· But we spelled it,
19· ·so whatever it is is there.· Do you see it on the
20· ·bottom of the page, 1516, "I replied Mr. Cruickshank."
21· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Every time you say that she
22· ·has to type it.· That's why I'm laughing.· Call him by
23· ·his first name.
24· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Hylton.· Hylton is his first
25· ·name, H-y-l-t-o-n.· He's quite a bagpipe player, by the
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
74 to 77
Page 76
·2· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Did you know that?
·3· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· No.
·4· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· You can rent him out to play
·5· ·bagpipe events.
·6· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· You've brought this up
·7· ·before.· This is nothing of any --
·8· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Yeah, I'm fascinated with the
·9· ·bagpipes.
10· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Sorry.· I was on the wrong
11· ·page.· I remember, yeah, because I just asked for
12· ·Hylton when I called him.
13· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· You ever operated a bagpipe,
14· ·sir?
15· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
16· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· No, I've never --
17· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Does it look easy to you?
18· · · ·A.· ·To make it make noise, yes.· But to play it,
19· ·no.
20· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· That's what I meant, to make it
21· ·where somebody wanted to listen.
22· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.· Yeah, that would --
23· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· Fine.· I digress.
24· · · · · · · · ·Your e-mail to Hylton or your note to
25· ·Hylton, do you see that?
Page 77
·1· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·Who was this guy?· Why were you dealing with
·3· ·him?
·4· · · ·A.· ·He was representing the owner, the property
·5· ·owner's insurance company.· And I guess I should note,
·6· ·one of the -- the negative effects of copy and pasting,
·7· ·instead of commas sometimes you get upside-down
·8· ·question marks.· So that's why the case file is present
·9· ·that way.
10· · · ·Q.· ·I understand that.
11· · · ·A.· ·Okay.
12· · · ·Q.· ·No problem.
13· · · ·A.· ·They're not replacement of words.· It's
14· ·usually just punctuation.
15· · · ·Q.· ·It appears to me also from looking at your
16· ·file that in addition to the log where you have this
17· ·chronological series of events, you also put backup or
18· ·keep backup in the file, which is the underlying
19· ·e-mails, letters, et cetera, that are basically
20· ·synonymous with what you have in your log?
21· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.· Typically we'll -- or I will attach
22· ·them in chains rather than -- if I -- if like, say, an
23· ·e-mail chain goes over a two-day period, I'll put the
24· ·notations, but I'll attach, say, the chain of
25· ·eight e-mails rather than eight different attachments.
YVer1f
 John Hale
February 20, 2019
Page 78
·1· · · ·Q.· ·Makes sense.
·2· · · ·A.· ·Unless there is an actual attachment to the
·3· ·e-mail.· Then I do save that particular e-mail
·4· ·separate.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·So, Mr. Hale, in your dealing with the owner
·6· ·through either the owner, the owner's agent, or owner's
·7· ·representative, from your recollection did the owner
·8· ·ever dispute that the 2012 building code applied?
·9· · · ·A.· ·I don't recall, because, like I said, they had
10· ·actually hired engineers and -- I think it was Holt
11· ·Engineering and so forth, and submitted information.
12· ·They did kind of a pre-submittal to show us, I think it
13· ·was, like three different options.
14· · · ·Q.· ·All of which were in compliance with the
15· ·2012 code, right?
16· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.· And they -- just various prices.
17· ·Obviously, full concrete would be the most expensive
18· ·and you would have to rework the entire garage to
19· ·support the weight.
20· · · ·Q.· ·And did the owner ever dispute that they
21· ·needed engineered repairs?
22· · · ·A.· ·Not after receiving our letter and
23· ·supplements.
24· · · ·Q.· ·Did the owner ever dispute that they needed a
25· ·building permit?
Page 79
·1· · · ·A.· ·No, sir.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·Did the owner ever dispute that the building
·3· ·didn't even meet, at the time you inspected it, the
·4· ·1976 code?
·5· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
·6· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I don't -- I don't believe
·7· ·so.· I'm trying -- I don't believe -- I believe we
·8· ·showed just very small portions to where the spacing
·9· ·was various.· We didn't show them every example
10· ·because, like I said, we walked along the actual guards
11· ·and -- and measured in, I would say, well over
12· ·20 places.· So we didn't stop at every single one,
13· ·so --
14· · · ·Q.· ·Yeah.· And in all of those 20 places it was
15· ·out of code, wasn't it?
16· · · ·A.· ·There were some that it met.· Like I said,
17· ·it -- it varied.
18· · · ·Q.· ·Enough that it wasn't a hard decision and
19· ·within one hour the team knew this garage was
20· ·dangerous?
21· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.· And the primary reason behind that also
22· ·was the -- the cables were actually drilled through
23· ·the -- the intermediate columns and there weren't
24· ·additional holes above or below.· So it kind of showed
25· ·us that -- and we measured the actual holes and they
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
78 to 81
Page 80
·1· ·were out of compliance.· Some of them were.· Some were
·2· ·actually -- actually less than, you know, eight inches.
·3· ·So it -- there was a variance and so forth.
·4· · · · · · · · ·So -- and there were actually, you know,
·5· ·kind of a -- I don't know if it was a joke or just kind
·6· ·of a -- just the off statement that, "Well, it looks
·7· ·like the '78 guy didn't measure all these."· So --
·8· ·but -- the inspector.· So --
·9· · · ·Q.· ·So even from that one-hour inspection it was
10· ·open and obvious that if all you looked at was the
11· ·holes, even the holes in the columns weren't drilled at
12· ·proper distances to meet the '78 code.· Isn't that
13· ·true?
14· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Objection, form.
15· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
16· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· In places.
17· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· And the comment amongst the
18· ·team was that it looked like even the '78 guy didn't do
19· ·his job?
20· · · ·A.· ·The building inspector.
21· · · ·Q.· ·Yeah, didn't -- didn't catch it at the time.
22· · · ·A.· ·And it could have been, you know, policy --
23· ·like we don't know what the policy was to measure a
24· ·couple.· So -- and it's not common that you'll see a
25· ·building inspector even today, because the garage next
Page 81
·1· ·door to it actually has a newer cable system.· And to
·2· ·measure every single one, I mean, it would be a lot of
·3· ·work.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·Right.
·5· · · ·A.· ·So --
·6· · · ·Q.· ·Now, a cable -- strike that.
·7· · · · · · · · ·A city inspector making some kind of
·8· ·mistake in either the inspection in '78 or if it were
·9· ·Mr. Collins or even yourself, that doesn't relieve the
10· ·owner of the responsibility of complying with the law,
11· ·does it?
12· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
13· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· If it -- if it was finaled,
14· ·typically we would allow -- or the building official
15· ·would allow it to be built to where it was finaled.
16· ·Like, say, with those holes that were drilled through,
17· ·it obviously was an oversight of the 1978 inspector.
18· ·But I don't -- I can't think of a reason, unless it was
19· ·grossly -- if it was several inches to where someone
20· ·could walk through or fall through, I think that would
21· ·be a case-by-case issue, depending on the severity.
22· · · · · · · · ·It was just an observation, along with
23· ·some of the loose wiring and spacing throughout, that
24· ·we -- that's what kind of compelled us to check the
25· ·holes, because if it was uneven throughout, what did
YVer1f
 John Hale
February 20, 2019
Page 82
·1· ·the holes measure.· So --
·2· · · ·Q.· ·Yeah, I appreciate that answer.
·3· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.
·4· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Let me just object as
·5· ·nonresponsive because I asked you a slightly different
·6· ·question.
·7· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Oh.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· My question is more of a
·9· ·policy question, which is this.
10· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.
11· · · ·Q.· ·Does it -- is it okay for the owner to just
12· ·wait for a city inspector to tell the owner he or she
13· ·is out of compliance before the owner gets in
14· ·compliance or should the owner do that regardless of
15· ·whether there's an inspection?
16· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
17· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· It should be -- if any
18· ·repairs are done, I mean, the property should be kept
19· ·in compliance by the owner.
20· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Other than those that you've
21· ·talked about already today, do you remember any other
22· ·conversations that you consider to be important or
23· ·stand out to you or relevant with you and, for
24· ·instance, Ms. Murray or anybody from Premier or
25· ·Mr. O'Brien or Mr. Kahn, anybody else that you think,
Page 83
·1· ·you know, knowing what we're all here about, it would ·1· ·had not visited with Mr. Breen before today.· Did you
·2· ·be something significant or germane?
·3· · · ·A.· ·Let me think for a minute.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·Sure.
·5· · · ·A.· ·I mean, most of it I tried to keep in the case
·6· ·documentation.· Obviously, him saying he needed to pick
·7· ·up his kids is irrelevant to the case, so -- that was
·8· ·the reason for rescheduling some meetings, but, I mean,
·9· ·I can't -- I can't really think of anything, because,
10· ·like I said, if it was noteworthy or relevant, because
11· ·keep in mind we are collecting evidence, because if
12· ·they don't fix it, then we would have to go to the
13· ·Building and Standards Commission or even condemn the 13· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MS. BARNES)· Okay.· And, more
14· ·building.· I mean, it could go that far, which we would
15· ·need evidence on.
16· · · · · · · · ·So I don't believe there was any -- any
17· ·additional information.· Most of the correspondence I
18· ·did with Mr. O'Brien was via e-mail, and that's just
19· ·really the safest way to communicate nowadays.
20· · · ·Q.· ·Sure.· So like, for instance, if I understand
21· ·what you're saying is, is that if you took an example
22· ·where you sent out a notice of violation like we saw
23· ·the summer of 2017 where it says, "Your entire building
24· ·is dangerous.· You need to do the following things," if
25· ·the owner says, "You know what?· I'm not going to do
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
82 to 85
Page 84
·1· ·that," then that actually could lead to the entire
·2· ·building being shut down and condemned as part of the
·3· ·process?
·4· · · ·A.· ·That would compel us to do it immediately,
·5· ·because, like I said, we have to, obviously, think of
·6· ·the public's safety and occupants, even if it is a
·7· ·private citizen or, say, it was the parking garage for
·8· ·this building, we would have to take that into
·9· ·consideration.· So --
10· · · ·Q.· ·The parking garage for this building doesn't
11· ·let you park in it, so that's not a big deal.
12· · · ·A.· ·Oh, okay.· I -- well, I didn't know.· I was
13· ·looking for parking and I ended up parking a couple
14· ·blocks away, so --
15· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Not today.
16· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Thanks for your time today,
17· ·Mr. Hale.· These fine questioning lawyers are going to
18· ·have some questions for you.· I may have a few
19· ·follow-ups.
20· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Thank you.
21· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Mr. Hale, thank you for
22· ·being here.· I just have a few.
23· · · · · · · · · · · · ·EXAMINATION
24· ·BY MS. BARNES:
25· · · ·Q.· ·First of all, you testified earlier that you
Page 85
·2· ·visit with someone from his office?
·3· · · ·A.· ·I don't -- I don't recall.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.
·5· · · ·A.· ·I mean --
·6· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Nobody else in my office
·7· ·works.
·8· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Well, I -- I guess -- I
·9· ·guess I can -- I can say there I had the safe
10· ·assumption that there was going to be a lawsuit because
11· ·that's just typical on incidents that happen on like
12· ·kind of quasi -- I mean, it did -- it happens.
14· ·specifically, have you talked with anybody from Howry
15· ·Breen or any other attorney in this case about your
16· ·findings or your testimony today?
17· · · ·A.· ·No, I don't recall any.
18· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· You were not involved in the
19· ·September 2016 event, correct?
20· · · ·A.· ·No, not -- not involved.
21· · · ·Q.· ·And I believe you understand that back in
22· ·September of 2016, Mr. Collins didn't require the owner
23· ·to pull a permit to make the repair to the ninth floor,
24· ·correct?
25· · · ·A.· ·That's correct.
YVer1f
 John Hale
February 20, 2019 86 to 89
Page 86 Page 88
·1· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Object to form. ·1· ·violations, building owners, they have to rely on
·2· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MS. BARNES)· And you said that -- you made ·2· ·engineers and others to give them advice about code,
·3· ·a comment earlier about, "GTT thought everything was ·3· ·correct?
·4· ·okay from their previous experience with the prior ·4· · · ·A.· ·It would depend on the situation, but on more
·5· ·inspector." ·5· ·complex repairs or maintenance, that would be accurate.
·6· · · · · · · · ·Do you recall saying something along ·6· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And this is one that you would qualify
·7· ·those lines? ·7· ·as more complex, correct?
·8· · · ·A.· ·Yes, yes. ·8· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·Is that what you were referring to? ·9· · · ·Q.· ·And I believe you're not offering any opinion
10· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.· And -- and that's -- I mean, I didn't 10· ·on the state of the garage in September of 2016,
11· ·find a compelling reason to -- to argue that point. 11· ·correct?
12· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· It seems clear that a permit was not 12· · · ·A.· ·I wasn't there, so I couldn't comment on it.
13· ·required, Mr. Collins accepted an engineering report, 13· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· So you don't have an opinion on whether
14· ·and closed the case, correct? 14· ·or not it needed to be brought up to code in 2016; is
15· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Object to form. 15· ·that correct?
16· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· More accurately, a permit 16· · · ·A.· ·If it remained unchanged between then and my
17· ·was required.· Troy did not direct them to get said 17· ·inspection, then you could logically deduce that
18· ·permit and he closed the case. 18· ·repairs are -- but, I mean, I wasn't -- I didn't do an
19· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MS. BARNES)· Okay.· So you're saying, in 19· ·inspection.
20· ·retrospect, that a permit should have been required? 20· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Okay.· I'll object to the
21· · · ·A.· ·Oh, absolutely, yes. 21· ·nonresponsive part.
22· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· All right.· So Mr. Collins testified 22· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Sorry.
23· ·today that in retrospect it was determined that a 23· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MS. BARNES)· But you have no information
24· ·permit was required, but at the time in 2016, they 24· ·as to how it was in 2016, correct?
25· ·commonly accepted an engineering report without a 25· · · ·A.· ·No, I did not perform an inspection.

Page 87
·1· ·permit being pulled.· Do you have any reason to dispute
·2· ·that?
·3· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Object to form.
·4· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· That's not typical practice
·5· ·for our department.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MS. BARNES)· Okay.
·7· · · ·A.· ·The Austin Code Department, to be specific.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And were you involved in commercial
·9· ·inspections back in September of 2016 in the City of
10· ·Austin?
11· · · ·A.· ·I wasn't directly assigned.· I mean, there
12· ·were occasional cases that I would be assigned. I
13· ·worked west campus, which a lot of those
14· ·sorority/fraternity houses are quasi commercial and
15· ·some will have apartments and then commercial.· So,
16· ·yeah, not in that division, but, yes, I had worked
17· ·commercial cases.
18· · · ·Q.· ·In any event, as far as you know, back in
19· ·September of 2016, GTT did everything that the City of
20· ·Austin asked them to do; is that correct?
21· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Object to form.
22· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· According to the case
23· ·documentation.
24· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MS. BARNES)· Okay.· And in these types of
25· ·cases it's -- or with -- with respect to code
Page 89
·1· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And with respect to your interaction
·2· ·with GTT following the Bowmer accident, is it fair to
·3· ·say they did everything that you asked them to do?
·4· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.· I think I had to send a few reminders,
·5· ·but that was about it.· Nothing paramount.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· They were compliant?
·7· · · ·A.· ·Yes, yes.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·And you were asked a lot of questions about
·9· ·whether or not the owner disputed a number of things,
10· ·including whether it should be brought up to code,
11· ·whether it was dangerous.· You recall those questions?
12· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.
13· · · ·Q.· ·You're the authority on that, right?
14· · · ·A.· ·What do you mean?
15· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Object to form.
16· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MS. BARNES)· Well, if you're telling an
17· ·owner, "This isn't up to code, this is unsafe," they're
18· ·not really in a position to argue with you about that,
19· ·are they?
20· · · ·A.· ·I mean, I guess -- I guess just the existence
21· ·of y'all's positions, I mean, you can argue it.· But
22· ·there's physical action as far as securing the property
23· ·that we can take regardless of what they believe is or
24· ·isn't a violation, depending on the amount of danger
25· ·that's perceived.

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 John Hale
February 20, 2019
Page 90
·1· · · · · · · · ·As code enforcement inspectors, we are --
·2· ·I would hate to use the word deputized, but we have the
·3· ·code official who is the official over the enforcement
·4· ·of the property maintenance code, which is the basic,
·5· ·you know, health/safety standards, and we act in her --
·6· ·in her stead for, you know, ordering.
·7· · · · · · · · ·So the short answer, yes, we give
·8· ·official determinations to property owners.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And since you give official
10· ·determinations to property owners, there's really no
11· ·point in them arguing with you because they have to
12· ·comply, right?
13· · · ·A.· ·I mean, essentially.· I mean, logically, yes.
14· ·If someone of authority tells you to do something to
15· ·comply with code, it would definitely make my job a lot
16· ·easier if they always complied.
17· · · ·Q.· ·If they always what?
18· · · ·A.· ·Complied and did it.
19· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Do you have a lot of -- a lot of
20· ·building owners, commercial building owners argue with
21· ·you?
22· · · ·A.· ·It happens on several occasions.· It's mainly
23· ·of, you know, "I don't think that's required," and so
24· ·forth.· So -- and it happens quite a bit.
25· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.
Page 91
·1· · · ·A.· ·And not just to me; to any inspector.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· But --
·3· · · ·A.· ·Even when it comes to cutting grass.· Some
·4· ·people don't believe they have to cut it.· So even on
·5· ·simple things that it's measurable, like 12 inches like
·6· ·grass, they'll argue.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And that did not happen with
·8· ·GTT Parking, correct?
·9· · · ·A.· ·No.· No.
10· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· That's all I have.· Thank you.
11· · · · · · · · · · · · ·EXAMINATION
12· ·BY MR. STARR:
13· · · ·Q.· ·Hi.· My name --
14· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Need help?· I have never had
15· ·that --
16· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· I can't see my zipper.
17· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. STARR)· My name is Paul Starr. I
18· ·represent Premier.· I wanted to ask you just a few
19· ·questions.· You had talked before about your
20· ·conversations with Christina Murray.
21· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
22· · · ·Q.· ·Have you discussed all the conversations you
23· ·recall having with her?
24· · · ·A.· ·Like I said, it was in the immediate moment.
25· ·I don't -- it wasn't like a long-standing
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
90 to 93
Page 92
·1· ·correspondence.· I believe, if you look at the e-mails,
·2· ·I think I cc'd her on maybe a couple of earlier ones.
·3· ·But as it became apparent she wasn't in control of the
·4· ·property, I didn't find her relevant as far as being
·5· ·able to take action.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.
·7· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Objection, nonresponsive.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. STARR)· And you testified it was your
·9· ·understanding she was a subcontractor of the owner?
10· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
11· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Operated the parking
12· ·portion of the garage.
13· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. STARR)· Okay.· Did you have an
14· ·understanding as to who employed Christina Murray?
15· · · ·A.· ·I believe she gave me her business card, so, I
16· ·mean, it -- but you can print up anything on a business
17· ·card.
18· · · ·Q.· ·That's true.
19· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
20· · · ·Q.· ·I guess the question, then, did you understand
21· ·that she worked as an employee of the owner of the
22· ·garage or as an employee of some other company, or do
23· ·you recall?
24· · · ·A.· ·There wasn't really clarity on that.· Like I
25· ·said, the -- as I sorted out the relevance on persons'
Page 93
·1· ·responsibility, I -- it -- I didn't connect her with
·2· ·direct employer of the owner.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· You ultimately -- or the City of Austin
·4· ·ultimately issued a citation and the notice of
·5· ·violation to whom?
·6· · · ·A.· ·The owner.
·7· · · ·Q.· ·And why is that?
·8· · · ·A.· ·That's who -- that's who's actually ultimately
·9· ·responsible for all property violations.
10· · · ·Q.· ·Let me ask you some quick questions about the
11· ·2016 incident.· Based upon your testimony, do you
12· ·believe that City of Austin compliance official
13· ·Troy Collins should have required a permit to have been
14· ·pulled in 2016 after the O'Conner accident?
15· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
16· · · ·Q.· ·I know after the 2017 incident you got a -- I
17· ·believe a building official involved, which was
18· ·Jose Roig?
19· · · ·A.· ·Yes, yes.
20· · · ·Q.· ·Do you know whether or not Mr. Collins got a
21· ·building official involved for the 2016 repair?
22· · · ·A.· ·I don't believe so.· I've only breezed through
23· ·his notes.· They weren't that extensive.
24· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.
25· · · ·A.· ·I don't believe there was an indication in
YVer1f
 John Hale
February 20, 2019
Page 94
·1· ·there.
·2· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Do you believe Compliance Officer
·3· ·Troy Collins should have gotten a building official
·4· ·involved in 2016 after the O'Conner incident?
·5· · · ·A.· ·At that point as a singular incident, it -- it
·6· ·probably would have been less likely, similar to like,
·7· ·say, if there was a fire, depending on the extent of
·8· ·the fire would kind of depend on whether or not we
·9· ·would call in additional authority.· It was obviously
10· ·apparent from his pictures and -- well, and the SUV
11· ·dangling that, I mean, the cables were damaged.· So --
12· · · ·Q.· ·On the ninth floor only, though, correct?
13· · · ·A.· ·The top floor, ninth floor, yeah.
14· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Do you have an opinion as to whether or
15· ·not City of Austin Compliance Officer Troy Collins
16· ·should have mandated that the entirety of the garage be
17· ·re-cabled, as was ultimately done after the 2017
18· ·incident?
19· · · ·A.· ·I believe I would say, especially after a
20· ·second incident, similar to when deferring to someone
21· ·with more expertise like the building official is a lot
22· ·of it's predicated on the severity of the incident.
23· ·And, like I said, with the second incident, obviously,
24· ·we were compelled to, obviously, take a -- a thorough
25· ·look.
Page 95
·1· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Okay.· I'll object as
·2· ·nonresponsive.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. STARR)· Do you think following the
·4· ·2016 incident with Mr. O'Conner, it would have been
·5· ·prudent for Compliance Officer Collins to walk the
·6· ·entirety of the garage and make sure that the remainder
·7· ·of the cabling was, in fact, safe?
·8· · · ·A.· ·I think it would have been appropriate to at
·9· ·least check random levels.
10· · · ·Q.· ·Do you know whether or not he did that?
11· · · ·A.· ·I don't think there was any indication that I
12· ·saw in this documentation.
13· · · ·Q.· ·And if he had done that, do you know whether
14· ·or not that may have prevented the incident that
15· ·ultimately occurred to Ms. Bowmer in 2017?
16· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Objection, form.
17· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· Objection, form.
18· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Yeah, I -- I don't know the
19· ·dynamics of the actual incident, so I couldn't really
20· ·say.
21· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. STARR)· Do you contend that the City
22· ·of Austin's failure to require a permit back in 2016
23· ·ultimately resulted in a less than adequate repair
24· ·being done at the garage?
25· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Object to form.
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
94 to 97
Page 96
·1· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· It was one that was not
·2· ·approved by the building official, which, by definition
·3· ·of the code, is the only adequate repair.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. STARR)· So in that case it was only
·5· ·approved by compliance officer, Mr. Collins, correct?
·6· · · ·A.· ·I believe it was more the form accepted rather
·7· ·than approved, I guess.· The -- I'm only going by the
·8· ·way it was written.· It didn't really state outright
·9· ·that there was some sort of determination.· It was just
10· ·a receipt of an engineer report and the case was
11· ·closed.· So I will say I don't know how I could really
12· ·answer that accurately, because, like I said, the
13· ·information in the case documentations kind of -- kind
14· ·of just closes.· There was not like a finality, I
15· ·guess.
16· · · ·Q.· ·So as far as you understand, back in 2016 the
17· ·City of Austin, through its compliance officer,
18· ·Mr. Collins, believed that the Littlefield Garage was
19· ·safe enough to operate, correct?
20· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Object to form.
21· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· The only thing I could
22· ·comment is he did not order it be secured or any
23· ·further work being done.
24· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. STARR)· Okay.· And back in 2016 the
25· ·City of Austin, through it compliance officer,
Page 97
·1· ·Mr. Collins, did not require the entirety of the garage
·2· ·cabling system to be replaced, correct?
·3· · · ·A.· ·That's correct.
·4· · · ·Q.· ·And it's your opinion at this time that may
·5· ·have resulted simply because Mr. Collins didn't go from
·6· ·floor to floor inspecting things as he should have?
·7· · · ·A.· ·That's -- that's plausible.· If you see
·8· ·violations that are more systemic throughout the whole
·9· ·system, like the cable system, then it would prompt you
10· ·to order further action be taken rather than just
11· ·typing in cables.
12· · · ·Q.· ·All right, sir.· I appreciate it.
13· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· I'll pass the witness.
14· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· I do have two other questions
15· ·for you.
16· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Do you mind if I check the
17· ·time?
18· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Yeah, sure.· Check it.
19· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I've got a kid in daycare,
20· ·so I --
21· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· No problem.· I only have
22· ·about five minutes for you, or less.
23· · · · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Off the record, 3:16.
24· · · · · · · · ·(Discussion off the record.)
25· · · · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Stand by.· This is
YVer1f
 John Hale
February 20, 2019
Page 98
·1· ·Segment No. 3.· Back on the record, 3:18.
·2· · · · · · · · · · ·FURTHER EXAMINATION
·3· ·BY MR. BREEN:
·4· · · ·Q.· ·I have a few questions for you, Mr. Hale,
·5· ·about Page 1508 and, specifically, the entry in your
·6· ·file on that page.· The provision I want to talk to you
·7· ·about starts off with, "The garage was originally built
·8· ·in 1979."
·9· · · · · · · · ·Do you see that?
10· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
11· · · ·Q.· ·All right.· And then it goes on to detail some
12· ·of the things that you've already told me here today.
13· ·I want to call your attention to the part that picks up
14· ·where it says, "As per our inspection yesterday."· Do
15· ·you see that, about five lines down from where I was
16· ·just advising you.· If you want to see it, it's
17· ·flagged --
18· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· I don't have 1508.
19· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· -- right here on the thing.
20· ·If you'll look up on the thing.
21· · · ·A.· ·Oh.· Well, then, yeah, I guess -- I didn't
22· ·know you had that.
23· · · ·Q.· ·That's all right.· See that part where it
24· ·says, "As per our inspection yesterday, it was
25· ·noticeable that several of the cable system railings do
Page 99
·1· ·not even meet these requirements"?· You see where I am? ·1· · · ·Q.· ·Fair enough.
·2· · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·It says, "In addition to that, there is
·4· ·evidence of repairs and cables are loose on several
·5· ·locations.· The repairs done last year on Level 9 were
·6· ·not permitted," right?
·7· · · ·A.· ·That is -- that is correct.
·8· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· Then it goes on to say you didn't
·9· ·receive any request for permit or engineering details
10· ·on the repairs.· Those would be things normally
11· ·required by the law, right?
12· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.· "We" in context is the building
13· ·official and development services.
14· · · ·Q.· ·I understand, that the City didn't receive
15· ·things that normally are required by law, permit, and
16· ·engineering details?
17· · · ·A.· ·That is correct.
18· · · ·Q.· ·And it says, "The engineer letter provided to
19· ·ACD on those repairs states that repairs were done in
20· ·accordance and compliance with the 2012 existing
21· ·building code, that damaged cables and end anchors were 21· ·the repairs hadn't been done in accord with the new
22· ·removed and replaced with knew cables and anchors and
23· ·that the barrier system has been constructed in general
24· ·conformance with the requirements of the structural
25· ·specifications and meet the requirements of applicable
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
98 to 101
Page 100
·1· ·laws, building codes, and ordinances related to repairs
·2· ·of existing buildings."
·3· · · · · · · · ·Then you say, "Per our visit and
·4· ·observation on the cables on the ninth floor, it does
·5· ·not appear that the cables were replaced and they are
·6· ·also loose."
·7· · · · · · · · ·So isn't it true, sir, that when you
·8· ·inspected the cables on the ninth floor, which is where
·9· ·Mr. O'Conner's vehicle went off, you found that the
10· ·cables in some instances were not replaced and cables
11· ·were also loose?
12· · · · · · · · ·MR. STARR:· Objection, form.
13· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Just to put it who actually
14· ·stated that in -- in this particular e-mail, that was
15· ·actually Jose Roig.
16· · · ·Q.· ·(BY MR. BREEN)· Okay.
17· · · ·A.· ·He said me, so I just wanted to clarify that.
18· · · ·Q.· ·Well, it says, "Per our visit."
19· · · ·A.· ·Yeah, this is a direct copy and paste of his
20· ·actual e-mail.
21· · · ·Q.· ·Well, when you visited the ninth floor, did
22· ·you find that there were cables that weren't replaced
23· ·and there were also loose cables?
24· · · ·A.· ·That's correct.· But I just -- because, like I
25· ·said, you put "I put."· I -- that was actually --
Page 101
·2· · · ·A.· ·I just --
·3· · · ·Q.· ·Let me re-ask it.
·4· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·When you visited the ninth floor, sir, you
·6· ·found physical evidence that was contrary to the
·7· ·engineering letter that had been given to the City in
·8· ·2016; isn't that true?
·9· · · ·A.· ·That is correct.· And the evidence was similar
10· ·to that of the newer repairs that the patina appeared
11· ·to match the older cables, which typically when you buy
12· ·new cables they don't look like older cables.
13· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And then there's also one other point
14· ·that I wanted to ask you about.· Where it says,
15· ·"Repairs to the cable system must be in accordance with
16· ·new codes and dangerous conditions must be eliminated,
17· ·and this was not the case with the repairs on the
18· ·ninth floor."
19· · · · · · · · ·So isn't it true when you and the team
20· ·you were with inspected the ninth floor, you found that
22· ·codes and the dangerous conditions had not been
23· ·eliminated?
24· · · ·A.· ·That is correct.· I think the engineer
25· ·reference was to the existing building code, which I
YVer1f
 John Hale
February 20, 2019
Page 102
·1· ·mentioned earlier, allows you to actually repair to the
·2· ·code in which it was built.· But since, like I said, it
·3· ·didn't appear that those occurred, they weren't done
·4· ·for -- to the current code or the existing building
·5· ·code.
·6· · · ·Q.· ·Thank you, Mr. Hale.· That's all I have.
·7· · · · · · · · ·MS. BARNES:· One question for you.
·8· · · · · · · · · · ·FURTHER EXAMINATION
·9· ·BY MS. BARNES:
10· · · ·Q.· ·You just said something about if these were
11· ·new cables -- you said something about them looking
12· ·like older cables, right?
13· · · ·A.· ·Yeah, there were sections on -- on the lower
14· ·floors that you can kind of tell to where -- where the
15· ·buckles were, that it was light or new, because
16· ·basically steel over time develops like a patina.
17· ·And -- and, like I said, when we looked at it and you
18· ·can see kind of like little crimps.· And typically with
19· ·a professional new installation, it will typically look
20· ·newer and the cables wouldn't have crimps in them.
21· · · ·Q.· ·What floor are you talking about, lower floor?
22· · · ·A.· ·No, no, the ninth floor.
23· · · ·Q.· ·Oh, you're talking on the ninth floor?
24· · · ·A.· ·I'm -- I'm using that as far as the point of
25· ·reference to where even a layman, I believe, could
Page 103
·1· ·determine that the cables weren't from the same spool.
·2· ·Like, say, for instance, from 1978 there's going to be
·3· ·all those exhaust fumes, wind, rain, all that stuff.
·4· ·So the metal cables that were installed then should
·5· ·actually have the same patina, because they're exposed
·6· ·to the same elements, as opposed to when you installed
·7· ·newer -- I mean, it takes several years to develop that
·8· ·patina.
·9· · · · · · · · ·Now, it is plausible that they used
10· ·heavily patinaed wire.· So, I mean, it is -- it's
11· ·plausible, but it was not apparent when we looked at
12· ·it.
13· · · ·Q.· ·And -- and you're talking about only the
14· ·ninth floor?
15· · · ·A.· ·Yes.· In other parts we could see where
16· ·like -- I hate to use the word "turnbuckle," but where
17· ·they were fastened to the end walls, you could see like
18· ·shiny new stainless steel that had very little patina,
19· ·which led us to believe that in the last couple of
20· ·years it was replaced because it didn't match the metal
21· ·that was right next to it.
22· · · · · · · · ·So -- and that's kind of similar to where
23· ·someone replaces siding.· I mean, you can tell siding
24· ·that has been weathered for 15 years versus, you know,
25· ·stuff that was just bought.· And there's certain
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC
713-653-7100
102 to 105
Page 104
·1· ·materials that aren't built anymore.· So we -- we make
·2· ·basic assessments.
·3· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· The testimony in this case we -- there
·4· ·was a witness by the name of Curtis Brown, who was
·5· ·hired by a prior owner to do a repair to the
·6· ·Littlefield Garage, and his testimony is he replaced
·7· ·all the cables in the entire garage in 2014, which
·8· ·would then mean when you were there in 2017 that the
·9· ·vast majority of the cables were approximately
10· ·three years old.· Does that comport with what you saw?
11· · · ·A.· ·And that could be why the patina on the
12· ·exterior cables was similar if he, in fact, replaced
13· ·all of them.
14· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· All right.· That's all the questions I
15· ·have.
16· · · · · · · · ·MR. BREEN:· Good.· Thank you, sir.· We're
17· ·done.
18· · · · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· We're off the record,
19· ·3:26.
20· · · · · · ·(Proceedings concluded at 3:26 p.m.)
21
22
23
24
25
Page 105
·1· · · · · · · · · · CHANGES AND SIGNATURE
· · ·WITNESS NAME: JOHN HALE
·2· ·DATE OF DEPOSITION: FEBRUARY 20, 2019
·3· ·PAGE· ·LINE· · · · · · ·CHANGE· · · · · · REASON
·4· ·_______________________________________________________
·5· ·_______________________________________________________
·6· ·_______________________________________________________
·7· ·_______________________________________________________
·8· ·_______________________________________________________
·9· ·_______________________________________________________
10· ·_______________________________________________________
11· ·_______________________________________________________
12· ·_______________________________________________________
13· ·_______________________________________________________
14· ·_______________________________________________________
15· ·_______________________________________________________
16· ·_______________________________________________________
17· ·_______________________________________________________
18· ·_______________________________________________________
19· ·_______________________________________________________
20· ·_______________________________________________________
21· ·_______________________________________________________
22· ·_______________________________________________________
23· ·_______________________________________________________
24· ·_______________________________________________________
25· ·_______________________________________________________
 John Hale
February 20, 2019
Page 106
·1· ·_______________________________________________________
·2· ·_______________________________________________________
·3· ·_______________________________________________________
·4· · · · · · I, JOHN HALE, have read the foregoing
· · ·deposition and hereby affix my signature that same is
·5· ·true and correct, except as noted above.
·6
·7
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·_______________________________
·8· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·JOHN HALE
·9
10· ·THE STATE OF __________)
· · ·COUNTY OF _____________)
11
12· · · ·Before me, ___________________________, on this day
13· ·personally appeared JOHN HALE, known to me (or proved
14· ·to me under oath or through
15· ·___________________________) (description of identity
16· ·card or other document) to be the person whose name is
17· ·subscribed to the foregoing instrument and acknowledged
18· ·to me that they executed the same for the purposes and
19· ·consideration therein expressed.
20· · · ·Given under my hand and seal of office this
21· ·__________ day of ________________________, __________.
22
23
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·_______________________________
24· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·THE STATE OF___________________
25· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·COMMISSION EXPIRES:____________
106 to 109
Page 108
·1· · · ·Mr. Sean E. Breen - 1 hr. 38 min.
· · · · ·Ms. Tasha Barnes - 10 min.
·2· · · ·Mr. Paul B. Starr - 7 min.
· · · · ·Mr. Brandon W. Carr -
·3
·4· · · ·That pursuant to information given to the
·5· ·deposition officer at the time said testimony was
·6· ·taken, the following includes counsel for all parties
·7· ·of record:
·8· · · ·Mr. Sean E. Breen, Attorney for Plaintiff;
· · · · ·Ms. Tasha Barnes, Attorney for Defendants GTT
·9· ·Parking, LP, Sheldon David Kahn;
· · · · ·Mr. Paul B. Starr, Attorney for Defendant Premier
10· ·Parking of Tennessee, LLC;
· · · · ·Mr. Brandon W. Carr, Attorney for Witness.
11
12· · · ·I further certify that I am neither counsel for,
13· ·related to, nor employed by any of the parties or
14· ·attorneys in the action in which this proceeding was
15· ·taken, and further that I am not financially or
16· ·otherwise interested in the outcome of the action.
17· · · ·Further certification requirements pursuant to Rule
18· ·203 of TRCP will be certified to after they have
19· ·occurred.
20
21
22
23
24
25

Page 107 Page 109

·1· · · · · · · · · · ·NO. D-1-GN-17-004456 ·1· · · ·Certified to by me this ______ of _____________,
·2· ·CHRISTI J. BOWMER,· · · · ·) IN THE DISTRICT COURT ·2· ·2019.
· · · · ·Plaintiff,· · · · · · ·) ·3
·3· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ) ·4
· · ·VS.· · · · · · · · · · · · ) TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS
·5
·4· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · )
·6
· · ·GTT PARKING, LP, SHELDON· ·)
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · Kim Seibert, Texas CSR 4589
·5· ·DAVID KAHN, PREMIER· · · · )
· · ·PARKING OF TENNESSEE,· · · ) ·7· · · · · · · · · · · · · Expiration Date 12-31-2021

·6· ·LLC, and WEITZMAN· · · · · ) · · · · · · · · · · · · · · U.S. Legal Support, Inc.

· · ·MANAGEMENT CORPORATION,· · ) ·8· · · · · · · · · · · · · 701 Brazos, Suite 380
·7· · · ·Defendants.· · · · · · ) 353RD JUDICIAL DISTRICT · · · · · · · · · · · · · · Austin, Texas· 78701
·8 ·9· · · · · · · · · · · · · Firm Registration 10558
· · · · · · · · · · ·REPORTER'S CERTIFICATION · · · · · · · · · · · · · · Expiration Date 12-31-2021
·9· · · · · · · ORAL AND VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF
10
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·JOHN HALE
11· ·Job No. 4-AUSTIN 287781 KS
10· · · · · · · · · · · FEBRUARY 20, 2019
12
11· · · ·I, KIM SEIBERT, Certified Shorthand Reporter in and
13
12· ·for the State of Texas, hereby certify to the
13· ·following: 14
14· · · ·That the witness, JOHN HALE, was duly sworn by the 15
15· ·officer and that the transcript of the oral deposition 16
16· ·is a true record of the testimony given by the witness; 17
17· · · ·That the deposition transcript was submitted on 18
18· ·_______________, 2019, to the witness or to the 19
19· ·attorney for the witness for examination, signature and
20
20· ·return to me by _________________, 2019;
21
21· · · ·That the amount of time used by each party at the
22
22· ·deposition is as follows:
23
23
24 24
25 25

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100
 John Hale
February 20, 2019 110
Page 110
·1· · · · · FURTHER CERTIFICATION UNDER RULE 203 TRCP
·2· · · ·The original deposition was/was not returned to the
·3· ·deposition officer on _________________________;
·4· · · ·If returned, the attached Changes and Signature
·5· ·page contains any changes and the reasons therefor;
·6· · · ·If returned, the original deposition was delivered
·7· ·to Mr. Sean E. Breen, Custodial Attorney;
·8· · · ·That $__________ is the deposition officer's
·9· ·charges to the Plaintiff for preparing the original
10· ·deposition transcript and any copies of exhibits;
11· · · ·That the deposition was delivered in accordance
12· ·with Rule 203.3, and that a copy of this certificate
13· ·was served on all parties shown herein on and filed
14· ·with the Clerk.
15· · · ·Certified to by me this __________ day of
16· ·____________________, 2019.
17
18
19
· · · · · · · · · ·Kim Seibert, Texas CSR 4589
20· · · · · · · · ·Expiration Date 12-31-2021
· · · · · · · · · ·U.S. Legal Support, Inc.
21· · · · · · · · ·701 Brazos, Suite 380
· · · · · · · · · ·Austin, Texas· 78701
22· · · · · · · · ·Firm Registration 10558
· · · · · · · · · ·Expiration Date 12-31-2021
23
24
· · ·Job No. 4-AUSTIN 287781 KS
25

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC

713-653-7100
Exhibit CC
 ,. ..

From: bbonniwell@blueconstruction.com
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2017 8:41 AM
To: Gib Jones; 'Ed Sides'; 'Don Jay'
Cc: ap@blueconstruction.com
Subject: RE: Littlefield Garage Cable Wires

Repair will be written to Premier Parking Littlefield garage.

Regards,

Brian Bonniwell
Superintendent I Field Operations
Blue & Associates, Inc.
15602 Patrica Street, Suite 200 - Austin TX 78728
Cell: (512)-801-1889 I Office: (512)-670-9310
bbonnlwell(@blueconstruction.com
,n\'"W .blueconstruction.com

-------- Original message --------

From: Gib Jones <jgibjones@blueconstruction.com>
Date: 3/24/17 8:13 AM (GMT-06:00)
To: 'Brian Bonniwell' <BBonniwell@blueconstruction.com>, 'Ed Sides' <esides@blueconstruction.com>, 'Don
Jay' <dj@blueconstruction.com>
Cc: ap@blueconstruction.com
Subject: RE: Littlefield Garage Cable Wires

Who will the contract be written to?

Regards,
J. Gib Jones
Senior Vice President
Blue & Associates, Inc.
15602 Patrica Street, Suite 200 I Austin TX 78728
c: 512.563.4261 Ip: 512.596.3067 If: 512.670.9312
jgibjones@blueconstruction.com I www.blueconstruction.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Brian Bonniwell [mailto:BBonniwell@blueconstruction.com]
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2017 7:29 AM
To: 'Gib Jones'; 'Ed Sides'; 'Don Jay'
Cc: ap@blueconstruction.com
Subject: FW: Littlefield Garage Cable Wires
'
<:r
I
::.. t
Team,

1
Last year we repaired the Littlefield parking garage incident when the car
jumped a curb and flew over the west side of the garage. Since we did a
spectacular job executing this we have been asked to repair two more cables
where the retrofit assembly has come apart. I have the contact to the
manufacturer of the GRAB IT anchors and will get a visual on the current
situation, and write a scope, as well as generate hours to compete the
operation overall.

-----Original Message-----
From: Christina Murray [mailto:christinamurray@premierparking.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2017 2:42 PM
To: bbonniwell
Subject: Littlefield Garage Cable Wires

Brian

In addition to the level we spoke of previously, level 7 up now also has

wide cabling out. I called your office but the suggested I reach out to you.

Christina Murray
Austin Operations Manager
508 Brazos Street
Austin, TX 78701
Office: (512) 536-1145
Mobile: (615) 339-4937
www.premierparking.com

2
Exhibit DD
 rf~ EXH1srr ~

From: Christina Murray christinam urray@prernierparking.corn ~ , . I y~ cr-- I

Subject :
Date:
To :
RE: Littlefield Cable Wire Repair
June 9, 2017 at 4:11 PM
Sean O'Brien sean .obi-ien .austin@gmail.com
I I ~r---T
-o-
I
.......
Cc : Sean O'Brien seanobrien@co li nawest.com
···········-· ··-· - -- - ---
-
We have 2 levels with wire cables out of the walls. Brian brought someone out to assess and
quote the damage for repair. He has the information and I can ask that he send to me for your
review, if you'd like.

Christina Murray, CPP I Austin Operations Manager I 615-339-4937 I christinamurray@premierparking.com

Premier Parking Office: 512-536· 1145
508 Brazos Street I Austin, TX 78701 I www.premierparking.com

lffl
From: Sean O'Brien [mailto:sean.obrien.austin@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, June 09, 2017 4:10 PM
To: Christina Murray <christinamurray@premierparking.com>
Cc: Sean O'Brien <seanobrien@colinawest.com>
Subject: Re: Littlefield Cable Wire Repair

I need a refresher. We will probably do in house with the same subs.

Sean O'Brien
512 .565.4477

On Jun 9, 2017, at 3:40 PM, Christina Murray <christinamurray_@.premierparking.com> wrote:

Sean,

I followed up with Brian at Blue yesterday about the cable wire repairs here at LF.
He said I should reach out to you to see if the repairs are approved.

<image001.png>
Christina Murray, CPP I Austin Operations Manager I 615-339-4937 I
christinamurray_@.RremierRarking .com
Premier Parking Office: 512-536-1145
508 Brazos Street I Austin, TX 78701 I www.Rremierparking .com
<image008.png> <image009.png><image010.png>

GTf 154
Exhibit EE
 Christi Bowmer
June 15, 2018 1 YVer1f

Page 1
·1· · · · · · · · · ·NO. D-1-GN-17-004456

·2· CHRISTI BOWMER,· · · · · · · ) IN THE DISTRICT COURT

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·)
·3· · · · · ·Plaintiff,· · · · · )
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·)
·4· VS.· · · · · · · · · · · · · ) TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·)
·5· GTT PARKING, L.P., AND· · · ·)
· · SHELDON DAVID KAHN,· · · · · )
·6· PREMIER PARKING OF· · · · · ·)
· · TENNESSEE, L.L.C.,· · · · · ·)
·7· WEITZMAN MANAGEMENT· · · · · )
· · CORPORATION,· · · · · · · · ·)
·8· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·)
· · · · · · ·Defendants.· · · · ·) 353RD JUDICIAL DISTRICT
·9
· · · · · · · -----------------------------------
10
· · · · · · · ·ORAL AND VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF
11
· · · · · · · · · · · · CHRISTI BOWMER
12
· · · · · · · · · · · · ·JUNE 15, 2018
13
· · · · · · · -----------------------------------
14· · · ·ORAL AND VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF CHRISTI BOWMER,

15· produced as a witness at the instance of the

16· Defendant, GTT Parking, L.P., and Sheldon David Kahn,

17· and duly sworn, was taken in the above-styled and

18· numbered cause on June 15, 2018, from 10:03 a.m. to

19· 12:33 p.m. and from 1:07 p.m. to 2:15 p.m. before

20· Vanessa J. Theisen, CSR in and for the State of

21· Texas, reported by machine shorthand, at the offices

22· of Howry Breen & Herman, L.L.P., 1900 Pearl Street,

23· Austin, Texas 78705, pursuant to the Texas Rules of

24· Civil Procedure and provisions stated on the record

25· or attached hereto.

 Christi Bowmer
June 15, 2018 2 to 5
Page 2 Page 4
·1· · · · · · · · · ·A P P E A R A N C E S ·1· · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· This is the
·2
· · FOR THE PLAINTIFF: ·2· videotaped oral deposition of Christi Bowmer.
·3· · · ·Mr. Chris Lavorato
· · · · ·Mr. Randy Howry ·3· Today's date, June 15th, 2018, the approximate time
·4· · · ·HOWRY BREEN & HERMAN ·4· 10:03 a.m.· We're recording and on the record.
· · · · ·1900 Pearl Street
·5· · · ·Austin, Texas 78705-5408 ·5· · · · · · · · · · · CHRISTI BOWMER,
· · · · ·(512) 474-7300
·6· · · ·Clavorato@howrybreen.com ·6· having been first duly sworn, testified as follows:
· · · · ·Mplazaola@howrybreen.com
·7 ·7· · · · · · · · · · · · EXAMINATION
· · FOR THE DEFENDANTS GTT PARKING, L.P., AND SHELDON ·8· BY MS. BARNES:
·8· DAVID KAHN:
· · · · ·Ms. Tasha L. Barnes ·9· · · ·Q.· Would you state your full name for the
·9· · · ·THOMPSON, COE, COUSINS & IRONS, L.L.P.
· · · · ·701 Brazos, Suite 1500 10· record, please?
10· · · ·Austin, Texas 78701 11· · · ·A.· It's Christi Joyce Bowmer.
· · · · ·(512) 708-8200
11· · · ·Tbarnes@thompsoncoe.com 12· · · ·Q.· Have you ever given a deposition before?
12
· · FOR THE DEFENDANT PREMIER PARKING OF TENNESSEE, 13· · · ·A.· I have not.
13· L.L.C.:
· · · · ·Mr. Christopher L. Rhodes
14· · · ·Q.· Okay.· I assume you've had an opportunity to
14· · · ·Ayik & Associates 15· speak with your attorneys about the purpose of
· · · · ·9601 McAllister Freeway, Suite 910
15· · · ·San Antonio, Texas 78216 16· today's deposition.· Is that correct?
· · · · ·(512) 423- 2058
16· · · ·Dwilli16@travelers.com 17· · · ·A.· That's correct.
17 18· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And I represent GTT Parking and
· · FOR THE DEFENDANT WEITZMAN MANAGEMENT CORPORATION:
18· · · ·Ms. Amanda A. McCoy 19· Sheldon David Kahn in the lawsuit that you've filed
· · · · ·NAMAN HOWELL SMITH & LEE
19· · · ·8310 N. Capital of Texas Highway 20· arising from your accident at the Littlefield Garage.
· · · · ·Suite 490
20· · · ·Austin, Texas 78731
21· Do you understand that?
· · · · ·(512) 479-0300 22· · · ·A.· I understand.
21· · · ·Amccoy@namanhowell.com
22 23· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And we've not met before today.
23· ALSO PRESENT:
· · · · ·Mr. Brent Kirby, Videographer 24· Correct?
24 25· · · ·A.· That is correct.
25

Page 3 Page 5
·1· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·INDEX ·1· · · ·Q.· I see you a lot because we work in the same
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·PAGE
·2· Appearances.....................................· ·2 ·2· building.· Correct?
·3· CHRISTI BOWMER ·3· · · ·A.· I just found that out, yes.
·4· · · ·EXAMINATION BY MS. BARNES..................· ·4
· · · · ·EXAMINATION BY MR. RHODES.................. 134
·4· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Okay.· Just a few ground rules for
·5· · · ·FURTHER EXAMINATION BY MS. BARNES.......... 148 ·5· today.· Because she's taking down everything we say,
·6
·6· it's important that you answer out loud and do
· · Signature and Changes........................... 150
·7· Reporter's Certificate.......................... 152 ·7· things -- not do things that we do in casual
·8 ·8· conversation, such as start to answer my question
·9· · · · · · · · · · · · ·EXHIBITS
10· NO.· · · ·DESCRIPTION· · · · · · · · · · · · · · PAGE ·9· before I'm finished with it.
11· 1· · · · ·Christi J. Bowmer Resume 10· · · · · · · · You're going to know where I'm headed
· · · · · · · Bowmer 001171 - 1172................... 24
12· 2· · · · ·W-2s and Earning Summaries
11· with the question, so kind of -- the tendency is to
· · · · · · · Bowmer 001166 - 1170................... 40 12· sort of jump in.· Please let me finish my question
13· 3· · · · ·Photograph of Parking Pass
13· before you start your answer, and I'll do the same
· · · · · · · Bowmer 001464.......................... 50
14· 4· · · · ·On-Going Issues from Accident.......... 60 14· for you.· Okay?
· · 5· · · · ·Cell Phone Records 15· · · ·A.· Okay.
15· · · · · · Bowmer 000052 - 0054................... 60
· · 6· · · · ·Psychological Evaluation of Christi 16· · · ·Q.· If at any time you don't understand one of
16· · · · · · Joyce Bowmer by H. David Feltoon, 17· my questions, please just let me know, and I'm happy
· · · · · · · Ph.D...................................114
17 18· to rephrase or restate it for you.· And if you don't
18 19· ask me to do that, I'm going to assume that you
19
20
20· understood my question.· Can we have that agreement?
· · REPORTER'S NOTE 21· · · ·A.· Yes.
21· Quotation marks are used for clarity and do not 22· · · ·Q.· Okay.· We're probably going to be here for a
· · necessarily reflect a direct quote
22 23· while, so if at any time you need to take a break for
23 24· the restroom or just because this may be upsetting to
24
25 25· you as well, if you'd like to take a break at any

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Christi Bowmer
June 15, 2018 6 to 9
Page 6 Page 8
·1· time, I'm happy to accommodate you.· Okay? ·1· · · ·A.· No.
·2· · · ·A.· (Nodding head up and down.) ·2· · · ·Q.· Do you normally take any other medications
·3· · · ·Q.· And you understand that you are under oath, ·3· on a daily basis?
·4· sworn to tell the truth just as if you were in front ·4· · · ·A.· I am supposed to take muscle relaxers as
·5· of the judge and jury at the courthouse? ·5· well, but I can't take them during work because
·6· · · ·A.· Yes. ·6· they -- I will fall asleep.· And so I've told my pain
·7· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Are you on any medications today? ·7· management person that I can't do it, and so she
·8· · · ·A.· Yes. ·8· says, "Well, then take it when you get home to try to
·9· · · ·Q.· What did you take today? ·9· help those muscles around the cage in your back
10· · · ·A.· Hydrocodone. 10· relax."
11· · · ·Q.· Okay.· When did you take that? 11· · · ·Q.· Is that what you've been doing?
12· · · ·A.· Approximately -- let's see.· When I got up, 12· · · ·A.· I haven't been doing it.
13· 7:00. 13· · · ·Q.· What's the name of that medication, if you
14· · · ·Q.· This morning? 14· know?
15· · · ·A.· Yes. 15· · · ·A.· Baclofen.
16· · · ·Q.· How much did you take? 16· · · ·Q.· And which doctor were you just referring to?
17· · · ·A.· My allotted amount.· I am supposed to take 17· · · ·A.· It's the same.· It's under Dr. Wages, but I
18· four a day.· I normally do not take that many a day. 18· normally see the PA.· Her name is Jessica.· And I do
19· I normally take three to get through the day. 19· have my most recent treatment in the car.
20· · · ·Q.· Do you take all of those in the morning? 20· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Are there any other medications that
21· · · ·A.· No, I do not. 21· you are routinely taking at this time?
22· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So how much did you take this morning 22· · · ·A.· Only a -- it's called -- it's a gel that I
23· at 7:00 a.m.? 23· put on my back.· And I routinely use that.· It's an
24· · · ·A.· Just one. 24· anti-inflammatory.
25· · · ·Q.· And what's the milligrams, if you know? 25· · · ·Q.· Voltarol?

Page 7 Page 9
·1· · · ·A.· I do have that, so if you want to -- maybe ·1· · · ·A.· Yes.
·2· during a break I can go to the car and get my pain ·2· · · ·Q.· I don't know the name offhand, but it's
·3· management.· I was just there this week. ·3· something like that?
·4· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And if at any time you don't know the ·4· · · ·A.· Yes.
·5· answer to my question, that's perfectly fine.· Just ·5· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And who prescribes that?
·6· let me know that you don't know. ·6· · · ·A.· The same people.
·7· · · · · · · · Who is your -- who is the doctor who is ·7· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Anything else that you routinely
·8· prescribing that? ·8· take?
·9· · · ·A.· It's Dr. Wages.· It's through the pain ·9· · · ·A.· No.
10· doctor.· And I see them once a month.· They assess 10· · · ·Q.· What's your current address?
11· my -- I guess my -- what do you call it, my pain 11· · · ·A.· 2710 Izoro, I-Z-O-R-O, Bend, Cedar Park,
12· management.· Assess how I'm doing on a monthly basis. 12· Texas 78613.
13· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Is the fact that you took that 13· · · ·Q.· How long have you lived at that address?
14· hydrocodone at 7:00 a.m. this morning, is that going 14· · · ·A.· Since my daughter was in first grade, so
15· to affect your testimony today? 15· probably 15 years.
16· · · ·A.· No. 16· · · ·Q.· Who lives there with you?
17· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And that's your normal routine? 17· · · ·A.· My daughter and my husband, Jay.
18· · · ·A.· Yes. 18· · · ·Q.· What's your daughter's name?
19· · · ·Q.· And do you normally take four a day? 19· · · ·A.· Courtney Monique Bowmer.
20· · · ·A.· I try not to take four a day.· I try to take 20· · · ·Q.· How old is Courtney?
21· three. 21· · · ·A.· 20.
22· · · ·Q.· Okay. 22· · · ·Q.· And your husband's name is Jay Bowmer?
23· · · ·A.· I mean, it's just so I can function, sit in 23· · · ·A.· It's William Jay Bowmer, but he goes by Jay.
24· a chair.· Otherwise, I can't -- I can't do it. 24· · · ·Q.· At the time of the accident were both
25· · · ·Q.· Have you taken any other medications today? 25· Courtney and Jay residing with you?

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Christi Bowmer
June 15, 2018 10 to 13
Page 10 Page 12
·1· · · ·A.· Yes. ·1· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Was that one eye or both eyes?
·2· · · ·Q.· What's your date of birth? ·2· · · ·A.· It was both eyes.
·3· · · ·A.· 1-27-68. ·3· · · ·Q.· And how long did it take for that to clear
·4· · · ·Q.· Where were you born? ·4· up?
·5· · · ·A.· Azle, Texas, A-Z-L-E. ·5· · · ·A.· I'm guessing, but I want to say three months
·6· · · ·Q.· What is your height? ·6· or more.· It had to have -- well, it had to have been
·7· · · ·A.· 5'7". ·7· longer than that.
·8· · · ·Q.· Has that changed because of the accident? ·8· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· You can estimate, but if
·9· · · ·A.· You know, I don't think so, but I would be ·9· you can't, don't guess.
10· guessing. 10· · · ·A.· I'm guessing.
11· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Do you know what your weight was at 11· · · ·Q.· (BY MS. BARNES) Who treated you for that?
12· the time of the accident? 12· · · ·A.· I don't remember his name.
13· · · ·A.· I do not know, no. 13· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So if you -- you had Lasik prior to
14· · · ·Q.· Are you claiming that it's changed related 14· the accident.· Correct?
15· to the accident? 15· · · ·A.· Fifteen years before, 10, 15, guessing.
16· · · ·A.· I definitely cannot workout or do anything 16· · · ·Q.· Did you still routinely see an eye doctor
17· to maintain it, as before I was working on that. I 17· after that?
18· had just joined a gym, Orangetheory.· Excited about 18· · · ·A.· No.
19· doing so.· And now I can't do that. 19· · · ·Q.· Okay.· At the time of the accident, do you
20· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Have you been able to workout at all 20· know how long it had been since you had seen an eye
21· since the accident? 21· doctor?
22· · · ·A.· No.· I've had physical therapy, which was -- 22· · · ·A.· I don't -- oh, I had had my eyes tested
23· I mean, it wasn't strenuous, but it was helping, and 23· maybe from health fairs at my office.
24· then my insurance denied it. 24· · · ·Q.· And with regard to that testing, did you get
25· · · ·Q.· How long did you do physical therapy? 25· any kind of indication of how your vision was?

Page 11 Page 13
·1· · · ·A.· Probably four months, over a period of four ·1· · · ·A.· I don't recall it being anything that I
·2· months, and then the insurance said that basically ·2· needed to worry about.
·3· they feel like that it wouldn't do any more good. ·3· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Were you having any problems with
·4· And they're wrong. ·4· your vision as of the date of the accident?
·5· · · ·Q.· Who is your health insurer? ·5· · · ·A.· No.
·6· · · ·A.· United Healthcare.· But they have also ·6· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Do you think you were seeing 20/20?
·7· denied medications. ·7· · · ·A.· Yeah, I do.
·8· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So going back to my original ·8· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Did you wear reading glasses at the
·9· question, do you believe you have gained weight that ·9· time -- prior to or at the time of the accident?
10· you're attributing to the accident? 10· · · ·A.· I did.
11· · · ·A.· I do. 11· · · ·Q.· Okay.· How frequently did you wear reading
12· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Do you have any idea what that is 12· glasses?
13· in -- 13· · · ·A.· Occasionally.· I can see the computer
14· · · ·A.· (Shaking head.)· No. 14· screen.· If it's really tiny print, then I'll pull
15· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Do you have any issues with your 15· out my reading glasses, but if it's just regular
16· hearing? 16· print, I'm fine.
17· · · ·A.· No. 17· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· This is all prior to the
18· · · ·Q.· Have you ever? 18· accident?
19· · · ·A.· I don't think so. 19· · · ·Q.· (BY MS. BARNES) I'm asking about prior to
20· · · ·Q.· Do you have any issues with your vision? 20· the accident.
21· · · ·A.· I did have Lasik, like, 15 years ago, but 21· · · ·A.· Yes.· Prior to the accident, I --
22· right now they -- I mean, I had spots in my eyes due 22· · · ·Q.· It stayed the same?
23· to the accident, but they have cleared up.· I haven't 23· · · ·A.· It --
24· gone back for a follow-up visit, but I was seeing 24· · · ·Q.· It stayed the same?
25· floaters. 25· · · ·A.· It stayed the same.

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Christi Bowmer
June 15, 2018 14 to 17
Page 14 Page 16
·1· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And your spouse's name is Jay. ·1· · · ·A.· Another vehicle.
·2· Correct? ·2· · · ·Q.· What injuries did you sustain?
·3· · · ·A.· Uh-huh. ·3· · · ·A.· I think I just had a bruise.· It was just
·4· · · ·Q.· How long have you been married? ·4· bruised.· I --
·5· · · ·A.· 31 years Monday. ·5· · · ·Q.· Were the --
·6· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Happy anniversary. ·6· · · ·A.· -- don't recall.
·7· · · ·A.· Thank you. ·7· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Were the police called?
·8· · · ·Q.· I assume you haven't had any prior ·8· · · ·A.· I believe the police were called.
·9· marriages? ·9· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And --
10· · · ·A.· No. 10· · · ·A.· But I don't recall.· It's been so long ago.
11· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Have you ever been separated from Jay 11· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Do you recall whether there was fault
12· at any point? 12· determined on either driver?
13· · · ·A.· No. 13· · · ·A.· I believe it was my fault, but...
14· · · ·Q.· And the only child you have is Courtney? 14· · · ·Q.· Did you receive a ticket?
15· · · ·A.· Uh-huh. 15· · · ·A.· I do not know.
16· · · ·Q.· Is that a yes, for the record? 16· · · ·Q.· And was the other driver injured?
17· · · ·A.· Yes.· I'm sorry. 17· · · ·A.· I don't think so.
18· · · ·Q.· Yeah, that's fine. 18· · · ·Q.· And no lawsuit was filed?
19· · · ·A.· Sorry. 19· · · ·A.· No.
20· · · ·Q.· And does Jay have any children from anyone 20· · · ·Q.· Was there a claim that came out of it, to
21· else? 21· your knowledge?
22· · · ·A.· No. 22· · · ·A.· I don't recall.· And it was actually more
23· · · ·Q.· Have you ever filed a lawsuit before? 23· than ten years ago, so...
24· · · ·A.· No. 24· · · ·Q.· It was more than ten years ago?
25· · · ·Q.· Have you ever been a defendant in a lawsuit 25· · · ·A.· (Nodding head.)

Page 15 Page 17
·1· before? ·1· · · ·Q.· In Dallas County, you think?
·2· · · ·A.· No. ·2· · · ·A.· Yes.
·3· · · ·Q.· Have you ever filed a claim for injuries ·3· · · ·Q.· Do you have a -- any recollection of what
·4· from any type of an accident before? ·4· happened in your vehicle, how it collided with the
·5· · · ·A.· No. ·5· other vehicle?
·6· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Have you ever been in a car accident ·6· · · ·A.· It's been so long ago, I would hate to
·7· before where you sustained an injury? ·7· guess.
·8· · · ·A.· Yes. ·8· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Any other car accidents that you've
·9· · · ·Q.· When was that? ·9· been involved in?
10· · · ·A.· Gosh.· I'm guessing, but I may have like 10· · · ·A.· I'm sure I've had minor ones, but I can't --
11· hurt myself, like -- it was ten years ago, or 11· they don't come to mind.
12· something like that. 12· · · ·Q.· The car you were driving on the day of the
13· · · ·Q.· Was that in Austin? 13· accident, what kind of car was that?
14· · · ·A.· No. 14· · · ·A.· A BMW.
15· · · ·Q.· Where was it? 15· · · ·Q.· What was the year and model if you know?
16· · · ·A.· Dallas, Texas. 16· · · ·A.· I believe it was a 2014 BMW 325i hardtop
17· · · ·Q.· Okay.· What was the nature of that accident? 17· convertible.
18· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· Objection, form.· Go 18· · · ·Q.· You purchased that car new.· Correct?
19· ahead.· You can answer. 19· · · ·A.· Yes.
20· · · ·A.· I was -- it was raining.· I don't recall all 20· · · ·Q.· Were you ever involved in an accident in
21· of it.· It's been so long ago, I'd be guessing. 21· that car?
22· · · ·Q.· (BY MS. BARNES) Okay.· Were you driving? 22· · · ·A.· I don't believe so.
23· · · ·A.· I was driving. 23· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Do you have any recollection of that
24· · · ·Q.· And did you have an accident with another 24· car hitting a fixed object at any point?
25· vehicle, or with a fixed object? 25· · · ·A.· I don't -- I can't recall.

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Christi Bowmer
June 15, 2018 18 to 21
Page 18 Page 20
·1· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Do you recall ever having to have it ·1· wanted or thought that you would benefit from that
·2· repaired for any -- I don't mean regular maintenance. ·2· the insurance company has disallowed?
·3· I mean any repair to the body? ·3· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· Objection, form.· You can
·4· · · ·A.· I don't recall at the moment. ·4· answer.
·5· · · ·Q.· Have you ever had an on-the-job accident ·5· · · ·A.· I -- you know, I probably need to be
·6· where you sustained an injury? ·6· assessed more than I have been.· I mean, I know that
·7· · · ·A.· No. ·7· they -- my -- they are stating that there are things
·8· · · ·Q.· And you mentioned you had United Healthcare ·8· that I probably should look at that are very scary to
·9· at the time of the accident.· Correct? ·9· me.· So...
10· · · ·A.· I did. 10· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· Can you pass some of that
11· · · ·Q.· And do you have an understanding of how much 11· tissue over here, please?
12· you have incurred out of pocket for medical bills? 12· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Yeah, yeah.
13· · · ·A.· I have an estimate, but I really don't know 13· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· Thank you.
14· the extent.· The bills just keep coming in. 14· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Here, let me do this.· This
15· · · ·Q.· Okay. 15· one will block the camera otherwise if you --
16· · · ·A.· Still. 16· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· In this week's
17· · · ·Q.· And you alluded to some things that you -- 17· appointment --
18· treatment that you would like to have that they 18· · · ·Q.· (BY MS. BARNES) I'm sorry.· This week what?
19· denied.· Correct? 19· · · ·A.· This week's appointment with my pain
20· · · ·A.· (Nodding head up and down.) 20· management, they're talking about another surgery
21· · · ·Q.· And one of the things you mentioned was PT, 21· with a spinal stimulator, and I don't want to do it.
22· physical -- 22· I'm sorry.
23· · · ·A.· Yes. 23· · · ·Q.· It's okay.· We can take a break at any time.
24· · · ·Q.· -- therapy? 24· So you just let me know.· Okay?
25· · · ·A.· Yes. 25· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· Are you okay to go on for

Page 19 Page 21
·1· · · ·Q.· And I believe some medications? ·1· now?
·2· · · ·A.· Flector patches. ·2· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Yeah.· (Nodding head.)
·3· · · ·Q.· Okay. ·3· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· Okay.
·4· · · ·A.· So really external patches that -- and -- ·4· · · ·Q.· (BY MS. BARNES)· So at this week's
·5· and there may be others, but I really -- those really ·5· appointment with your pain management doctor, they
·6· did help and they were denied. ·6· were talking about a spinal stimulator?
·7· · · ·Q.· Is that for pain? ·7· · · ·A.· And we're going to talk about it in my next
·8· · · ·A.· Pain. ·8· two visits because I broke down in the office.· And
·9· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Where are those placed? ·9· she tried to comfort me, and it's -- it's hard to
10· · · ·A.· Lower back. 10· deal with this new reality.
11· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And that was for lower back pain? 11· · · ·Q.· And when you say that, are you referring to
12· · · ·A.· Yes. 12· pain?
13· · · ·Q.· And you placed them directly on the lower 13· · · ·A.· My -- yes, my whole -- the way I've lost the
14· back? 14· ability to do so many things.
15· · · ·A.· Yes. 15· · · ·Q.· Okay.
16· · · ·Q.· And they denied you getting refills of 16· · · ·A.· And that's why I brought this (indicating),
17· those? 17· so I wouldn't forget.· I mean, the incident I
18· · · ·A.· They just denied them, period.· I had got 18· remember.· But I wanted to write this so I wouldn't
19· samples of them -- 19· forget the impact, because I knew I would be so
20· · · ·Q.· Okay. 20· nervous.· I wanted you to know what this has done to
21· · · ·A.· -- and they really worked well, but they're 21· my life.
22· -- I guess my insurance decided they were too 22· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So you wrote something out about how
23· expensive. 23· the accident has affected you --
24· · · ·Q.· Is there anything else that you can think of 24· · · ·A.· Yes.
25· that you have -- in terms of treatment that you have 25· · · ·Q.· -- and your injuries?· Okay.· And I

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Christi Bowmer
June 15, 2018 22 to 25
Page 22 Page 24
·1· appreciate that.· Thank you for doing that.· And, ·1· · · ·A.· He also has a master's degree.
·2· again, you know, at any time if you want to just take ·2· · · ·Q.· And what's his master's degree in?
·3· a break and calm down, just let me know. ·3· · · ·A.· It's -- he has an MBA as well.
·4· · · ·A.· I'm sorry. ·4· · · ·Q.· What kind of work does he do at this time?
·5· · · ·Q.· You're fine.· I -- ·5· · · ·A.· He is a network engineer.
·6· · · ·A.· Thank you. ·6· · · ·Q.· Who is his employer?
·7· · · ·Q.· -- under -- I understand this is an ·7· · · ·A.· AT&T.
·8· emotional day for you.· So I'm going to switch gears ·8· · · ·Q.· How long has he worked for AT&T?
·9· for a minute. ·9· · · ·A.· His company has been purchased, so he has
10· · · ·A.· Okay. 10· been there probably 17 years.
11· · · ·Q.· So you said you were raised in Azle. 11· · · ·Q.· What was the name of the prior company?
12· Correct? 12· · · ·A.· Computer Science Corp.
13· · · ·A.· Uh-huh. 13· · · ·Q.· I have a copy of your resume I'm going to
14· · · ·Q.· And did you go to high school in Azle? 14· mark --
15· · · ·A.· I did. 15· · · · · · · · (Exhibit 1 marked.)
16· · · ·Q.· What year did you graduate? 16· · · ·Q.· -- as Exhibit 1 to your deposition.· I'll
17· · · ·A.· 1986. 17· hand you that.· Will you look over that and tell me
18· · · ·Q.· And what did you do right after high school? 18· if that's a true and correct copy of your resume?
19· · · ·A.· I went to college for a little while, and I 19· · · ·A.· Yes.
20· met my husband and we got married. 20· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So, generally speaking, you were
21· · · ·Q.· Where did you go to college? 21· talking about you got a job in Dallas as a
22· · · ·A.· At first I went to Weatherford Junior 22· receptionist.· Were you doing office work --
23· College, and then I went to a junior college, and 23· · · ·A.· Uh-huh.
24· then I went off to Southwest Texas State, which was 24· · · ·Q.· -- until the time you completed your BBA at
25· the first time really being away from home, and 25· St. Edwards?

Page 23 Page 25
·1· that's where I met Jay. ·1· · · ·A.· Well, no.· I started a comp -- I was a
·2· · · ·Q.· Okay.· What year was that? ·2· receptionist, and then I got a job with another
·3· · · ·A.· 1987. ·3· company, L-Corp (phonetic).· And then not too long
·4· · · ·Q.· Did you get a degree from Southwest Texas ·4· after that I got a job at Brigham Exploration, and I
·5· State? ·5· believe that was March of 1993.
·6· · · ·A.· I did not. ·6· · · ·Q.· Okay.
·7· · · ·Q.· Okay.· I know you eventually got your MBA ·7· · · ·A.· And I started as the administrative
·8· from St. Ed's.· Correct? ·8· assistant to the vice president, and she was an
·9· · · ·A.· Correct. ·9· attorney and a geologist at Brigham.· And then I
10· · · ·Q.· All right.· So what happens between -- 1987, 10· worked my way up from there.
11· you're going to Texas State.· How long did you stay 11· · · · · · · · She was an amazing mentor, and -- I
12· there? 12· would go to school at night, and eventually I got my
13· · · ·A.· Approximately a year. 13· BBA, and then in 2003, my MBA, and then proved
14· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And did you start working at that 14· that -- you know, I was really doing the HR work
15· point? 15· there, and in '97 was -- we moved there.
16· · · ·A.· No.· I had told my parents that, you know, I 16· · · · · · · · But in '99, they actually had given me
17· had fell in love and I wanted to get married, and so 17· the position of the HR manager and eventually
18· they basically said if you're going to do this adult 18· promoted to the director --
19· thing, you're an adult.· And so they gave us a small 19· · · ·Q.· Okay.
20· wedding, and we moved to Dallas, and then I did 20· · · ·A.· -- of Brigham.
21· proceed to get a job. 21· · · ·Q.· Okay.
22· · · ·Q.· Okay.· What kind of job were you doing at 22· · · ·A.· So I spent my whole adult life there, and it
23· that time? 23· was an amazing experience.
24· · · ·A.· I got a job as a receptionist. 24· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So when did you move from Dallas to
25· · · ·Q.· Did Jay complete college? 25· Austin?

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Christi Bowmer
June 15, 2018 26 to 29
Page 26 Page 28
·1· · · ·A.· '97.· 1997. ·1· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Who did you refer to?
·2· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And were you working for Brigham ·2· · · ·A.· Bud Brigham.
·3· before that, or did you move to Austin to work for ·3· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Is that the owner of the company?
·4· Brigham? ·4· · · ·A.· Yes, but it -- we did go public.· He is the
·5· · · ·A.· No.· I moved with Brigham. ·5· CEO and chairman.
·6· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So you had started with Brigham in ·6· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Who did you directly report to at
·7· Dallas -- ·7· Brigham in the 2011 time frame?
·8· · · ·A.· Yes. ·8· · · ·A.· David Brigham, executive vice president of
·9· · · ·Q.· -- and then moved -- ·9· land and administration.
10· · · ·A.· Moved. 10· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So for two years with Statoil your
11· · · ·Q.· -- to Austin? 11· title remains the same.· What does it change to after
12· · · ·A.· Yes. 12· that period?
13· · · ·Q.· Okay. 13· · · ·A.· Well, going from about 150 employees to
14· · · ·A.· With the company. 14· 27,000, of course, I wasn't going to be at the same
15· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And so what's your position when you 15· level and I knew that.· So they changed -- it's a
16· moved to Austin? 16· Norwegian based company, and so the titles are very
17· · · ·A.· When I moved to Austin, I was probably the 17· generic, but HR leader, HR business partner.
18· office manager. 18· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And how did your duties change at
19· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And you go to school, you get your 19· that point?
20· BBA in 2001? 20· · · ·A.· Instead of being in charge of a whole
21· · · ·A.· 2001. 21· department and everything that goes along with that,
22· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And at that point what's your 22· benefits, etcetera, more strategic.· No more
23· position with Brigham? 23· administrative-type duties.· More high level, you
24· · · ·A.· HR manager. 24· know, not -- I mean, not that I wasn't doing high
25· · · ·Q.· And you continue going to school at night? 25· level.· I was on the management team, but having to

Page 27 Page 29
·1· · · ·A.· I do. ·1· do everything, you know, that encompasses an HR
·2· · · ·Q.· And you get your MBA in 2003.· Correct? ·2· department to -- they had centers of excellence, so I
·3· · · ·A.· Uh-huh. ·3· no longer -- they had rewards, they had global
·4· · · ·Q.· And at some point you get promoted to ·4· mobility, you know, those type things.· So it was
·5· director of HR? ·5· more strategic coaching, counseling, manpower
·6· · · ·A.· Uh-huh. ·6· planning.
·7· · · ·Q.· Do you know when that was? ·7· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And you're talking about Statoil with
·8· · · ·A.· I don't. ·8· the last part?
·9· · · ·Q.· Okay.· When did you leave Brigham? ·9· · · ·A.· Yes.
10· · · ·A.· The company was sold in 2011 to Statoil. 10· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And how long do you stay with
11· · · ·Q.· Okay. 11· Statoil?
12· · · · · · · · THE REPORTER:· To who? 12· · · ·A.· Four years.
13· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Statoil, S-T-A-T. 13· · · ·Q.· Who was your immediate supervisor during
14· · · ·Q.· (BY MS. BARNES) All right.· So when the 14· that four years?
15· company was sold, do you have a recollection of how 15· · · ·A.· Kim Burt.
16· long you had been the HR director? 16· · · ·Q.· I'm sorry?
17· · · ·A.· I don't. 17· · · ·A.· Kim Burt.· Kimberly Burt, B-U-R-T.
18· · · ·Q.· When the company was sold to Statoil, you 18· · · ·Q.· And so that role ended December 31st of
19· stay on? 19· 2015?
20· · · ·A.· Yes. 20· · · ·A.· That's correct.
21· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And you -- do you remain HR director? 21· · · ·Q.· What happened at that point?
22· · · ·A.· For a period of two years they didn't change 22· · · ·A.· There was a downsize and reorg, and so I was
23· my title.· Bud had put in a poison pill for his key 23· told my position was going to be eliminated in
24· employees which I was one of, and so they were unable 24· October of 2011 [sic], but was asked to stay on until
25· to reduce our salaries or our titles for two years. 25· the end of the year to help employees that were

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Christi Bowmer
June 15, 2018 30 to 33
Page 30 Page 32
·1· relocating from Houston to Austin in the downsize ·1· · · ·A.· We had an interim supervisor.· She was a
·2· because they were very unhappy about it.· But they ·2· peer.· And prior to the accident, the VP was Dean
·3· had offered me such a wonderful package I said yes. ·3· Clark.· And then he was released from the
·4· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And you said October of 2011, and I ·4· organization, and in the interim they put a peer in
·5· think you meant October of 2015.· Correct?· Is when ·5· place, and her name is Katie Edwards.· And then they
·6· they -- ·6· decided that they needed to bring in someone else and
·7· · · ·A.· Oh, yes.· I'm sorry. ·7· so now I have Ayesha.
·8· · · ·Q.· All right.· So you stayed on for a couple of ·8· · · ·Q.· And on a daily basis, describe what your
·9· months to help them? ·9· responsibilities are.
10· · · ·A.· The transitionary period. 10· · · ·A.· Coaching, counseling employees, compensation
11· · · ·Q.· Okay.· All right.· So was there a period of 11· analysis.· I was the recruiting manager, and because
12· time where you were not employed after Statoil? 12· we're growing so much, we decided that -- Ayesha
13· · · ·A.· Yes.· There was approximately three months 13· decided that the HR business partners just needed to
14· after Statoil that I was looking. 14· handle the -- their clients.· And so just in March
15· · · ·Q.· And then you went to work at E.ON? 15· I'm no longer the recruiting manager.· We -- one of
16· · · ·A.· E.ON. 16· my prior employees is now the recruiting manager, was
17· · · ·Q.· Correct? 17· promoted up into that.· So I'm happy for him.
18· · · ·A.· Uh-huh. 18· · · ·Q.· Okay.
19· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And that's where you work currently. 19· · · ·A.· Yeah.· But...
20· Correct? 20· · · ·Q.· So primarily coaching, counseling --
21· · · ·A.· That's correct. 21· · · ·A.· Counseling.
22· · · ·Q.· What was your title when you were hired 22· · · ·Q.· -- and comp analysis?
23· at E.ON? 23· · · ·A.· And succession planning.· I mean, it's the
24· · · ·A.· Regional HR manager/HR business partner. 24· same thing that I did at Statoil and, you know, we --
25· · · ·Q.· Is that your current title? 25· whatever initiatives come from the corporate office,

Page 31 Page 33
·1· · · ·A.· It is. ·1· they are -- basically there's 50,000 globally.
·2· · · ·Q.· And you started there in March of 2016? ·2· They're a international organization, so...
·3· · · ·A.· That's correct. ·3· · · ·Q.· Do you have to travel for your job?
·4· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And when you went from Statoil ·4· · · ·A.· I do.
·5· to E.ON, did you keep the same salary? ·5· · · ·Q.· How frequently do you travel?
·6· · · ·A.· No. ·6· · · ·A.· Prior to the accident I was not traveling as
·7· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Are you making less at E.ON? ·7· much because that VP didn't authorize a whole lot of
·8· · · ·A.· Much less. ·8· traveling.· This VP is amazing and wants us to get
·9· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And I assume you're making a claim ·9· out in the field, and so I will be traveling a whole
10· for lost wages in this lawsuit.· Correct? 10· lot more.· I was gone all last week on a trip. I
11· · · ·A.· Yes. 11· will also be traveling next Sunday through next
12· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Tell me what you're earning at E.ON. 12· Friday.· I have plans in July.· There's a leadership
13· · · ·A.· Right now it's about 92K with a 17 to 13· in August.· So, yes, I will be traveling.
14· 20 percent bonus. 14· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And with respect to your job, is that
15· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And is the bonus performance based, 15· local travel, like within the state of Texas, or is
16· or is it automatic? 16· it more national?
17· · · ·A.· It's pretty automatic.· The automatic piece 17· · · ·A.· It's more national.
18· is the 17.· Anything above that would be the, you 18· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So you said like last week you were
19· know, up to the discretion of the supervisor. 19· on a trip.· Where were you?
20· · · ·Q.· Who is your supervisor? 20· · · ·A.· South Texas.
21· · · ·A.· Currently her name is Ayesha Sattaur, and 21· · · ·Q.· Okay.
22· she is new to the organization. 22· · · ·A.· Primarily South Texas area.· Uvalde.· But
23· · · ·Q.· Can you spell that for -- 23· next week -- not next week, but the following will be
24· · · ·A.· I believe it's S-A-T-T-A-U-R. 24· midwest, northeast.· I'm taking over the HR business
25· · · ·Q.· Who was your supervisor before that? 25· partner for that area, and so I will be going with my

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Christi Bowmer
June 15, 2018 34 to 37
Page 34 Page 36
·1· VP and a regional VP to meet all of our site ·1· · · ·A.· Okay.
·2· supervisors and learn about their pain points and how ·2· · · ·Q.· I appreciate that.· And when you say, "play
·3· we can help them. ·3· over and over in your head," you're talking about the
·4· · · ·Q.· Back at the time of the accident, how many ·4· accident?
·5· hours a week were you working? ·5· · · ·A.· (Nodding head up and down.)
·6· · · ·A.· 40. ·6· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Who diagnosed you with PTSD?
·7· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Is that still true? ·7· · · ·A.· It was a psychologist that the law firm --
·8· · · ·A.· That is true. ·8· · · ·Q.· Dr. Feltoon?
·9· · · ·Q.· Okay.· It's a 40-hour a week job? ·9· · · ·A.· Yes.
10· · · ·A.· Yeah, it is.· I mean, sometimes it's more 10· · · ·Q.· And he was -- your lawyers retained him and
11· but -- you know, it's -- it just -- it's normally a 11· he met you and interviewed you.· Correct?
12· 40-hour week. 12· · · ·A.· That's correct.
13· · · ·Q.· Do you do a lot of computer work? 13· · · ·Q.· Okay.· In -- so far you've told me in terms
14· · · ·A.· I do. 14· of the physical demands of your job, you sit for long
15· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And I really just want to understand 15· periods of time, and you're having trouble with that.
16· sort of the physical requirements of your job.· What 16· Correct?
17· kinds of things are you doing on a daily basis? 17· · · ·A.· Yeah.
18· · · ·A.· It's more sitting for long periods of time, 18· · · ·Q.· Are there other things?
19· and so I try to get up as often as I can. 19· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· Is that a yes?
20· · · ·Q.· And in terms of the travel that you were 20· · · ·A.· Yes.· Sorry.
21· telling me about, have your injuries that you 21· · · ·Q.· (BY MS. BARNES) Are there other physical
22· sustained in this accident affected your ability to 22· aspects of your job that have been affected by the
23· travel? 23· accident?
24· · · ·A.· Yes. 24· · · ·A.· Just traveling.
25· · · ·Q.· How? 25· · · ·Q.· Okay.· How much time did you miss from work

Page 35 Page 37
·1· · · ·A.· Just -- it's just painful to sit long ·1· after the accident?
·2· periods.· And I do sit long periods, so -- but being ·2· · · ·A.· Three months.
·3· in the car for, let's say I went from Houston last ·3· · · ·Q.· You went back to work in early October.· Is
·4· week to Raymondville.· It was about six hours.· I'm ·4· that correct?
·5· just really sore from that.· I should have gotten out ·5· · · ·A.· That's correct.
·6· of the car more often. ·6· · · ·Q.· Do you remember the day?
·7· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And you were alone? ·7· · · ·A.· I believe it was October 6th, and it was
·8· · · ·A.· For part of the trip, yes. ·8· important to me to remember that because my FL --
·9· · · ·Q.· Okay.· You were driving? ·9· FMLA ended, and anything after that would have been
10· · · ·A.· Yes.· They would have preferred I rented a 10· unpaid.
11· car, but I was more comfortable in my car. 11· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So you took FMLA leave for 12 weeks?
12· · · ·Q.· In terms of decision-making strategy, 12· · · ·A.· Yes.
13· counseling, has the accident affected your ability to 13· · · ·Q.· And so you received some compensation during
14· do those aspects of your job? 14· that time?
15· · · ·A.· I don't think so. 15· · · ·A.· I did.
16· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Mentally, you think you're still able 16· · · ·Q.· Was it a hundred percent?
17· to do your job and do a really good job? 17· · · ·A.· It was a hundred percent.· But any accrued
18· · · ·A.· Mentally, I'm just anxious and -- you know, 18· vacation, any benefits and things like that did not
19· I've been diagnosed with post stress disorder. 19· accrue during that time.· My bonus was reduced for
20· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Tell me about the anxious.· What are 20· that time.· No seniority for that time.
21· you referring to? 21· · · ·Q.· During that time did you have to use any of
22· · · ·A.· Just having that play over and over in my 22· your vacation or sick leave?
23· head.· Thinking about the things I can't do.· That's 23· · · ·A.· I did.
24· when we can get into this if you'd like. 24· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So you've used all of your accrued
25· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And we'll do that later. 25· vacation and sick leave?

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Christi Bowmer
June 15, 2018 38 to 41
Page 38 Page 40
·1· · · ·A.· Yes. ·1· evaluations since the accident?
·2· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Do you have an understanding of how ·2· · · ·A.· No.
·3· it affected your bonus? ·3· · · ·Q.· Do you routinely have performance
·4· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· Objection, form.· You can ·4· evaluations?
·5· answer if you know. ·5· · · ·A.· Yes.
·6· · · ·A.· I would be guessing how much it reduced it. ·6· · · ·Q.· Okay.· When would be the next one?
·7· · · ·Q.· (BY MS. BARNES) Okay.· Do you have a guess? ·7· · · ·A.· Well, we're in the process of getting them,
·8· · · ·A.· By the three months. ·8· and -- I take that back.· We -- I did have one, but
·9· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· Objection, form. ·9· it was with the new VP and the interim, and just to
10· · · ·A.· Oh. 10· kind of go over the performance, but I hadn't been
11· · · ·Q.· (BY MS. BARNES) So when -- you said earlier 11· there very long, so it wasn't much of one.
12· it's between 17 and 20 percent.· Correct? 12· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Have you had any complaints about
13· · · ·A.· Yes. 13· your work?
14· · · ·Q.· So some -- you didn't get some portion of 14· · · ·A.· No.
15· that because of the time that you were off work? 15· · · ·Q.· I also have your W-2s that were produced in
16· · · ·A.· That's correct. 16· this suit.· I'm going to mark those as Exhibit 2.
17· · · ·Q.· Are there any other benefits that you lost 17· · · · · · · · (Exhibit 2 marked.)
18· because you were off work for the three months that 18· · · ·Q.· I just kind of want to walk through these.
19· we haven't already talked about? 19· Your -- it -- your lawyers have produced your W-2s
20· · · ·A.· I don't think so. 20· from 2013 to 2017.· And so the first one on the first
21· · · ·Q.· Okay. 21· page from 2013, that's when you were working for
22· · · ·A.· But I'd be guessing. 22· Statoil.· Correct?
23· · · ·Q.· But in terms of compensation, you still 23· · · ·A.· 2013, yes.· I would have been working for
24· received your full salary; you lost some portion of 24· Statoil.
25· your bonus.· Is that correct? 25· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And the -- I guess we can go with the

Page 39 Page 41
·1· · · ·A.· Yes. ·1· first box, Wages, Tips, Other Compensation.· It shows
·2· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And when you returned on October 6th, ·2· that in 2013 you earned $240,570.70.· Is that
·3· did you return to full duty? ·3· correct?
·4· · · ·A.· I did. ·4· · · ·A.· That's correct.
·5· · · ·Q.· And did you have any work restrictions? ·5· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And then the next page, 2014, also
·6· · · ·A.· It was difficult. ·6· with Statoil, that reflects that you earned -- this
·7· · · ·Q.· Well, did a doctor say you can't do this? ·7· one is hard to read.
·8· · · ·A.· No. ·8· · · ·A.· It is hard to read.
·9· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And since October 6th you have gone ·9· · · ·Q.· Is it 181,017.96 in that first box?
10· back to earning your full salary? 10· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· I mean, if you can read
11· · · ·A.· Yes. 11· it.· But if you can't, don't --
12· · · ·Q.· You're making the same as you were prior to 12· · · ·A.· I can't --
13· the accident? 13· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· -- guess.· Don't be
14· · · ·A.· Yes. 14· like --
15· · · ·Q.· Have you received any raises since the 15· · · ·A.· -- I can't read it.
16· accident? 16· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· We all need glasses for
17· · · ·A.· In March I received a raise, so I -- I 17· this one, Tasha.
18· believe I was making 88 before, and in March I 18· · · ·Q.· (BY MS. BARNES) Well, it's actually -- if
19· received 92. 19· you look to the very -- because it's repeated over
20· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Is that an annual raise? 20· and over, the clearest box is over on the right.
21· · · ·A.· It's an annual raise. 21· It's in the 181 range.· Does that comport with your
22· · · ·Q.· Does it happen in March of every year? 22· memory?
23· · · ·A.· That's when we process it.· It's retro back 23· · · ·A.· That's what it looks like.· I mean, we would
24· to January 1. 24· probably need a clearer copy of this.
25· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Have you had any performance 25· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So why would there have been a

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Christi Bowmer
June 15, 2018 42 to 45
Page 42 Page 44
·1· difference between 2013 and 2014, that's about a ·1· · · ·A.· It does.
·2· $60,000 from 2013 to 2014? ·2· · · ·Q.· And you worked from March --
·3· · · ·A.· I'm recalling that they couldn't do anything ·3· · · ·A.· March to the end of the year.
·4· for two years with my salary or title.· Once that two ·4· · · ·Q.· All right.· And then the next page is your
·5· years was up, I don't know if this was the time line, ·5· 2017 W-2, which is the year of the accident.
·6· so I would have to like go reconstruct that.· But I'm ·6· Correct?
·7· going to have to guess that that -- the bonus ·7· · · ·A.· It is.
·8· structure was reduced, and the title was changed from ·8· · · ·Q.· And that shows wages, tips, compensation in
·9· director to HR leader. ·9· the first box of 89,175.61.· Correct?
10· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And then that would have reflected a 10· · · ·A.· Correct.
11· title change and also a compensation change. 11· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And do you have an estimate or
12· Correct? 12· approximation of how much income you believe you lost
13· · · ·A.· Yes. 13· because of the accident?
14· · · ·Q.· All right.· And then looking at 2015 on the 14· · · ·A.· I do not know.
15· next page, this reflects in the first box 318,760. 15· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Have you ever been arrested?
16· Did I read that correctly? 16· · · ·A.· No.
17· · · ·A.· I can't see it either.· It's very, very 17· · · ·Q.· Have you ever been charged with a crime?
18· dark. 18· · · ·A.· No.
19· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Well, why would it have then gone 19· · · ·Q.· Do you currently drink alcohol?
20· back up from 2014 to 2015? 20· · · ·A.· I do.
21· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· Form.· You can answer if 21· · · ·Q.· How frequently?
22· you know. 22· · · ·A.· Weekly.
23· · · ·A.· I was asked to stay at the end of that year, 23· · · ·Q.· How many drinks a week?
24· and in doing so, I was offered a severance. 24· · · ·A.· In the evening I may have two to three in my
25· · · ·Q.· (BY MS. BARNES) Okay.· So this amount would 25· cabana for -- that's approximately.

Page 43 Page 45
·1· include the severance that you received? ·1· · · ·Q.· Two to three a day?
·2· · · ·A.· Yes. ·2· · · ·A.· Not every day, but yes.
·3· · · ·Q.· Okay.· The next one is 2016.· This is from ·3· · · ·Q.· And what's your preferred drink?
·4· Insperity.· Correct? ·4· · · ·A.· Chardonnay.
·5· · · ·A.· That's correct. ·5· · · ·Q.· Have you ever had any issues with alcohol in
·6· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And this reflects wages in 2016 of ·6· the past?
·7· 61,554.· How long did you work for Insperity? ·7· · · ·A.· No.
·8· · · ·A.· Insperity is the PEO, so I worked 50 percent ·8· · · ·Q.· Have you ever gone to alcohol
·9· for Insperity, 50 percent for E.ON.· And when I was ·9· rehabilitation?
10· hired, I did not know that we were part of a PEO, a 10· · · ·A.· No.
11· leased organization.· So they handled all of our 11· · · ·Q.· Has any doctor ever recommend that you seek
12· benefits and things like that.· But, I mean, I was 12· alcohol treatment?
13· hired by E.ON and then later found out that we were 13· · · ·A.· No.
14· part of this organization. 14· · · ·Q.· Do you smoke?
15· · · ·Q.· Okay. 15· · · ·A.· I do.
16· · · ·A.· And most of our employees -- it's not 16· · · ·Q.· How frequently?
17· transparent.· They don't understand this so... 17· · · ·A.· In the evenings.
18· · · ·Q.· What does PEO stand for? 18· · · ·Q.· How many cigarettes a day?
19· · · ·A.· It's a leased organization where you're 19· · · ·A.· I would be guessing, but seven.
20· leased back. 20· · · ·Q.· Has that changed since the accident?
21· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So your wages were paid by Insperity, 21· · · ·A.· Yes.
22· but you were actually an employee of -- 22· · · ·Q.· How has it changed?
23· · · ·A.· Of E.ON. 23· · · ·A.· I probably smoke more.
24· · · ·Q.· -- E.ON?· Okay.· And does this represent 24· · · ·Q.· Has any doctor recommended you quit smoking?
25· your total compensation for 2016? 25· · · ·A.· All doctors want you to quit smoking.

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Christi Bowmer
June 15, 2018 46 to 49
Page 46 Page 48
·1· · · ·Q.· Have you tried? ·1· · · ·A.· Well, I needed my car sometimes.· I would
·2· · · ·A.· Not yet. ·2· have to drive my car.
·3· · · ·Q.· Has there been any point in time where you ·3· · · ·Q.· Okay.
·4· stopped smoking for a significant period of time? ·4· · · ·A.· And it's nice to have your car, you know, if
·5· · · ·A.· Yes. ·5· you have a doctor's appointment or things like that.
·6· · · ·Q.· When was that? ·6· But generally the train.
·7· · · ·A.· During the accident. ·7· · · ·Q.· Does your employer provide you parking?
·8· · · ·Q.· Right after the accident? ·8· · · ·A.· No.
·9· · · ·A.· Yeah. ·9· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So if you had to take your car, where
10· · · ·Q.· Okay.· How long did you stop? 10· would you generally park?
11· · · ·A.· I'm guessing, but probably three months. 11· · · ·A.· Anywhere I could find a place.
12· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Why was that? 12· · · ·Q.· Okay.
13· · · ·A.· Well, I -- I was in the hospital and I 13· · · ·A.· That was one of our main complaints with the
14· didn't feel like it.· I didn't want to, I was in so 14· employer.
15· much pain.· And then as you get sedentary and 15· · · ·Q.· One of the main complaints was that they
16· depressed, I picked them back up. 16· didn't provide parking?
17· · · ·Q.· When did you start smoking?· What age? 17· · · ·A.· Yes.· And I was not told that when I was
18· · · ·A.· Off and on, I -- I probably started my 18· hired.
19· senior year of high school, but I quit off and on all 19· · · ·Q.· Okay.
20· through my life.· Of course, I didn't smoke when I 20· · · ·A.· I do not recall being told that, so it was a
21· had my child, and so it's been off and on.· And I've 21· big complaint.
22· quit and then started back up, and quit and started 22· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Had you ever parked in the
23· back up. 23· Littlefield Garage before?
24· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So your office at E.ON is located at 24· · · ·A.· I had.
25· 701 -- 701 Brazos.· Correct? 25· · · ·Q.· How many times?

Page 47 Page 49
·1· · · ·A.· Correct. ·1· · · ·A.· I can't recall, but I had.· I know I had
·2· · · ·Q.· And that is about a block from the ·2· parked there occasionally.
·3· Littlefield Garage.· Correct? ·3· · · ·Q.· More than ten times?
·4· · · ·A.· That's correct. ·4· · · ·A.· I would be guessing.
·5· · · ·Q.· Okay. ·5· · · ·Q.· More than five times?
·6· · · ·A.· I have to see it every day. ·6· · · ·A.· I would say that probably, yes, more than
·7· · · ·Q.· Where were you parking back in July of 2017 ·7· five times.
·8· before the accident? ·8· · · ·Q.· And previously -- not this day but
·9· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· Objection, form. ·9· previously when you had parked there, did you pull a
10· · · ·A.· It varied. 10· ticket and pay on the way out?
11· · · ·Q.· (BY MS. BARNES) Okay.· How did you normally 11· · · ·A.· When I -- previous to the July time frame,
12· get to work? 12· yes.
13· · · ·A.· Via train. 13· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And in the July time frame did that
14· · · ·Q.· From Cedar Park to downtown? 14· change?
15· · · ·A.· Yes. 15· · · ·A.· When I got an access card from a friend.
16· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And then where does the train end up? 16· · · ·Q.· Okay.
17· · · ·A.· On 4th. 17· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· Hey, Tasha?
18· · · ·Q.· 4th and what? 18· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Uh-huh.
19· · · ·A.· 4th and Brazos area. 19· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· If I may, we just
20· · · ·Q.· Did you walk from there? 20· supplemented discovery this morning, and I got this
21· · · ·A.· I would. 21· photo from Ms. Bowmer.· And basically what it is is a
22· · · ·Q.· Okay.· How frequently did you take the 22· photo of the pass --
23· train? 23· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· I'm sorry.· It's --
24· · · ·A.· Daily. 24· basically it's what?
25· · · ·Q.· Every day? 25· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· It's a photo of the pass

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Christi Bowmer
June 15, 2018 50 to 53
Page 50 Page 52
·1· that was used.· It's -- ·1· · · ·A.· It was most likely in July, yes.
·2· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Okay. ·2· · · ·Q.· Do you know how long you had had the pass at
·3· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· -- like a little card. ·3· the time that you used it?· I'm sorry.· Do you know
·4· So I'm just going to give -- I -- we supplemented and ·4· how long you had had the pass as of the date of the
·5· I think it's in your e-mail, but -- ·5· accident?
·6· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Yeah.· Okay. ·6· · · ·A.· I'm guessing, but I don't think I had it
·7· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· -- and here is a copy for ·7· longer than three weeks.
·8· each of you. ·8· · · ·Q.· Okay.
·9· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· I'll mark this as Exhibit 3 ·9· · · ·A.· Because I know I looked back, and I did buy
10· to your deposition. 10· a train pass for June.
11· · · · · · · · (Exhibit 3 marked.) 11· · · ·Q.· Okay.· You bought a train pass for June.
12· · · ·Q.· (BY MS. BARNES) I'm handing you Exhibit 3 to 12· And Mr. Kopecky loaned you his access card at some
13· your deposition which your lawyer provided me this 13· point, which you believe was July?
14· morning.· Is that a photograph of the parking pass 14· · · ·A.· Yes.
15· you used at the Littlefield garage on the day of the 15· · · ·Q.· And when he loaned it to you, did you start
16· accident? 16· parking in the Littlefield garage every day?
17· · · ·A.· Yes. 17· · · ·A.· I don't know that I parked in it every day,
18· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Who owns that parking pass? 18· but I -- I probably parked in it -- I was excited to
19· · · ·A.· His name is Eric Kopecky. 19· have it, and the day of the accident I was super
20· · · ·Q.· How do you spell his last name? 20· excited to have it because I was meeting a friend for
21· · · ·A.· K-O-P-C-K-Y (sic), I believe. 21· dinner, and so I definitely did park in it that day.
22· · · ·Q.· How do you know Mr. Kopecky? 22· · · ·Q.· And do you recall parking -- well, let me
23· · · ·A.· He's a friend of mine. 23· back up.· What day of the week was the accident?
24· · · ·Q.· Does he work at E.ON? 24· · · ·A.· It was a Thursday.
25· · · ·A.· He does not. 25· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Had you parked in it that week?

Page 51 Page 53
·1· · · ·Q.· Does he work in the Littlefield building? ·1· · · ·A.· I'm guessing, but probably.
·2· · · ·A.· He does not. ·2· · · ·Q.· Okay.
·3· · · ·Q.· Okay.· He had a monthly parking pass at the ·3· · · ·A.· But hopefully since you have the card, you
·4· Littlefield garage? ·4· can -- or his name you can get that.
·5· · · ·A.· He does. ·5· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· Again, she doesn't want
·6· · · ·Q.· Do you know why he had that monthly parking ·6· you to guess.
·7· pass? ·7· · · ·A.· I'm guessing.
·8· · · ·A.· From his employer. ·8· · · ·Q.· (BY MS. BARNES) When Mr. Kopecky loaned --
·9· · · ·Q.· Who is his employer? ·9· he loaned you the card.· Right?
10· · · ·A.· I don't know. 10· · · ·A.· Yes.
11· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And in July of 2017, did Mr. Kopecky 11· · · ·Q.· He wasn't giving it to you.· Is that
12· loan you his parking pass? 12· correct?
13· · · ·A.· Yes. 13· · · ·A.· That's correct.
14· · · ·Q.· Do you know if there was a reason why he 14· · · ·Q.· Okay.· When he loaned you the card, did he
15· wasn't using the parking pass during that time? 15· give you any instructions?
16· · · ·A.· He lives downtown and he said he didn't use 16· · · ·A.· He just said when he needed it back he would
17· it frequently. 17· let me know.
18· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So on July 13th, was that the first 18· · · ·Q.· Did he tell you anything about the garage?
19· time that you had used his parking pass to park in 19· · · ·A.· No.
20· the Littlefield garage? 20· · · ·Q.· Did he give you any instructions on how to
21· · · ·A.· No. 21· use the card?
22· · · ·Q.· Okay.· When was the first time that you used 22· · · ·A.· No.
23· it? 23· · · ·Q.· Did he give you any information about the
24· · · ·A.· I don't recall. 24· garage?
25· · · ·Q.· Was it in July? 25· · · ·A.· No.

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Christi Bowmer
June 15, 2018 54 to 57
Page 54 Page 56
·1· · · ·Q.· How long have you known Mr. Kopecky? ·1· · · ·Q.· Have you increased your alcohol intake
·2· · · ·A.· I'm guessing, but probably -- I haven't seen ·2· because of the accident?
·3· him in a very long time, but I have known him ·3· · · ·A.· I don't think so.
·4· probably for five years. ·4· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Prior to this accident, was there
·5· · · ·Q.· Who were you meeting that night for dinner? ·5· ever an incident where you accidently hit the
·6· · · ·A.· Karen McClure Keller. ·6· accelerator instead of the brake?
·7· · · · · · · · THE REPORTER:· I'm sorry.· Say that ·7· · · ·A.· Not that I'm aware of.
·8· again? ·8· · · ·Q.· Have you ever filed a workers comp claim?
·9· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Karen Keller. ·9· · · ·A.· I have not.
10· · · ·Q.· (BY MS. BARNES) And how do you know 10· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Going back to the day of the
11· Ms. Keller? 11· accident.· You said you had plans to go to dinner at
12· · · ·A.· She is one of my closest friends that I 12· Steiner Ranch.· Correct?
13· worked at Statoil with. 13· · · ·A.· Yes.
14· · · ·Q.· And did you have dinner reservations? 14· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So that's not close to down.· Right?
15· · · ·A.· No, we were just going to have dinner and 15· · · ·A.· Exactly.· I needed the car.
16· meet. 16· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So instead of having to take the
17· · · ·Q.· Did you have a particular restaurant picked 17· train back home, then drive to Steiner Ranch, you
18· out? 18· were able to -- your plan was to park downtown and go
19· · · ·A.· Yes. 19· directly there after work?
20· · · ·Q.· Where is that? 20· · · ·A.· Yes.
21· · · ·A.· Steiner Steakhouse. 21· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Was there a particular time you were
22· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· We've been going for 22· supposed to be there?
23· about an hour.· Do you need a break? 23· · · ·A.· I probably would have hoped to be there by
24· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· I would like a break. 24· 6:00 or 6:30.
25· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Yeah.· Sure.· Let's do 25· · · ·Q.· What time do you normally --

Page 55 Page 57
·1· that. ·1· · · ·A.· I'm guesstimating.
·2· · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Going off the record ·2· · · ·Q.· I'm sorry.· What time do you normally arrive
·3· at 11:01. ·3· at work?
·4· · · · · · · · (Recess 11:01 a.m. to 11:20 a.m.) ·4· · · ·A.· It varies, but no later than 9:00.
·5· · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· This is segment ·5· · · ·Q.· What were you wearing that day?
·6· No. 2.· We're back on the record, 11:20. ·6· · · ·A.· I recall because I have seen it over and
·7· · · ·Q.· (BY MS. BARNES) We're back on the record ·7· over in the videos.· An orange dress.
·8· after a break.· I thought of a couple of things. ·8· · · ·Q.· What kind of shoes?
·9· Jumped around for a second, back to some other topics ·9· · · ·A.· I was wearing sandals, high-heeled sandals.
10· we've already talked about. 10· · · ·Q.· What kind of heels did the sandals have?
11· · · · · · · · With regard to your job, do you enjoy 11· · · ·A.· They're what you would call like a pump type
12· doing your job? 12· sandal.
13· · · ·A.· I love being an HR person. 13· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So would it be a spike heel?
14· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Do you have any plans to leave E.ON? 14· · · ·A.· I would call it a spike heel, a three-inch
15· · · ·A.· No. 15· heel.· But I'm very used to wearing those.
16· · · ·Q.· You're able to perform that job and you 16· · · ·Q.· Okay.· That's what you normally wore at that
17· intend to continue working there? 17· time?
18· · · ·A.· Yes. 18· · · ·A.· I have been wearing heels since -- I mean,
19· · · ·Q.· In terms of alcohol intake, you told me 19· in the professional organization all the time, so
20· earlier how much you're consuming now.· Is that more 20· yeah.· I loved them.· They were very pretty.
21· or less or the same as prior to the accident? 21· · · ·Q.· Are you able to wear heels now?
22· · · ·A.· I would be guessing, it's been so long. 22· · · ·A.· I am not.
23· · · ·Q.· Is it generally the same as it was a year 23· · · ·Q.· Have you worn them since the accident?
24· ago? 24· · · ·A.· I tried.· My husband bought me a pair of
25· · · ·A.· I'd be guessing. 25· Echoes, and he thought since it -- if it was a very

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Christi Bowmer
June 15, 2018 58 to 61
Page 58 Page 60
·1· good shoe.· I did try to wear them one day and, no. ·1· down.· And he generally comes down and talks and we,
·2· And I've tried to wear low heels, but then my back ·2· you know, chat.· But my television is down there,
·3· will hurt.· So I have tried it in the last couple of ·3· my -- you know, it's kind of a -- my friends call it
·4· months, but I've resigned myself to flats. ·4· a Barbie cabana.
·5· · · ·Q.· Okay.· All right.· So let's talk about that ·5· · · ·Q.· Okay.
·6· morning of the accident.· Was there anything unusual ·6· · · ·A.· But my retreat where I read and --
·7· about that morning? ·7· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Do you remember anything else about
·8· · · ·A.· No.· I just remember being excited because I ·8· that evening?
·9· was going to be seeing one of my close friends. ·9· · · ·A.· I don't.
10· · · ·Q.· Okay.· What time when you were driving 10· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Do you -- did you take any
11· downtown would you normally leave your house in Cedar 11· medications that night or that morning?
12· Park to arrive at work? 12· · · ·A.· No.
13· · · ·A.· It varies on the day, but probably 7:15, 13· · · ·Q.· Would you have had any alcoholic beverages
14· 7:30.· My office was very flexible -- flexible with 14· that morning?
15· the arrival times, as long as you get your job done. 15· · · ·A.· No.
16· · · ·Q.· But you were supposed to be there not later 16· · · ·Q.· For the record, I'm going to identify --
17· than 9:00? 17· · · · · · · · (Exhibit 4 marked.)
18· · · ·A.· It -- I could have been there at 9:30, but 18· · · ·Q.· -- Exhibit 4 is your summary of how the
19· for some reason I was going to be there at 8:30. I 19· accident has affected you.· Is that correct?
20· believe I may have had a meeting that morning. 20· · · ·A.· Yes.
21· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Do you remember having a meeting at 21· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And I'm going to mark as Exhibit 5
22· 8:30 that morning? 22· some cell phone records that your attorney has
23· · · ·A.· My coworker said that that's the reason she 23· produced.
24· was looking for me is that I missed a meeting. I 24· · · ·A.· Okay.
25· didn't recall it, but that's what she has told me. 25· · · · · · · · (Exhibit 5 marked.)

Page 59 Page 61
·1· · · ·Q.· Who is that? ·1· · · ·Q.· (BY MS. BARNES) And on the first page, this
·2· · · ·A.· Katie Edwards. ·2· identifies these records as Christi Bowmer, AT&T,
·3· · · ·Q.· All right.· With regard to the night before ·3· (512) 422-3087.· Is that your cell phone?
·4· the accident, do you recall what you were doing that ·4· · · ·A.· It is.
·5· night? ·5· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Do you have any other cell phones?
·6· · · ·A.· I sit in my cabana every night, so I know I ·6· · · ·A.· I have a work phone.
·7· was in my cabana. ·7· · · ·Q.· Okay.· What is that phone number?
·8· · · ·Q.· Okay.· When you say "cabana," that makes me ·8· · · ·A.· I don't remember it.· I don't use it very
·9· think you have a pool. ·9· often --
10· · · ·A.· I do. 10· · · ·Q.· Okay.
11· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And so you sit in your cabana next to 11· · · ·A.· -- at all and...
12· the pool? 12· · · ·Q.· Did you have it with you at the time of the
13· · · ·A.· I do. 13· accident?
14· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Do you have a specific recollection 14· · · ·A.· It may have been in my purse, but I don't --
15· of doing that the night before the accident? 15· I didn't use it often at all.
16· · · ·A.· I know I was in my cabana. 16· · · ·Q.· On what kinds of occasions would you use it?
17· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And based on your prior testimony, in 17· · · ·A.· When people called me from the office.· But
18· your cabana and probably drinking Chardonnay? 18· they knew to call my personal phone because I did not
19· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· Objection, form.· You can 19· like carrying two phones.
20· answer. 20· · · ·Q.· Okay.· All right.· And I'm going to
21· · · ·A.· I probably had a glass or two. 21· represent to you that I believe some things have been
22· · · ·Q.· (BY MS. BARNES) Okay.· Who was with you, if 22· redacted from these records, but the first entry that
23· you recall? 23· shows up, it says Thursday, 7-13, which was the day
24· · · ·A.· It is my place of retreat, my happy place. 24· of the accident.· Correct?
25· And so I know my husband says he does recall coming 25· · · ·A.· Yes.

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Christi Bowmer
June 15, 2018 62 to 65
Page 62 Page 64
·1· · · ·Q.· And it says 1:13 a.m., Austin, Texas.· It ·1· · · ·Q.· Not your habit?
·2· looks like a two-minute phone call.· Do you see that? ·2· · · ·A.· It is now because we have a little
·3· · · ·A.· Yes. ·3· convenience store that opened around the corner, but
·4· · · ·Q.· Do you have any idea what that was about? ·4· that -- that would not have been my habit then, no.
·5· · · ·A.· I don't. ·5· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And let's talk about habits.· When
·6· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And it -- what time do you normally ·6· you drive, do you listen to music?
·7· go to bed? ·7· · · ·A.· I do listen to music.
·8· · · ·A.· It varies, but I like to binge watch Netflix ·8· · · ·Q.· What do you normally listen to?
·9· and read and -- but it varies.· But... ·9· · · ·A.· 101X.
10· · · ·Q.· Do you stay up late? 10· · · ·Q.· The radio?
11· · · ·A.· I did before the accident. 11· · · ·A.· The radio.
12· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Do you have an idea what time you 12· · · ·Q.· Versus your own music on your phone or
13· went to bed the night before the accident? 13· anything like that?
14· · · ·A.· Probably very shortly thereafter. 14· · · ·A.· That's correct.
15· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And do you know what time you woke up 15· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Do you smoke when you drive?
16· that morning? 16· · · ·A.· I do not.
17· · · ·A.· I didn't have to be there until 8:30, so 17· · · ·Q.· Do you -- when you leave the house in the
18· probably around 6:30.· I'm guessing. 18· morning, do you normally take coffee or some sort of
19· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And then the next page I believe 19· beverage with you?
20· reflects text messages, and it shows the first 20· · · ·A.· I do now, but I did not before.· I didn't
21· message received at 6:38 a.m.· Do you see that? 21· drive that often.
22· · · ·A.· Received? 22· · · ·Q.· Okay.· All right.· I appreciate that.· And
23· · · ·Q.· It says "received" next to it, 6:38 a.m. 23· my questions, I'm geared toward before the accident
24· with Rcvd.· Do you see that? 24· or --
25· · · ·A.· Uh-huh. 25· · · ·A.· Yeah.

Page 63 Page 65
·1· · · ·Q.· Do you have any memory of that? ·1· · · ·Q.· -- the day of the accident.
·2· · · ·A.· I -- not receiving one. ·2· · · ·A.· Okay.· That helps me.
·3· · · ·Q.· Do you have a memory of sending one? ·3· · · ·Q.· Did you normally take anything to eat with
·4· · · ·A.· I remember that morning like listening to ·4· you?
·5· KGSR, and I don't know what I was trying to win, but ·5· · · ·A.· No.
·6· I remember texting a code to them to win something. ·6· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Did you normally talk on the phone
·7· · · ·Q.· Okay. ·7· when you were driving to work?
·8· · · ·A.· Because I listen to that in the morning. ·8· · · ·A.· No.
·9· · · ·Q.· Okay.· In your car? ·9· · · ·Q.· Do you ever apply makeup in the car on the
10· · · ·A.· No. 10· way to work?
11· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Before you left the house? 11· · · ·A.· No.
12· · · ·A.· Before I left the house. 12· · · ·Q.· All right.· So your best recollection is
13· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So you get up around 6:30.· Do you -- 13· that morning you would not have had anything to eat
14· and I think you've testified previously you think you 14· or drink with you on the way into downtown.· Is that
15· left around 7:15 to 7:30 a.m.· Right? 15· correct?
16· · · ·A.· Yeah, probably. 16· · · ·A.· That's correct.
17· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So you leave your house in Cedar 17· · · ·Q.· And you would not have been smoking?
18· Park.· Before you arrive downtown, do you stop 18· · · ·A.· I would not have been smoking.
19· anywhere? 19· · · ·Q.· Okay.
20· · · ·A.· I don't recall that at all. 20· · · ·A.· I do not smoke during the day.
21· · · ·Q.· Okay.· You don't know one way or the other, 21· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Was there anything on your mind that
22· or you don't think you did? 22· morning that was bothering you?
23· · · ·A.· I wouldn't have. 23· · · ·A.· The only thing I was excited about was
24· · · ·Q.· Okay. 24· getting to see my girlfriend.
25· · · ·A.· I mean -- 25· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Any distractions in the vehicle at

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Christi Bowmer
June 15, 2018 66 to 69
Page 66 Page 68
·1· all? ·1· · · ·A.· No.
·2· · · ·A.· Not that I'm aware of. ·2· · · ·Q.· Were you in a hurry for any reason?
·3· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· We're just talking like ·3· · · ·A.· No.
·4· generally on the way over to the garage.· Is that ·4· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So you entered the Littlefield Garage
·5· right? ·5· from Brazos Street.· Correct?
·6· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Yeah.· Right. ·6· · · ·A.· I believe so, yes.
·7· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· Is that what you're ·7· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So you would pull into Brazos Street
·8· talking about? ·8· and you would have swiped the access card.· Correct?
·9· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· That's what I'm asking ·9· · · ·A.· Yes.
10· about. 10· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And the gate came up and you drove
11· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· Okay. 11· through.· Right?
12· · · ·Q.· (BY MS. BARNES) Okay.· And we discussed 12· · · ·A.· Uh-huh.
13· earlier that you had borrowed the card from your 13· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Kind of walk me through what happens
14· friend.· Correct? 14· after that.
15· · · ·A.· Correct. 15· · · ·A.· Okay.· Well, that parking garage is probably
16· · · ·Q.· And the reason you did that is because it 16· one of the tightest garages I've ever parked in.· So
17· was prepaid parking.· Right? 17· -- and every -- it is a very full parking garage, so
18· · · ·A.· Right. 18· it is very, very difficult to find a spot.· So you
19· · · ·Q.· So it was free to you.· Correct? 19· kind of have to be very careful because even when you
20· · · ·A.· Yes. 20· turn the corner there is like cement posts.· So I
21· · · ·Q.· And you could have parked there.· In fact, I 21· know I was driving very cautiously, because it's a
22· believe you testified you had parked there previously 22· very tight garage and, again, it's very difficult to
23· and had to pay for it? 23· find a spot.
24· · · ·A.· Yes. 24· · · · · · · · And so I had to go up and up and up and
25· · · ·Q.· And it's expensive? 25· then finally see one, and that's when the incident

Page 67 Page 69
·1· · · ·A.· It's expensive. ·1· occurred.
·2· · · ·Q.· What was the weather that day? ·2· · · ·Q.· Okay.· I'm going to stop you there for a
·3· · · ·A.· To my recollection, it was a nice day. ·3· second.· Seventh floor.· Correct?
·4· · · ·Q.· Hot and sunny? ·4· · · ·A.· Yes.
·5· · · ·A.· Yes. ·5· · · ·Q.· You're on the seventh floor.· And certain
·6· · · ·Q.· Like every other day in July in Austin, ·6· drivers have habits in looking for a particular type
·7· Texas? ·7· of spot.· Do you understand what I mean?
·8· · · ·A.· Yeah. ·8· · · ·A.· Uh-huh, yeah.
·9· · · ·Q.· Did you have any other electronic devices ·9· · · ·Q.· Was there any particular type of spot that
10· with you other than your personal cell phone and 10· you were looking for?
11· possibly your work cell phone? 11· · · ·A.· I was just looking for a spot.
12· · · ·A.· No. 12· · · ·Q.· Okay.· First available?
13· · · ·Q.· Did you make any phone calls between the 13· · · ·A.· Yeah.
14· time you left your house and the time that you were 14· · · ·Q.· And is that what you took was a first
15· parking at the Littlefield Garage? 15· available spot?
16· · · ·A.· I did not. 16· · · ·A.· Yes.
17· · · ·Q.· Did you send any text messages between the 17· · · ·Q.· So were there other cars parked on either
18· time you left your house and the time you parked at 18· side of the spot you were pulling into?
19· the Littlefield Garage? 19· · · ·A.· I don't recall, but I would have to think
20· · · ·A.· Did not. 20· that there were, because that's such a full garage.
21· · · ·Q.· Did you look at your phone at any point 21· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· Again, don't guess.
22· between the time you left your house and the time you 22· · · ·A.· But I'm guessing.· I'm guessing.· Sorry.
23· parked in the Littlefield Garage? 23· · · ·Q.· (BY MS. BARNES) You said you were driving
24· · · ·A.· That, I do not know. 24· very careful and cautiously as you were going through
25· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Were you running late that day? 25· the garage looking for a spot.· Correct?

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Christi Bowmer
June 15, 2018 70 to 73
Page 70 Page 72
·1· · · ·A.· Yes. ·1· · · ·A.· I was right -- like, I slowly had pulled
·2· · · ·Q.· How fast were you going? ·2· into it, and I was there.· And then when I looked up
·3· · · ·A.· Well, I know I wasn't going fast, but I have ·3· I was like, "There's nothing in front of me."· It
·4· been told that my BMW has a black box, and it was -- ·4· should never have happened.
·5· I was not going over three to four miles an hour, ·5· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Let me know if you need a break,
·6· period. ·6· because I have to ask you more questions about this.
·7· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· I'm going to object to the ·7· Okay?
·8· nonresponsive. ·8· · · ·A.· Okay.
·9· · · ·Q.· (BY MS. BARNES) I'm going to ask you, based ·9· · · ·Q.· And I'm sorry.· I don't want to make you
10· on your memory, how fast were you driving when you 10· feel bad.
11· were driving through the garage? 11· · · ·A.· It's all right.
12· · · ·A.· I would not have been going over four miles 12· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· Do you need a break,
13· an hour. 13· Christi or --
14· · · ·Q.· So in order to pull into a spot, you've got 14· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· I'm okay.· Maybe a short
15· to turn your car one way or the other.· Right? 15· one.
16· · · ·A.· (Indicating.) 16· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Okay.
17· · · ·Q.· Is that a yes? 17· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· Sure.
18· · · ·A.· That's yes.· Sorry. 18· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· So I'm not crying.
19· · · ·Q.· And was the spot on your left or on your 19· · · · · · · · (Recess 11:40 a.m. to 11:44 a.m.)
20· right? 20· · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Back on the record,
21· · · ·A.· It would be on my left. 21· 11:44.
22· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Do you recall if you came to a 22· · · ·Q.· (BY MS. BARNES) Ms. Bowmer, we're back on
23· complete stop before you pulled into the parking 23· the record after a short break.
24· spot, or whether you just continued moving slowly and 24· · · ·A.· Okay.
25· started to pull into the spot? 25· · · ·Q.· We were talking about how the accident

Page 71 Page 73
·1· · · ·A.· I continued to move slowly into the spot ·1· happened.· You had parked in the Littlefield Garage
·2· until I pulled up to a small bar.· And then when I ·2· before.· Correct?
·3· looked up, I became very anxious because I didn't see ·3· · · ·A.· I had.
·4· anything in front of me.· It was just like this open ·4· · · ·Q.· And you were aware that there's a cable
·5· space.· It -- I became very anxious at that point. ·5· barrier system.· Correct?
·6· · · ·Q.· Okay.· You referenced a bar.· What do you ·6· · · ·A.· I hadn't noticed it before.
·7· mean? ·7· · · ·Q.· Okay.· You never noticed that cable barrier
·8· · · ·A.· There's just a cement bar.· I was pulling up ·8· system before?
·9· towards that cement bar on the ground.· And then when ·9· · · ·A.· I -- the cars were always parked in those
10· I looked up, I was just like, "Oh my goodness. 10· spots.· I -- you know, if I had noticed it, I didn't
11· There's nothing in front of me."· And I was very 11· think about it.
12· anxious.· And that's when I thought, "I've got to hit 12· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Had you parked on that outer edge
13· my brake because there's nothing in front of me," and 13· before?
14· I accidently hit the gas instead of the brake.· And 14· · · ·A.· Never.· Not to my -- never.
15· then -- 15· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And your testimony was that when you
16· · · ·Q.· So you remember the cement parking stop 16· were pulling in, you looked up and you saw nothing
17· being there, and you're turning your car to pull in, 17· there.· Is that what you're saying?
18· and you became anxious and accidently hit the gas 18· · · ·A.· Pretty much.· I mean, I didn't really see
19· instead of the brake? 19· anything in front of me.· It just looked like an open
20· · · ·A.· Once I was kind of close to the bar, I 20· space.
21· looked up and I was like, "Oh my gosh.· There's 21· · · ·Q.· But you now know that there were cables
22· nothing in front of me." 22· there.· Right?
23· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So it's your testimony that you 23· · · ·A.· Yes.
24· accidently hit the gas when you were close to the 24· · · ·Q.· Do you have any reason that would explain
25· cement parking stop? 25· why it looked open to you?

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Christi Bowmer
June 15, 2018 74 to 77
Page 74 Page 76
·1· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· Objection, form.· You can ·1· you pick back up as to what happened?
·2· answer. ·2· · · ·A.· I was hanging upside down, and I knew that
·3· · · ·A.· I didn't see anything over my hood when I ·3· something was very wrong.· And then a man and some
·4· looked up, and so I got really anxious and I hit ·4· workers pulled me from the car.· They laid me on the
·5· my -- what I thought was my brake. ·5· ground.· And I knew my back was broken and I knew I
·6· · · ·Q.· (BY MS. BARNES) And that was right as you ·6· was bleeding heavily.· And so I asked a passerby for
·7· were pulling up to the bar, as you call it.· Right? ·7· their phone because I wanted to tell my husband and
·8· · · ·A.· Yes. ·8· my daughter goodbye because I knew I was going to
·9· · · ·Q.· And you hit the brake, and then what ·9· die.
10· happens?· What you thought was the brake.· I'm sorry. 10· · · · · · · · And then the man prayed at my shoulder.
11· Let me back that up.· I'll re-ask the question. 11· He prayed.· And somewhere in my head I was asked if I
12· · · · · · · · You're pulling up and you're right at 12· wanted to stay, and I said "Yes.· Don't take me."
13· the bar and you intend to hit the brake.· Correct? 13· And the man said, I was told not to lead you to
14· · · ·A.· I intended to hit the brake. 14· salvation.· I was told you were to stay here.· And if
15· · · ·Q.· And you instead accidently hit the 15· he wouldn't have pulled me from that car, they told
16· accelerator.· Right? 16· me I would have bled out and died.· I --
17· · · ·A.· That's correct. 17· · · ·Q.· Do you know who the man was?
18· · · ·Q.· And did you fully engage the accelerator? 18· · · ·A.· He wouldn't come forward, but when I was
19· · · ·A.· I don't know. 19· filming later, I got to meet him.
20· · · ·Q.· You hit the accelerator? 20· · · ·Q.· Okay.
21· · · ·A.· It happened so fast.· I mean, the next 21· · · ·A.· I was so honored to meet him.
22· second I'm screaming, "No.· God, no."· My car didn't 22· · · ·Q.· Do you know his name?
23· feel like it hit anything.· It just -- I was just 23· · · ·A.· His name is Robert.· I don't remember his
24· falling and falling.· And it felt like forever.· And 24· last name right now.· But I hugged him and I said,
25· then I hit the ground. 25· "Thank you so much.· Thank you so much for saving my

Page 75 Page 77
·1· · · ·Q.· Okay.· I'm going to give you a minute. ·1· life."· And he said, "I've been watching you."· And I
·2· · · ·A.· Sorry. ·2· said, "Why didn't you come forward?· I wanted to say
·3· · · ·Q.· You're okay. ·3· thank you."· And he said "I just didn't want to"
·4· · · ·A.· And then there was blood everywhere. ·4· and -- but I'm going to do something for his family
·5· · · ·Q.· Well, let's back up for one second.· Okay? ·5· at some point.· And then the ambulance ride.
·6· · · ·A.· Okay. ·6· · · ·Q.· Okay.· You mentioned borrowing a cell phone
·7· · · ·Q.· I've seen statements from you that say that ·7· or that you wanted to.· Did you actually borrow a
·8· your foot slipped off the brake and hit the ·8· cell phone and call your daughter and your husband?
·9· accelerator.· Is that correct? ·9· · · ·A.· Someone dialed it for me.
10· · · ·A.· I could have said that, but I don't really 10· · · ·Q.· Did you talk to them?
11· know what happened.· I really don't know. 11· · · ·A.· I did.
12· · · ·Q.· Okay.· All you know is you hit the 12· · · ·Q.· Both of them?
13· accelerator when you intended to hit the brake? 13· · · ·A.· No.
14· · · ·A.· Yes.· It was my fault. 14· · · ·Q.· Who did you talk to?
15· · · ·Q.· Okay.· You just described for me what 15· · · ·A.· My husband.
16· happened after.· I don't want you to go back through 16· · · ·Q.· What did you say?
17· that again.· Do you have any memory of the impact 17· · · ·A.· I said "I've been in a really bad accident
18· with the building on the other side of the alley? 18· and I don't think I'm going to make it.· And I want
19· · · ·A.· I know from videos that -- that I hit that 19· to say -- I want to tell you guys I love you because
20· wall but I don't -- I don't recall.· I mean, it 20· I don't think I'll ever see you again."
21· happened so fast and then it was just straight down 21· · · · · · · · (Crying.)· I'm sorry.· I'm sorry.
22· after that, but I don't -- I know that I did, from 22· · · ·Q.· You're -- you don't need to apologize.
23· video. 23· Okay.
24· · · ·Q.· Okay.· All right.· And you were starting to 24· · · ·A.· I didn't think I was going to see them.
25· tell me that there was blood everywhere.· I will let 25· · · ·Q.· Did he respond back to you that you recall?

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Christi Bowmer
June 15, 2018 78 to 81
Page 78 Page 80
·1· · · ·A.· He just said, "I love you.· I love you." ·1· Correct?
·2· And then they had to take me. ·2· · · ·A.· I did.· And then the next day they took me
·3· · · · · · · · THE REPORTER:· I'm sorry.· And then ·3· in for emergency back surgery, because L4 had
·4· what? ·4· exploded in my back and I had compression fractures
·5· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· They had to take me. ·5· above and below that.· I did not know this until
·6· · · ·Q.· (BY MS. BARNES) Okay.· EMS was there when ·6· after the fact.
·7· you made that call.· Is that -- ·7· · · · · · · · I had also cracked my sternum, rib,
·8· · · ·A.· I don't know if -- ·8· broken leg, cuts everywhere else.· So they put eight
·9· · · ·Q.· Okay. ·9· screws, two rods.· And then I couldn't breathe
10· · · ·A.· -- they were there or not. 10· because my sternum hurt so bad.· I couldn't move.
11· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And you're taken by ambulance to Dell 11· And so I was so scared I'd never walk again. I
12· Seton.· Correct? 12· didn't know.· They didn't know.
13· · · ·A.· Yeah. 13· · · ·Q.· When were you scared that you were never
14· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Is there anything else that happened 14· going to walk again?
15· at the scene that stands out in your mind that you 15· · · ·A.· After the surgery.
16· would like to share? 16· · · ·Q.· Did you have two back surgeries when you
17· · · ·A.· Just to all the people that I saw trying to 17· were at Dell Seton, or one?· Do you know?
18· help.· Just that I knew I was going to die.· And then 18· · · ·A.· I believe it was one.
19· when they got me in the operating room, I don't know 19· · · ·Q.· Okay.
20· if they couldn't put me to sleep or what, but they 20· · · ·A.· But that's where I wanted to not forget.
21· were digging around in my head.· I had two cerebral 21· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Take a look at what we have marked as
22· hemorrhages.· And I heard someone say, "It's a hot 22· Exhibit 4.· If you want to read through that and add
23· mess in there.· We've got stop it."· And I heard 23· anything in to what we've just talked about, but
24· someone say, "What do you give her, 10 percent?"· And 24· right now we're talking about what happened at the
25· I'm like, "You're saying this while I'm awake. 25· scene and what happened at Dell Seton.· Okay?

Page 79 Page 81
·1· You're digging around in my head and you're saying ·1· · · ·A.· Okay.
·2· this while I'm awake." ·2· · · ·Q.· Is there -- do you want to take a look at
·3· · · · · · · · And I was so scared.· I was so scared I ·3· that and --
·4· wasn't going to leave that table.· And they -- my ·4· · · ·A.· That's just -- you know, I'm -- the fear of
·5· husband told me that they wouldn't even let them see ·5· walking.· The fear of losing my job.· The fear of,
·6· me.· They weren't going to let them say goodbye. ·6· you know, those things that run through your head
·7· They were trying to rush me straight to emergency ·7· that I just -- you're just so scared because you --
·8· surgery.· And so I think he was just so upset that he ·8· they told me the extent of my injuries after my back
·9· wasn't going to get to say goodbye because they ·9· surgery and I knew I was bad.· But that probably
10· didn't -- they had told him "You need to" -- "She 10· scared me the most because, you know, I'm still here.
11· might not make it." 11· So that part we got.· Right?· I'm -- I'm still here
12· · · ·Q.· When you were -- when EMS arrives, where 12· now.· But now am I going to walk?· So it was just
13· were you feeling pain? 13· walking through that trauma.
14· · · ·A.· I was just so scared.· I knew my back was 14· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And you said you knew it was bad but
15· broken.· I could feel that.· I knew my head was 15· when they told you the extent of your injuries is
16· gushing blood.· I was just so scared. 16· when you got really scared.· What are you talking
17· · · ·Q.· Okay. 17· about?· You're in the hospital.
18· · · ·A.· I knew -- I didn't know until after the fact 18· · · ·A.· I'm in the hospital.
19· that I needed transfusions, but that makes sense. I 19· · · ·Q.· Okay.
20· was losing so much blood. 20· · · ·A.· And they're just trying to tell me, "Look,
21· · · ·Q.· You had a transfusion? 21· you -- the reason why you have a tube coming out of
22· · · ·A.· I don't know how many. 22· your head is because we've got to get the blood --
23· · · ·Q.· How long were you at Dell Seton? 23· you know, the pressure off your head."· And so you
24· · · ·A.· I believe eight or nine days. 24· don't know.· What does that mean?· You don't -- I
25· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And you had surgery for your back. 25· didn't know if I was going to walk, because they told

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Christi Bowmer
June 15, 2018 82 to 85
Page 82 Page 84
·1· me L4 exploded, and I had spinal problems.· So you're ·1· · · ·Q.· Your lower back.· And was the PT for your
·2· just laying there thinking, "I can't move.· I can't ·2· lower back or your leg or both?
·3· breathe."· You are just scared. ·3· · · ·A.· It was for my leg, for my scapula, my lower
·4· · · ·Q.· Okay.· All right.· So when you were released ·4· back.· And it was mostly for my lower back, but we
·5· from Dell Seton, do you -- are you released home or ·5· also did some things for my leg and my arm.
·6· are you released to a therapy program? ·6· · · ·Q.· Do you have a recollection of how much PT
·7· · · ·A.· Home. ·7· you went through?
·8· · · ·Q.· Home.· Okay.· And how are you doing ·8· · · ·A.· I would have to estimate.· I believe it's in
·9· physically when you were discharged home? ·9· my records, though.
10· · · ·A.· I couldn't do anything for myself. 10· · · ·Q.· Were you done with it before you went back
11· · · ·Q.· Are you in a wheelchair? 11· to work in October?
12· · · ·A.· I -- they put me in a boot.· I was not in a 12· · · ·A.· No.
13· wheelchair.· At home I used a walker.· My husband 13· · · ·Q.· Okay.· You continued to go after that?
14· assisted me in everything that I did.· Potty chair, 14· · · ·A.· I continued to go and kept trying to fight
15· shower chair, bed rail.· In ICU this wonderful nurse 15· for more.· Tillman tried to keep sending requests,
16· wrapped up a blanket with tape and so every time I 16· and I believe that I could use more.
17· would move I would pretty much scream.· But she said 17· · · ·Q.· PT was helpful for reducing pain?
18· if I would grab that blanket to my chest to compress 18· · · ·A.· Range of motion.· They would actually even
19· it and help me, that would help me move with -- and 19· massage me, put heat and ice.· And it's just those
20· without excruciating pain from the sternum.· And so I 20· muscles around that cage and the bottom of my back,
21· used that. 21· just feels like somebody is reaching in there.· And I
22· · · · · · · · But he was amazing.· He assisted me in 22· can't -- I can't function without the hydrocodone.
23· everything I did -- and pretty much, you know, I 23· And I have been on it almost a year, and that's why
24· remember -- recall just having to set me down on a 24· we're talking about the spinal stimulator, because I
25· potty, like next to the bed, and he would empty the 25· can't continue to just -- I don't want to continue to

Page 83 Page 85
·1· bucket and then really kind of put me back in.· Kind ·1· be on drugs.
·2· of humiliating, but he was -- he did it because he's ·2· · · ·Q.· Okay.
·3· had a whole lot of medical problems in his life and ·3· · · ·A.· And I can't take the muscle relaxer that
·4· I've taken care of him, and he took care of me. ·4· they want me to because I can't work, and I need my
·5· · · ·Q.· Sounds like he did a really good job for ·5· job.
·6· you. ·6· · · ·Q.· If you don't take the hydrocodone, what's
·7· · · ·A.· He did.· He's amazing.· He still does to ·7· your pain like?
·8· this day. ·8· · · ·A.· Probably a five.
·9· · · ·Q.· So what happens next in terms of your ·9· · · ·Q.· In your low back?
10· treatment after you're discharged home? 10· · · ·A.· In my low back.
11· · · ·A.· Just trying to recover. 11· · · ·Q.· As of June of 2018, do you have pain in
12· · · ·Q.· You eventually did PT.· Right? 12· other areas of your body other than your low back?
13· · · ·A.· Yeah. 13· · · ·A.· I never had pain before my accident.
14· · · ·Q.· How soon was that? 14· · · ·Q.· Well, I mean, as we sit here today, you're
15· · · ·A.· I don't think it was for at least -- I'm 15· complaining that you have pain that's a five in your
16· estimating, but the end -- coming on the end of that, 16· low back.· Are there other areas of your body --
17· three months, because I couldn't do anything with my 17· · · ·A.· That hurt?
18· back and my sternum and my -- I mean, it took a 18· · · ·Q.· -- that cause you pain?
19· while.· And I had a boot.· But I remember it was 19· · · ·A.· Yes.
20· probably that -- estimating, that last month, after 20· · · ·Q.· What?
21· two months probably. 21· · · ·A.· My sternum sometimes when it gets cold.· If
22· · · ·Q.· Okay.· All right.· So your most significant 22· I lift too much, I pay for it.· If I move the wrong
23· pain, where does that come from, as you sit here 23· way, my left scapula will hurt.· Not excruciating.
24· today? 24· The sternum is not excruciating.· It just hurts.· The
25· · · ·A.· My lower back. 25· excruciating piece is the lower back.

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Christi Bowmer
June 15, 2018 86 to 89
Page 86 Page 88
·1· · · ·Q.· Okay.· How is your leg?· Which leg was it? ·1· people.· I can't think of any other besides the eye
·2· · · ·A.· Right. ·2· doctor.
·3· · · ·Q.· And you had a fracture.· Right? ·3· · · ·Q.· Prior to the accident, were you having any
·4· · · ·A.· Yeah. ·4· medical problems at all?
·5· · · ·Q.· And has that pain resolved? ·5· · · ·A.· No.
·6· · · ·A.· I can't wear heels yet.· They swell, both ·6· · · ·Q.· I saw a reference in your records from May
·7· ankles will swell.· Small boot heel maybe is okay. ·7· of 2017, so a couple of months before the accident,
·8· That's okay.· And -- but, you know, I -- like I said, ·8· about tremor.· Do you know what that would be about?
·9· I've tried, but it's not worth it.· I mean, ·9· · · ·A.· I do now that you're talking about it. I
10· sometimes -- like, once I put on a pair of heels for 10· may have -- I went to a neurosurgeon.· My right hand
11· a meeting, and then I took them right back off.· But 11· shook a little bit, and he called them nothing to
12· I just walked down the hall, put them on and then 12· worry about.· He said it's a familiar tremor but
13· walked back and took them off. 13· nothing concerning.
14· · · ·Q.· As long as you're not wearing heels, do you 14· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Do you have an understanding of the
15· have any pain in your right leg? 15· cause of that tremor?
16· · · ·A.· No.· I mean, not now.· I did.· A lot of it. 16· · · ·A.· He said that there is no -- no known cause.
17· But it's kind of continually gotten better.· I have 17· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Do you know the name of the
18· what they call I guess trauma, like I've got just 18· neurosurgeon?
19· disfiguration on both feet from veins.· They -- and 19· · · ·A.· I do have it.· I can provide you with it.
20· my pain doctor said, you know, we could do something 20· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And I'm assuming that's whose records
21· about -- you could do that, but it would be cosmetic, 21· I have, but I'm not sure.
22· and it would be very painful.· And I said no, I'm not 22· · · ·A.· Yeah.
23· even going to consider that.· I'm not -- 23· · · ·Q.· I also saw something about edema, swelling
24· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And the veins, the disfiguration you 24· in your feet or ankles, or something like that prior
25· relate to this accident? 25· to the accident.· Do you have a memory of that?

Page 87 Page 89
·1· · · ·A.· Yes. ·1· · · ·A.· I'm trying to think.· I don't.· I would have
·2· · · ·Q.· Okay. ·2· to go --
·3· · · ·A.· They were not there before. ·3· · · ·Q.· Did you have some sort of a rheumatoid
·4· · · ·Q.· You started seeing a pain management doctor ·4· disorder?
·5· at some point? ·5· · · ·A.· A groomatoid [sic]?
·6· · · ·A.· Yes. ·6· · · ·Q.· Yeah.
·7· · · ·Q.· Do you recall when that was? ·7· · · ·A.· Rheumatoid.· Yes.· Gosh.· It's like
·8· · · ·A.· I don't. ·8· Raynaud's.· So basically your fingers will get cold.
·9· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And you saw the eye doctor, who I ·9· I'm trying to think of the name of it.· But there's
10· asked you about earlier and you didn't recall who it 10· nothing to do with that except for, you know, ensure
11· was.· Correct? 11· that you're -- you stay warm.
12· · · ·A.· His name I don't -- it's a -- 12· · · ·Q.· And you have been diagnosed with Raynaud's?
13· · · ·Q.· Right. 13· · · ·A.· Yeah.
14· · · ·A.· -- very difficult name. 14· · · ·Q.· Okay.
15· · · ·Q.· Okay.· The eye issues have completely 15· · · ·A.· I forgot about that, but yes.
16· resolved? 16· · · ·Q.· Were you seeing someone?
17· · · ·A.· I believe so.· I mean, as far as -- I mean, 17· · · ·A.· No, not regularly.· Once it was diagnosed,
18· I would have to probably have another follow-up, but 18· there's nothing to do but, he said, don't move
19· I'm assuming that -- you know, we looked at it and 19· anywhere cold.
20· there's no more floaters. 20· · · ·Q.· Did you have a regular family practice
21· · · ·Q.· Are there any other medical providers that 21· physician or an OB/GYN prior to the accident?
22· you've seen since the accident that we haven't 22· · · ·A.· I did have a regular OB/GYN.
23· already talked about? 23· · · ·Q.· Who's that?
24· · · ·A.· Just the gentleman that did my back, 24· · · ·A.· Dr. Terrence Kuhlmann, K-U-H-L-M-A-N [sic].
25· Dr. Wang, and the pain management people, the PT 25· · · ·Q.· Were you having any issues with high blood

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Christi Bowmer
June 15, 2018 90 to 93
Page 90 Page 92
·1· pressure? ·1· · · ·A.· Well, my father died of a heart attack, but
·2· · · ·A.· No. ·2· he was overweight.
·3· · · ·Q.· High cholesterol? ·3· · · ·Q.· Okay.
·4· · · ·A.· No. ·4· · · ·A.· So not really.· My mother is 80 and still
·5· · · ·Q.· Any issues with dizziness? ·5· going and amazing.
·6· · · ·A.· No. ·6· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Prior to the accident, had you had
·7· · · ·Q.· Any history of headaches prior to the ·7· any kind of surgery whatsoever?
·8· accident? ·8· · · ·A.· I was attacked by a dog when I was 10 years
·9· · · ·A.· No. ·9· old, and I have also had breast implants.
10· · · ·Q.· Any trouble walking prior to the accident? 10· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Other than that have you ever had any
11· · · ·A.· No. 11· surgeries?
12· · · ·Q.· Any back pain prior to the accident? 12· · · ·A.· No.
13· · · ·A.· No. 13· · · ·Q.· And other than the Raynaud's that we talked
14· · · ·Q.· Have you ever had back pain in your life? 14· about, had you been diagnosed with any disease or
15· · · ·A.· Not really. 15· condition prior to the accident?
16· · · ·Q.· Before the accident obviously? 16· · · ·A.· Not that I recall.
17· · · ·A.· No. 17· · · ·Q.· Had you been hospitalized for any reason
18· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Have you ever sought medical 18· prior to the accident?
19· treatment for any type of back pain? 19· · · ·A.· For the sepsis from that.
20· · · ·A.· No. 20· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Where were you treated for that?
21· · · ·Q.· Okay.· I saw a reference in a record from 21· · · ·A.· Cedar Park Regional.
22· 2001 about back rods.· Do you have any idea what 22· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Have you ever had a broken bone prior
23· that's about? 23· to the accident?
24· · · ·A.· My husband has them. 24· · · ·A.· I may have had a broken foot maybe at one
25· · · ·Q.· Okay.· But you have not? 25· point, way back when, like when I was in my 20s.

Page 91 Page 93
·1· · · ·A.· I have not. ·1· · · ·Q.· Any history of arthritis?
·2· · · ·Q.· You've never had a surgery on your back ·2· · · ·A.· No.
·3· prior to the accident? ·3· · · ·Q.· Have you been diagnosed with depression in
·4· · · ·A.· No, but my husband has had many. ·4· the past?
·5· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Have you ever had surgery on your ·5· · · ·A.· No.
·6· neck prior to the accident? ·6· · · ·Q.· Have you ever been diagnosed with anxiety
·7· · · ·A.· No. ·7· prior to the accident?
·8· · · ·Q.· Have you ever had any issues with neck pain ·8· · · ·A.· No.
·9· or a neck injury prior to the accident? ·9· · · ·Q.· Have you ever taken medication for
10· · · ·A.· No. 10· depression prior to the accident?
11· · · ·Q.· Have you ever had a history of any type of 11· · · ·A.· Well, Dr. Kuhlmann gave me Wellbutrin, but
12· injury to either leg? 12· he was trying to help me stop smoking.
13· · · ·A.· I did hit my leg on -- and this may be the 13· · · ·Q.· That's the only reason you've ever taken
14· swelling piece.· I hit my leg on the corner of a 14· Wellbutrin is to stop smoking?
15· hotel room and it got infected and it swelled up and 15· · · ·A.· He said it would help with weight loss too.
16· it had staph. 16· · · ·Q.· But you weren't taking it as an
17· · · ·Q.· When was that? 17· antidepressant?
18· · · ·A.· Last year?· No, I was working for -- I was 18· · · ·A.· No.
19· working for Statoil at the time, so -- 19· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Have you ever been given a
20· · · ·Q.· Okay. 20· prescription for anxiety prior to the accident?
21· · · ·A.· -- several years ago. 21· · · ·A.· Not that I'm aware of.
22· · · ·Q.· And that healed without incident? 22· · · ·Q.· Tobacco dependence is listed in your medical
23· · · ·A.· Yes. 23· records.· You would agree with that.· Right?
24· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Do you have any medical conditions 24· · · ·A.· I would agree with that.
25· that run in your family that are concerning to you? 25· · · ·Q.· Alcohol dependence is also listed in your

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Christi Bowmer
June 15, 2018 94 to 97
Page 94 Page 96
·1· medical records.· Would you agree with that? ·1· consciousness?
·2· · · ·A.· I would not agree with that. ·2· · · ·A.· No.
·3· · · ·Q.· Okay.· As of the day of the accident you've ·3· · · ·Q.· Okay.
·4· had no physical complaints.· Is that correct? ·4· · · ·A.· I hadn't asked either, but...
·5· · · ·A.· That's correct. ·5· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Other than your attorneys, I don't
·6· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And there was nothing about your ·6· want to know anything about discussions with your
·7· mental or physical condition that would have affected ·7· attorneys.
·8· your ability to operate a motor vehicle that day.· Is ·8· · · ·A.· Okay.
·9· that correct? ·9· · · ·Q.· Who have you talked to about the accident?
10· · · ·A.· That's correct. 10· · · ·A.· It was all over the world.
11· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Your friend did not have an assigned 11· · · ·Q.· Yeah.· It looks -- and we'll go through
12· parking spot in the Littlefield Garage.· Is that 12· those in a minute.· Have you talked to anyone from
13· correct? 13· GTT Parking, my client?
14· · · ·A.· Not that I'm aware of. 14· · · ·A.· I -- if I did, I wouldn't know.
15· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Had you ever suffered from anxiety or 15· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Have you talked to anybody from
16· any type of a panic attack prior to this day? 16· Premier Parking, who manages the garage?
17· · · ·A.· I think I may have once, but I believe it 17· · · ·A.· If I did, I wouldn't know.
18· only, like, happened one time, and it's a long time 18· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Have you talked to anybody from
19· ago. 19· Weitzman Management Company about the accident?
20· · · ·Q.· Were you involved in an accident related to 20· · · ·A.· I don't even know who Weitzman is.
21· that? 21· · · ·Q.· Okay.· I assume you've talked to your
22· · · ·A.· No. 22· husband about the accident?
23· · · ·Q.· Did you suffer any injury related to that? 23· · · ·A.· (Nodding head up and down.)
24· · · ·A.· I don't recall what I was anxious about. 24· · · ·Q.· Yes?
25· · · ·Q.· Would you describe this event as a panic 25· · · ·A.· Yes.

Page 95 Page 97
·1· attack? ·1· · · ·Q.· And your daughter, I assume?
·2· · · ·A.· I don't know that I -- I think I was just ·2· · · ·A.· Yes.
·3· anxious, I would think.· I don't know -- I don't ·3· · · ·Q.· Yes.· Other friends that you've talked to
·4· recall that any -- but... ·4· about the accident?
·5· · · ·Q.· And when you were pulling into the spot, ·5· · · ·A.· Sure.· Everybody asks me about it --
·6· were you looking straight ahead? ·6· · · ·Q.· Okay.
·7· · · ·A.· I was. ·7· · · ·A.· -- and people come up to me and recognize
·8· · · ·Q.· And you weren't looking down at anything in ·8· me.· My -- one of the senior VPs said she saw it in
·9· your car? ·9· Spain.· The IT person said -- he's the executive for
10· · · ·A.· No. 10· IT -- said he saw it in Germany.· It was in Italy.
11· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And you weren't talking on the phone. 11· My --
12· Correct? 12· · · ·Q.· How does --
13· · · ·A.· I was not. 13· · · ·A.· -- husband --
14· · · ·Q.· And you weren't looking down at your phone. 14· · · ·Q.· -- that make you feel?· Oh, I didn't mean to
15· Correct? 15· interrupt you.· If you want to keep talking.
16· · · ·A.· Huh-uh. 16· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· Objection, form.· You can
17· · · ·Q.· Were you conscious the whole time? 17· answer.
18· · · ·A.· I believe that I was, but -- I believe that 18· · · ·A.· Uncomfortable.
19· I was, but I don't know that.· I mean, it -- this all 19· · · ·Q.· (BY MS. BARNES) Well, were there more on
20· happened so fast and, you know, the man praying at my 20· that list?· You went through Spain, Germany, Italy.
21· shoulder. 21· · · ·A.· I heard it was everywhere.
22· · · ·Q.· Okay.· As far as you know, you were 22· · · ·Q.· Okay.
23· conscious the whole time? 23· · · ·A.· And I guess the video went viral?
24· · · ·A.· As far as I know. 24· · · ·Q.· Okay.· How did you hear that?
25· · · ·Q.· Has anyone told you that you lost 25· · · ·A.· That's just what everybody is saying.

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Christi Bowmer
June 15, 2018 98 to 101
Page 98 Page 100
·1· · · ·Q.· Gotcha.· You gave a number of interviews. ·1· to say thank you to all those people that helped me
·2· Right? ·2· and it was very important for me to say thank you.
·3· · · ·A.· I did. ·3· And so one of the EMS guys, I would -- I think he's
·4· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Who did you interview with? ·4· EMS, came up and said, "Hey, I heard you wanted to
·5· · · ·A.· The Today show, Inside Edition, KXAN.· And I ·5· see me."· And I said, "I did."· And he hugged me.
·6· believe, Fox?· I don't know, but... ·6· And I said, "What's your name?"· And it's hard to
·7· · · ·Q.· You agreed voluntarily to give those ·7· forget because his name was Daniel Ender.· And I
·8· interviews.· Right? ·8· said, "What a name to give me a new beginning."
·9· · · ·A.· I agreed. ·9· · · ·Q.· Is there -- go ahead.· Is there more to that
10· · · ·Q.· Why did you do that? 10· answer?
11· · · ·A.· Because I don't want it to happen to anybody 11· · · ·A.· There was a couple of guys that came out.
12· else. 12· My attorney was with me at the time, so I don't know
13· · · ·Q.· Were those painful for you? 13· if he got their names.
14· · · ·A.· Yes. 14· · · ·Q.· Is there anyone else that you can think of
15· · · ·Q.· And many of those were shortly after the 15· that you have talked to about the accident in depth
16· accident.· Is that right? 16· other than friends or coworkers, colleagues, just
17· · · ·A.· I don't remember the time frame, but it -- I 17· kind of asking about it?
18· know I still had my boot from my broken leg. 18· · · ·A.· Everyone asks about it.
19· · · ·Q.· Okay.· You said when you got discharged how 19· · · ·Q.· Still to this day?
20· you weren't able to do anything for yourself and Jay 20· · · ·A.· Still to this day.
21· took good care of you.· When was it, in your mind, 21· · · ·Q.· What do you tell them when they ask about
22· that you were able to kind of start doing some things 22· it?
23· for yourself? 23· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· Objection, form.
24· · · ·A.· I don't know.· I would have to ask him when 24· · · ·A.· I just tell them I was in a horrific
25· -- what he thinks. 25· accident and I point them towards -- I'm like, all

Page 99 Page 101

·1· · · ·Q.· Was it less than a month? ·1· you have to do is Google my name, so I don't have to
·2· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· Don't guess. ·2· go through it again.· And that's what I tell them so
·3· · · ·A.· I don't know. ·3· I don't have to go through it.
·4· · · ·Q.· (BY MS. BARNES) When you gave the Inside ·4· · · ·Q.· (BY MS. BARNES) Do you take some
·5· Edition interview, you were walking around and ·5· responsibility for the accident?
·6· showing them the garage.· Correct? ·6· · · ·A.· I take responsibility for what happened in
·7· · · ·A.· Yes. ·7· my car.
·8· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So by that point you were doing okay. ·8· · · ·Q.· Meaning you should have hit the brake
·9· Right? ·9· instead of hitting the accelerator.· Correct?
10· · · ·A.· Yes.· But, you know, I don't know for -- you 10· · · ·A.· Yes.
11· know, how I was feeling.· I mean, at least I was able 11· · · ·Q.· You made a mistake?
12· to walk. 12· · · ·A.· I made a mistake.· I didn't mean to, but...
13· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Have you talked to any eyewitnesses 13· · · ·Q.· I understand.
14· to the accident since the accident? 14· · · ·A.· I take accountable -- I'm accountable for
15· · · ·A.· When we were filming, people from those 15· that.
16· buildings came out, yes. 16· · · ·Q.· We've talked about your low back pain.· That
17· · · ·Q.· Do you know any of their names? 17· seems to be your primary problem.· Is that correct?
18· · · ·A.· I can't remember any of them -- 18· · · ·A.· That's correct.
19· · · ·Q.· Okay. 19· · · ·Q.· Just trying to control that pain?
20· · · ·A.· -- besides Robert. 20· · · ·A.· Yes.
21· · · ·Q.· Right.· Are there any eyewitnesses you 21· · · ·Q.· Okay.· You did look at your Exhibit 4, your
22· talked to that you remember by name other than 22· notes.· I would just like for you to tell me, we can
23· Robert? 23· start with physically, how is this accident affecting
24· · · ·A.· There was a man that came and visited me in 24· you currently?
25· the hospital, and I had told everyone that I wanted 25· · · ·A.· I can't do the things that I love.· I can't

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Christi Bowmer
June 15, 2018 102 to 105
Page 102 Page 104
·1· play golf.· I haven't danced.· I was very, very ·1· rented one for my daughter.
·2· social.· I had friends that make -- you know, make ·2· · · ·Q.· And that's something you think you can't do
·3· their minds up for me that I can't do things, like, ·3· now?
·4· so that I don't get invited to a lot of things. ·4· · · ·A.· Oh, no.
·5· · · · · · · · I'm a terrible passenger.· I completely ·5· · · ·Q.· Because of your back?
·6· have panic attacks when we go over flyovers.· And if ·6· · · ·A.· My back.
·7· he gets too close to a car -- this is my husband, I'm ·7· · · ·Q.· And you mentioned snow skiing?
·8· -- I generally don't like to be a passenger after ·8· · · ·A.· Yeah.
·9· this accident, but I trust him.· But still, it's very ·9· · · ·Q.· Is that another thing you think you can't do
10· difficult.· He sold my motorcycle because he knew I'd 10· because of your back?
11· never ride again.· I canceled my membership. 11· · · ·A.· I would agree that I could not do that. I
12· · · · · · · · I have to weigh everything that I'm 12· can't play golf.· I mean --
13· going to do.· Like long car rides, just -- if I lay 13· · · ·Q.· Tell me about that.· How often would you
14· in bed too long, every morning when I get up, I still 14· play golf before?
15· to this day have to use my handrail to get in and out 15· · · ·A.· I tried to play as often as I could with my
16· of bed.· Every day. 16· friends.· It was just a passion of my mine.· I had a
17· · · · · · · · I have nightmares every night, according 17· golf membership at Twin Creeks and River Place.· And
18· to my husband, and I do.· It was humiliating to be 18· it was just something that we loved to do when we
19· bald.· The disfigurement on my back is humiliating. 19· could get together.· Cari Potts and Karen and I would
20· I'm scared that I'm not going to be able to maintain 20· try to play at least, at a minimum, once a month, you
21· my weight.· I was so excited about Orangetheory 21· know, during the -- at a minimum.
22· before.· I was working out.· I can't do that anymore. 22· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Have you tried to play since?
23· · · · · · · · It's just hard to adjust to a new life 23· · · ·A.· I don't even want to attempt it right now.
24· of not being able to jet ski, not being able to ski, 24· · · ·Q.· Okay.· What --
25· never go snow skiing, never do the things that you 25· · · ·A.· I can't -- I don't want to -- there's no way

Page 103 Page 105

·1· love because it's painful.· Not -- scared to drive in ·1· I could walk that whole course or twist.· I mean, my
·2· the rain, scared to drive in the dark.· Scared of ·2· scapula is like hurting and my back is hurting, and I
·3· having the stupid stimulator.· I don't want to do ·3· would be paying for that for days if -- at some point
·4· that.· But she says it may be my only option. ·4· I will try.
·5· · · · · · · · I feel guilty for not being able to help ·5· · · ·Q.· Okay.
·6· around the house.· I'm sorry.· It's gotten ·6· · · ·A.· I mean but -- because it's my passion.· I'm
·7· incrementally better, but it's -- without the ·7· not very good at it, but...
·8· hydrocodone, I can't function. ·8· · · ·Q.· Would you normally walk the course or --
·9· · · ·Q.· Prior to the accident, had you ever taken ·9· · · ·A.· Well, not walk it, but you're -- I would
10· hydrocodone? 10· have a cart, but you're still walking a lot.· But
11· · · ·A.· No. 11· it's more swinging the club and --
12· · · ·Q.· I want to go through some of the things you 12· · · ·Q.· Sure.· How often would you snow ski prior to
13· told me.· You had a motorcycle before? 13· the accident?
14· · · ·A.· I didn't ride it very often.· I had a 14· · · ·A.· Not often.· I hadn't been in years.· Since
15· trainer. 15· Courtney was probably in junior high.
16· · · ·Q.· Okay. 16· · · ·Q.· You don't use an orthotic at this point.· Is
17· · · ·A.· I was not on it very often. 17· that correct?
18· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And your husband sold it after the 18· · · ·A.· No.
19· accident? 19· · · ·Q.· Okay.· It is -- that was a bad question.
20· · · ·A.· Yeah. 20· You no longer use an orthotic.· Is that correct?
21· · · ·Q.· You said jet skied before? 21· · · ·A.· That's correct.
22· · · ·A.· Yeah, during the summers.· Not -- we don't 22· · · ·Q.· Okay.· You said working out, you had to let
23· have one but -- you know, I'd like to if the 23· your Orangetheory membership go.· Correct?
24· opportunity arose.· So last summer I don't think I 24· · · ·A.· Yes.
25· did, but maybe the summer before I got to once.· Like 25· · · ·Q.· How often were you working out prior to the

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Christi Bowmer
June 15, 2018 106 to 109
Page 106 Page 108
·1· accident? ·1· · · ·A.· I have scars across my forehead.· I have an
·2· · · ·A.· I had just joined and excited about it. I ·2· indention that's -- your finger can fit in that goes
·3· worked out myself, but I had -- I had just joined ·3· all the way back to here, but you can't see that now.
·4· that and was going with friends.· So it was a social ·4· You could.· I mean, that was embarrassing, because
·5· thing as well. ·5· you're bald and you've got this big thing on your
·6· · · ·Q.· So you had just started that? ·6· head.· And I'll have this big huge scar forever on my
·7· · · ·A.· Yeah. ·7· forehead.· So I just kind of put my bangs over it.
·8· · · ·Q.· Okay.· You said you feel bad you can't help ·8· · · ·Q.· I forgot -- we're about to run out of tape.
·9· around the house.· What things can you do to help ·9· Right?· Okay.· Let's take a break.
10· with the household work? 10· · · ·A.· Okay.
11· · · ·A.· I can take clothes out of the dryer if 11· · · ·Q.· And I think lunch may be here too.
12· they're not heavy.· Jay will have to come help if 12· · · · · · · · (Lunch recess 12:33 p.m. to 1:07 p.m.)
13· there's like a blanket or something like that.· I can 13· · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· This is segment No.
14· do dishes and put them in the dishwasher.· I don't -- 14· 3.· We're back on the record, 1:07.
15· I can't -- I'm not doing anything else. 15· · · ·Q.· (BY MS. BARNES) Ms. Bowmer, we're back on
16· · · ·Q.· Okay. 16· the record after a lunch break.
17· · · ·A.· He's doing everything else.· I mean, we do 17· · · ·A.· Okay.
18· have a housekeeper, but I'm not like doing any 18· · · ·Q.· You mentioned before the break the spinal
19· outside work like I used to.· I used to help him 19· cord stimulator.· Correct?
20· power spray, used to help him clean the pool.· I've 20· · · ·A.· (Nodding head.)
21· tried to help, and pay for it. 21· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And every time you mention that, you
22· · · ·Q.· Did you have a housekeeper before the 22· get this look on your face.· Tell me what you're
23· accident? 23· thinking when you talk about the spinal cord
24· · · ·A.· I did. 24· stimulator.
25· · · ·Q.· How often did your housekeeper come before 25· · · ·A.· It's just very, very scary to think that

Page 107 Page 109

·1· the accident? ·1· they're going to have to open me up and put this
·2· · · ·A.· She comes every other week -- or they come ·2· thing -- and I don't know much about it, but it --
·3· every other week. ·3· it's going to be a permanent implant.· And then I
·4· · · ·Q.· Okay.· You said it was humiliating to be ·4· hear that -- I don't -- she says she's going to talk
·5· bald? ·5· to me about it in my next two sessions.· But, I mean,
·6· · · ·A.· Yes. ·6· the fact that I'm going to have to have something
·7· · · ·Q.· Was it -- it was one area.· Right? ·7· like this because of this accident, I mean, it
·8· · · ·A.· It was shaved.· We have pictures of it I'm ·8· just -- it's just like one more thing that -- I just
·9· sure.· But basically it was shaved all the way back ·9· don't know why this happened.· It shouldn't have
10· to here.· So -- and then I had -- like in the 10· happened.
11· hospital, I'm sure you've seen the brain tube and all 11· · · ·Q.· The spinal cord stimulator will be to
12· of that, but I just started wearing hats.· I mean, I 12· control pain.· Correct?
13· didn't want to wear a wig.· But yeah, I was bald. 13· · · ·A.· Yes.
14· · · ·Q.· How long did it take for your hair to come 14· · · ·Q.· So that you can wean off the hydrocodone.
15· back? 15· Correct?
16· · · ·A.· Gosh.· It's been a year and I've had it 16· · · ·A.· Yes.
17· trimmed up, but this is the length and -- I mean, but 17· · · ·Q.· Has any physician recommended anything else
18· I have had it trimmed up, you know, to -- so -- 18· less invasive than the spinal cord stimulator?
19· because I do work in a professional office. 19· · · ·A.· Not yet.
20· · · ·Q.· You mentioned disfigurement on your back. 20· · · ·Q.· When you say, "not yet," do you --
21· Can you describe that for me? 21· · · ·A.· Well --
22· · · ·A.· I've just got big, huge scars on my back 22· · · ·Q.· -- plan to see someone?
23· where I used to not have anything.· And then the 23· · · ·A.· -- I did -- we did try trigger point
24· disfigurement, the terrible looking veins on my feet. 24· injections and a steroid shot, and they did nothing.
25· · · ·Q.· Are there other scars other than those? 25· · · ·Q.· Okay.

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Christi Bowmer
June 15, 2018 110 to 113
Page 110 Page 112
·1· · · ·A.· And they put me under for that.· She said ·1· very messy.· I actually try to use it every day
·2· she didn't think I could tolerate it otherwise.· But ·2· unless I've got something, you know, really designer
·3· I had ten shots in the back and one she called it ·3· on or something like that.· Or I'll let it dry before
·4· steroidal -- there's some -- kind of where your hip ·4· I put it on.· But it doesn't do near what the Flector
·5· connects your -- anyway, it's probably in my records. ·5· does.
·6· But it didn't really do anything, and I think it made ·6· · · ·Q.· Are there any other options that have been
·7· my -- the hip worse. ·7· discussed with you for controlling your low back pain
·8· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Who is "she" when you're saying she? ·8· other than the spinal cord stimulator?
·9· · · ·A.· Oh.· Jessica.· I'm sorry.· She's the PA. ·9· · · ·A.· Well, we did the shots.
10· And Dr. Wages comes in, you know, occasionally, but 10· · · ·Q.· Right.
11· normally I see his PA.· And I guess they have 11· · · ·A.· And we could try that again.· And --
12· discussed this and -- I'm going to assume they have 12· · · ·Q.· When was that?· Do you have a recollection
13· discussed this, that he wouldn't allow her to be 13· of when you did the shots?
14· discussing this with me.· But I don't know how it 14· · · ·A.· It wasn't that long ago.
15· works, you know. 15· · · ·Q.· Okay.· But no relief at all?
16· · · · · · · · But they say they generally like to wait 16· · · ·A.· None.· I think it made it worse.
17· a year but it looks like this is something that -- 17· · · ·Q.· Your back too, or just the hip?
18· that is going to be in my future.· But I really want 18· · · ·A.· Just the hip.
19· to know -- I want a second opinion.· I want to know 19· · · ·Q.· Okay.· But you got the shots in your back as
20· how long it's going to last.· All of those things 20· well?
21· and -- I just can't tolerate any -- any more right 21· · · ·A.· Yes.· I had ten shots in my back and just
22· now.· And I just told her that.· I said I can't -- I 22· the 11th was the steroidal shot.· And I -- they're
23· can't -- 23· called trigger point injections.· I don't know what
24· · · ·Q.· You got effective relief with the Flexeril 24· they used.
25· patches.· Correct? 25· · · ·Q.· Do you have any upcoming appointments?

Page 111 Page 113

·1· · · ·A.· I've got -- it helps.· I mean, it's like -- ·1· · · ·A.· I have one once a month with the pain
·2· you know, it -- it really did help.· And they're time ·2· doctor, so they can assess, you know, how I'm doing.
·3· released.· They're -- it -- you know, because I have ·3· · · ·Q.· Is there any other physicians that you plan
·4· to sit long periods, and I've learned to do it, but ·4· to see?
·5· I'm sore.· And after being in bed, I mean, literally ·5· · · ·A.· No.· Other than an OB/GYN for just the
·6· I'm in a lot of pain when I get up.· And I use my ·6· normal checkups and the -- I just saw my dentist.
·7· hand rail to get out.· But if I could immediately put ·7· · · ·Q.· Okay.
·8· that on, I mean, it's almost -- it helps a lot. ·8· · · ·A.· But nothing that's out of the ordinary.
·9· · · ·Q.· If I'm remembering correctly, you said if ·9· · · ·Q.· Nothing accident related?
10· you don't take the hydrocodone, your pain level is 10· · · ·A.· No.· I mean, Dr. Wang wants to see me back,
11· about a five out of a scale of one to ten? 11· but I can't recall when he wants to see me back.
12· · · ·A.· One to ten it's probably a five. 12· · · ·Q.· Is he your orthopedic surgeon or --
13· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And when you do take the hydrocodone, 13· · · ·A.· He --
14· what does that bring it down to? 14· · · ·Q.· -- maybe he's the neurosurgeon?
15· · · ·A.· Almost -- like I just took one ten minutes 15· · · ·A.· -- he's a -- he's a neurosurgeon.· He's
16· ago.· It's almost -- it's like a one.· I mean, I know 16· very, very good, but communication skills are a
17· it's there.· I can feel the -- I can feel the cage, I 17· little -- but you know what, I could care less.
18· know it's there.· I can feel my lower back, but it's 18· · · ·Q.· I've heard that's the best surgeons.
19· not like an ice pick. 19· · · ·A.· Yeah.· He did an amazing job of putting me
20· · · ·Q.· The Voltarol gel, how does -- how does that 20· back together after seeing the x-ray, because it was
21· help? 21· completely just like a vers -- it just was like a --
22· · · ·A.· It is sort of the replacement for the 22· I don't know how they put it back together.· I don't
23· Flector -- 23· know how you do that.· But I guess that's why I'm not
24· · · ·Q.· Okay. 24· a neurosurgeon.
25· · · ·A.· -- but it doesn't work near as well.· It's 25· · · ·Q.· Do you recall meeting with Dr. Feltoon?

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Christi Bowmer
June 15, 2018 114 to 117
Page 114 Page 116
·1· · · ·A.· Yes. ·1· accident she takes the pain medication, Hydrocodone,
·2· · · ·Q.· The psychological evaluation? ·2· 10 milligrams, every five hours."· Is that what you
·3· · · ·A.· Yes, yes. ·3· normally take?
·4· · · ·Q.· Okay.· I'm going to mark as Exhibit 6 ·4· · · ·A.· I'm trying to take less, but I take three to
·5· Dr. Feltoon's report and ask you a few questions ·5· four a day.
·6· about it. ·6· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And they're 10 milligrams?
·7· · · ·A.· I have not read the report. ·7· · · ·A.· Yes.
·8· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Fair enough. ·8· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And Baclofen, 10 milligrams?
·9· · · · · · · · (Exhibit 6 marked.) ·9· · · ·A.· I'm supposed to be taking it.· Like I said,
10· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· Thank you. 10· I can't take it at work.
11· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Have you seen this? 11· · · ·Q.· That's the muscle relaxer?
12· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· (Indicating.) 12· · · ·A.· Yes.
13· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· No? 13· · · ·Q.· And you can't take it at work because it
14· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· Listen to her questions. 14· causes you not to be able to function?
15· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Oh, okay. 15· · · ·A.· It makes me drowsy.
16· · · ·Q.· (BY MS. BARNES) So if you look on the front 16· · · ·Q.· Drowsy.· And then he references the Voltarol
17· page it says "Psychological Evaluation," and it has 17· gel that you just talked about.· Correct?
18· your name and date of birth.· And it says "Date of 18· · · ·A.· Uh-huh.
19· Testing:· March 15th, 2018."· Does that comport with 19· · · ·Q.· Okay.· The last sentence says, "She's not
20· your -- does that comport with your recollection? 20· under the care of a psychologist, counselor, or
21· · · ·A.· I think so, yes. 21· psychiatrist."· Is that true?
22· · · ·Q.· It's just a few months ago? 22· · · ·A.· That is true.
23· · · ·A.· Yeah. 23· · · ·Q.· Have you ever been under the care of a
24· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And he gave you a series of tests, I 24· psychologist, counselor, or psychiatrist?
25· assume.· Right? 25· · · ·A.· No.

Page 115 Page 117

·1· · · ·A.· Yes. ·1· · · ·Q.· Do you have any plans to do so?
·2· · · ·Q.· He lists them there.· You see that "Tests ·2· · · ·A.· I think it might be a good idea regarding
·3· administered" and he says -- he gave you a number of ·3· the accident.· I do.
·4· tests and -- he says "and a clinical interview." ·4· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Why?
·5· Correct? ·5· · · ·A.· Just to get over the anxiety, the trauma of
·6· · · ·A.· Yes. ·6· it, just to not cry every time I think about it,
·7· · · ·Q.· How long did he spend talking to you? ·7· to...
·8· · · ·A.· A long time. ·8· · · ·Q.· Okay.· The next paragraph.· "Ms. Bowmer also
·9· · · · · · · · THE REPORTER:· I'm sorry? ·9· reported that she smokes one half a package of
10· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· It was a long time. I 10· cigarettes a day, an increased amount from the four
11· don't know the length, but I know it was a couple 11· or five cigarettes per day she smoked prior to the
12· hours. 12· accident."· Is that true?
13· · · ·Q.· (BY MS. BARNES) Okay.· That he spent talking 13· · · ·A.· I probably smoke seven, but I know I
14· to you, or the whole thing? 14· probably smoke more than I did before.· I mean, I'm
15· · · ·A.· The whole thing. 15· -- that's an estimate that he has, so...
16· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And I was asking about how long he 16· · · ·Q.· Here's a stupid question.· How many
17· interviewed you. 17· cigarettes are in a pack?
18· · · ·A.· I don't recall. 18· · · ·A.· 24.
19· · · ·Q.· Okay. 19· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So half a pack would be 12?
20· · · ·A.· I -- 20· · · ·A.· Yeah.
21· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· Don't guess. 21· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And you're saying you don't smoke 12?
22· · · ·A.· I'm not.· I don't know. 22· · · ·A.· No.
23· · · ·Q.· (BY MS. BARNES) All right.· And flipping to 23· · · ·Q.· Okay.
24· the next page, page 2, the third paragraph down. 24· · · ·A.· Generally don't smoke half a pack.
25· "Ms. Bowmer reported that since the automobile 25· · · ·Q.· Okay.· The next sentence.· "Every night she

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Christi Bowmer
June 15, 2018 118 to 121
Page 118 Page 120
·1· consumes wine."· Do you agree with that? ·1· learned to manage it.· I've learned to push through.
·2· · · ·A.· Not every night. ·2· I've learned to put on a good face.· I've learned
·3· · · ·Q.· How would you describe it? ·3· to -- to be able to sit and, you know, I get up and
·4· · · ·A.· You know, three to four -- four.· I would ·4· stand when I need to.
·5· say four.· I like to -- when I come home to relax and ·5· · · ·Q.· The next sentence, "Other than dealing with
·6· have a glass of Chardonnay, watch my shows, and smoke ·6· the injuries sustained in the accident, Ms. Bowmer
·7· a cigarette with that.· I don't smoke during the day ·7· stated that she does not have any other major
·8· because I think it's unprofessional. ·8· problems."· Do you agree with that?
·9· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Not the next sentence but the one ·9· · · ·A.· I agree with that.
10· after that, "Although there has been no change in her 10· · · ·Q.· Okay.
11· appetite, she has gained 10 pounds from lack of 11· · · ·A.· I got a good hat collection out of it.
12· exercise, going from a previous 135 to 145 pounds." 12· · · ·Q.· That's great.· Okay.· So flip to the next
13· Is that accurate? 13· page.· Current complaints.· "Ms. Bowmer said that she
14· · · ·A.· It's -- that's close, yeah.· I would say 14· suffers with pain in her lower back, usually at a
15· that he's about right with that.· But I've been 15· level three, at its worst a level seven and at its
16· trying to eat less because I can't exercise.· My PT 16· least, a two or three."· Do you agree with that?
17· says I need to walk more, so I'm trying to walk to 17· · · ·A.· It's -- you know, with pain medication it
18· lunch instead of just going downstairs.· So I'm 18· gets better.· Without it, like Tuesday I was at a
19· trying to go to Leaf, you know, things like that. 19· five, and I didn't take it when I went at 8:30 in the
20· Try to get out to walk.· So hopefully I can do better 20· morning because I didn't want to mask it because I
21· than this. 21· wanted her to look at it.
22· · · ·Q.· The next sentence is, "She admitted to 22· · · ·Q.· Uh-huh.
23· having suicidal ideations, stressing that she would 23· · · ·A.· But, you know, I mean, it can get to -- it
24· not follow through on these thoughts."· Can you tell 24· just depends, like, if I've lifted my briefcase or,
25· me about that? 25· if I travel, like I have a suitcase.· I mean, so it

Page 119 Page 121

·1· · · ·A.· I think at first, just being bald and not ·1· varies.· But without the hydrocodone, it's probably a
·2· being able to do the things that you can do.· I would ·2· five.
·3· never do that but, you know, like, "Why, God, did you ·3· · · ·Q.· All right.
·4· save me?"· You know and, "Thank you."· But then you ·4· · · ·A.· And then if I do other things that, you
·5· start sitting there going -- you just kind of get ·5· know, I try to do, makes it worse.
·6· depressed about what you can't do anymore.· But I'm ·6· · · ·Q.· Okay.· The last sentence of that paragraph
·7· okay.· I mean, that's why, you know, I think the -- ·7· says, "She feels soreness, quote, "'everywhere.'"
·8· seeing someone I think would be a good idea. ·8· What are you referring to?
·9· · · ·Q.· Okay. ·9· · · ·A.· It's just like your -- my scapula, my -- it
10· · · ·A.· But I'm not -- I'm not -- it's just 10· just depends on the day.· I mean, I can feel like my
11· depressing. 11· sternum when it gets cold, and it's -- it feels like
12· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Is that something that is still 12· a tightness in your chest.· My ribs no longer bother
13· happening, that you're having these suicidal 13· me.· I'm just stiff and sore, just -- I guess I hunch
14· ideations? 14· to try to protect myself, so, you know, I'm thinking
15· · · ·A.· No.· I mean, I'm just depressed about it. I 15· that maybe massage might help that.
16· mean, I just feel like it shouldn't have happened 16· · · · · · · · I didn't realize -- we had an expert
17· and -- I was the second person.· Why didn't they do 17· that was pushing on my back.· I had no idea that
18· anything?· I mean why? 18· those areas even really -- you know, I'm focusing so
19· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· I'm going to object to the 19· much on my back, my lower back, that I didn't realize
20· nonresponsive part. 20· that soft tissue even hurt, but it did.· I was like,
21· · · ·Q.· (BY MS. BARNES) "She did add, however, that 21· "Wow."· I mean, you're -- I'm just focusing on, I
22· the pain, quote, 'gets to be too much.'" 22· guess, one thing at a time, just getting through.
23· · · ·A.· It was very hard at first.· It was like, you 23· · · ·Q.· What do you mean when you said you had
24· touch me I'm going to start screaming.· I mean, it 24· somebody pushing on your back?
25· was very, very hard.· And it's gotten better.· I've 25· · · ·A.· I had the -- the spinal expert, I guess,

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Christi Bowmer
June 15, 2018 122 to 125
Page 122 Page 124
·1· that assessed me. ·1· · · ·A.· No.· It's okay.
·2· · · ·Q.· Okay. ·2· · · ·Q.· It says, "The theme is falling, death and
·3· · · ·A.· And so she was pushing around on my scapula, ·3· car crashes."· Is that true?
·4· which was injured in the accident as well.· And I ·4· · · ·A.· That is true.
·5· didn't realize it was as sore as it was until she hit ·5· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Always your nightmares are about
·6· it, but other than that, I mean -- ·6· that?
·7· · · ·Q.· Okay. ·7· · · ·A.· Mostly about falling.
·8· · · ·A.· It's just -- and you just get tight, you ·8· · · ·Q.· "She awakens from these feeling scared,
·9· know. ·9· sweating and with her heart pounding."
10· · · ·Q.· All right.· The next paragraph.· Ms. Bowmer 10· · · ·A.· That is true.
11· is aware that she is sad and depressed and admitted 11· · · ·Q.· "She also has flashbacks of the event."· Do
12· that she cries almost every day.· Is that true? 12· you have flashbacks of the event?
13· · · ·A.· Not every day.· I mean, but it's hard to not 13· · · ·A.· It plays in my head like a television.
14· think about it and realize you're not getting invited 14· · · ·Q.· All the time?
15· to things.· And I was really social.· I mean -- 15· · · ·A.· Every day.
16· · · ·Q.· Is there -- you've brought that up before. 16· · · ·Q.· Every day.· "Crying at this point,
17· Is there something specific that you know about or -- 17· Ms. Bowmer said, quote, 'I feel myself falling. I
18· · · ·A.· Like golf outings.· I get -- they're not 18· see it happening.· Loud noises make me jump.· When
19· inviting me to -- you know, when I could probably 19· I'm a passenger I get panic attacks.· When a car is
20· ride maybe, but they're afraid that I'm too fragile 20· too close I feel out of control.· I'm very careful
21· or I would spoil fun or, you know. 21· about the way I drive.· I thought I was going to die.
22· · · ·Q.· Have you asked your friends? 22· A security guard pulled me out.'"· Do you recall
23· · · ·A.· I did.· I just -- I'm going to meet Karen 23· stating that?
24· next week and -- but, you know, she's a CrossFit 24· · · ·A.· I agree with those statements.
25· person very active, and my -- both of them are very 25· · · ·Q.· Okay.· You feel yourself falling?

Page 123 Page 125

·1· CrossFit, and that's why I was going to start the ·1· · · ·A.· You can see it.· It's like slow motion.· I'm
·2· Orangetheory and try to start working out with them ·2· just like trying to grasp for anything, and you can
·3· and -- but... ·3· just -- it felt like it lasted a minute and -- or
·4· · · ·Q.· Okay.· The next sentence.· She stated, "I ·4· more.· It just -- I know it happened faster than
·5· think about the accident all the time.· I try not to, ·5· that, but it just feels like an eternity.
·6· but the pain is a constant reminder.· It keeps ·6· · · ·Q.· And that's part of your flashback is you go
·7· entering my mind."· Is that true? ·7· through that sequence?
·8· · · ·A.· That is true. ·8· · · ·A.· Yeah, and hit the ground.
·9· · · ·Q.· The next paragraph.· "Sleep issues are a ·9· · · ·Q.· The next paragraph says, "Crying
10· factor for Ms. Bowmer.· She said, quote, 'Pain meds 10· uncontrollably at this point, Ms. Bowmer said, 'I
11· let me fall asleep, but I wake up several times every 11· would have died if it wasn't for him.· I was bleeding
12· night then have trouble going back to sleep.'"· Is 12· out.· I called my husband and daughter to say goodbye
13· that -- 13· because I knew I was going to die.· A bystander
14· · · ·A.· That is true. 14· dialed the numbers for me and handed me the phone.'"
15· · · ·Q.· -- true?· Okay.· "She suffers with 15· We talked about that already.· Correct?
16· nightmares two or three times a week since the 16· · · ·A.· That's true.
17· accident, never before."· Is that correct? 17· · · ·Q.· Okay.· "I avoid driving whenever possible.
18· · · ·A.· That is correct.· But my husband says 18· I try not to drive at night."· Is that true?
19· they're much worse than I -- he says "Sometimes you 19· · · ·A.· That's true.
20· don't wake up," and he just pushes the dog towards me 20· · · ·Q.· Do you drive to work every day now?
21· and let's me kind of hold her, or he says he just 21· · · ·A.· I am.· And the MoPac express wasn't open
22· pats me until it stops. 22· before the accident so --
23· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Does the -- 23· · · ·Q.· Okay.
24· · · ·A.· And -- 24· · · ·A.· -- it's -- makes it really nice.
25· · · ·Q.· Go ahead.· I'm sorry. 25· · · ·Q.· Where do you park now?

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Christi Bowmer
June 15, 2018 126 to 129
Page 126 Page 128
·1· · · ·A.· I park in the Omni building.· It's ·1· be a nuisance.· And that would be with my husband,
·2· underground, so it's not scary at all. ·2· and he is the sweetest man on earth, so -- and he has
·3· · · ·Q.· Okay.· "Ms. Bowmer is aware that she's ·3· been through a lot himself.
·4· having problems in many areas of her life."· Is that ·4· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Was he in an accident?
·5· true? ·5· · · ·A.· He has had surgeries since we were married.
·6· · · ·A.· No.· I mean, I don't think so. ·6· He's had both hips replaced.· He's been opened up
·7· · · ·Q.· Okay.· "She has difficulty concentrating." ·7· many, many times.
·8· Do you have difficulty concentrating? ·8· · · ·Q.· Is it related to an accident?
·9· · · ·A.· If I'm taking Baclofen.· I mean -- ·9· · · ·A.· No.
10· · · ·Q.· Okay.· That's not something that's going on 10· · · ·Q.· Okay.· "It is difficult for her to walk any
11· all the time? 11· distances, and she is unable to sit or stand too
12· · · ·A.· No. 12· long."· How far can you walk?
13· · · ·Q.· Okay.· "Her mind wanders and she has 13· · · ·A.· I'm trying to walk further.· It's part of
14· problems focusing."· Is that true? 14· the -- my -- Dr. Tillman, or Michael Tillman said I
15· · · ·A.· Sometimes.· If I'm thinking about this 15· needed to start walking.· And so I'm trying to walk
16· accident, yeah. 16· further, like Leaf on Congress.
17· · · ·Q.· Okay. 17· · · ·Q.· Right.
18· · · ·A.· That hints -- he suggested that I see 18· · · ·A.· And I just make sure that I have on flat
19· someone. 19· shoes, so -- it's my goal to start walking and quit
20· · · ·Q.· "She said, quote, 'It does affect my work, 20· being so sedentary.· And I know I'm doing that
21· but I get up and walk around and try to regain 21· because it hurts, but if I want to maintain my weight
22· focus.'"· I thought you testified earlier that it's 22· at this point, that's all I can do.
23· not really affecting your work mentally.· Is that 23· · · ·Q.· I think I saw a reference in your records
24· true? 24· that you had walked a half mile at one point.· Do you
25· · · ·A.· I mean, I don't know how to say that.· Yeah, 25· recall reporting that?

Page 127 Page 129

·1· I think about it.· I mean, but it gets better. I ·1· · · ·A.· I -- you know, it depends on which
·2· mean, but I do get up and walk around and shake it ·2· restaurant.· You know, I've done it downtown, I'm
·3· off, and I don't want -- I want to be professional. ·3· sure.· I don't do it very often, but I'm trying to
·4· I don't want my coworkers to see.· And I try not to ·4· get better about not just going downstairs.
·5· complain.· I want them to see me as a professional. ·5· · · ·Q.· So if you're walking or --
·6· · · ·Q.· Is that something that happens every day? ·6· · · ·A.· That's just been recently.
·7· · · ·A.· I have to get up, you know.· But you mean ·7· · · ·Q.· Okay.
·8· just like thinking about it? ·8· · · ·A.· Yeah.
·9· · · ·Q.· Right. ·9· · · ·Q.· What's preventing you from walking?
10· · · ·A.· It's always there. 10· · · ·A.· Just the pain.
11· · · ·Q.· Okay. 11· · · ·Q.· In your back?
12· · · ·A.· When you can feel it in your back, I mean, 12· · · ·A.· Yeah.
13· it's not like -- it never goes away. 13· · · ·Q.· Okay.· "She has withdrawn and stays home
14· · · ·Q.· You feel the pain, and it reminds you of the 14· more."· You would agree with that?
15· accident? 15· · · ·A.· Yeah.
16· · · ·A.· Yeah.· I mean, it's always there. 16· · · ·Q.· Do you still go out some?
17· · · ·Q.· The next sentence is, "She is aware that she 17· · · ·A.· Some, but not near like -- you know, not
18· is more easily irritated, agitated and angry."· Is 18· near like I was on the weekends and things like that
19· that true? 19· with my friends and -- but, yeah.
20· · · ·A.· I don't know if angry -- I would throw angry 20· · · ·Q.· Did you used to go out every weekend?
21· in there.· I think I -- I think I jump a little bit 21· · · ·A.· We would try to do something, yeah.· At my
22· more than I used to.· I mean, I think I get scared a 22· country club or, you know, girls night out, Painting
23· little easier than I would have. 23· With a Twist.· Fun things.· Golfing.· Trips, which we
24· · · ·Q.· Are you more irritable? 24· haven't -- I mean, I -- we took one in January and we
25· · · ·A.· Only when it is so painful, but I try not to 25· -- as a family, but very low key.

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Christi Bowmer
June 15, 2018 130 to 133
Page 130 Page 132
·1· · · ·Q.· Where was that? ·1· · · ·A.· I don't -- no, it's not an issue.· It's not.
·2· · · ·A.· We took a cruise out of Galveston, but I ·2· · · ·Q.· Okay.· "She is more anxious, tense and
·3· couldn't do any of the things that they wanted to do. ·3· nervous."· Is that true?
·4· But I did get to go snorkeling.· And it was probably ·4· · · ·A.· That is true.
·5· the first time that I had been in water and not had ·5· · · ·Q.· Okay.· "She did say that her pain is
·6· gravity.· And so now I realize I -- that's something ·6· debilitating, and her future looks bleak."· Do you
·7· that I'm going to start trying to do in my own house. ·7· agree with that?
·8· It feels so much better to not have -- you know, not ·8· · · ·A.· I'm not going to be the same ever.· So, does
·9· have the gravity.· And so I haven't kick boarded or ·9· it depress me?· Yeah.
10· anything like that, but Jessica and I talked about 10· · · ·Q.· Do you have hope for the future?
11· that's something I need to start doing, is trying to 11· · · ·A.· I hope so.
12· walk back and forth in the pool. 12· · · ·Q.· "Her physicians said she had a 10 percent
13· · · · · · · · But I have had some anxiety being out 13· chance of survival."· I think that's referring to
14· there by myself, so I want my family with me.· And so 14· something you --
15· we're doing that.· They're going to help me with 15· · · ·A.· Heard in the -- when the --
16· that. 16· · · ·Q.· -- in the OR?
17· · · ·Q.· Your daughter lives at home? 17· · · ·A.· -- in the -- yeah.
18· · · ·A.· She does. 18· · · ·Q.· Okay.
19· · · ·Q.· Does she go to school? 19· · · ·A.· Scared the -- scared me.· I'm sorry.
20· · · ·A.· She's not right now, it's summer, but yes. 20· · · ·Q.· It's okay.· I'm skipping to the very last --
21· · · ·Q.· Where does she go to school? 21· well, it's not the last page, but page five.
22· · · ·A.· She goes to ACC. 22· Dr. Feltoon writes, "She frequently entertains
23· · · ·Q.· All right.· So back to the bottom paragraph. 23· suicidal ideations even though she has no intention
24· "Ms. Bowmer also suffers from headaches occasionally, 24· of following through."· Would you agree that you
25· about once a week." 25· frequently entertain suicidal ideations?

Page 131 Page 133

·1· · · ·A.· It's gotten better.· I mean, and I think ·1· · · ·A.· I wouldn't say it's frequently.
·2· part of it was just trying to fight through being ·2· · · ·Q.· Okay.· "She experiences frequent and
·3· dizzy with -- from the Baclofen.· It's sporadic. ·3· uncontrollable crying spells almost every day."
·4· · · ·Q.· When was the last time you recall having a ·4· · · ·A.· It gets better.
·5· headache? ·5· · · ·Q.· Okay.· I haven't heard anything from you
·6· · · ·A.· Last week.· I couldn't tell you when. ·6· about frequent and uncontrollable crying spells every
·7· · · ·Q.· Okay.· "She has no issues with hearing, ·7· day.· Is that true?
·8· speech, memory, taste or smell; however, she is aware ·8· · · ·A.· At first it probably was the case.· I mean,
·9· that her sense of balance is not as good as it was." ·9· it's depressing.
10· Is that accurate? 10· · · ·Q.· The depressing part is the pain.· Is that
11· · · ·A.· That's accurate -- accurate. 11· right?
12· · · ·Q.· Okay.· And you relate that to your back 12· · · ·A.· And not being able to do the things I used
13· instability? 13· to do.· I mean, if it -- I don't know why it had to
14· · · ·A.· I just think my hips are not aligned. I 14· happen.· I don't know why they couldn't have just put
15· think that I probably -- could probably use some 15· those water barriers up.· If they just would have
16· massage therapy or, you know, maybe it -- my husband 16· done that.
17· suggested a chiropractor, but that scares the heck 17· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· I'm going to object to the
18· out of me.· I don't want -- I don't think without a 18· nonresponsive part.
19· doctor's note.· I mean, the PT is what I think -- you 19· · · ·Q.· (BY MS. BARNES)· Okay.· I may have already
20· know, I need to be under a real physical therapist. 20· asked you this, but he again states you have
21· · · ·Q.· Okay.· Have you had any falls since the 21· difficulty concentrating on tasks.· And that's not
22· accident? 22· something that's happening frequently.· Is that
23· · · ·A.· No. 23· correct?
24· · · ·Q.· Okay.· "At first she experienced dizziness, 24· · · ·A.· It's not happening as frequently anymore.
25· but this is no longer an issue." 25· · · ·Q.· Okay.

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Christi Bowmer
June 15, 2018 134 to 137
Page 134 Page 136
·1· · · ·A.· I need to get my meds straight, which I ·1· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· Objection, form.
·2· think I've done.· I've got to have the hydrocodone. ·2· · · ·A.· I don't know that for a fact.
·3· I take the Baclofen when I go home, if I take it. I ·3· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. RHODES) Did Mr. Kopecky tell you
·4· just don't want to be on all that stuff. ·4· that it was a direct violation of that contract for a
·5· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Okay.· I think that's all ·5· contracted monthly parker to trade, transfer or allow
·6· the questions I have for you.· Thank you for your -- ·6· usage by another individual who was not on the
·7· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Okay.· Thank you. ·7· contract or agreement?
·8· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· -- time today.· And I'm ·8· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· Objection, form.
·9· sure some of these other lawyers have some questions ·9· · · ·A.· No.
10· for you. 10· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. RHODES) Did he tell you that the
11· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Thank you. 11· contract did not allow shared usage between
12· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· Can we take a quick 12· individuals?
13· break? 13· · · ·A.· No.
14· · · · · · · · MR. RHODES:· I was just going to suggest 14· · · ·Q.· Did he tell you that each individual parker
15· that. 15· in the garage had to have his or her own access card?
16· · · · · · · · (Recess 1:38 p.m. to 1:55 p.m.) 16· · · ·A.· No.
17· · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· This is segment No. 17· · · ·Q.· So when you used the card on July 13th,
18· 4.· We're back on the record, 1:55. 18· 2017, you did not have a contract with the parking
19· · · · · · · · · · · · ·EXAMINATION. 19· garage or the management company for the parking
20· BY MR. RHODES: 20· garage.· Is that right?
21· · · ·Q.· Hi, Ms. Bowmer.· My name is Chris Rhodes. I 21· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· Objection, form.· Go
22· represent defendant Premier Parking of Tennessee, 22· ahead.
23· LLC. 23· · · ·A.· Correct.
24· · · ·A.· Okay. 24· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. RHODES) That when you parked there
25· · · ·Q.· Did you ever have your own parking card for 25· on a daily basis before you used Mr. Kopacky's card,

Page 135 Page 137

·1· the Littlefield Garage? ·1· did you pull a little paper card each time you went
·2· · · ·A.· I did not. ·2· in?
·3· · · ·Q.· So you never had a contract with the owner ·3· · · ·A.· I did not park there on a daily basis before
·4· of the garage or the management company for the ·4· having the card.· I rode the train in.
·5· garage? ·5· · · ·Q.· Did you ever park in the Littlefield Garage
·6· · · ·A.· That's correct. ·6· before you borrowed Mr. Kopacky's card?
·7· · · ·Q.· Do you even know who Premier Parking of ·7· · · ·A.· Yes.
·8· Tennessee is? ·8· · · ·Q.· And when you did that, did you pull a paper
·9· · · ·A.· No.· I mean, I've seen the lots but, no, I ·9· card?
10· don't. 10· · · ·A.· I did.
11· · · ·Q.· Do you know what role they play in this 11· · · ·Q.· And did you look at that card and the
12· lawsuit you've brought against various defendants? 12· contract that you received when you pulled that card?
13· · · ·A.· I do not. 13· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· Objection, form.
14· · · ·Q.· Did you talk to Mr. Kopecky about the use of 14· · · ·A.· I just saw a piece of paper.
15· the card for the Littlefield Garage before he gave 15· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. RHODES) There are notices posted in
16· you the card? 16· that garage with regard to the contract with the
17· · · ·A.· No. 17· parking garage, aren't there?
18· · · ·Q.· Did he tell you that he had a contract with 18· · · ·A.· I have no idea.
19· the garage? 19· · · ·Q.· You didn't read notices?
20· · · ·A.· No. 20· · · ·A.· I did not.
21· · · ·Q.· Did he tell you that the contract with the 21· · · ·Q.· Do you ever read notices when you park in a
22· garage was just between him and the garage? 22· parking garage?
23· · · ·A.· No.· He said it was from his office. 23· · · ·A.· I didn't notice those.
24· · · ·Q.· So it was -- his office had the contract 24· · · ·Q.· Do you ever read notices when you park in a
25· with the garage, you think? 25· parking garage?

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Christi Bowmer
June 15, 2018 138 to 141
Page 138 Page 140
·1· · · ·A.· There are no notices that I'm aware of in ·1· 6th Street also open?
·2· the parking garage that I'm at right now. ·2· · · ·A.· I don't recall anything else being open
·3· · · ·Q.· Do you ever read notices when you park in ·3· where I parked.
·4· other parking garages? ·4· · · ·Q.· So the east side of the garage on the Brazos
·5· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· Objection, form.· Go ·5· Street side is not open?
·6· ahead. ·6· · · ·A.· Not to my recollection.· But I -- I had
·7· · · ·A.· I'm sure that I have looked at them ·7· never parked anywhere where there was an opening
·8· possibly, but I don't park in parking garages very ·8· besides that day.
·9· often. ·9· · · ·Q.· So in the places you parked before that day
10· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. RHODES) Well, how about the parking 10· were they always up against like a cinderblock wall?
11· garage you've been parking in recently at the Omni 11· · · ·A.· Either a cinderblock wall or in the middle.
12· Hotel complex? 12· · · ·Q.· What's in the middle in front of your car if
13· · · ·A.· I don't see any notices. 13· you park face-in?
14· · · ·Q.· You don't -- 14· · · ·A.· There's -- it's not like -- nothing to the
15· · · ·A.· Just that the parking -- the rate when I go 15· outside.· You would be parking in front of another
16· in. 16· car or a barrier.
17· · · ·Q.· Do you have a contract with that building? 17· · · ·Q.· Were they the cable barriers?
18· · · ·A.· I do. 18· · · ·A.· No.
19· · · ·Q.· And is that the building at 701 Brazos? 19· · · ·Q.· What kind of barriers were in those interior
20· · · ·A.· It is. 20· spots where you parked up against another car?
21· · · ·Q.· And so that's the building that you work in 21· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· Objection, form.· Go
22· and the building Ms. Barnes works in.· Right? 22· ahead.
23· · · ·A.· That's correct. 23· · · ·A.· I'm visualizer -- trying to visualize. I
24· · · ·Q.· When did you enter into that parking 24· mean, you parked in it for years.· But put it this
25· contract? 25· way, I never parked in anything that had an opening

Page 139 Page 141

·1· · · ·A.· It has been recently.· I don't know the ·1· before, ever.
·2· date. ·2· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. RHODES) When you talked about the
·3· · · ·Q.· Are you able to share your parking card with ·3· garage you park in now at the building where your
·4· others at that garage? ·4· employer is -- I can't remember exactly what you said
·5· · · ·A.· I have never attempted.· No one has ever ·5· when Ms. Barnes was asking you questions, but you
·6· asked. ·6· said something like it's okay because it's
·7· · · ·Q.· I used to park in the Littlefield parking ·7· underground.· Is that what you said?
·8· garage for years and years, so I kind of have a ·8· · · ·A.· It doesn't scare me because I -- it's not
·9· mental picture of it as well. ·9· high up in the air.· It doesn't -- it -- it's well
10· · · · · · · · In the times that you parked there 10· lit.· It's safer.· Seems much safer to me.
11· before July 13, 2017, are you telling the ladies and 11· · · ·Q.· Are you saying that the Littlefield parking
12· gentlemen of the jury that you never parked on the 12· garage had a problem on July 13, 2017, because it was
13· part of the perimeter that faces East 6th Street or 13· poorly lit?
14· Brazos Street? 14· · · ·A.· I'm saying because they didn't do anything
15· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· Objection, form.· Go 15· after the first person fell.· It's just a tragedy. I
16· ahead. 16· mean, this should not have happened to me.· And if
17· · · ·A.· I never parked in -- where there was an 17· they would have just done something, this wouldn't
18· open -- open opening like that without a barrier. 18· have happened.· That's what I'm saying.
19· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. RHODES) So the west side of that 19· · · · · · · · MR. RHODES:· Object to responsiveness.
20· structure is facing the alley.· Is that right? 20· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. RHODES) Are you saying that the
21· · · ·A.· That's correct. 21· Littlefield Garage had a problem July 13, 2017
22· · · ·Q.· And that's the open side that you were on 22· because it was poorly lit?
23· that day.· Is that right? 23· · · ·A.· I'm not saying that.· I'm saying that they
24· · · ·A.· That's correct. 24· didn't do anything after the first person went off.
25· · · ·Q.· Is the north side of the garage on 25· And if they would have done something, I would not

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Christi Bowmer
June 15, 2018 142 to 145
Page 142 Page 144
·1· have gone off. ·1· correct.
·2· · · ·Q.· But you don't think it had anything to do ·2· · · ·Q.· And was your travel usually by car or plane
·3· with the lighting, do you? ·3· or train or bus or what?
·4· · · ·A.· I don't think so.· I mean, what -- the ·4· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· Objection, form.· Go
·5· problem was is they were negligent. ·5· ahead.
·6· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· Belated objection, form. ·6· · · ·A.· Plane to Chicago.
·7· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· Objection to the ·7· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. RHODES) Always Chicago, or other
·8· responsiveness. ·8· towns?
·9· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. RHODES) Do you think the July 13, ·9· · · ·A.· It was rare, but I probably did -- went to
10· 2017, accident was attributable at least in part to a 10· South Texas in a car and someone else was driving.
11· lack of lighting in the parking structure? 11· · · ·Q.· You mean way south, Lower Rio Grande Valley?
12· · · ·A.· No. 12· · · ·A.· Raymondville, Texas.
13· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· Same objection. 13· · · ·Q.· Is there a particular airline that you would
14· · · ·A.· No.· It was a bright and sunny day, to my 14· take before the accident in July of '17?
15· recollection. 15· · · ·A.· Whatever was most compliant, meaning price
16· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. RHODES) This happened in the 16· wise.· We have a contract through Concur.· I believe
17· morning.· Right? 17· now it's with American Express, but we have to choose
18· · · ·A.· Yes. 18· what's most compliant.
19· · · ·Q.· And you weren't on the side of the building 19· · · ·Q.· With your travel policies.· Right?
20· where the sun would have been in your eyes, were you? 20· · · ·A.· Yes.
21· · · ·A.· I don't recall. 21· · · ·Q.· Did you book coach fares?
22· · · ·Q.· So the sun in your eyes or reflecting off of 22· · · ·A.· Yes, sir.
23· your rearview mirror or anything else was not a 23· · · ·Q.· Did you ever have an opportunity to upgrade
24· factor either, was it? 24· to business class or first class?
25· · · ·A.· I was just anxious when I drove up and saw 25· · · ·A.· No.

Page 143 Page 145

·1· that there was nothing in front of me. ·1· · · ·Q.· How about with the travel you're doing now,
·2· · · ·Q.· But do you think that the sun or sunlight or ·2· and specifically in the last 11 months at E.ON, how
·3· sunlight reflecting off of anything played a factor ·3· often are you traveling?
·4· in this? ·4· · · ·A.· Just now, with the new VP would like us to
·5· · · ·A.· I don't recall that. ·5· start traveling more to go out into the field.
·6· · · ·Q.· And there wasn't a light shining in your ·6· · · ·Q.· Are you doing Chicago trips again?
·7· eyes from the bank building across the alley that ·7· · · ·A.· I will be in Pennsylvania -- I think I fly
·8· distracted you, was there? ·8· in to Pennsylvania next Sunday.· I would have to look
·9· · · ·A.· No. ·9· at my itinerary.· I'm going with the VP, so I kind of
10· · · ·Q.· When you traveled for work before July 13, 10· just booked whatever he booked.
11· 2017, how often was that travel? 11· · · ·Q.· Will that be coach?
12· · · ·A.· It wasn't often. 12· · · ·A.· It will be coach.
13· · · ·Q.· So once a quarter? 13· · · ·Q.· Do you think you -- you-all have points or
14· · · ·A.· Maybe once a quarter.· That VP didn't have 14· another way to upgrade to business or first class?
15· us travel very often.· At this particular employer. 15· · · ·A.· No.· I would like to.
16· · · ·Q.· And that employer -- 16· · · ·Q.· Do you have TSA pre-check or Global Entry?
17· · · ·A.· Is E.ON. 17· · · ·A.· I do not.
18· · · ·Q.· So -- 18· · · ·Q.· So you have to wait in the longer security
19· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· Wait for the question. 19· lines?
20· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Sorry. 20· · · ·A.· Yes.
21· · · ·Q.· (BY MR. RHODES) -- around 16 months from the 21· · · ·Q.· You have to take your shoes off, take your
22· time you're at E.ON, March 16 through the accident 22· jacket off, take your belt off, take your laptop out
23· date, July 17, you were traveling infrequently, maybe 23· of your carry-on.· Right?
24· four times a year.· Is that right? 24· · · ·A.· That's correct.
25· · · ·A.· I would estimate that that was probably 25· · · ·Q.· Do you have any trouble doing that?

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

713-653-7100 YVer1f
 Christi Bowmer
June 15, 2018 146 to 149
Page 146 Page 148
·1· · · ·A.· I haven't traveled often enough yet to -- ·1· · · · · · · · MR. RHODES:· Pass the witnesses.
·2· but it's -- hasn't been a problem yet because the ·2· · · · · · · · MS. MCCOY:· Hello.· I --
·3· lines haven't been long.· And I do get detained, so I ·3· · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· He's got the mic.
·4· do get to sit down, because I have so much metal in ·4· · · · · · · · MS. MCCOY:· Oh, okay.· Hi.· My name is
·5· my body.· Most every time I get pulled to the side so ·5· Amanda McCoy.· I'm one of the attorneys who is
·6· I can sit down. ·6· representing Weitzman Management Corporation, and
·7· · · ·Q.· By "detained" you mean the TSA ·7· we're going to reserve our questions at this time.
·8· representatives have to do an additional screening on ·8· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Okay.· Thank you.
·9· you because you alert the x-ray or whatever device ·9· · · · · · · · · · FURTHER EXAMINATION
10· you walk through at the airport? 10· BY MS. BARNES:
11· · · ·A.· Yes. 11· · · ·Q.· Ms. Bowmer, were you aware of the 2016
12· · · ·Q.· And so then they have to use a wand and do 12· incident before your accident?
13· an individual screening on you? 13· · · ·A.· I didn't know it was the same parking
14· · · ·A.· That's correct. 14· garage.
15· · · ·Q.· And is that embarrassing or humiliating when 15· · · ·Q.· Okay.· You were aware --
16· that happens? 16· · · ·A.· I was aware of it, but I did not realize
17· · · ·A.· Of course it is. 17· until I was told it was the same parking garage.
18· · · ·Q.· Has that happened when you've been traveling 18· · · ·Q.· Okay.
19· with colleagues? 19· · · ·A.· I didn't put two and two together.
20· · · ·A.· Yes. 20· · · ·Q.· Okay.· So as of the day of the accident when
21· · · ·Q.· And has that embarrassed you or made you 21· you entered the garage, you were not aware that
22· anxious or upset? 22· another vehicle had gone over?
23· · · ·A.· It's just embarrassing.· I think it would 23· · · ·A.· I was not aware.
24· make anyone embarrassed. 24· · · ·Q.· Okay.· All right.
25· · · ·Q.· Have you ever spoken to anyone at Premier 25· · · · · · · · MS. BARNES:· That's all the questions I

Page 147 Page 149

·1· Parking of Tennessee? ·1· have.· Thank you.
·2· · · ·A.· Not to my knowledge. ·2· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· We'll reserve our
·3· · · ·Q.· Have you ever communicated with anyone at ·3· questions for the time of trial.· Thank you.
·4· Premier Parking of Tennessee by e-mail, fax, letter, ·4· · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Okay.
·5· text, social media, or any other way? ·5· · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· We're off the record.
·6· · · ·A.· Not to my knowledge. ·6· 2:15.
·7· · · ·Q.· Have you done any research -- on your own, ·7· · · · · · · · (Deposition concluded at 2:15 p.m.)
·8· I'm not talking about your attorneys, but on your ·8
·9· own, into Premier Parking of Tennessee? ·9
10· · · ·A.· I have not. 10
11· · · ·Q.· Have you read anything about Premier Parking 11
12· of Tennessee? 12
13· · · ·A.· I have not. 13
14· · · ·Q.· Do you have an opinion about Premier Parking 14
15· of Tennessee's reputation in its business? 15
16· · · ·A.· I do not. 16
17· · · ·Q.· Do you know anyone that works or have worked 17
18· at Premier Parking of Tennessee? 18
19· · · ·A.· Not that I'm aware of. 19
20· · · ·Q.· Do you know what Premier Parking of 20
21· Tennessee did wrong or failed to do that caused the 21
22· July 13, 2017 accident? 22
23· · · · · · · · MR. LAVORATO:· Objection, form.· Go 23
24· ahead. 24
25· · · ·A.· I do not know. 25

U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT

713-653-7100
Exhibit FF
 CAUSE NO. D-1-GN-17-004456

CHRISTI J. BOWMER, § IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF

Plaintiff, §
§
~- § TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS
§
GTT PARKING, LP, PREMIER PARKING §
OF TENNESSEE, LLC, and WEITZMAN §
MANAGEMENT CORPORATION §
Defendants. § 353 rd illDICIAL DISTRICT

AFFIDAVIT OF CAM COPE

STATE OF TEXAS §
§
COUNTY OF TRAVIS §

Before me, the undersigned authority, this day personally appeared Cam Cope, who, being
by me duly sworn, deposed as follows:

1. "My name is Cam Cope. I am over 21 years of age, of sound mind, and capable of
making this affidavit. I have never been convicted of a felony or any crime involving a dishonest
act or false statement. All statements contained in this affidavit, and in the attachments to this
affidavit, are based on my personal knowledge and are true and correct.

2. The knowledge, education, and experience that qualify me to make this affidavit,
and to form the opinions contained in the attachments to this affidavit, are set forth in my
curriculum vitae, a copy of which is attached to this affidavit as Exhibit A. All information set
forth in the attached curriculum vitae is true and correct.

3. The expert report I prepared for this lawsuit is attached to this affidavit as Exhibit
B. The information contained in my report is true and correct, forms the basis for my opinions
articulated in the report, and it and the evidence it references are incorporated for all purposes into
this affidavit."

Page 1 of2
SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me on February* .2019.

My commission expires:
NOTARY PUBLIC IN AN
STA EOFTEXAS
I
JEW\TYREE
My Notary ID# 131450810 Notary's printed name
Expires February 14, 2022

Page 2 of2
Exhibit A to Cope Affidavit
 CAM COPE
Curriculum Vitae
www.firesafetyconsultant.com camcope@me.com

AREAS OF SPECIALIZED EXPERTISE

Accident Reconstruction Crash Data Retrieval of Vehicles (CDR/Black Box)

Fire Origin and Cause (NFPA 921) to any transportation Case Evaluation of Accidents
Structure & Vehicle Fires & Explosions to any transportation Analysis of Vehicle Products
Aircraft Transportation and Logistics Occupant Restraint Systems / Airbags
Fuel Systems Integrity, FMVSS 301 Commercial Trucking Accidents
Flammability of Interior Materials FMVSS 302 FARO Laser Scanning
(Focus 3D-X-330)

Mr. Cope received a Bachelor of Science degree in 1971 and has been investigating and reconstructing fires and accidents for
the past thirty (30) years. He continues his education and training through various organizations such as the NFPA, NAFI,
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE), and the many other organizations that provide the training required for fire and accident
investigation, analysis and documentation. These organizations provide the most peer reviewed literature and training with
regards to fires and accident reconstruction. Engineering programs taught through the various Universities generally provide no
courses in investigation, fire origin and cause or accident reconstruction, which means we must pursue the training and
technology from the organizations I belong to that do provide the necessary training. Both the Texas Association of Accident
Reconstruction Specialists and the National Association of Professional Accident Reconstruction Specialists provide training and
literature for the Accident Reconstructionist. The National Fire Protection Association, International Association of Arson
Investigators, National Association of Fire Investigators and various Chapters of Accident Reconstruction and Fire Investigation
also provide training and technology in the field of fire origin and cause investigation. In addition to these organizations, Mr.
Cope received training through the Texas A&M Extension Service such as the 80-hour Advanced Accident Reconstruction
course. Mr. Cope helped to establish and teaches at the only Vehicle Fire Certification Program which is available through
training conducted at Eastern Kentucky University and/or Scott County Fire Service. Cam Cope currently works on the SAE
Accident Reconstruction Committee, as well as the Vehicle Fire Task Force Committee, which is a part of the revisions
committee for the vehicle section of NFPA 921. Please refer to the attached Curriculum Vitae for Cam Cope for his complete
educational background and list of seminars attended. Mr. Cope also has experience and training from law enforcement and
military. Mr. Cope has experience and knowledge of the Transportation and Logistics of any trends and current issues within air,
maritime and ground transportations.

Bowmer 001173
 Cam Cope, Curriculum Vitae

ACADEMIC EDUCATION
Bachelor of Science, New Mexico Highlands University, 1971
Undergraduate and Graduate Courses (60 hours including but not limited to Biology, Chemistry, Photography), Texas A & M
University, beginning in 1974 upon completion of Military obligation
Advanced Accident Reconstruction, Texas A & M (80 Hour Course), 1993

CERTIFICATIONS
CFEI, Certified Fire Explosion Investigator
CFII, Certified Fire Investigator Instructor
CVFI, Certified Vehicle Fire Investigator

MILITARY
U.S. Army 1971-1974
Surgical Research, Walter Reed Army Medical Center
Medical and Veterinary Team, Fort Benning, GA
Veterinary Team, K-9 unit, Viet Nam
Surgical Research, William Beaumont Army Medical Center

GUNS and ARCHERY

ATF – Federal Firearms License

NRA – Certified Home Firearm Safety
NRA – Certified Pistol
NRA – Range Safety Officer

LAW ENFORCEMENT
College Station Police Department, Reserve Officer, 1985 to 1990
Police Academy Training-Accident Investigation, Routine Patrol

PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR LICENSE FOR STATE OF TEXAS

Texas Board of Private Investigators and Private Security Agencies
Licensed Private Investigator, License A09524

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
Since 1998 Auto Fire & Safety Consultants, Inc.

Vehicle and structural fire investigation (origin and cause) - to any transportation
Vehicle Fire Testing - to any transportation
Review and analysis of governmental and industry crash testing
Accident Reconstruction (SEE LIST OF COURSES TAUGHT AND ATTENDED)
ARC crash testing in Las Vegas, NV
Animations & Simulations
Expert Auto Stats
Case evaluation and rapid response in the documentation of vehicular accidents
Inspection of structures, vehicles and research
FARO 3-D Digital Scanning for structure, scene and vehicle documentation
Products liability and identification of defective products, testing and research
Identification of occupant restraint system usage, including airbags and seatbelts
Crash Data Retrieval (CDR) Retrieval of data as provided by Bosch
CDR training through SAE, ARC, Vetronix and GM, beginning in the early 1990’s
Rollovers, trucking accidents, industrial and construction accidents
Professional experience also includes Plaintiffs, Defense and Criminal Defense cases
Investigator and Licensed Private Investigator for State of Texas
1/5/2017 Auto Fire & Safety Consultants, Inc. 2
35 Promenade St N, Montgomery, TX 77356
Off: 281.362.0930 Fax: 281.362.1329
Bowmer 001174
 Cam Cope, Curriculum Vitae

January 1991 to 1998 Engineering Reconstruction Associates

Accident reconstruction, case evaluation and model building

January 1992 to September 1996 Crowley, Marks, and Douglas

Accident reconstruction, evaluation, analysis and research
Vehicular and structure fires (cause and origin) determination and documentation (following NFPA 921)
Evaluation and investigation of vehicle products
Analysis of Vehicle Products Liability, to include Rollovers, tire failures, restraint systems, etc.

January 1985 to January 1992 Crowley and Waltman

Investigation and reconstruction of accidents including vehicles (private and commercial), products and structures
Fire Origin and Cause, per NFPA 921
Occupant restraint systems

PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS Current & Past

NFPA National Fire Protection Association, (Technical Committee), (FSTE Executive Board Member)
Attending NFPA 921 committee meetings
NAFI National Association of Fire Investigators (Board Member)
CFEI Certified Fire and Explosion Investigator
CFII Certified Fire Investigation Instructor
CVFI Certified Vehicle Fire Investigator
FIVE Fires in Vehicles - Reference Group for the International Standard on Fire Suppression Systems
for use in Bus and Coach Engine Compartments
NSTI National Safety and Transportation Institute (Board Member)
NAPARS National Association of Professional Accident Reconstruction Specialists
TAARS Texas Association of Accident Reconstruction Specialists
SAE Society of Automotive Engineers
Committee Accident Investigation Practices Standards
Vehicle Fires Committee
Auto/Pedestrian Standards
Sectional Leader, Gulf Coast Chapter
NSC National Safety Council
IAAI International Association of Fire and Arson Investigators
NFPA National Fire Protection Association
ACFE American College of Forensic Examiners
Engineering and Technology Board
Diplomat, Chairman of Engineering and Technology 2000
Continuing Education Committee and Editorial Review Board
Texas Board of Private Investigators and Private Security Agencies
Licensed Private Investigator, License A09524
TALI Texas Association of Licensed Investigators
FIAA Fire Investigation Association of Alberta (Chapter 38 IAAI)
CTFIA Central Texas Fire Investigators Association
ASCE American Society of Civil Engineers (Affiliate Member)
ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers
NFPA Latin American Section of the National Fire Protection Association
SP Technical Research Institute of Sweden
Reference Group for the International standard on fire suppression systems for use in bus and coach engine
compartments
1/5/2017 Auto Fire & Safety Consultants, Inc. 3
35 Promenade St N, Montgomery, TX 77356
Off: 281.362.0930 Fax: 281.362.1329
Bowmer 001175
 Cam Cope, Curriculum Vitae

VFW Lifetime Membership

PUBLICATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS

Cope, Cam, “Black Box Data Crash Retrieval”, “Post Collision Fuel Fed Fire” and “Sources of Information/Recalls/Service
Bulletins”, 2015 National Vehicle Fire, Arson and Explosion Investigation Science and Technology Seminar, Lexington,
KY, September 21-24, 2015. (Instructor)

Cope, Cam, “Sources of Information/Recalls/Service Bulletins”, 2013 National Vehicle Fire, Arson and Explosion
Investigation Science and Technology Seminar, Lexington, KY, September 30 – October 3, 2013. (Instructor)

Cope, Cam, “’Black Box’ Data Crash Retrieval” and “Sources of Information/Recalls/Service Bulletins “, 2011 National
Vehicle Fire, Arson and Explosion Investigation Science and Technology Seminar, Lexington, KY; September 12-16,
2011.

Cope, Cam, “Effectiveness of Shielding Vehicle Hot Surfaces”, Fire and Materials 2011, 12 th International Conference
and Exhibition, Interscience Communications Limited, San Francisco, CA; January 31 – February 2, 2011.

Cope, Cam, “Shielding Vehicle Hot Surfaces “, 2010 International Symposium on Fire Investigation Science and
Technology, Baltimore, MD; September 29, 2010.

Cope, Cam and John M. Stilson, “Effectiveness of Shielding Vehicle Hot Surfaces”, 2009 ASME International Mechanical
Engineering Congress & Exposition, Lake Buena Vista, FL; November 18, 2009.

Cope, Cam, “Black Box’ Data Crash Retrieval” and “Sources of Information/Recalls/Service Bulletins”, 2009 Vehicle Fire,
Arson & Explosion Investigation Science & Technology Seminar, NAFI and Eastern Kentucky University, Lexington, KY;
Sept. 24, 2009. (Instructor).

Cope, Cam, “Vehicle Engine Compartment Fires,” Fire and Materials 2009, 11th International Conference and Exhibition,
Interscience Communications Limited, San Francisco, CA; January 26-28, 2009 (Instructor).

Cope, Cam, “Battery Disconnect Devices,” 2008 ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition,
Boston, MA; November 4, 2008.

Cope, Cam, “Testifying and Preparing for Courts and Depositions,” American College of Forensic Examiners 2008
National Conference, San Diego, CA; September 4-6, 2008.

International Symposium on Fire Investigation Science and Technology (ISFI), Cincinnati, OH; May 19-21, 2008.

Engineering Institute Kick-Off, Magazine Mountain, AR; January 17-18, 2008 (Instructor).

Cope, Cam, 2007 Vehicle Fire, Arson & Explosion Investigation Science and Technology Seminar, NAFI and Eastern
Kentucky University, Lexington, KY; Sept. 24-27, 2007. (Instructor).

National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), Hazard and Risk of Contents and Furnishings; July 26, 2007.

Cope, Cam, “The Investigation of Vehicle Fires,” TALI Super Conference, Las Colinas, TX; July 26 – 28, 2007.
(Instructor)

Cope, Cam, “The Investigation of Electrical Fires in Vehicles,” Fire Explosions, and Electricity: Intensive Instruction, Irmo,
SC; April 20 – 21, 2007. (Instructor).

Cope, Cam, ISFI 2006 – International Symposium on Fire Investigation Science and Technology, Fire Technology
Involving Vehicles & Structures, Faro Scene 3D Laser Scanner, Cincinnati, OH; June 26 – 29, 2006. (Instructor).

Cope, Cam, Inner Circle of Investigators 2005 Annual Conference, “Heavy Truck Fires,” Williamsburg, VA; October 14-
15, 2005. (Instructor).
1/5/2017 Auto Fire & Safety Consultants, Inc. 4
35 Promenade St N, Montgomery, TX 77356
Off: 281.362.0930 Fax: 281.362.1329
Bowmer 001176
 Cam Cope, Curriculum Vitae

Cope, Cam, 2005 Vehicle Fire, Arson & Explosion Investigation Science and Technology Seminar, NAFI and Eastern
Kentucky University, Richmond, KY; Sept. 26-29, 2005. (Instructor).

Cope, Cam. “Crash Data Retrieval”, 2004 Vehicle Fire, Arson & Explosion Investigation Science and Technology
Seminar, NAFI and Eastern Kentucky University, Richmond, KY; Sept. 27-30, 2004. (Instructor).

Cope, Cam. “Sources of Information”, 2004 Vehicle Fire, Arson & Explosion Investigation Science and Technology
Seminar, NAFI and Eastern Kentucky University, Richmond, KY; Sept. 27-30, 2004. (Instructor).

Cope, Cam. “Vehicle Systems Design, Form, & Function,” “Crash Data Retrieval;” Test Burns. 2004 Vehicle Fire, Arson,
& Explosion Investigation Training Program, NAFI, Eastern Kentucky University, Richmond, KY; September 27-30, 2004.
Live burns- Vehicle Fire Testing.

Cope, Cam. “Vehicle Fire Investigation”, International Symposium on Fire Investigation, NFPA, Fire Service College,
Moreton-in-Marsh, Gloucestershire, UK; June 27-30, 2004. (Instructor).

Cope, Cam. “Vehicle Systems Design, Form, & Function,” “Crash Data Retrieval;” Test Burns. 2003 Vehicle Fire, Arson,
& Explosion Investigation Training Program, NAFI, Eastern Kentucky University, Richmond, KY; October 1-4, 2003. Live
burns- Vehicle Testing.

Cope, Cam. “Vehicle Investigation Issues.” 2003 National Fire, Arson & Explosion Investigation Training Program, NAFI,
Sarasota, FL; August 13, 2003. Vehicle testing and live burns.

“2002 Vehicle Fire, Arson & Explosion Investigation & Technology Seminar,” National Association of Fire Investigators
and Fire and Safety Engineering Technology; Eastern Kentucky University, Richmond, KY; September 30 -October 2,
2002. (Instructor).

Cope, Cam and Bill Camp. "Use of Digital Photography in Investigation.” American Trial Lawyers Association
Presentation: Chicago, IL; July 31, 2000.

Cope, Cam. “Airbag Investigation.” The Legal Investigator – All CLI Issue. National Association of Legal Investigators;
May 2001.

Cope, Cam. “Motor Vehicle Fires and NFPA 921.” Test Burning of Vehicles 2001: National Advanced Fire, Arson, and
Explosion Investigation Science and Technology: Eastern Kentucky University, Richmond, KY; March 13-17, 2001.

Cope, Cam and Bob Swint. "Airbag Safety & Investigation." The Forensic Examiner. May/June 2000.

Cope, Cam and Dennis Andrews. "Low-Speed Rear-End Impact Analysis / Seat Belts / Airbags." ACFE Workshop
Presentation: New York City, NY; October 29 - November 1, 1999.

Cope, Cam. "History of Occupant Restraint Systems." ACFE 6th National Scientific Academy: Naples, FL; October 12-
14, 1998.

Cope, Cam and Bob Swint. “The Documentation of Vehicles Involved in Accidents.” Engineering and Technology, The
Forensic Examiner. Vol. 7: Sept/Oct 1998.

Cope, Cam. "Investigation of Vehicle Rollover.” Advanced Forensic Civil Investigations. Lawyers & Judges Publishing
Co., 1997.

Cope, Cam. “Restraint System Documentation and Investigation.” Presentation at 5th National Scientific Academy &
Retreat of the American College of Forensic Examiners: San Diego, CA; December 11-13, 1997.

Cope, Cam. "Investigation of an Automobile Accident." Presentation at the National Association of Legal Investigator
Mid-Winter Conference: Chicago, IL; March 1995.

Cope, Cam. "Investigation of a Products Liability Case." Presentation at the National Association of Legal Investigator
Silver Anniversary Conference: St. Louis, MO; 1992.
1/5/2017 Auto Fire & Safety Consultants, Inc. 5
35 Promenade St N, Montgomery, TX 77356
Off: 281.362.0930 Fax: 281.362.1329
Bowmer 001177
 Cam Cope, Curriculum Vitae

Cope, Cam. "Vehicle Documentation." Presentation at N.A.L.I. National Convention: Houston, TX; 1991.

Cope, Cam. "Accident Investigation Forms," A series of data forms to be used by Accident Investigators.

CONTINUING EDUCATION

2015 Vehicle Fire, Arson & Explosion Investigation Science & Technology Seminar, (Total Burns – Testing), NAFI, Fire
and Safety Engineering Technology, Eastern Kentucky University, September 21-24, 2015.

2014 ARC-CSI Crash Conference. Crash Testing, Las Vegas, NV, June 2-5, 2014.

2013 Vehicle Fire, Arson & Explosion Investigation Science & Technology Seminar, (Total Burns-Testing), NAFI, Fire
and Safety Engineering Technology, Eastern Kentucky University, September 30 – October 3, 2013.

SAE ABA Fire Safety Committee Meeting (teleconference), April 26, 2012

Inner Circle of Investigators, 2011 Annual Conference, Investigative Professional Development Conference, Conroe, TX;
October 21-22, 2011.

2011 National Vehicle Fire, Arson and Explosion Investigation Science and Technology Seminar, Lexington, KY;
September 12-16, 2011.

2011 ARC-CSI Crash Conference, Crash Testing, Las Vegas, NV; May 23-24, 2011.

“Fire and Materials 2011”, 12th International Conference and Exhibition, Interscience Communications Limited, San
Francisco, CA; January 31-February 2, 2011.

NFPA Committee on 921, Baltimore, MD; September 30, 2010.

2010 International Symposium on Fire Investigation Science and Technology, Baltimore, MD; September 27-29, 2010.

Inner Circle of Investigators, 2010 Annual Conference, Investigative Professional Development Conference, St Louis,
MO; September 17, 2010.

Technical Committee on Hazard and Risk of Contents and Furnishings; NFPA 557 HAR-AAA ROP Meeting; Quincy,
MA; August 4-5, 2010

2010 NFPA Conference & Expo, Las Vegas, NV; June 7-10, 2010; Technical Committee, Fire Science & Tech Section,
Latin American Section.

2010 SAE New Era – New Solutions New Congress, SAE ABA Fire Safety Committee; Motor Vehicle Fire Investigation
Task Force Committee; Accident Reconstruction Committee; Sessions: Electronics, Emissions / Environment /
Sustainability; Integrated Design & Manufacturing; Management / Marketplace; Materials; Powertrain / Propulsion; Safety
/ Testing; Detroit, MI; April 13-14, 2010

2009 ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress & Exposition, Lake Buena Vista, FL; November 13-19, 2009.

2009 ACFE National Conference, Las Vegas, NV; October 14-16, 2009.

2009 Vehicle Fire, Arson & Explosion Investigation Science & Technology Seminar, (Total Burns – Testing), NAFI, Fire
and Safety Engineering Technology, Eastern Kentucky University; September 19-24, 2009.

2009 SAE World Congress, SAE Motor Vehicle Fire Investigation Task Force, Detroit, MI; April 20-22, 2009.

NFPA 556 Committee Meeting and Rule-Making, San Antonio, TX; February 5-6, 2009.

Fire and Materials 2009, 11th International Conference and Exhibition, Interscience Communications Limited, San

1/5/2017 Auto Fire & Safety Consultants, Inc. 6

35 Promenade St N, Montgomery, TX 77356
Off: 281.362.0930 Fax: 281.362.1329
Bowmer 001178
 Cam Cope, Curriculum Vitae

Francisco, CA; January 26-28, 2009.

2009 CDR User’s Conference, Houston, TX; January 26-28, 2009. (Attended by Joe Partain, Auto Fire & Safety
Consultants)

2008 Trucking Litigation and D.O.T. Regulations, Houston, TX; November 13, 2008. (Attended by Joe Partain, Auto Fire
& Safety Consultants)

2008 Texas Association of Accident Reconstructionists, Annual Meeting, Houston, TX; November 13-15, 2008.
(Attended by Aaron Zeamer, Auto Fire & Safety Consultants)

NFPA Technical Committee Board Meeting regarding NFPA 921, Orlando, FL; October 8-10, 2008.

Inner Circle of Investigators, 2008 Annual Conference, Investigative Professional Development Conference, Jackson
Hole, WY; August 15-16, 2008.

2008 ARC-CSI Crash Conference, Crash Testing, New Vehicle Technologies, Reconstruction Techniques, Momentum
and Energy, Airborne Analysis and Rotational Mechanics, Pedestrian Crash Analysis, Reconstruction of PIT crashes,
Rollovers, Las Vegas, NV; June 2-4, 2008.

2008 NFPA World Safety Conference & Exposition; Executive Board Member FSTE, Campus Fire Safety, Air Force
Application of Arc Flash Protection, Pitfalls, Perils and Reasoning Fallacies of Determining Fire Cause in the Absence of
Proof, Las Vegas, NV; June 2-5, 2008.

2008 SAE World Congress, SAE ABA Fire Safety Committee, SAE Motor Vehicle Fire Investigation Task Force, and
AIRP Committee Meeting, Detroit, MI; April 13-17, 2008.

2007 SAE Highway Vehicle Event Data Recorder Symposium, NTSB Training Center, Ashburn, VA; September 5-6,
2007.

2007 National Fire, Arson & Explosion Investigation Training Program; National Association of Fire Investigators (NAFI)
and National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), Sarasota, FL; August 6-8, 2007.

“Background Investigations,” “Digital/Computer Investigations,” 2007 TALI Super Conference, Las Colinas, TX; July 26
- 28, 2007.

People Safe in Rollovers Foundation; Emergency World Summit, Washington, D.C.; July 18-20, 2007.

2007 ARC-CSI Crash Conference, Las Vegas, NV; June 4-7, 2007. (Attended by Aaron Zeamer, Auto Fire & Safety
Consultants)

Technical Committee on Hazard and Risk of Contents & Furnishings; National Fire Protection Association (NFPA); May
1 – 2, 2007.

Inner Circle of Investigators, 2007 Annual Conference, The Warren Group, Forensic Engineers & Consultants, Fires
Explosions and Electricity, Irmo, SC; April 20 – 21, 2007.

2007 SAE World Congress, SAE ABA Fire Safety Committee, SAE Motor Vehicle Fire Investigation Task Force, and
AIRP Committee Meeting, Detroit, MI; April 16-19, 2007.

“Fire and Materials 2007”, Interscience Communications Limited, Fire School, San Francisco, CA; January 29-31, 2007.

Central Texas Fire Investigators Associations Annual Meeting & Conference, Electrical Fires 102 Training Program,
Austin, TX; December 12 - 13, 2006.

2006 ISFI – International Symposium on Fire Investigation Science and Technology, Fire Technology Involving Vehicles
& Structures, Cincinnati, OH; June 26 – 29, 2006.

1/5/2017 Auto Fire & Safety Consultants, Inc. 7

35 Promenade St N, Montgomery, TX 77356
Off: 281.362.0930 Fax: 281.362.1329
Bowmer 001179
 Cam Cope, Curriculum Vitae

2006 ARC-CSI Crash Conference, Crash Testing – Rollover, Motorcycle and Bus, Las Vegas, NV; June 5-8, 2006.

2006 SAE World Congress, SAE AIRP Committee Meeting, SAE ABA Fire Safety Committee, Hydrogen Vehicle Safety
(Parts 1 & 2), Fire Statistics and Analysis (Parts 1 & 2), Material Flammability and Fire Experiments (Parts 1 & 2), Detroit,
MI; April 3-7, 2006.

Live Burn Testing of Five (5) Ford Vehicles Related to Cruise Control Deactivation Switches conducted by Nationwide
Insurance, Houston, TX; December 5, 2005.

Inner Circle of Investigators, 2005 Annual Conference, Investigative Professional Development Conference,
Williamsburg, VA; October 14-15, 2005. (10 hrs)

“Vehicle Fire, Arson & Explosion Investigation”, (Total Burns - Testing) Science & Technology Seminar, NAFI, Fire and
Safety Engineering Technology, Eastern Kentucky University; September 26-29, 2005.

NFPA 921 – Task Force Committee Meetings Relative Changes to NFPA 921, Minneapolis, MN; September 14 – 16,
2005.

2005 NAFI - National Seminar on Fire Analysis Litigation, Sarasota, FL; August 11-12, 2005.

2005 NAFI - National Fire, Arson & Explosion Investigation Training Program, Computer Fire Modeling, Sarasota, FL;
August 8-10, 2005.

2005 SAE World Congress, “Fire Safety” “Accident Reconstruction”, “Side Impact & Rollovers”, “Restraints Systems”,
(AIRP Standards Committee & VFI Advisory Group), Detroit, MI; April 12-15, 2005.

“Fire and Materials 2005”, Interscience Communications Limited, Fire School, San Francisco, CA; January 31-February
1, 2005.

“Fire Hazard to Occupants of Road Vehicles”, Interscience Communications Limited, Fire School, San Francisco, CA;
January 31-February 1, 2005.

“Cone Calorimeter Predictions of FMVSS 302 Performance”, Interscience Communications Limited, Fire School, San
Francisco, California; January 31-February 1, 2005.

“Vehicle Fire, Arson & Explosion Investigation”, (Vehicle Burns – Testing) Science & Technology Seminar, NAFI, Fire
and Safety Engineering Technology, Eastern Kentucky University; September 27-30, 2004.

“Electrical Faults as Fire Causes” (The Investigator’s Perspective), NFPA, International Symposium on Fire Investigation,
Fire Service College, Moreton-in-Marsh, Gloucestershire, UK; June 29, 2004.

“Forensic Pathology”, NFPA, International Symposium on Fire Investigation, Fire Service College, Moreton-in-Marsh,
Gloucestershire, UK; June 29, 2004.

“Scene Management”, NFPA, International Symposium on Fire Investigation, Fire Service College, Moreton-in-Marsh,
Gloucestershire, UK; June 29, 2004.

“Scene Examination (Case Study Based)”, NFPA, International Symposium on Fire Investigation, Fire Service College,
Moreton-in-Marsh, Gloucestershire, UK; June 28, 2004.

“Fire Dynamics and Fire Science”, NFPA, International Symposium on Fire Investigation, Fire Service College, Moreton-
in Marsh, Gloucestershire UK; June 28, 2004.

“Highway Vehicle Event Data Record Symposium: State-of-the-Art of Passenger Vehicle Accident Recorder Technology;
EDR Device Research and Validation; and EDR End-User and Accident Reconstruction,” National Transportation Safety
Board; George Washington University, Virginia Campus; June 3-4, 2004.

“2004 SAE World Congress”, “Force Response during Tire Tread Detachment Event.”, Detroit, MI; March 8-11, 2004

1/5/2017 Auto Fire & Safety Consultants, Inc. 8

35 Promenade St N, Montgomery, TX 77356
Off: 281.362.0930 Fax: 281.362.1329
Bowmer 001180
 Cam Cope, Curriculum Vitae

“2003 NFPA Fall Education Conference,” Reno, NV; November 16-19, 2003; Pre-Conference Seminars, November 14-
15, 2003.

“2003 Vehicle Fire, Arson & Explosion Investigation Training Program,” (Live Burns – Testing) National Association of
Fire Investigators; Eastern Kentucky University, Richmond, KY; October 1-4, 2003.

“2003 National Fire, Arson & Explosion Investigation Training Program,” National Association of Fire Investigators;
Sarasota, FL; August 11-15, 2003.

“Vehicle Dynamics & Simulation,” Society of Automotive Engineers 2003 World Congress; Detroit, MI; March 5, 2003.

“Vehicle Agressivity & Compatibility in Automotive Crashes,” Society of Automotive Engineers 2003 World Congress;
Detroit, MI; March 5, 2003.

“Engineering Safety Specifications: Designing for Safety,” Society of Automotive Engineers 2003 World Congress,
Detroit, MI, March 3-4, 2003. (16 hours)

“Accident Reconstruction,” Society of Automotive Engineers 2003 World Congress; Detroit, MI; March 4-5, 2003.

“Side Impact, Rear Impact & Rollover,” Society of Automotive Engineers 2003 World Congress; Detroit, MI; March 3,
2003.

“2002 Vehicle Fire, Arson & Explosion Investigation & Technology Seminar,” National Association of Fire Investigators
and Fire and Safety Engineering Technology; Eastern Kentucky University, Lexington, KY; September 30 – October 2,
2002.

“2002 National Seminar on Fire Analysis Litigation,” National Association of Fire Investigators and National Fire
Protection Agency; Sarasota, FL; August 15-16, 2002. (16 hrs)

“2002 National Fire, Arson & Explosion Investigation Training Program,” National Association of Fire Investigators and
National Fire Protection Agency; Sarasota, FL; August 12-14, 2002. (32 hrs)

“A Fire Scene Analysis,” 2001 National Advanced Fire; Eastern Kentucky University, Richmond, KY; March 2002. (16
hrs)

“Engineering Dynamics Corporation-HVE-2D-EDCRASH Reconstruction Course,” Terry Day –PDOF and Damage
Profile of Vehicle, Collision Deformation Classification, EDCRASH Input Data; CA State University Northridge; Burbank,
CA; January 21-25, 2002. (40 hrs)

“Investigation of Motor Vehicle Fires,” Lee S. Cole. Peter Klaput Investigation of motor vehicle fires; Where and how did
it start; Hands-on investigation of burned vehicles; Elements Necessary for a Fire; Loyola University, New Orleans, LA;
December 5-7, 2001.

“Hot Wheels 2001,” Investigating Vehicle Fires; 15 vehicles burned, investigation, methodology, ignition sources, fuel
loads, electrical failures, presentations for vehicles burned; Fire Investigation Association of Alberta; Calgary, Alberta,
Canada; September 20-22, 2001.

“NFPA 921 Structural and Vehicles,” Live Vehicle Burn IAAI-Louisville Fire Department.

“Post Impact Fuel Fed Fires,” Tom DeSantis and Lou Molnar (Design Analysis Engineers at Ford Motor Company);
“Origin and Cause on Vehicles Fires Utilizing NFPA 921,” Ralph Newell (Newell Investigation); “Electrical Fires in
Components-Vehicles,” Chuck Adams (Design Analysis Engineer at Ford Motor Company); “Mechanical Fires – Fuel-
Fed Fires - Vehicles,” John Washington and Sunil Sharma (Design Analysis Engineers at Ford Motor Company);
“Electrical System,” Mark Hoffman (Ford Motor Company); “NFPA 921,” David Smith; Live Vehicle Burn, Electrical Short
in dash, Flammability of Vehicle Fuels tested, Testing of Interior Temperatures, Roof, Engine, Occupant and Truck in
Vehicle Fires; Louisville, KY; August 22-24, 2001.

“Fire and Pattern Analysis,” Patrick Kennedy; “Processing the Fire Scene - Diagramming Evidence and Note Taking,”
Dennis Smith; “Determining Origin-Heat and Flame Vector Analysis” and “Fire Scene Photography,” Michael Schulz;
1/5/2017 Auto Fire & Safety Consultants, Inc. 9
35 Promenade St N, Montgomery, TX 77356
Off: 281.362.0930 Fax: 281.362.1329
Bowmer 001181
 Cam Cope, Curriculum Vitae

“Philosophy of Fire Analysis,” Patrick Kennedy; “Electrical,” Daniel Churchward; 2001 National Fire, Arson and Explosion
Investigation Training Program; Sarasota, FL; July 22-27, 2001.

"Texas Association of Legal Investigators, 2001 Convention and Seminar,” San Antonio, TX; June 15-17, 2001. (10 hrs
Continuing Education Credit).

“Introduction to Explosives Theory and Explosion Devices,” Tom Thurman, 2001 National Advanced Fire, Arson, and
Explosion Investigation Science and Technology Program; Eastern Kentucky University, Richmond, KY; March 13-17,
2001. (8 hrs on-site explosion and fire investigation of burning vehicles).

“Fire Scene Analysis,” 2001 National Advanced Fire; Eastern Kentucky University, Richmond, KY; March 16, 2001. (8
hrs)

“Analysis of Electrical Fires Causes,” 2001 National Advanced Fire; Eastern Kentucky University, Richmond, KY; March
15, 2001. (8 hrs)

“PC-Crash Program, 3D Accident Simulation and Reconstruction,” William Cliff and Hermann Steffan, Detroit, MI; March
8-9, 2001. (16 hrs)

"Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) Accident Reconstruction Conference,” Detroit, MI; March 5-8, 2001.

“Certified Fire Investigator Instructor Program,” Ron Hopkins, Fire and Safety Engineering Technology; Eastern Kentucky
University; March 2001. (8 hrs and examination)

"Crash Data Retrieval Systems," Don Gilman, Vetronix Corporation, WREX2000; College Station, TX; September 24-
29, 2000.

"Lamp Examination for ON or OFF in Traffic Accidents," Gary Stephens, WREX 2000l; College Station, TX; September
24-29, 2000.

"Full Force / Weight Tests of Air-Braked Trucks, Truck Tractor & Semi Trailer Compared to Automobiles," Dave Stopper,
WREX 2000; College Station, TX; September 24-29, 2000.

"Trailer Underride; Conspicuity, Human Factors and Rear Bumpers," Joseph E. Badger, WREX 2000; College Station,
TX; September 24-29, 2000.

"WREX 2000 World Reconstruction Exposition," Accident Reconstruction and Crash Testing; College Station, TX;
September 24-29, 2000. (36 credit hrs)

"Demonstration of Crush Deformation Measurement System and Current Validation of the EDCRASH Computer
Program,” Tom Curtis, WREX 2000; College Station, TX; September 24-29, 2000.

"Airbags and Restraint Systems," ATLA Convention, Product Liability A.I.E.G.; Chicago, IL; July 31, 2000.

"The Dynamics of Fire Investigation” and "Fire Pattern Development and Fire Analysis," Patrick Kennedy / National Fire,
Arson, and Explosion Investigation Training Program; Chicago, IL; July 24-28, 2000.

"Chemistry of Fire-Properties of Materials" and "Fire Dynamics for Fire Investigation,” Ron Hopkins / National Fire, Arson,
and Explosion Investigation and Training Program; Chicago, IL; July 24-28, 2000.

“Basic Electricity and the Investigation of Electrical Fires” and “Cause Determination NFPA,” Daniel Churchward and
Dennis Smith / National Fire, Arson, and Explosion Investigation and Training Program; Chicago, IL; July 24-28, 2000.

"Fire Cause and Origin," National Association of Fire Investigators; Chicago, IL; July 24-28, 2000.

Society of Automotive Engineers 21st Annual Section Officers Leadership Seminar, Pittsburgh, PA, May 20-23, 2000.

"Accident Reconstruction – State-of-the-Art," SAE-TOPTEC; "Frontal Collision Performance," Dagmar Jewkes, Ph.D.;
"Side-Collision Performance,” Greg D. Stephens; "Rear-Collision Performance & Rollover Reconstruction,” Stein E.
1/5/2017 Auto Fire & Safety Consultants, Inc. 10
35 Promenade St N, Montgomery, TX 77356
Off: 281.362.0930 Fax: 281.362.1329
Bowmer 001182
 Cam Cope, Curriculum Vitae

Husher; Costa Mesa, CA; December 9-10, 1999.

"A.C.F.E. National Convention,” Engineering and Technology Accident Reconstruction; New York City, NY; October 28-
31, 1999.

"Low Speed Accident Reconstruction and Litigation,” Lawyers & Judges Convention; Scottsdale, AZ; October 21-23,
1999.

"Issues in Automotive Crashworthiness Litigation, Trial Evidentiary,” A.I.E.G.; Scottsdale, AZ; September 23-25, 1999.

“Liability Issues,” National N.A.L.I. Convention, New Orleans, LA; June 3-5, 1999.

"TTLA’s On-Line, Hands-on Investigation Research Workshop,” Houston, TX; April 29, 1999.

"GM Fuel System Integrity,” A.I.E.G., Atlanta, GA; April 15-17, 1999.

"Airbag Field Performance: An Engineer's Perspective,” Jerome M. Kossar, A.I.E.G., Atlanta, GA; April 15-17, 1999.

"Analysis and Investigation of Post-Accident Air Bag Systems,” Bill Rosenbluth ASA, A.I.E.G., Atlanta, GA; April 15-17,
1999.

"Evolution of the Lock-for-the-Latch,” Kendall Few; “Forensic Analysis of Skip Lock,” Alan Cantor; “Biomechanics and
Injury Criteria of Child and Adult Dummies,” Dr. Tony Sances; “Motor Vehicle Glass,” Patrick M. Ardis, A.I.E.G., Atlanta,
GA; April 15-17, 1999.

“Vehicle Fires and Restraint Systems,” Atlanta, GA; April 15-17, 1999.

"Auto Focus AIEG Airbags, Rollovers, Auto Fires, Inertia Release (Seat Belt Buckles),” San Francisco, CA; October 24-
26, 1998.

"A.C.F.E. National Convention," Engineering and Technology Accident Reconstruction, Naples, FL; October 12-14, l998.

"Facts & Mechanics for Injury Analysis – Pathologists,” Patrick E. Besant-Matthews, M.D., TAARS Annual Meeting, Lago
Vista, TX; June 25-27, 1998.

"Mechanics of Vehicle Rollover," Richard J. Schleuter, P.E., TAARS Annual Meeting, Lago Vista, TX; June 25-27, 1998.

"Texas Association of Accident Reconstruction Specialists—Accident Reconstruction,” Austin, TX; June 25-27, 1998
(additional seminars not listed since 93).

"Occupant Protection,” Society of Automotive Engineers – TOPTEC, Tempe, AZ; May 20-21, 1998.

"Side Impact,” Society of Automotive Engineers – TOPTEC, Tempe, AZ; May 18-19, 1998.

"Inertially Unlatching Seat Belt Buckles-Proving the Defect,” Ben Hogan, Kendall Few and Dr. Tony Sances, A.I.E.G.,
San Antonio, TX; May 14-16, 1998.

"Car Crashes and Occupant Injuries – Frontal Impact – Side Impact – Rollovers,” Greg Stephens, Stein Husher and Ed
Moffatt, Association for the Advancement for Automotive Medicine, Tempe, AZ; April 16-17, 1998.

"Car Crash and Occupant Injuries: A Team Approach to Crash Investigation,” AAAM, Tempe, AZ; April 16-17, 1998.

"GM Technical on Airbags,” SDM System Operation-Component Locations, Glenn C. Libby, Milford Training Center,
Houston, TX; March 5, 1998.

"A.C.F.E. National Convention,” American Board of Forensic Engineering and Technology, San Diego, CA; December
11-13, 1997.

"Technology and Performance of Airbags," David Biss, A.I.E.G., Scottsdale, AZ; September 25-27, 1997.

1/5/2017 Auto Fire & Safety Consultants, Inc. 11

35 Promenade St N, Montgomery, TX 77356
Off: 281.362.0930 Fax: 281.362.1329
Bowmer 001183
 Cam Cope, Curriculum Vitae

"Airbag Litigation,” Larry Coben and Don Slavik, A.I.E.G., Scottsdale, AZ; September 25-27, 1997.

"Airbag Design and Performance," Society of Automotive Engineers – TOPTEC, Costa Mesa, CA; August 14-15, 1997.

"Evaluating and Preparing Vehicle Rollovers," Michael Kerensky, Texas Trial Lawyers Association, Houston, TX;
February 1-2, 1996

"Vehicle Restraint Systems and Airbags," Brent Carpenter, Texas Trial Lawyers Association, Houston, TX; Feb. 1-2,
1996.

"Vehicle Fuel Tank Integrity,” Mick McBee, Texas Trial Lawyers Association, Houston, TX; February 1-2, 1996.

"Liftgates and Seatbacks,” Todd Tracy, Texas Trial Lawyers Association, Houston, TX; February 1-2, 1996.

"Motor Vehicle Crashworthiness Frontal Collisions: Safety Issues" and "Rollover Crashworthiness," Engineering
Demonstrations / Arndt and Associates / A.I.E.G., Phoenix, AZ; October 29-30, 1993.

National Association of Fire Investigation Schools (NAFI), Certification Program, Chicago, IL; 1990, 1991, 1992.

"Advanced Theories in Automotive Restraint Crashworthiness Cases,” Donald H. Slavik, A.I.E.G., Sonoma County, CA;
September 26-27, 1992.

"Fire and Explosion Investigation,” John A. Kennedy, National Fire, Arson, and Explosion Investigation, Chicago, IL;
August 18-21, 1992.

"Forensic Fire Science and Technology Laboratory Training,” NAFI, Kennedy and Associates, Chicago, IL; August 17,
1992.

"Rear Seat Lap-Only Belt Litigation," Jeffery Burke, Ralph Hoar, Ben Kelly, A.I.E.G., Dallas, TX; April 25-26, 1992.

"Hands-on Reconstruction Techniques,” Fred E. Arndt and Mark Arndt, A.I.E.G., Phoenix, AZ; October 11-12, 1991.

"Computerized Reconstruction," Fred E. Arndt, A.I.E.G., Phoenix, AZ; October 11-12, 1991.

"A Brief Review of Motor Vehicle Accident Reconstruction," Robert J. Caldwell, P.E., A.I.E.G., Phoenix, AZ; October 11-
12, 1991.

"Occupant Restraint and Protection," Don Slavik, A.I.E.G., Denver, CO; April 19-20, 1991.

"Advance Fire Pattern Analysis," Ron Hopkins, NAFI, Chicago, IL; August 8-10, 1990.

"Human Factors and Safety Evaluation," Edward W. Karnes, Ph.D., ATV Adult Toys, A.I.E.G., Phoenix, AZ; April 6-7,
1990.

"Chemistry and Incendiary Devices,” Rolfe Scofield PhD.; "Searching Diagramming and Evidence Collection at the Fire
Scene," Sgt. Gene Deck; "Fire Pattern Analysis,” Patrick Kennedy, Ph.D., NAFI Seminar, Chicago, IL; September 9-11,
1987.

"Photography in Fire, Arson and Explosion Investigation,” Patrick Kennedy, PhD., NAFI Fire School, Chicago, IL;
September 11, 1987.

"Fire and Safety Engineering Technology,” Ron Hopkins, Eastern Kentucky University, Richmond, KY; September 1987.

"Fire, Arson and Explosion Training,” A.J. Scardino, Ph.D., and John Odom, P.E., NAFI, Chicago, IL; September 17-19,
1986.

1/5/2017 Auto Fire & Safety Consultants, Inc. 12

35 Promenade St N, Montgomery, TX 77356
Off: 281.362.0930 Fax: 281.362.1329
Bowmer 001184
Exhibit B to Cope Affidavit
 Expert Report
Relative to the Matter of
Bowmer

AFSC File: 17131

March 28, 2018

Prepared for:
Chris Lavorato
Howry Breen & Herman, LLP
1900 Pearl Street
Austin, Texas 78705
Off: 512-474-7300
Fax: 512-474-8557

Date of Incident:
July 13, 2017

Location of Incident:
An alleyway behind 508 Brazos St in Travis County, TX

Bowmer 001185
 Bowmer

Report Contents

1.0 Introduction and Review of the Texas Peace Officer's Crash Report

2.0 Vehicle Photographs

2.1 Unit 1/BMW
2.2 Unit 2/Chevrolet

3.0 Scene Inspection

4.0 Accident Reconstruction

5.0 Overview of Findings and Opinions

6.0 Materials Reviewed

AFSC File: 17131 Auto Fire & Safety Consultants, Inc. 2

35 Promenade St. N, Montgomery, TX 77356
281.362.0930 l 281.362.1329 Fax

Bowmer 001186
 Bowmer

Attorney Chris Lavorato contacted the undersigned to evaluate and prepare an accident investigation and
reconstruction report for an Incident that occurred on July 13, 2017 in a parking garage and an alleyway
behind 508 Brazos St in Travis County, Texas. This document contains an analysis of the Incident that was
investigated and associated facts furnished providing discussions, conclusions and an overview of opinions
relative to the event.

Attached to this document is the Curriculum Vitae of Mr. Cam Cope. Mr. Cope is being compensated for
services on this matter at the rate of $225.00 per hour.

1.0 INTRODUCTION AND REVIEW OF THE TEXAS PEACE OFFICER’S CRASH REPORT

Unit 1 is a black 2014 BMW 428i with VIN WBA3V5C59EJ969202 and Texas license plate number
FPB1060. The vehicle is registered to Christi Bowmer of 2710 Izoro Bend Cedar Creek, TX 78613.
The vehicle was being operated by Christi Bowmer at the time of the occurrence and injuries. Unit 1
2014 BMW 428i will herein be referred to as “Unit 1/BMW”.

Unit 2 is a grey 2008 Chevrolet Tahoe with VIN 1GNFC13C78R194845 and Texas license plate
number CKV8387. The vehicle is registered to William Burch of 1115 Remington Dr. Leander, TX
78641. The vehicle was being operated by William Burch at the time of the collision. Unit 2 2008
Chevrolet Tahoe will herein be referred to as “Unit 2/Chevrolet”.

Investigators Narrative Opinion Produced in the Texas Peace Officer’s Crash Report

AFSC File: 17131 Auto Fire & Safety Consultants, Inc. 3

35 Promenade St. N, Montgomery, TX 77356
281.362.0930 l 281.362.1329 Fax

Bowmer 001187
 Bowmer

Investigators Scene Diagram

AFSC File: 17131 Auto Fire & Safety Consultants, Inc. 4

35 Promenade St. N, Montgomery, TX 77356
281.362.0930 l 281.362.1329 Fax

Bowmer 001188
 Bowmer

2.0 VEHICLE PHOTOGRAPHS

Unit 1/BMW was inspected, photographed and documented by Auto Fire & Safety Consultants on September 6, 2017. At
the time of this report Unit 2/Chevrolet has not been made available to this investigator for inspecting. The statistics for the
model vehicle were generally obtained from AutoStats, VIN Edit and All Data, as well as the actual inspection and
documentation(s). Photographs were taken with a digital camera and Unit 1 was scanned with a FARO 3D scanner.

2.1 Unit 1/BMW Photos

Photograph # 1
Exemplar 2014 BMW 428i

AFSC File: 17131 Auto Fire & Safety Consultants, Inc. 5

35 Promenade St. N, Montgomery, TX 77356
281.362.0930 l 281.362.1329 Fax

Bowmer 001189
 Bowmer

Photograph # 2
Damage to the front of Unit 1/BMW as a result of impacting the alleyway road. Damage to the roof area was a
result of impacting/sliding down the Bank of America parking garage east wall of in the alleyway along with
doing a half roll and coming to rest on its rooftop.

Photograph # 3
The front driver’s airbag, the knee inflator and the driver’s side seat airbag deployed during this event. The CDR
indicates that Ms. Bowmer, the driver of Unit 1/BMW was belted at the time of the incident. This is
supported by the physical evidence shown in photographs # 5 & 6 below.
AFSC File: 17131 Auto Fire & Safety Consultants, Inc. 6
35 Promenade St. N, Montgomery, TX 77356
281.362.0930 l 281.362.1329 Fax

Bowmer 001190
 Bowmer

Photograph # 4
Scrap marks present to the top of Unit 1/BMW resulting from impacting/sliding down a portion of the Bank of America
parking garage east wall in the alleyway. This portion of the wall can be seen in photograph # 12 below.

Photograph # 5
The front driver’s seatbelt webbing is shown with transfer marks from the clothing Ms. Bowmer was wearing
on the day this incident occurred.
AFSC File: 17131 Auto Fire & Safety Consultants, Inc. 7
35 Promenade St. N, Montgomery, TX 77356
281.362.0930 l 281.362.1329 Fax

Bowmer 001191
 Bowmer

Photograph # 6
Unit 1/BMW’s front driver’s seatbelt latch plate is shown with load-marks sustained at the time of impact with
the ground in the alleyway behind 508 Brazos St.

AFSC File: 17131 Auto Fire & Safety Consultants, Inc. 8

35 Promenade St. N, Montgomery, TX 77356
281.362.0930 l 281.362.1329 Fax

Bowmer 001192
 Bowmer

2.2 Unit 2/Chevrolet Photos

Photograph # 7
Exemplar 2008 Chevrolet Tahoe

Bank of
Littlefield
America
Parking
Parking
Garage
Garage

Photograph # 8
A still image of Unit 2/Chevrolet taken from a surveillance camera captured across the street (6th St.) from where
the incident occurred. This image shows the alleyway between the Bank of America parking and the Littlefield
parking garage.

AFSC File: 17131 Auto Fire & Safety Consultants, Inc. 9

35 Promenade St. N, Montgomery, TX 77356
281.362.0930 l 281.362.1329 Fax

Bowmer 001193
 Bowmer

3.0 SCENE PHOTOGRAPHS

The scene was documented, scanned with our FARO laser scanner and photographed on August 2, 2017 by
AFSC.

Bank of
America
Parking Littlefield
Garage Parking
Garage

Alleyway
Where
Incident 508
Occurred Brazos
St
Austin,
TX
78701

Photograph # 9
Aerial Photograph of the scene located in an alleyway behind 508 Brazos St in Austin, TX 78701. The blue arrow
indicates the alleyway between the Bank of America parking and Littlefield parking garage where the incident
occurred behind 508 Brazos St.

AFSC File: 17131 Auto Fire & Safety Consultants, Inc. 10

35 Promenade St. N, Montgomery, TX 77356
281.362.0930 l 281.362.1329 Fax

Bowmer 001194
 Bowmer

½ inch
Steel
Concrete Cables
Parking
Blocks

Photograph # 10
The level between the 6th and 7th floor of the Littlefield parking garage located at 508 Brazos St in Austin, TX 78701. The red
arrow indicates the area where Unit 1/BMW drove over the concrete parking block and through the steel cable barrier
system, making its way into the alleyway. The 5 cable barrier system is insufficient and not up to industry safety
standards.

Photograph # 11
The concrete parking block driven over by Unit 1/BMW was 5 inches in height and has an approximate 50 degree angle.
Both tires of Unit 1/BMW rolled over the 50 degree sloping concrete parking block normally used for identifying parking
spaces on level parking lots such as malls. Unit 1/ BMW rolled over the block at 9-12 mph.

AFSC File: 17131 Auto Fire & Safety Consultants, Inc. 11

35 Promenade St. N, Montgomery, TX 77356
281.362.0930 l 281.362.1329 Fax

Bowmer 001195
 Bowmer

Photograph # 12
Scrape marks present to a portion of the Bank of America parking garage east wall are the result of Unit 1/BMW’s
roof area impacting/sliding it as it fell towards the bottom of the concrete alleyway.
Unit
1/BMW

Unit
2/Chevrolet

Photograph # 13
Unit 1/BMW is shown exiting between the 6th and 7th floor of the Littlefield parking garage. Unit 2/Chevrolet is shown facing
north in the alleyway just prior to coming to a stop. This still image was obtained from surveillance footage taken from
across 6th Street.

AFSC File: 17131 Auto Fire & Safety Consultants, Inc. 12

35 Promenade St. N, Montgomery, TX 77356
281.362.0930 l 281.362.1329 Fax

Bowmer 001196
 Bowmer

Unit
1/BMW

Unit
2/Chevrolet

Photograph # 14
Unit 1/BMW shown making contact with the Bank of America parking garage east wall of the alleyway just prior to impacting
with the concrete alleyway. Unit 2/Chevrolet is just coming to a stop and is slightly farther north in the alleyway than
photograph # 13 above.

Unit Unit
2/Chevrolet 1/BMW

Photograph # 15
Unit 1/BMW is shown just after making impact with the concrete in the alleyway, right before dropping onto the rear of Unit
2/Chevrolet that had come to complete stop and had just started to reverse at the time of collision. Unit 1/BMW then
did half a roll off of the rear of Unit 2/Chevrolet and came to rest on its rooftop, upside down.
AFSC File: 17131 Auto Fire & Safety Consultants, Inc. 13
35 Promenade St. N, Montgomery, TX 77356
281.362.0930 l 281.362.1329 Fax

Bowmer 001197
 Bowmer

Unit
1/BMW

Unit
2/Chevrolet

Photograph # 16
Final Rest of Unit 1/BMW on its rooftop facing west and Unit 2/Chevrolet upright and facing north.

AFSC File: 17131 Auto Fire & Safety Consultants, Inc. 14

35 Promenade St. N, Montgomery, TX 77356
281.362.0930 l 281.362.1329 Fax

Bowmer 001198
 Bowmer

Photograph # 17
Unit 1/BMW is shown at Final Rest position, upside down and facing west in the alleyway. This photo was provided to this
investigator and was taken on the day the incident occurred.

AFSC File: 17131 Auto Fire & Safety Consultants, Inc. 15

35 Promenade St. N, Montgomery, TX 77356
281.362.0930 l 281.362.1329 Fax

Bowmer 001199
 Bowmer

AFSC Diagram # 1
Unit 1/BMW fell from a height of approximately 53 feet from the level between the 6th and 7th floor of the
Littlefield parking garage. Its first point of contact to the Bank of America east wall in the alleyway is
approximately 36 feet above the concrete alleyway. AFSC FARO scan image of the scene.

Photograph # 18
A photo taken from the inside of Littlefield garage facing the north wall (6th Street), showing a concrete barrier providing
physical protection from unintended vehicle egress. This barrier is over 42 inches in height and approximately a foot in
width as shown in photographs # 19 & 20 below.

AFSC File: 17131 Auto Fire & Safety Consultants, Inc. 16

35 Promenade St. N, Montgomery, TX 77356
281.362.0930 l 281.362.1329 Fax

Bowmer 001200
 Bowmer

Photograph # 19
The concrete barrier to the north side of the parking garage is over 42 inches in height and approximately a foot in width.

Photograph # 20
Had the west wall of the Littlefield parking garage had a similar concrete barrier that is in place to the north wall, this incident
would not have occurred.

AFSC File: 17131 Auto Fire & Safety Consultants, Inc. 17

35 Promenade St. N, Montgomery, TX 77356
281.362.0930 l 281.362.1329 Fax

Bowmer 001201
 Bowmer

4.0 ACCIDENT RECONSTRUCTION

4.1 Pre-Crash
Unit 1/BMW, operated by Christi Bowmer was between the 6th and 7th floor of the Littlefield
parking garage located at 508 Brazos St in Austin, TX. Unit 2/Chevrolet, operated by
William Burch was traveling north in an alleyway between 5th and 6th Street, adjacent to the
parking garage Unit 1/BMW was attempting to park in.

4.2 Crash
It is well known to garage operators and owners that vehicular accidents routinely occur in
parking garages. For this reason, especially in multi story garages, the owners and
operators of the garage must ensure that adequate vehicle restraint systems are in place
to prevent what are foreseeable and typically low speed and non injury accidents from
becoming occurrences of serious injury or death. This crash presents an example of how
a dangerous and insufficient vehicle restrain system in a multi level parking garage turned
what should have been a low speed collision with a barrier and no injuries into a horrific
plunge off of a multi story garage resulting in permanent and serious injuries. Here, Unit
1/BMW was driving at a low speed and coming in to park when she accidently hit the
accelerator instead of her brake. Had the barrier been sufficient, Unit 1 would have made
a relatively low impact collision and suffered no injuries. Instead, Unit 1 rolled over the
insufficient 5 inch high concrete parking block and through the failed and dangerously
insufficient 5 steel cable barrier system between the 6th and 7th floor of the Littlefield
parking garage. Unit 1/BMW traveled through the air in a westerly direction and began to
fall, engine first towards the alleyway, with its rooftop making contact with the Bank of
America parking garage east wall of the alley approximately 36 feet above the ground. Unit
1/BMW slid an approximate distance of 6-8 feet down the east wall before separating from
it. Unit 1/BMW then struck the alleyway concrete with its front end, before landing on the
rear of Unit 2/Chevrolet with its underbody. Unit 2/Chevrolet was traveling north in the
alleyway and had come to a stop and just began to reverse before Unit 1/BMW’s
underbody fell onto its driver’s side rear.

4.3 Post Crash

Unit 1/BMW did a half roll off of Unit 2/Chevrolet and came to rest on its rooftop facing
west in the alleyway. Unit 2/Chevrolet pulled forward and came to rest upright and facing
north in the alleyway after contact with Unit 1/BMW. Final rest of Units 1 and 2 can be
seen in photographs # 16 and 17 above.

AFSC File: 17131 Auto Fire & Safety Consultants, Inc. 18

35 Promenade St. N, Montgomery, TX 77356
281.362.0930 l 281.362.1329 Fax

Bowmer 001202
 Bowmer

5.0 FINDINGS AND OPINIONS

The following is an overview of findings and opinions offered with regards to this accident
reconstruction are from the information available to me at the time this report is written.

My methodology consisted of the following: In addition to relying upon my education, training and
experience, I reviewed documentation from the case and the scene, inspected Unit 1, inspected the
scene and reviewed the facts of the case, which included scene photographs and documents provided
by the attorney.

1. Unit 1/BMW, operated by Christi Bowmer was between the 6th and 7th floor level of the
Littlefield garage located at 508 Brazos St in Austin, TX 78701 on July 13, 2017 at
approximately 8:38am when this incident occurred. Unit 2/Chevrolet, operated by William
Burch facing north in the alleyway between the parking garages at the time this incident
occurred. The alleyway is perpendicular to and located between 5th and 6th Street, it’s
approximately 20 feet in width.

2. The CDR report for Unit 1/BMW indicates she was traveling at an approximate range of 6-7
miles per hour in the Littlefield parking garage prior to preparing to park in a slot. Unit 1/BMW
accidently hit the accelerator instead of her brake while attempting to park, driving over the
insufficient 5 inch high concrete parking block with a 50 degree slope, and through the
dangerously insufficient and failed 5 steel cable barrier system of the Littlefield parking
garage between the 6th and 7th floor level. Had the garage been equipped with a proper and
safe restraint system, the vehicle would have been restrained with no physical injuries to Ms.
Bowmer. Instead, the dangerous system failed, the vehicle fell and crashed below and Ms.
Bowmer suffered serious and permanent injuries.

3. Unit 1/BMW traveled through the air in a westerly direction and began to fall, engine first
towards the alleyway, with its rooftop making contact with the Bank of America east wall of
the alley approximately 36 feet above the concrete alleyway road. This can be seen in
photographs # 12 and 14 above. Unit 1/BMW slid an approximate distance of 6-8 feet down
the west wall before separating from it.

4. Unit 1/BMW then struck the alleyway concrete with its front end, before landing on the rear of
Unit 2/Chevrolet. Unit 2/Chevrolet was traveling north in the alleyway, came to a stop and
just began to reverse before Unit 1/BMW’s underbody fell onto its driver’s side rear. Unit
1/BMW did a half roll off of Unit 2/Chevrolet and came to rest on its rooftop facing west in the
alleyway. Unit 2/Chevrolet pulled forward and came to a stop facing north in the alley way.
Final rest of Units 1 and 2 can be seen in photographs # 16 and 17 above.

5. Unit 1/BMW was traveling in an approximate range of 9-12 miles per hour as it drove over
the concrete parking block and through the failed 5 steel cable barrier system. Unit 1/BMW
showed no signs of braking prior to exiting the level between the 6th and 7th floor of the
Littlefield parking garage. This is all supported by physical evidence at the scene, the CDR
download of Unit 1/BMW and the surveillance footage of the event provided by Attorneys.

AFSC File: 17131 Auto Fire & Safety Consultants, Inc. 19

35 Promenade St. N, Montgomery, TX 77356
281.362.0930 l 281.362.1329 Fax

Bowmer 001203
 Bowmer

6. Unit 1/BMW fell from a height of 53 feet from the level between the 6th and 7th floor of the
Littlefield parking garage. During the fall Unit 1/BMW accelerated to an approximate range of
39-43 miles per hour before impacting with the concrete bottom of the alleyway. The CDR
report indicates that Unit 1/BMW experienced a longitudinal delta-v in an approximate range
of 36-38 miles per hour when its front end impacted the concrete in the alleyway.

7. Unit 1/BMW front driver’s air bag and knee inflator deployed during the impact with the
concrete alleyway surface. The driver’s front seat side airbag deployed a very short time
there after during the rollover event. Ms. Bowmer was belted at the time of this incident,
which is supported by the physical evidence seen in photographs # 5 and 6 above as well as
the CDR report that indicated the driver safety belt status was “belted”.

8. The Littlefield parking garage ½ inch 5 steel barrier cable system was dangerous and posed
an unreasonable risk of harm and failed to prevent egress to Unit 1/BMW, allowing it to pass
through with ease, which is supported by the physical evidence at the scene and the
surveillance footage of the event provided by Attorneys. An analysis of the system by
engineers from WJE indicates the system should have been able to hold the vehicle from
plunging off the garage even if it was travelling up to a speed of 18 MPH. WJE concluded
that multiple factors, including ineffectual maintenance, inappropriate repairs and lack of
backstressing likely contributed to the failure and full breach of the barrier cable system.

9. The Littlefield parking garage ½ inch 5 steel barrier cable system failed to meet the building
codes for cable barriers.

10. The owner/operator of the garage knew or should have known of the danger created by the
dangerous and ineffective restraint system for a number of reasons. One obvious reason is
that a similar instance occurred in September of 2016, when a SUV drove through the
ineffective cable barrier system on the ninth floor of the same Littlefield parking garage and
miraculously dangled from one of the cables while the driver had to climb out to safety.

11. Had Littlefield parking garage properly fixed and maintained the dangerous cable barrier
system or had it installed safe concrete retaining walls to their parking garage after the first
incident that occurred in September of 2016, this incident and injuries to Ms. Bowmer would
not have happened.

12. Photographs # 18, 19 and 20 above show a concrete barrier wall that was in place on the
day this incident occurred to the north wall of the Littlefield parking garage. Had this same
concrete barrier been in place to the west wall, this incident and injuries to Ms. Bowmer
would not have occurred.

13. The negligence and gross negligence of Littlefield parking garage was a proximate cause of
the accident and the injuries sustained to the driver of Unit 1/BMW, Christi Bowmer.

The opinions in this report are expressed with a reasonable degree of accident reconstruction
probability. I reserve the right to supplement or modify my opinions as new information is received
or in response to investigation or opinions of other experts.
AFSC File: 17131 Auto Fire & Safety Consultants, Inc. 20
35 Promenade St. N, Montgomery, TX 77356
281.362.0930 l 281.362.1329 Fax

Bowmer 001204
 Bowmer

My curriculum vita is attached.

Sincerely yours,

Auto Fire & Safety Consultants, Inc.

Cam Cope, CFEI, CFII, CVFI

President

AFSC File: 17131 Auto Fire & Safety Consultants, Inc. 21

35 Promenade St. N, Montgomery, TX 77356
281.362.0930 l 281.362.1329 Fax

Bowmer 001205
 Bowmer

6.0 MATERIALS REVIEWED

In addition to my education, training, and experience in accident reconstruction, the following sources of information and
activities were utilized to form my observations and findings. Additional materials forming the basis of the undersigned opinions
include many documents reviewed and general literature, knowledge of accident reconstruction and products associated with
vehicles.

1. Texas Peace Officers Crash Report prepared by Investigator Jason Goodman;

2. Scene Diagram prepared by Texas Peace Officer;
3. AFSC Scene Inspection 08.02.17;
4. AFSC Unit 1/BMW Inspection 09.06.17;
5. AutoStats of Unit 1/BMW;
6. VinLink of Unit 1/BMW;
7. CDR download of Unit 1/BMW;
8. AutoStats of Unit 2/Chevrolet;
9. VinLink of Unit 2/Chevrolet;
10. Google Earth Images of Scene;
11. Accident Scene surveillance video provided by Attorney:
12. Rudolf Limpert Accident Reconstruction books as well as other published materials;
13. Various other accident reconstruction documents;
14. Traffic Safety and the Driver, by Leonard Evans Van Nostrand Reinhold;
15. WJE Report
16. Literature related to steel cable barriers, concrete barriers and concrete parking blocks.

AFSC File: 17131 Auto Fire & Safety Consultants, Inc. 22

35 Promenade St. N, Montgomery, TX 77356
281.362.0930 l 281.362.1329 Fax

Bowmer 001206
Exhibit GG
Placeholder for video
Exhibit HH
Placeholder for video
Exhibit II
 CAUSE NO. D-1-GN-17-004456

CHRISTI J. BOWMER and W. JAY § IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF

BOWMER §
Plaintiffs, §
§
vs. § TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS
§
GTT PARKING, LP, SHELDON DAVID §
KAHN, PREMIER PARKING OF §
TENNESSEE, LLC, and WEITZMAN §
MANAGEMENT CORPORATION §
Defendants. § 353rd JUDICIAL DISTRICT

PLAINTIFF CHRISTI BOWMER’S OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO

DEFENDANT GTT PARKING, LP’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND
FIRST REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION

TO: Defendant GTT PARKING, LP, by and through its attorney of record Tasha Barnes,
THOMPSON COE COUSINS & IRONS, LLP, 701 Brazos St., Suite 1500, Austin, TX 78701.

Plaintiff Christi Bowmer (“Plaintiff”) serves its objections and responses to GTT

PARKING, LP’S interrogatories and request for production pursuant to the Texas Rules of Civil

Procedure.

Page 1 of 33
Dated: October 19, 2017 Respectfully submitted,

HOWRY BREEN & HERMAN, L.L.P.

_____________________________________
Randy Howry
State Bar No. 10121690
Sean E. Breen
State Bar No. 00783715
Chris Lavorato
State Bar No. 24096074

1900 Pearl Street

Austin, Texas 78705-5408
(512) 474-7300 Phone
(512) 474-8557 Facsimile
rhowry@howrybreen.com
sbreen@howrybreen.com
clavorato@howrybreen.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff Christi Bowmer

Page 2 of 33
 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that a true and correct copy of this document was served by electronic mail, in accordance
with Rules 21 and 21a of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, to all counsel of record of record on
October 19, 2017:

Tasha Barnes
Matthew J. Riley
THOMPSON COE COUSINS & IRONS, LLP
701 Brazos St., Suite 1500
Austin, TX 78701
tbarnes@thompsoncoe.com
mriley@thompsoncoe.com

Attorneys for GTT Parking, LP and Sheldon

David Kahn

Christopher L. Rhodes
AYIK & ASSOCIATES
9601 McAllister Freeway, Suite 910
San Antonio, Texas 78216
CRhodes2@Travelers.com

Attorneys for Premier Parking of Tennessee,

LLC

Curtis J. Kurhajec
NAMAN, HOWELL, SMITH & LEE, PLLC
8310 N. Capital of Texas Highway, Suite 490
Austin, Texas 78731
ckurhajec@namanhowell.com

Attorneys for Weitzman Management

Corporation

Randy Howry

Page 3 of 33
3. If you claim to have sustained any injury to your body or mind as a result of the incident
made the basis of this lawsuit, please state fully and completely all parts of your body or
mind you claim were injured and any pain and suffering you have had as a result of each.

Answer:

Objection – seeks a narrative more appropriate for oral deposition. The phrase
“completely and fully” is overbroad. Texas Rules do not require a party to marshal
evidence in response to an interrogatory. See Tex. R. Civ. P. 197, cmt. 1. Further, this
request is also unreasonably cumulative or duplicative, or is obtainable from some
other source that is more convenient, less burdensome, or less expensive. TRCP
192.4(a). Plaintiff further objects to this request to the extent that it calls for an
expert’s opinion.

Subject to the foregoing objections – and without waiving them – Plaintiff responds
as follows:

See Plaintiff’s response 194.2(j) and all supplements thereto, which is incorporated
herein as if set out in full. Additionally, Plaintiff is producing the discharge
paperwork from Dell Seton Medical Center and the Pharmaceutical Pay Summary
and Med Pay Summary from Optum on behalf of United Healthcare, which identify
some of her injuries.

As of the date of this response, Plaintiff’s continues to experience pain in multiple

areas of her body, including her back, both arms, her ankle. The constant pain
prevents her from doing normal day-to-day activities, for example such as
household chores like washing dishes. Plaintiff is unable to drive for long periods of

Page 6 of 33
time. Plaintiff is not able to do the activities she normally enjoys such as golfing with
friends. Some days, the pain is so bad that Plaintiff is unable to get out of bed.

As noted on the Dell discharge paperwork, Plaintiff sustained a laceration on her

head (and subsequently had to have her hair cut very short), fractured rib,
fractured right ankle, lumbar burst fracture, sternal fracture, and thoracic
vertebral fracture. As her medical records will further detail, Plaintiff also suffered
injuries to her teeth (including a chipped tooth), bruising to her eyes, and muscle
and joint pain in both arms.

Regarding “pain and suffering”, Plaintiff’s personal and professional life have been
significantly affected by the incident in almost every respect. A few examples of this
include the daily pain that persists in connection with all of her injuries, and the
disfigurement of her body. Plaintiff wears a hat daily now, because of the large
unsightly laceration on her scalp. Plaintiff is frustrated that she cannot do many of
the things that she could do before the incident, including both every-day activities
such as walking or sitting for durations of time. Plaintiff feels intense feelings of
fear, embarrassment, sadness and uncertainty that she never felt before the
incident. There are days when Plaintiff does not want to get out of bed.

Plaintiff reserves the right to supplement this response and to testify in greater
detail at oral deposition and at the time of trial.

Page 7 of 33
Exhibit JJ
 ORDINANCE NO. 20130606-089

AN ORDINANCE REPEALING AND REPLACING ARTICLE 1 OF CITY CODE

CHAPTER 25-12 TO ADOPT THE 2012 INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE
AND LOCAL AMENDMENTS.

BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN:

PART 1. Article 1, Division 1 {Building Code) of City Code Chapter 25-12 {Technical
Codes) is repealed and replaced with a new Article 1, Division 1, to read as follows:
ARTICLE L BUILDING CODE.
Division 1. International Building Code and Local Amendments
§ 25-12-1 BUILDING CODE.
(A) The 2012 International Building Code published by the Intemational Code
Council is adopted and incorporated into this section with deletions and
amendments in Subsection (B) and Section 25-12-3 {Local Amendments to
the Building Code).
(B) The following provisions of the 2012 Intemational Building Code are
deleted. All subsections contained within a deleted section or subsection are
also deleted, even if not specifically listed below.
Sec. 101.2 Sec. 101.4.1 Sec 101.4.2 Sec. 101.4.3
Sec. 103 Sec. 104.10.1 Sec. 105.1.1 Sec. 105.1.2
Sec. 105.2 Sec. 105.3.2 Sec. 105.5 Sec. 107.2.5
Sec. 110.3.1 Sec 110.3.3 Sec. 110.3.5 Sec. 110.3.7
Sec. 110.3.10.1 Sec. 112.3 Sec. 113 Sec. 305.2
Sec. 305.2.2 Sec. 305.2.3 Sec. 308.3.1 Sec. 308.3.2
Sec. 308.4 Sec. 308.4.1 Sec. 308.6 Sec. 308.6.1
Sec. 308.6.3 Sec. 308.6.4 Sec. 310.3 Sec. 310.5.1
Sec. 403.2.1 Sec. 403.2.1.1 Sec. 403.2.1.2 Sec. 403.3
Sec. 403.5.3.1 Sec. 406.4.4 Sec. 406.5.7 Sec. 414.1.3
Sec. 501.2 Sec. 503.1.1 Sec. 507.2 Sec. 507.3
Sec. 510.4 Sec. 510.6 Sec. 713.14.1 Sec. 714.4.1.1.2

Page 1 of 87
 Sec. 718.5 Sec. 901.5 Sec. 903.2.6 Sec. 903.3.1.2.1
Sec. 903.3.1.3 Sec.903.3.5.2 Sec. 903.3.6 Sec. 904.9
Sec. 904.11 Sec. 905.1 Sec 905.3.1 Sec. 905.3.4.1
Sec. 905.4 Sec. 905.5.3 Sec. 906.1 Sec. 907.2
Sec. 907.2.7 Sec. 907.2.8.1 Sec. 907.2.8.2 Sec. 907.2.9
Sec. 907.2.9.1 Sec. 907.2.9.2 Sec. 907.2.13.2 Sec. 907.4.1
Sec. 907.5.2.3.4 Sec. 907.6.5 Sec. 909 Sec. 912.1
Sec. 912.3 Sec. 912.3.1 Table 1004.1.2 Sec. 1005.3.1
Sec. 1005.3.2 Sec. 1007.3 Sec. 1008.1.2 Sec. 1008.1.4.3
Sec. 1008.1.9.7 Sec. 1008.1.9.8 Sec. 1021.2 Table 1021.2(1)
Table 1021.2(2) Sec. 1015.2.1 Sec. 1018.4 Sec. 1026.3
Sec. 1101.1 Sec. 1101.2 Sec. 1104.1 Sec. 1106.6
Sec. 1107.6.1.2 Sec. 1107.6.2.1.2 Sec. 1107.6.2.2 Sec. 1107.6.3
Sec. 1107.6.4.2 Sec. 1109.15 Sec. 1301 Sec. 1507.8
Sec. 1507.8.1 Sec. 1507.8.1.1 Sec. 1507.8.2 Sec. 1507.8.3
Sec. 1507.8.3.1 Table 1507.8 Sec. 1507.8.4 Sec. 1507.8.5
Table 1507.8.5 Sec. 1507.8.6 Sec. 1507.8.7 Table 1507.8.7
Sec. 1507.8.8 Sec. 1507.9 Sec. 1507.9.1 Sec. 1507.9.1.1
Sec. 1507.9.2 Sec. 1507.9.3 Sec. 1507.9.3.1 Sec. 1507.9.4
Sec. 1507.9.5 Sec. 1507.9.6 Table 1507.9.6 Sec. 1507.9.7
Sec. 1507.9.8 Sec. 1507.9.9 Sec. 1603.1.3 Sec. 1603.1.4
Sec. 1607.8.1 Sec. 1607.10.2 Sec. 1612 Sec. 1704.2.3
Sec. 2407.1 Sec. 3102.1 Sec. 3109.3 Sec. 3201.1
Sec. 3202.1 Sec. 3202.2.1 Sec. 3202.3.3 Chapter 34
(C) The city clerk shall file a copy of the 2012 Intemational Building Code with
the official ordinances of the City.

§ 25-12-2 CITATIONS TO THE BUILDING CODE.

In the City Code, "Building Code" means the 2012 Intemational Building Code
adopted by Section 25-12-1 {Building Code), as amended by Section 25-12-1 {Building
Code) Subsection (B) and Section 25-12-3 {Local Amendments to the Building Code).

Page 2 of 87
§ 25-12-3 LOCAL AMENDMENTS TO THE BUILDING CODE.
The following provisions are local amendments to the 2012 Intemational Building
Code. Each provision in this section is a substitute for the identically numbered
provision deleted by Section 25-12-1(B) {Building Code) or is an addition to the 2012
Intemational Building Code.
101.2 Scope. The provisions of the Building Code shall apply to the constmction,
alteration, addition, relocation, enlargement, replacement, repair, equipment, use and
occupancy, including a change in occupancy, location, maintenance, removal, and
demolition of every building or stmcture or any appurtenances connected or attached to
such buildings or stmctures.
Exceptions:
1. Detached one- and two-family dwellings and multiple single-family
dwellings (townhouses) not more than three stories above grade plane
in height with a separate means of egress and their accessory
stmctures shall comply with the Intemational Residential Code.
2. Existing buildings undergoing repair, alteration, additions, relocation,
or a change of use shall comply with the 2012 Intemational Existing
Building Code as adopted and incorporated into the City Code.
101.4.1 Gas. The provisions of the Intemational Fuel Gas Code and the Plumbing Code
shall apply to the installation of gas piping from the point of delivery, gas appliances, and
related accessories as covered in this code. The Plumbing Code supersedes the
Intemational Fuel Gas Code to the extent of conflict. These requirements apply to gas
piping systems extending from the point of delivery to the inlet connections of appliances
and the installation and operation of residential and commercial gas appliances and
related accessories.
101.4.2 Mechanical. The provisions of the Intemational Mechanical Code and the
Mechanical Code shall apply to the installation, alterations, repairs, and replacement of
mechanical systems, including equipment, appliances, fixtures, fittings, and/or
appurtenances, including ventilating, heating, cooling, air conditioning, and refiigeration
systems, incinerators, and other energy related systems. The Mechanical Code
supersedes the Intemational Mechanical Code to the extent of conflict.
101.4.3 Plumbing. The provisions of the Intemational Plumbing Code and the Plumbing
Code shall apply to the installation, alteration, repairs, and replacement of plumbing
systems, including equipment, appliances, fixtures, fittings, and appurtenances, and
Page 3 of 87
where connected to a water or sewage system and all aspects of a medical gas system.
The Plumbing Code supersedes the Intemational Plumbing Code to the extent of conflict.
The provisions of the Intemational Private Sewage Disposal Code and the Plumbing
Code shall apply to private sewage disposal systems. The Plumbing Code supersedes the
International Private Sewage Code to the extent of conflict.
103 Building official. The City Manager shall appoint a building official to administer
and interpret this Code. The building official may appoint one or more deputy building
officials.
105.2 Work exempt from permit. Exemptions from permit requirements of this code
shall not be deemed to grant authorization for any work to be done in any manner in
violation of the provisions of this code or any other laws or ordinances of this
jurisdiction. Permits shall not be required for the following:

Building:

1. One-story detached accessory stmctures used as tool and storage

sheds, playhouses, and similar uses, provided the floor area is not
greater than 120 square feet (11 m^); provided they are not located
within a flood hazard area.

2. Fences not over 7 feet (2134 mm) high; provided they are not located
within a flood hazard area.

3. Oil derricks; provided they are not located within a flood hazard area.

4. Retaining walls that are not over 4 feet (1219 mm) in height measured
from the bottom of the footing to the top of the wall, unless supporting
a surcharge or impounding Class I, II or IIIA liquids; provided they
are not located within a flood hazard area.

5. Water tanks supported directly on grade if the capacity is not greater

than 5,000 gallons (18 925 L) and the ratio of height to diameter or
width is not greater than 2:1; provided they are not located within a
flood hazard area.

6. Sidewalks and driveways not more than 30 inches (762 mm) above
adjacent grade, and not over any basement or story below and are not
part of an accessible route; provided they are not located within a
flood hazard area.

Page 4 of 87
 7. Painting, papering, tiling, carpeting, cabinets, counter tops, and
similar finish work.

8. Temporary motion picture, television, and theater stage sets and

scenery.

9. Prefabricated swimming pools accessory to a Group R-3 occupancy

that are less than 24 inches (610 mm) deep, are not greater than 5,000
gallons (18,925 L) and are installed entirely above ground; provided
they are not located within a flood hazard area.

10. Shade cloth stmctures constmcted for nursery or agricultural

purposes, not including service systems; provided they are not located
within a flood hazard area.

11. Swings and other playground equipment accessory to detached one-

and two-family dwellings; provided they are not located within a
flood hazard area.

12. Window awnings in Group R-3 and U occupancies, supported by an

exterior wall that do not project more than 54 inches (1,372 mm) from
the exterior wall and do not require additional support.

13. Nonfixed and movable fixtures, cases, racks, counters, and partitions
not over 5 feet 9 inches (1,753 mm) in height.

14. Repair to gypsum board that is not part of afire-resistance-ratedwall,

a shear assembly, or part of a shower or water closet surround;
provided it is limited to a maximum of 32 square feet.

Electrical:

Repairs and maintenance: Minor repair work, including the replacement of

lamps or the connection of approved portable electrical equipment to
approved permanently installed receptacles.

Radio and television transmitting stations: The provisions of this code are
not applicable to electrical equipment used for radio and television
transmissions, but do apply to equipment and wiring for a power supply and
the installations of towers and antennas.

Page 5 of 87
 Temporary testing systems: A permit shall not be required for the
installation of any temporary system required for the testing or servicing of
electrical equipment or apparatus.

Gas:

1. Portable heating appliance.

2. Replacement of any minor part that does not alter approval of

equipment or make such equipment unsafe.

Mechanical:

1. Portable heating appliance.

2. Portable ventilation equipment.

3. Portable cooling unit.

4. Steam, hot or chilled water piping within any heating or cooling

equipment regulated by this code.

5. Replacement of any part that does not alter its approval or make it
unsafe.

6. Portable evaporative cooler.

7. Self-contained refiigeration system containing 10 pounds (5 kg) or

less of refiigerant and actuated by motors of 1 horsepower (746 W) or
less.

Plumbing:

1. The stopping of leaks in drains, water, soil, waste or vent pipe,

provided, however, that if any concealed trap, drain pipe, water, soil,
waste or vent pipe becomes defective and it becomes necessary to
remove and replace the same with new material, such work shall be
considered as new work and a permit shall be obtained and inspection
made as provided in this code.

Page 6 of87
 2. The clearing of stoppages or the repairing of leaks in pipes, valves, or
fixtures and the removal and reinstallation of water closets, provided
such repairs do not involve or require the replacement or
rearrangement of valves, pipes or fixtures.

105.5 Time Limitation on Application; Permit Expiration and Reactivation. Time

limits on permit applications and requirements for permit expiration and reactivation,
including a review fee for expired permits, are set forth in City Code Chapter 25-12,
Article 13 {Administration of Technical Codes).

105.8 Transfer of permit. The building official is authorized to establish a building

permit transfer poUcy.
107.2.2.3 Fire protection at penetrations. Deferred submittal shop drawings and
schedules that are submitted shall indicate the fire protective assemblies proposed for
installation at all penetrations through fire and smoke constmction in accordance with
Sections 714 {Penetrations) and 715 {Fire-Resistant Joint Systems).
107.2.5 Site plan. The constmction documents submitted with the application for permit
shall be accompanied by a site plan showing to scale the size and location of new
constmction and existing stmctures on the site, distances from lot lines, the established
street grades and the proposed finished grades and, as applicable, flood hazard areas,
floodways, and design flood elevations: and it shall be drawn in accordance with an
accurate boundary line survey. In the case of demolition, the site plan shall show
constmction to be demolished and the location and size of existing stmctures and
constmction that are to remain on the site or plot. For a building or stmcture involving
below-grade constmction, the site plan shall show the location of proposed earth
retention system components allowed under Section 3202.1.4 {Earth Retention System
Components). The building official is authorized to waive or modify the requirement for
a site plan when the application for permit is for alteration or repair or when otherwise
warranted.
108.5 Temporary earth retention systems. Temporary earth retention system
components used to facilitate below-grade constmction of a building or stmcture shall
conform to Sections 1811 {Earth Retention Systems) and Section 3202.1.4 {Earth
retention system components).
109.7 Plan review fees. An applicant must pay a plan review fee, adopted by separate
ordinance, when plans and specifications are submitted for review under Section 107
{Submittal Documents). The building official shall compute the building plan review fees
using the total value of all constmction work for which the permit is issued as well as the
value of all finish work, painting, roofing, electrical, plumbing, heating, air conditioning,
elevators, fire-extinguishing systems, and other permanent equipment. The building
Page 7 of87
official shall charge an additional plan review fee if plans are incomplete or changed so
as to require additional plan review. The plan review fees referenced in this section are in
addition to the permit fees referenced in Section 109.1 {Payment of fees).
110.3.1 Building pre-construction inspection. This is the first inspection conducted.
The inspector verifies the permits that were issued for work at a site and meets with the
contractor or owner at the site to review plans and identify potential issues. The inspector
notifies the contractor of the inspector's work hours and identifies required inspections.
110.3.1.2 Layout Inspection. A layout inspection shall be made after all foundation
forms have been erected and are in place, but before any concrete is placed.
110.3.1.3 Footing and foundation inspection. Footing and foundation inspections shall
be made after excavations for footings are complete and any required reinforcing steel is
in place. For concrete foundations, any required forms shall be in place prior to
inspection. Materials for the foundation shall be on the job, except where concrete is
ready mixed in accordance with ASTM C 94, the concrete need not be on the job.
110.3.1.3.1 Lowest floor elevation. In flood hazard areas, before placement of the lowest
floor, including the basement, and prior to fiirther vertical constmction, the elevation
certification required in Section 1612.5 {Flood hazard documentation) shall be submitted
to and approved by the building official.

110.3.5 Lath and gypsum board inspection. Lath and gypsum board inspections shall
be made after lathing and gypsum board, interior and exterior, is in place, but before any
plastering is applied or gypsum board joints and fasteners are taped and finished.
Exception: Gypsum board that is not part of a fire-resistance-rated wall, a shear
assembly, or part of a shower or water closet surround; provided it is limited to a
maximum of 32 square feet.
110.3.7 Energy efficiency inspections. Inspections shall be made to determine
compliance with the energy efficiency requirements of the Energy Code, as adopted by
Chapter 25-12, Article 12 (Energy Code), and shall include, but not be limited to,
inspections for: envelope insulation R and U values, fenestration U value, duct system R
value, and HVAC and water-heating equipment efficiency.
110.3.10.1 Flood hazard documentation. If located in a flood hazard area,
documentation of the elevation of the lowest floor as required in Section 1612.5 shall be
submitted to and approved by the building official prior to the final inspection.
110.7 Inspectors. An inspection conducted under this code shall be performed by an
inspector employed by the City or by a non-city employee approved by the building
official. A person hired by the City as a building inspector after the effective date of the
Building Code, must attain certification as a Commercial Building Inspector and as a
Page 8 of87
Commercial Energy Inspector within one year of the person's date of employment under
the certification program established by the Intemational Code Council.
111.5 Maintenance of records. The building owner, or the owner's authorized agent,
must maintain a copy of the certificate of occupancy on the premises and provide it to an
authorized official on request.
112.3 Authority to disconnect service utilities. The building official may authorize the
disconnection of utility service to the building, stmcture, or service system regulated by
this code and the codes referenced under this section.

112.3.1 Circumstances for which utilities may be disconnected. The building official
may authorize the disconnection of utilities if the building official determines that:
1. disconnection is necessary to eliminate an immediate hazard to life or
property;
2. an owner or occupant is in violation of a stop work order;
3. electrical work has been installed without a permit;
4. plumbing or gas piping has been installed without a permit; or
5. development does not comply with Title 25 {Land Development).
112.3.2 Notice. This section prescribes notice requirements for disconnection of utilities.
112.3.2.1 Disconnection because of an immediate threat to life or property. If
disconnection of utilities is necessary to eliminate an immediate hazard to life, the
building official shall notify the serving utility and whenever possible, the owner and
occupant of the building, stmcture, or service system of the decision prior to taking any
action. If not notified prior to disconnecting, the owner or occupant of the building,
stmcture or service system shall be notified in writing, by certified mail, retum receipt
requested, as soon as practical thereafter.
112.3.2.2 Disconnection for a reason other than an immediate threat to life or
property. If the disconnection of utilities is for a reason other than to eliminate an
immediate hazard to life, the building official shall give notice according to this section.
Notice shall first be provided for the violation in accordance with the applicable section
of City Code Title 25 {Land Development). The notice of violation shall include a
statement that the building official may authorize the disconnection of utilities if the
violation is not cured within the timeframe established in the notice of violation. If the
owner or occupant fails to comply with the notice of violation, the building official may
issue a notice to the owner and occupant stating that utilities to the property will be
disconnected not less than one week after the date that the notice is mailed. The notice
must identify each utility that will be disconnected.
Page 9 of 87
SECTION 113 BUILDING AND FIRE CODE BOARD OF APPEALS
Regulations regarding the Building and Fire Code Board of Appeals are found in Chapter
2-1 of the City Code.
SECTION 202 DEFINITIONS
202.1 Supplemental Definitions. The definitions in this subsection apply throughout
this code and amend or supplement the definitions in Section 202 {General Definitions)
in the 2012 Intemational Building Code, as published.
BALCONY, EXTERIOR. An exterior floor projected from and supported by a
stmcture without additional independent supports.
BASE FLOOD. A flood having a 1-percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any
given year (100-year flood).
BED AND BREAKFAST. A private residence having a limited number of sleeping
rooms which are available for transient guests who have paid for accommodations. For
the different classifications of Bed and Breakfast, refer to LDC 25-2-781 (Bed and
Breakfast Residential Use Structures Classified).
DECK. An exterior floor supported on at least two opposing sides by an adjacent
stmcture, and/or post, piers or other independent supports.
DESIGN FLOOD. The flood associated with an area with a flood plain subject to a 1-
percent or greater chance of flooding in any year (100-yearflood)based on projected full
development in accordance with the City of Austin Drainage Criteria Manual.
DESIGN FLOOD ELEVATION. The elevation of the "design flood relative to the City
of Austin vertical datum standard.
EXISTING CONSTRUCTION. Any buildings and stmcUires for which the start of
construction commenced before September 2, 1981. "Existing constmction" is also
referred to as "existing stmctures."
FLOOD H A Z A R D A R E A . The greater of the following two areas:
1. An area within a flood plain subject to a 1-percent or greater chance of
flooding in any year (100-year flood); or
2. An area with a flood plain subject to a 1-percent or greater chance of
flooding in any year (100-yearflood)based on projected full development in
accordance with the City of Austin Drainage Criteria Manual.

FLOODWAY. The channel of the river, creek or other watercourse and the adjacent land
areas that must be reserved in order to discharge the base flood without cumulatively
Page 10 of 87
 1
increasing the water surface elevation more than a designated height. An area with a
flood plain subject to a 4-percent or greater chance of flooding in any year (25-year
flood) based on projected full development in accordance with the City of Austin
Drainage Criteria Manual.
NEW CONSTRUCTION (for Section 1612 Flood Loads). Stmctures for which
the start of constmction commenced on or after September 2, 1981 and includes any
subsequent improvements to such stmctures and improvements to all existing
constmction.
R E G U L A T O R Y FLOOD DATUM. An established plane of reference from which
elevations and depth of flooding may be determined for specific locations of the
floodplain. It is the water level of the design flood plus afreeboardfactor of one foot.
Design flood plus freeboard equals Regulatory Flood Datum.
START OF CONSTRUCTION. The date of permit issuance for new constmction and
substantial improvements to existing stmctures, provided the actual start of constmction,
repair, reconstmction, rehabilitation, addition, placement, or other improvement is within
180 days after the date of issuance. The actual start of constmction means the first
placement of permanent constmction of a building (including a manufactured home) on a
site, such as the pouring of a slab or footings, installation of pilings, or constmction of
columns. Permanent constmction does not include land preparation (such as clearing,
excavation, grading, or filling), the installation of streets or walkways, excavation for a
basement, footings, piers or foundations, the erection of temporary forms, or the
installation of accessory buildings such as garages or sheds not occupied as dwelling
units or not part of the main building. For a substantial improvement, the actual "start of
constmction" means the first alteration of any wall, ceiling, floor or other stmctural part
of a building, whether or not that alteration affects the external dimensions of the
building.
SUBSTANTIAL IMPROVEMENT. For the purpose of determining compliance with
the flood hazard management provisions of this code, substantial improvement means
any repair, alteration, reconstmction, rehabilitation, addition, or improvement of a
building or stmcture, the cost of which equals or exceeds 50 percent of the current market
value of the stmcture before the improvement or repair is started or, if the stmcture has
been damaged and is being restored, before the damage occurred. The cost used in the
substantial improvement determination shall be cumulative cost of all previous additions
or improvements for a specific building or stmcture occurring during the immediate 10-
year period. If the stmcture has sustained substantial damage, any repairs are considered
substantial improvement regardless of the actual repair work performed. The term does
not, however, include either:

Page 11 of 87
 1. Any project for improvement of a building required to correct existing
health, sanitary or safety code violations identified by the building official
and that are the minimum necessary to assure safe living conditions.
2. Any alteration of a historic stmcture provided that the alteration will not
preclude the stmcture's continued designation as a historic stmcture.
3. An aesthetic improvement if the value of the improvement does not exceed
10 percent of the current market value of the building or stmcture.
202.1.2 Deleted Definitions. The definition of FLOOD HAZARD AREA SUBJECT TO
HIGH VELOCITY WAVE ACTION is deleted from Section 202 {General Definitions)
in the 2012 Intemational Building Code, as published.
305.2 Group E, day care facilities. This group includes buildings and stmctures or
portions thereof occupied by more than six children older than 2 Vi years of age who
receive educational, supervision, or personal care services for fewer than 24 hours per
day.
305.2.2 Six or fewer children. A facility having six or fewer children receiving such
day care shall be classified as part of the primary occupancy.
305.2.3 Six or fewer children in a dwelling unit. A facility such as the above within a
dwelling unit and having six or fewer children receiving such day care shall be classified
as a Group R-3 occupancy or shall comply with the Intemational Residential Code,
provided an automatic sprinkler system is installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.3
(NFPA 13D sprinkler systems) or with Section P2904 of the 2012 Intemational
Residential Code as published.
308.3.1 Six or fewer persons receiving care. A facility such as above with six or fewer
persons receiving such care shall be classified as Group R-3 or shall comply with the
Intemational Residential Code, provided an automatic sprinkler system is installed in
accordance with Section 903.3.1.3 (NFPA 13D sprinkler systems) or with Section P2904
of the 2012 Intemational Residential Code as published.
308.3.2 Seven to sixteen persons receiving care. A facility such as the above, housing
not fewer than seven and not more than 16 persons receiving such care, shall be classified
as Group R-4.
308.4 Institutional Group 1-2. This occupancy shall include buildings and stmctures
used for medical care on a 24-hour basis for more than six persons who are incapable of
self-preservation. This group shall include, but not be limited to, the following:
Child care facilities
Detoxification facilities
Hospitals
Page 12 of 87
 Nursing homes
Psychiatric hospitals
308.4.1 Six or fewer persons receiving care. A facility such as the above with six or
fewer persons receiving such care shall be classified as Group R-3 or shall comply with
the Intemational Residential Code, provided an automatic sprinkler system is installed in
accordance with Section 903.3.1.3 (NFPA 13D sprinkler systems) or with Section P2904
of the 2012 Intemational Residential Code as published.

308.6 Institutional Group 1-4, day care facilities. This group shall include buildings
and stmctures occupied by more than six persons of any age who receive custodial care
for fewer than 24 hours per day by persons other than parents or guardians, relative by
blood, marriage, or adoption, and in a place other than the home of the person cared for.
This group shall include, but not be limited to, the following:
Adult day care
Child day care
308.6.1 Classification as Group E. A child care facility that provides care for more than
six but no more than 100 children 2 years or less of age, where the rooms in which the
children are cared for are located on a level of exit discharge serving such rooms and
each of these child care rooms has an exit door directly to the exterior, shall be classified
as Group E.
308.6.3 Six of fewer persons receiving care. A facility having six or fewer persons
receiving custodial care shall be classified as part of the primary occupancy.
308.6.4 Six or fewer persons receiving are in a dwelling unit. A facility such as the
above within a dwelling unit and having six or fewer persons receiving custodial care
shall be classified as a Group R-3 occupancy or shall comply with the Intemational
Residential Code, provided an automatic sprinkler system is installed in accordance with
Section 903.3.1.3 (NFPA 13D sprinkler systems) or with Section P2904 of the 2012
Intemational Residential Code as published.
310.3 Residential Group R-1. Residential occupancies containing sleeping units where
the occupants are primarily transient in nature, including:
Boarding houses (transient) with more than 10 occupants
Congregate living facilities (transient) with more than 10 occupants
Hotels (transient)
Motels (transient)
Bed and Breakfasts
Page 13 of 87
 Exception: Compliance with Section 903.2.8 (Group R) is not required for a
single stmcture Group R-1 Bed and Breakfast occupancy (see City Code Section
25-2-781) when the owner resides within the Bed and Breakfast occupancy and
provided that:
1. the stmcture is a detached single family home that was legally
constmcted and occupied as a single family residence prior to January
1,2006,
2. the total number of sleeping rooms has not been increased after
January 1, 2006,
3. the residence is protected by a monitored residential style fire/security
system with an appropriate automatic smoke detection system
installed throughout the residence with occupant notification devices
in accordance with Section 901.5{0ccupant notification systems), and
4. The residential style fire/security system must be inspected, tested and
maintained in accordance with Section 907.8 {Inspection, testing and
maintenance.)
310.5.1 Care facilities within a dwelling. Care facilities for six or fewer persons
receiving care that are within a single-family dwelling are permitted to comply with the
Intemational Residential Code, provided an automatic sprinkler system is installed in
accordance with Section 903.3.1.3 (NFPA 13D sprinkler systems) or with Section P2904
of the 2012 Intemational Residential Code as published.
Exception: Compliance with Section 903.3.1.3 (NFPA 13D sprinkler systems) is
not required for adult care and child care facilities that are within the proprietor's
single-family home; provided that the home was constmcted and occupied as a
residence prior to October 1, 2010.
403.2.1 Reduction in fire-resistance rating. Thefire-resistance-rating reductions listed
in Section 403.2.1.1 {Type of construction) shall be allowed in buildings that have
sprinkler control valves equipped with supervisory initiating devices and water-flow
initiating devices for each floor.
403.2.1.1 Type of construction. The following reductions in the minimum constmction
type allowed in Table 601 shall be allowed as provided in Section 403.2.1 {Reduction in
fire-resistance rating):
1. Type l A constmction shall be allowed to be reduced to Type IB, except in
buildings over 12 stories or over 160 feet high.
2. In other than Groups F-1, M , and S-1, Type IB constmction shall be allowed
to be reduced to Type IIA.
Page 14 of 87
 3. The height and area limitations of the reduced constmction type shall be
allowed to be the same as for the original constmction type.
403.3 Automatic sprinkler system. Buildings and stmctures shall be equipped
throughout with an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1
{NFPA 13 sprinkler system) and a secondary water supply where required by Section
403.3.2 {Water supply to requiredfire pumps).

Exception: An automatic sprinkler system shall not be required in spaces or areas

of

1. Stand-alone open parking garages in accordance with Section 406.5

{Open parking garages).

2. Telecommunications equipment buildings used exclusively for

telecommunications equipment, associated electrical power
distribution equipment, batteries and standby engines, provided that
those spaces or areas are equipped throughout with an automatic fire
detection system in accordance with Section 907.2 {Where required -
new buildings and structures) and are separated from the remainder of
the building by not less than 1-hour fire barriers constmcted in
accordance with Section 707 {Fire Barriers) or not less than 2-hour
horizontal assemblies constmcted in accordance with Section 711
{Horizontal Assemblies), or both.

403.5.3.1 Stairway communications system. A telephone or other two-way

communications system connected to an approved constantly attended station shall be
provided at not less than every floor in each required stairway if the doors to the stairway
are capable of being locked.
Exception: The stairway communication system is not required in high rise
buildings when all the following conditions are met;
1. Area of refuge communication system terminal, installed and
maintained per Intemational Building Code Sec. 1007.6.3 {Two-way
communication), is located immediately adjacent to each floor level
landing.
2. The area of refuge communication terminal is connected to an
approved constantly attended station.
3. The door between the stair and the vestibule (area of refuge) cannot be
locked.

Page 15 of 87
 4. An approved sign is provided at each floor level landing inside the
stairwell.
403.7 Fire department communication systems. A two-way fire department
communications system connected to an approved constantly attended station shall be
provided at every floor in each required stairway where the door to the stairway is locked.
406.4.4 Ramps. Vehicle ramps shall not serve as an exit element. Vehicle ramps that
serve as part of an accessible route shall not exceed a slope of 1:20 (5 percent).

406.5.7 Means of egress. Where persons other than parking attendants are permitted,
open parking garages shall meet the means of egress requirements of Chapter 10 {Means
of Egress). Lifts shall be permitted to be installed for use of employees only, provided
they are completely enclosed by noncombustible materials.

414.1.3 Information required. Separate floor plans shall be submitted for buildings and
stmctures with an occupancy in Group H, identifying the locations of anticipated contents
and processes, to reflect the nature of each occupied portion of every building and
stmcture. The floor plan shall identify the hazards associated with the contents and
processes. A report identifying hazardous materials including, but not limited to,
materials representing hazards that are classified in Group H to be stored or used, shall be
submitted and the methods of protection from such hazards shall be indicated on the
constmction documents. The building official or fire marshal may also require a technical
opinion that addresses the adequacy of the protective measures provided. The opinion
and report shall be prepared by a qualified individual, firm or corporation approved by
the building official and fire marshal, and shall be provided without charge to the City of
Austin.

501.2 Premises identification. Approved numbers or addresses shall be provided on

new buildings in a position that is clearly visible and legible from the street or roadway
fronting the property. Letters or numbers shall comply with the requirements set out in
the Fire Code and in the Fire Protection Criteria Manual. When required by the fire code
official, address numbers shall be provided in additional approved locations to facilitate
emergency response.
503.1.1 Special industrial occupancies. In other than H occupancies, buildings and
stmctures designed to house special industrial processes that require large areas and
unusual building heights to accommodate craneways or special machinery and
equipment, including, among others, rolling mills; stmctural metal fabrication shops and
foundries; or the production and distribution of electric, gas or steam power, shall be
exempt from the building height and area limitations of Table 503.

Page 16 of87
507.3 Sprinklered, one story. The area of a Group B, F, M or S building no more than
one story above grade plane of any constmction type, or the area of a Group A-4 building
no more than one story above grade plane of other than Type V constmction, shall not be
limited where the building is provided with an automatic sprinkler system throughout in
accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 {NFPA 13 sprinkler systems), and is surrounded and
adjoined by public ways or yards not less than 60 feet (18,288 mm) in width.
Exceptions:
1. Buildings and stmctures of Type I and II constmction for rack storage
facilities which do not have access by the public shall not be limited
in height provided that such buildings conform to the requirements of
Sections 507.3 {Sprinklered, one story), 903.3.1.1 {NFPA 13 sprinkler
systems) and Chapter 32 {High-Piled Combustible Storage) of the
Intemational Fire Code.
2. The automatic sprinkler system shall not be required in the areas
occupied for indoor participant sports such as tennis, skating,
swimming, and equestrian activities in occupancies in Group A-4
provided that:
2.1. Exit doors directly to the outside are provided for occupants of
the participant sports areas;
2.2. The building is equipped with a fire alarm system with manual
fire alarm boxes installed in accordance with Section 907 {Fire
Alarm and Detection Systems); and
2.3. Accessory and ancillary spaces shall be fully protected in
accordance with NFPA 13.
510.4 Parking beneath Group R. Where a maximum one-story above grade plane
Group S-2 parking garage, enclosed or open, or combination thereof, of Type I
constmction, with grade entrance, is provided under a building of Group R, the number
of stories to be used in determining the minimum type of constmction shall be measured
from the floor above such a parking area. The floor assembly between the parking garage
and the Group R above shall comply with the type of constmction required for the
parking garage and shall also provide afire-resistancerating not less than 3 hours.
713.14.1 Elevator lobby. An enclosed elevator lobby shall be provided at each floor
where an elevator shaft enclosure connects more than three stories. The lobby enclosure
shall separate the elevator shaft enclosure doors from each floor by fire partitions. In
addition to the requirements in Section 708 {Fire Partitions) for fire partitions, doors
protecting openings in the elevator lobby enclosure walls shall also comply with Section
716.5.3 {Door assemblies in corridors and smoke barriers) as required for corridor walls
Page 17 of 87
and penetrations of the elevator lobby enclosure by ducts and air transfer openings shall
be protected as required for corridors in accordance with Section 717.5.4.1 {Corridors).
Elevator lobbies shall have at least one means of egress complying with Chapter 10
{Means of Egress) and other provisions within this code.
Exceptions:
1. Enclosed elevator lobbies are not required at the level(s) of exit
discharge, provided the level(s) of exit discharge is equipped with an
automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1
{NFPA 13 sprinkler systems).
2. Elevators not required to be located in a shaft in accordance with
Section 708.2 {Shaft enclosure required) are not required to have
enclosed elevator lobbies.
3. Enclosed elevator lobbies are not required where additional doors are
provided at the hoistway opening in accordance with Section 3002.6
{Prohibited doors). Such doors shall comply with the smoke and draft
control door assembly requirements in Section 716.5.3.1 {Smoke and
draft control}, when tested in accordance with UL 1784 without an
artificial bottom seal.
4. Enclosed elevator lobbies are not required where the building is
protected by an automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance
with Section 903.3.1.1 {NFPA 13 sprinkler systems) or 903.3.1.2
{NFPA 13R sprinkler systems). This exception shall not apply to the
following:
4.1. Group 1-2 occupancies;
4.2. Group 1-3 occupancies; and
4.3. Elevators serving floor levels over 75 feet (22 860 mm) above the
lowest level offiredepartment access in high-rise buildings.
Exception: Elevator lobbies shall be required for Occupant
Evacuation Elevators.
5. Smoke partitions shall be permitted in lieu of fire partitions to
separate the elevator lobby at each floor where the building is
equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system installed in
accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 {NFPA 13 sprinkler systems) or
903.3.1.2 {NFPA 13R sprinkler systems). In addition to the
requirements in Section 710 {Smoke Partitions) for smoke partitions,
doors protecting openings in the smoke partitions shall also comply
Page 18 of 87
 with Sections 711.5.2.2 {Smoke and draft control doors), 711.5.2.3
{Self- or automatic-closing doors), and 715.5.9 {Door closing) and
duct penetrations of the smoke partitions shall be protected as required
for corridors in accordance with Section 717.5.4.1 {Corridors).
Exception: Elevator lobbies shall be required for Occupant
Evacuation Elevators and Fire Service Access Elevators.
6. Enclosed elevator lobbies are not required where the elevator hoist-
way is pressurized in accordance with Section 909.21 {Elevator
hoistway pressurization alternative).
Exception: Elevator lobbies shall be required for Occupant
Evacuation Elevators and Fire Service Access Elevators.
7. Enclosed elevator lobbies are not required where the elevator serves
only open parking garages in accordance with Section 406.5 {Open
parking garages).
714.4.1.1.2 Through-penetration firestop system. Through penetrations shall be
protected by an approved through-penetration firestop system installed and tested in
accordance with ASTM E 814 or UL 1479, with a minimum positive pressure differential
of 0.01 inch of water (2.49 Pa). The system shall have an F rating/T rating of not less
than 1 hour but not less than the required rating of the floor penetrated.

Exceptions:

1. Floor penetrations contained and located within the cavity of a wall

above the floor or below the floor do not require a T rating.

2. Floor penetrations by floor drains, tub drains or shower drains contained

and located within the concealed space of a horizontal assembly do not
require a T rating.

3. Penetrations by non-ferrous conduits or pipes up to 4 inches (101.6 mm)

in diameter with the annular space protected with materials that have
been demonstrated to prevent the passage of flame and hot gasses when
the penetrations and penefrating materials are completely contained
within a fire resistive assembly consisting of an approved fire rated wall
assembly connected to an approved fire rated floor/ceiling assembly by
an approved joint.

Page 19 of 87
718.5 Combustible materials in concealed spaces in Type I or II construction.
Combustible materials shall not be permitted in concealed spaces of buildings of Type I
or II constmction.
Exceptions:
1. Combustible materials in accordance with Section 603 {Combustible
Material in Type I and II Construction).
2. Combustible materials exposed within plenums complying with
Section 602 {Plenums) of the Intemational Mechanical Code.
3. Class A interior finish materials classified in accordance with Section
803 {Wall and Ceiling Finishes).
4. Combustible piping within partitions or shaft enclosures installed in
accordance with the provisions of this code.
5. Combustible piping within concealed ceiling spaces installed in
accordance with the Intemational Mechanical Code and the
Intemational Plumbing Code.

[F]901.5 Installation acceptance testing. Fire detection and alarm systems, fire-
extinguishing systems, fire hydrant systems, fire standpipe systems, fire pump systems,
private fire service mains, and all other fire protection systems and appurtenances thereto
shall be subject to acceptance tests as contained in the installation standards and as
approved by the fire department. The fire department emergency prevention division
shall be notified before any required acceptance testing.
The conditions of approval of all Halon automatic fire-extinguishing systems shall
include (i) a demonstration of need acceptable to the fire chief detailing a critical need for
the system such as a direct effect on life safety that cannot be adequately addressed by
other types of suppression systems, and (ii) an approved method of testing that does not
include the intentional release of Halon gas.
[F]903.2.6. Group I. An automatic sprinkler system shall be provided throughout
buildings with a Group I fire area.
Exceptions:
1. An automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section
903.3.1.2 {NFPA 13R sprinkler systems) shall be permitted in Group
I-l facilities.
2. Where a building being constmcted will be within the scope of
903.3.1.3 {NFPA 13D sprinkler systems), an automatic sprinkler
Page 20 of 87
 system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.3 {NFPA 13D
sprinkler systems) shall be allowed in Group I-l facilities when in
compliance with all of the following:
2.1. A hydraulic design information sign is located on the
system riser;
2.2. Exception 1 of Section 903.4 {Sprinkler system
supervision and alarm) is not applied; and
2.3. Systems shall be maintained in accordance with the
requirements of Section 903.3.1.2 {NFPA 13R sprinkler
systems).
3. An automatic sprinkler system is not required where day care facilities
are at the level of exit discharge and where every room where care is
provided has at least one exterior exit door.
4. In buildings where Group 1-4 day care is provided on levels other than
the level of exit discharge, an automatic sprinkler system in
accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 {NFPA 13 sprinkler systems) shall
be installed on the entire floor where care is provided and all floors
between the level of care and the level of exit discharge, all floors
below the level of exit discharge,.
Exception: An automatic sprinkler system installed in
accordance with Section 903.3.1.2 {NFPA 13R sprinkler
systems) shall be allowed in Group I-l facilities.
[F]903.3.1.2.1 Balconies and decks. Sprinkler protection shall be provided for exterior
balconies, decks, and ground floor patios of dwelling units where the building is of Type
V constmction, or of Type III constmction if the balcony or deck is framed with wood;
provided there is a roof or deck above. Sidewall sprinklers that are used to protect such
areas shall be permitted to be located such that their deflectors are within 1 inch (25 mm)
to 6 inches (152 mm) below the stmctural members and a maximum distance of 14
inches (356 mm) below the deck of the exterior balconies and decks that are constmcted
of open wood joist constmction.
[F]903.3.1.2.2 Balcony closets. Sprinkler protection shall be provided for all balcony
closets.
[F]903.3.1.3 NFPA 13D sprinkler systems. Automatic sprinkler systems installed in one
and two-family dwellings. Group R-3 and R-4 congregate living facilities with 16 or
fewer residents and townhouses shall be permitted to be installed throughout in
accordance with NFPA 13D.
Page 21 of 87
[F]903.3.5.2 Water supplies designed for automatic sprinkler systems shall provide a
safety factor of ten (10) pounds per square inch gauge (PSIG) or ten (10) percent of the
minimum required residual pressure, whichever is greater. The safety factor shall be
based on the calculated system design flow and pressure.
Exception: A safety factor less than those defined in this Section may be approved
by the fire chief only if historical water supply data is available to demonstrate that
reasonable expected fluctuations will not cause the water supply to fall below the
system demand.
[F]903.3.5.3 Hose Stream Demand. The minimum calculated hose stream demand for
Type V-B and Type V - A constmction, as defined in the Building Code, shall be a
minimum of 250 Gallons Per Minute (GPM).
[F]903.3.6 Hose threads. Fire hose threads and fittings used in connection with
automatic sprinkler systems shall be approved and shall be National Standard Hose
Thread.
[F]903.3.8 Sprinkler System Flex Piping. Flex piping used in automatic sprinkler
systems shall be limited in length to a maximum of 6 feet. The extinguishing agent shall
pass through a maximum of one 6 foot section before discharging from the sprinkler
orifice (head). Approval of shop drawing submittals shall be required for all uses of flex
sprinkler piping and where more than one (1) flex piping sprinkler drop is used in a
remodel application the adequacy of the water supply shall be verified by hydraulic
calculations.
[F]904.9 Halon systems. Halogenated extinguishing systems shall be installed,
maintained, and periodically inspected and tested in accordance with NFPA 12A and
their listing. The conditions of approval of all Halon automatic fire-extinguishing
systems shall include (i) a demonstration of need acceptable to the fire chief detailing a
critical need for the system such as a direct effect on life safety that cannot be adequately
addressed by other types of suppression systems, and (ii) an approved method of testing
that does not include the intentional release of Halon gas.
[FJ904.il Commercial cooking systems. The automaticfire-extinguishingsystem for
commercial cooking systems shall be of a type recognized for protection of commercial
cooking equipment and exhaust systems of the type and arrangement protected. Each pre-
engineered automatic dry- and wet-chemical extinguishing system shall be tested in
accordance with UL 300 and listed and labeled for its intended application. Other types
of extinguishing systems shall be listed and labeled for specific use as protection for
commercial cooking operations. The system shall be installed in accordance with this
code, its listing and the manufacturer's installation instmctions. Automatic fire
suppression systems of the following types shall be installed in accordance with the
referenced standard indicated, as follows:
Page 22 of 87
 1. Carbon-dioxide extinguishing systems, NFPA 12.
2. Automatic sprinkler system, NFPA 13.
3. Foam-water sprinkler system or foam-water spray systems, NFPA 16.
4. Dry-chemical extinguishing systems, NFPA 17.
5. Wet-chemical extinguishing systems, NFPA 17A.
Exception 1: Factory-built commercial cooking recirculating systems that are
tested in accordance with UL 71 OB, and listed and installed in accordance with
Section 304.1 {General) of the Intemational Mechanical Code.
Exception 2: With the concurrence of the building official, commercial cooking
equipment used intermittently for periods which total less than 6 hours per week
may be served by a Type II ventilation hood without fixed fire suppression. A
portable fire extinguisher rated for commercial cooking applications shall be
provided.
[F]905.1 General. Standpipe systems shall be provided in new buildings and stmctures
in accordance with this section. Fire hose threads used in connection with new fire
standpipe systems shall be approved and shall be National Standard Hose Thread. Except
as otherwise approved by the fire chief, existing standpipe fire hose threads shall be
national standard hose thread. The location of fire department hose connections shall be
approved. In buildings used for high-piled combustible storage, fire protection shall be in
accordance with Chapter 32 {High-piled Combustible Storage) of the Intemational Fire
Code.
[FJ905.1.1 Hose. With the concurrence of the Building official, hoses need not be
installed or maintained on standpipes of any class when the occupancy does not provide
training in the use of standpipe hose and the employees, residents, or other regular
occupants of the occupancy are trained/instmcted to evacuate and evacuation drills are
conducted at intervals agreed on by the owner/agent and the Fire Department.
[F]905.3.1 Building height. Class III standpipe systems shall be installed throughout
buildings where the floor level of the highest story is located more than 30 feet (9,144
mm) above the lowest level of fire department vehicle access, or where the floor level of
the lowest story is located more than 30 feet (9144mm) below the highest level of fire
department vehicle access.
Exceptions:
1. Class I standpipes are allowed in buildings equipped throughout with an
automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 {NFPA 13
sprinkler systems) or 903.3.1.2 {NFPA 13R sprinkler systems).
Page 23 of 87
 2. Class I manual standpipes are allowed in open parking garages where the
highest floor is located not more than 150 feet (45,720 mm) above the
lowest level of fire department vehicle access.
3. Class I manual dry standpipes are allowed in open parking garages that are
subject to freezing temperatures, provided that additional hose connections
are located as required for Class II standpipes in accordance with Section
905.5 {Location of Class II standpipe hose connections).
4. Class I standpipes are allowed in basements equipped throughout with an
automatic sprinkler system.
5. In determining the lowest level of fire department vehicle access, it shall not
be required to consider:
5.1. Recessed loading docks for four vehicles or less, and
5.2. Conditions where topography makes access from the fire department
vehicle to the building impractical or impossible.
[FJ905.3.4.1 Hose and cabinet. If hose is installed, the IVa-inch (38 mm) hose
connections shall be equipped with sufficient lengths of P/4-inch (38 mm) hose to provide
fire protection for the stage area. Hose connections shall be equipped with an approved
adjustable fog nozzle and be mounted in a cabinet or on a rack.
[F]905.4 Location of Class I standpipe hose connections. Class I standpipe hose
connections shall be provided in all of the following locations:
1. In every required stairway, a hose connection shall be provided for each
floor level above or below grade. Hose connections shall be located at an
intermediate floor level landing between floors, unless otherwise approved
by the fire code official.
2. On each side of the wall adjacent to the exit opening of a horizontal exit.
Exception: Where floor areas adjacent to a horizontal exit are
reachable from exit stairway hose connections by a 30-foot (9,144
mm) hose stream from a nozzle attached to 100 feet (30,480 mm) of
hose, a hose connection shall not be required at the horizontal exit.
3. In every exit passageway, at the entrance from the exit passageway to other
areas of a building.
Exception: Where floor areas adjacent to an exit passageway are
reachable from exit stairway hose connections by a 30-foot (9,144
mm) hose stream from a nozzle attached to 100 feet (30,480 mm) of

Page 24 of 87
 hose, a hose connection shall not be required at the entrance from the
exit passageway to other areas of the building.
4. In covered mall buildings, adjacent to each exterior public entrance to the
mall and adjacent to each entrance from an exit passageway or exit corridor
to the mall. In open mall buildings, adjacent to each public entrance to the
mall at the perimeter line and adjacent to each entrance from an exit
passageway or exit corridor to the mall.
5. Where the roof has a slope less than four units vertical in 12 units horizontal
(33.3 percent slope), a hose connection shall be located to serve the roof or
at the highest landing of a stairway with stair access to the roof provided in
accordance with Section 1009.16 {Stairway to roof). An additional hose
connection shall be provided at the top of the most hydraulically remote
standpipe for testing purposes.
6. Where the most remote portion of a nonsprinklered floor or story is more
than 150 feet (45,720 mm) from a hose connection or the most remote
portion of a sprinklered floor or story is more than 200 feet (60,960 mm)
from a hose connection, the fire code official is authorized to require that
additional hose connections be provided in approved locations.
[F]905.5.3 Class II system hose. If installed, the minimum diameter for standpipe hose
shall be V/i inches (38 mm) and the hose shall be listed for this service.
[F]906.1 Where required. Portable fire extinguishers shall be installed in the following
locations. Before the installation of Halon fire extinguishers in new occupancies or
processes, the applicant must submit a demonstration of need acceptable to the chief
detailing a critical need for this type of extinguisher such as a direct effect on life safety
that cannot be adequately addressed by other types of extinguishing agents.
1. In all Group A, B, E, F, H, I, M , R-1, R-2, R-4 and S occupancies.
Exception: In all Group E occupancies equipped throughout with quick-
response sprinklers, portable fire extinguishers shall be required only in
locations specified in Items 2 through 6.
2. Within 30 feet (9,144 mm) of commercial cooking equipment.
3. In areas where flammable or combustible liquids are stored, used or
dispensed.
4. On each floor of stmctures under constmction, except Group R-3
occupancies, in accordance with Section 3315.1 {Where required) of the
Intemational Fire Code.

Page 25 of 87
 5. Where required by the sections indicated in Table 906.1 {Additional
Required Portable Fire Extinguisher) in the Intemational Fire Code.
6. Special-hazard areas, including but not limited to laboratories, computer
rooms and generator rooms, where required by the fire chief
[F1907.2 Where required—new buildings and structures. An approved manual,
automatic or manual and automatic fire alarm system installed in accordance with the
provisions of this code and NFPA 72 shall be provided in new buildings and stmctures in
accordance with Sections 907.2.1 {Group A) through 907.2.23 {Battery rooms) and
provide occupant notification in accordance with Section 907.6 {Installation), unless
other requirements are provided by another section of this code. The fire alarm control
panel or a full function remote annunciator shall be installed at the main entrance for use
by fire department personnel.
A minimum of one manual fire alarm box shall be provided in an approved location to
initiate a fire alarm signal for fire alarm systems employing automatic fire detectors or
water-flow detection devices. The automatic fire detectors shall be smoke detectors.
Where other sections of this code allow elimination of fire alarm boxes due to sprinklers,
a single fire alarm box shall be installed. The manual fire alarm box is required to provide
a means for fire watch personnel to initiate an alarm during a sprinkler system
impairment event. The manual fire alarm box may be located in an area that is accessible
to the public.
Exceptions:
1. The manual fire alarm box is not required for fire alarm systems dedicated to
elevator recall control and supervisory service.
2. Automatic heat detection required by this section shall not be required if
automatic sprinkler protection installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1
{NFPA 13 sprinkler systems) or 903.3.1.2 {NFPA 13R sprinkler systems) is
provided and connected to the building fire alarm system.
3. Where ambient conditions prohibit installation of automatic smoke
detection, other automatic fire detection shall be allowed.
[F]907.2.1.3 Electrical Shunt for Amplified Sound Conditions. For venues with
amplified music or sound systems, in Group A occupancies having an occupant load of
300 or more, electrical shunts shall be provided to de-energize the music or sound
systems upon alarm activation as necessary to demonstrate compliance with the audibility
requirements of NFPA 72.
[F1907.2.3.1. Common Areas Within Day Care and Child Care Facility
Occupancies. These occupancies shall be provided a fire alarm system per IFC
Page 26 of 87
Amendment Section 907.2.6.4 {Common Areas within Day Cara Occupancies), in
addition to the requirements of 907.2.3 {Group E).
[F] 907.2.6.4 Common Areas within Day Care Occupancies. Day care occupancies
shall be protected by a fire alarm system which monitors smoke detectors installed in
accordance with this section, the listing of the detectors and NFPA 72. Detectors must be
placed on each story in front of doors to the stairways and at no greater spacing than the
detector's listed spacing in the corridors of all floors containing the day care facility.
Detectors must also be installed in lounges, recreation areas and sleeping rooms in the
day care occupancy and as required by the Building Code. Alarms shall be visible and
audible throughout the day care facility.
Exceptions:
1. Day cares housed within a single room.
2. A Group E day care housed within and serving the students of an E
occupancy, such as an after school program, summer program, or
similar function, are permitted to comply with the alarm and detection
requirements of section 907.2.3 {Group E).
3. Day cares serving less than 12 children when operated within the
single family residence of the day care operator, provided that the
dwelling is protected with interconnected hard wired smoke alarms
located as required by this section and powered as required for a new
home in accordance with the Intemational Residential Code and
NFPA 72. When such residential day cares serve hearing impaired
children, parents, or guardians, the interconnected single station
smoke alarms shall be listed for visual alarm service.
4. Single story day care occupancies serving 30 or fewer children with
multiple remote at grade exits as defined by the Building Code may be
provided with a smoke detection system complying with the State of
Texas licensing standards provided that the operation of any detection
device will cause the operation of an alarm device within every area
listed above. When such small day cares serve hearing impaired
children, parents, or guardians, the alarm signals shall be produced by
devices listed for visual alarm service.
[F]907.2.7 Group M.
A manual fire alarm system that activates the occupant notification system in accordance
with Section 907.6 {Installation) shall be installed in Group M occupancies where one of
the following conditions exists:

Page 27 of 87
 1. The combined Group M occupant load of all floors is 500 or more persons.
2. The Group M occupant load is more than 100 persons above or below the
lowest level of exit discharge.
Exceptions:
1. A manual fire alarm system is not required in covered mall buildings
complying with Section 402 {Covered Mall and Open Mall Buildings).
2. Manual fire alarm boxes are not required where the building is equipped
throughout with an automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with
Section 903.3.1.1 {NFPA 13 sprinkler systems) and the occupant notification
appliances will automatically activate throughout the notification zones upon
sprinkler water flow.
3. Duct smoke detectors installed in separate lease spaces of large shell
buildings need not be connected to monitoring panels where the only fire
alarm system installed in the building is the required monitoring for a fire
sprinkler system and the sprinkler monitoring system is located inside a
different lease space.
[F]907.2.8.1 Manual fire alarm system. A manual fire alarm system shall be installed
in Group R-1 occupancies.
Exceptions:
1. A manual fire alarm system is not required in buildings not more than two
stories in height where all individual sleeping units and contiguous attic and
crawl spaces are separated from each other and public or common areas by
at least 1-hour fire partitions and each individual sleeping unit has an exit
directly to a public way, exit court or yard.
2. Manual fire alarm boxes are not required throughout the building when the
following conditions are met:
2.1. The building is equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler
system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 {NFPA 13
sprinkler systems) or 903.3.1.2 {NFPA 13R sprinkler systems).
2.2. The notification appliances will activate upon sprinkler water flow;
and
2.3. At least one manual fire alarm box is installed at an approved
location.

Page 28 of 87
 3. Audibility requirements shall not be applicable on balconies less than 100
square feet in area, or on balconies where the least dimension is 5' or less.
[F]907.2.8.2 Automatic smoke detection system. An automatic smoke detection system
that activates the occupant notification system in accordance with Section 907.6
{Installation) shall be installed throughout all group R-1 occupancies. Listed system-type
automatic detectors shall be installed within interior corridors serving sleeping units and
within fiimace rooms and common areas such as, recreational rooms, laundry rooms, and
similar areas served by such interior corridors providing access to and egress from
sleeping units.
Exception: An automatic smoke detection system is not required in buildings that
do not have interior corridors serving sleeping units, where each sleeping unit has a
means of egress door opening directly to an exit or to an exterior exit access that
leads directly to an exit, and where recreational rooms, laundry rooms, fiimace
rooms, and similar areas are not located within or along the egress paths from
sleeping units.
[F]907.2.9 Group R-2. Fire alarm systems and smoke alarms shall be installed in Group
R-2 occupancies as required in Section 907.2.9.1 {Manual and automatic fire alarm
system) and 907.2.9.2 {Smoke alarms).
[F]907.2.9.1 Manual and automatic fire alarm system. A manual and automatic fire
alarm system that activates the occupant notification system in accordance with 907.6
{Installation) shall be installed in Group R-2 occupancies where:
1. Any dwelling unit or sleeping unit is located three or more stories above the
lowest level of exit discharge;
2. Any dwelling unit or sleeping unit is located more than one story below the
highest level of exit discharge of exits serving the dwelling unit or sleeping
unit; or
3. The building contains more than 16 dwelling units or sleeping units.
Listed system-type automatic detectors shall be installed within fiimace rooms and
common areas such as recreational rooms, laundry rooms, interior corridors serving as
the primary access and egress for dwelling units, and similar areas.
Exceptions:
1. A fire alarm system is not required in buildings not more than two stories in
height where all dwelling units or sleeping units and contiguous attic and
crawl spaces are separated from each other and public or common areas by
at least 1-hour fire partitions and each dwelling unit or sleeping unit has an
exit directly to a public way, exit court or yard.
Page 29 of 87
 2. Manual fire alarm boxes are not required throughout the building when all
the following conditions are met:
2.1. The building is equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler
system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 {NFPA 13 sprinkler
systems) or Section 903.3.1.2 {NFPA 13R sprinkler systems);
2.2. The notification appliances will automatically activate throughout the
notification zones upon sprinkler water flow; and
2.3. At least one manual fire alarm box is installed at an approved
location,
3. A separate fire alarm system is not required in buildings that do not have
interior corridors serving dwelling units and are protected by an approved
automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with 903.3.1.1 {NFPA 13
sprinkler systems) or 903.3.1.2 {NFPA 13R sprinkler systems), provided that
sprinkler system activation results in a local alarm designed to notify all
occupants and dwelling units have a means of egress door opening directly
to an exterior exit access that leads directly to the exists or are served by
open ended corridors designed in accordance with Section 1026.6 {Exterior
stairway and ramp protection), exception 4.
4. Audibility requirements shall not be applicable on balconies less than 100
square feet in area, or on balconies where the least dimension is 5' or less.
[F]907.2.9.2 Smoke alarms. Single- and multiple-station smoke alarms shall be installed
in accordance with section 907.2.11 {Single- and multiple-station smoke alarms).
[F]907.2.13.2 Fire department wired communications system. An approved two-way,
fire department wired communication system designed and installed in accordance with
NFPA 72 shall be provided for fire department use. It shall operate between a fire
command center complying with Section 508 {Fire Command Center) of the
Intemational Fire Code and elevators, elevator lobbies, emergency and standby power
rooms, fire pump rooms, areas of refiige and inside enclosed exit stairways. The fire
department communication device shall be provided at each floor level within the
enclosed exit stairway.
[F]907.4.1 Protection of fire alarm control unit. In areas that are not continuously
occupied, a single smoke detector shall be provided at the location of each fire alarm
control unit, notification appliance circuit power extenders, and supervising station
transmitting equipment.
Exceptions:

Page 30 of 87
 1. Where ambient conditions prohibit installation of automatic smoke
detection, a heat detector shall be permitted.
2. The smoke detector shall not be required at the location of notification
appliance circuit power extenders where the building is equipped throughout
with an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1
{NFPA 13 sprinkler systems) or 903.3.1.2 {NFPA 13R sprinkler systems).
[F]907.6.5 Monitoring. Fire alarm systems required by this chapter or by the
Intemational Building Code shall be monitored by an approved supervising station in
accordance with NFPA 72, or by a local alarm which gives audible and visual signals at a
constantly attended location. Reporting procedures and personnel training records for
local alarm systems monitored at a constantly attended location shall be maintained for
review and approval by the Fire Department.
Exception: Supervisory service is not required for:
1. Single-station and multiple-station smoke alarms required by Section
907.2.11 {Single- and multiple-station smoke alarms).
2. Automatic sprinkler systems in one- and two-family dwellings.
[F]907.6.6 Annunciation and control. The main fire alarm control panel or a full
function remote annunciator shall be installed at the main entrance or at an approved
location near the main entrance of buildings with fire alarm systems.

SECTION 909 SMOKE CONTROL SYSTEMS

[F]909.1 Scope and purpose. This section applies to mechanical or passive smoke
control systems when they are required by other provisions of this code. The purpose of
this section is to establish minimum requirements for the design, installation, and
acceptance testing of smoke control systems that are intended to provide a tenable
environment for the evacuation or relocation of occupants. These provisions are not
intended for the preservation of contents, the timely restoration of operations or for
assistance in fire suppression or overhaul activities. Smoke control systems regulated by
this section serve a different purpose than the smoke- and heat-venting provisions found
in Section 910 {Smoke and Heat Removal). Mechanical smoke control systems shall not
be considered exhaust systems under Chapter 5 {Exhaust Systems) of the Intemational
Mechanical Code.

[F] 909.2 General design requirements. Buildings, stmctures, or parts thereof required
by this code to have a smoke control system or systems shall have such systems designed
in accordance with the applicable requirements of Section 909 {Smoke Control Systems)
Page 31 of 87
and the generally accepted and well- established principles of engineering relevant to the
design. The constmction documents shall include sufficient information and detail to
adequately describe the elements of the design necessary for the proper implementation
of the smoke control systems. These documents shall be accompanied by sufficient
information and analysis to demonstrate compliance with these provisions.

[F]909.3 Special inspection and test requirements. In addition to the ordinary

inspection and test requirements which buildings, stmctures, and parts thereof are
required to undergo, smoke confrol systems subject to the provisions of Section 909
{Smoke Control Systems) shall undergo special inspections and tests sufficient to verify
the proper commissioning of the smoke control design in its final installed condition.
The design submission accompanying the constmction documents shall clearly detail
procedures and methods to be used and the items subject to such inspections and tests.
Such commissioning shall be in accordance with generally accepted engineering practice
and, where possible, based on published standards for the particular testing involved.
The special inspections and tests required by this section shall be conducted under the
same terms in Section 1704 {Special Inspections, Contractor Responsibility and
Structural Observations).

[F]909.4 Analysis. A rational analysis supporting the types of smoke control systems to
be employed, their methods of operation, the systems supporting them and the methods
of constmction to be utilized shall accompany the submitted constmction documents and
shall include, but not be limited to, the items indicated in Sections 909.4.1 {Stack effect)
through 909.4.6 {Duration of operation).

[FJ909.4.1 Stack effect. The system shall be designed such that the maximum probable
normal or reverse stack effect will not adversely interfere with the system's capabilities.
In determining the maximum probable stack effect, altitude, elevation, weather history,
and interior temperatures shall be used.

[F]909.4.2 Temperature effect of fire. Buoyancy and expansion caused by the design
fire in accordance with Section 909.9 {Design Fire) shall be analyzed. The system shall
be designed such that these effects do not adversely interfere with the system's
capabilities.

[F] 909.4.3 Wind effect. The design shall consider the adverse effects of wind,
consistent with the wind-loading provisions of Chapter 16 {Structural Design).

[F]909.4.4 H V A C systems. The design shall consider the effects of the heating,
ventilating, and air- conditioning (HVAC) systems on both smoke and fire transport. The

Page 32 of 87
analysis shall include all permutations of systems status. The design shall consider the
effects of the fire on the HVAC systems.

[F]909.4.5 Climate. The design shall consider the effects of low temperatures on
systems, property, and occupants. Air inlets and exhausts shall be located so as to
prevent snow or ice blockage.

[F]909.4.6 Duration of operation. All portions of active or passive smoke control

systems shall be capable of continued operation after detection of the fire event for not
less than 20 minutes.

[F]909.5 Smoke barrier construction. Smoke barriers shall comply with Section 710
{Smoke Partitions), and shall be constmcted and sealed to limit leakage areas exclusive of
protected openings. The maximum allowable leakage area shall be the aggregate area
calculated using the following leakage area ratios:

1. Walls: A/Aw = 0.00100

2. Interior exit stairways and ramps and exit passageways: A/Aw = 0.00035

3. Enclosed exit access stairways and ramps and all other shafts: A/Aw = 0.00150

4. Floors and roofs: A/Ap = 0.00050

where:

A= Total leakage area, square feet (m2).

Ap^Unit floor or roof area of barrier, square feet (m2).
Aw=Unit wall area of barrier, square feet (m2).

The leakage area ratios shown do not include openings due to doors, operable windows,
or similar gaps. These shall be included in calculating the total leakage area.

[F]909.5.1 Leakage area. The total leakage area of the barrier is the product of the
smoke barrier gross area monitored by the allowable leakage area ratio, plus the area of
other openings such as gaps and operable windows. Compliance shall be determined by
achieving the minimum air pressure difference across the barrier with the system in the
smoke control mode for mechanical smoke control systems. Passive smoke control
systems tested using other approved means such as door fan testing shall be as approved
by the building official.

Page 33 of 87
[F]909.5.2 Opening protection. Openings in smoke barriers shall be protected by
automatic-closing devices actuated by the required controls for the mechanical smoke
control system. Door openings shall be protected by door assemblies complying with
Section 716.5.3 {Door assemblies in corridors and smoke barriers).

Exceptions:

1. Passive smoke control systems with automatic-closing devices actuated by spot-

type smoke detectors listed for releasing service installed in accordance with
Section 907.3 {Fire safety functions).
2. Fixed openings between smoke zones that are protected utilizing the airflow
method.
3. In Group 1-2, where such doors are installed across corridors, a pair of opposite-
swinging doors without a center mullion shall be installed having vision panels
with approved fire-rated glazing materials in approved fire-rated frames, the
area of which shall not exceed that tested. The doors shall be close fitting
within operational tolerances and shall not have undercuts, louvers, or grilles.
The doors shall have head and jamb stops, astragals or rabbets at meeting edges
and shall be automatic-closing by smoke detection in accordance with Section
716.5.9.3 {Smoke-activated doors). Positive-latching devices are not required.
4. Group 1-3.
5. Openings between smoke zones with clear ceiling heights of 14 feet (4267 mm)
or greater and bank-down capacity of greater than 20 minutes as determined
by the design fire size.

[F]909.5.2.1 Ducts and air transfer openings. Ducts and air transfer openings are
required to be protected with a minimum Class II, 250° F (121° C) smoke damper
complying with Section 717 {Ducts and Air Transfer Openings).

[F]909.6 Pressurization method. The primary mechanical means of controlling smoke

shall be by pressure differences across smoke barriers. Maintenance of a tenable
environment is not required in the smoke confrol zone of fire origin.

[F]909.6.1 Minimum pressure difference. The minimum pressure difference across a

smoke barrier shall be 0.05 inch water gage (0.0124 kPa) in fully sprinklered buildings.
In buildings permitted to be less than fully sprinklered, the smoke confrol system shall be
designed to achieve pressure differences at least two times the maximum calculated
pressure difference produced by the design fire.

[F]909.6.2 Maximum pressure difference. The maximum air pressure difference

across a smoke barrier shall be determined by required door-opening or closing forces.
Page 34 of 87
The actual force required to open exit doors when the system is in the smoke control
mode shall be in accordance with Section 1008.1.3 {Door opening force). Opening and
closing forces for other doors shall be determined by standard engineering methods for
the resolution of forces and reactions. The calculated force to set a side-hinged, swinging
door in motion shall be determined by:

F = Fdc + K(WAAP)/2(W - d) (Equation 9-1)

where:

A=Door area, square feet (m2).

d= Distancefromdoor handle to latch edge of door, feet (m).

F=Total door opening force, pounds (N).

Fdc=Force required to overcome closing device, pounds (N).

K= Coefficient 5.2 (1.0).

W= Door width, feet (m).

AP= Design pressure difference, inches of water (Pa).

[F]909.7 Airflow design method. When approved by the fire code official, smoke
migration through openings fixed in a permanendy open position, which are located
between smoke control zones by the use of the airflow method, shall be permitted. The
design airflow shall be in accordance with this section. Airflow shall be directed to limit
smoke migration from the fire zone. The geometry of openings shall be considered to
prevent flow reversalfromturbulent effects.

[F] 909.7.1 Velocity. The minimum average velocity through a fixed opening shall not
be less than:
11/2
V = 217.2 [h (Tf- To)/(Tf + 460)]"" (Equation 9-2)

For SI: V = 119.9 [h (Tf- To)/Tf ]''^

where:

h= Height of opening, feet (m).

Page 35 of 87
Tf = Temperature of smoke, °F (°K).

To=Temperature of ambient air, °F (°K),

v= Air velocity, feet per minute (m/minute).

[F]909.7.2 Prohibited conditions. The airflow design method shall not be employed
where either the quantity of air or the velocity of the airflow will adversely affect other
portions of the smoke control system, unduly intensify the fire, dismpt plume dynamics
or interfere with exiting. In no case shall airflow toward the fire exceed 200 feet per
minute (1.02 m/s). Where the formula in Section 909.7.1 {Velocity) requires airflow to
exceed this limit, the airflow method shall not be used.

[F]909.8 Exhaust method. When approved by the fire code official, mechanical smoke
control for large enclosed volumes, such as in atriums or malls shall be permitted to use
the exhaust method. Smoke control systems using the exhaust method shall be designed
in accordance with NFPA 92.

[F]909.8.1 Exhaust rate. The height of the lowest horizontal surface of the smoke layer
interface shall be maintained at least 6 feet (1,829 mm) above any walking surface that
forms a portion of a required egress system within the smoke zone. The required exhaust
rate for the zone shall be the largest of the calculated plume mass flow rates for the
possible plume configurations. Provisions shall be made for natural or mechanical
supply of air from outside or adjacent smoke zones to make up for the air exhausted. It is
recommended that a makeup airflow rate of not greater than 90 percent of the exhaust
rate be provided. Makeup airflow rates, when measured at the potential fire location,
shall not exceed 200 feet per minute (60,960 mm per minute) toward the fire. The
temperature of the makeup air shall be such that it does not expose temperature-sensitive
fire protection systems beyond their limits.

[F]909.9 Design fire. The design fire shall be based on a Q of not less than 5,000 Btu/s
(5,275 kW) unless a rational analysis is performed by the registered design professional
and approved by the fire code official. The design fire shall be based on the analysis in
accordance with Section 909.4.1 {Analysis) and this section.

[F]909.9.1 Factors considered. The engineering analysis shall include the

characteristics of the fuel, fuel load, effects included by the fire, and whether the fire is
likely to be steady or unsteady.

Page 36 of 87
[F]909.9.2 Design fire fuel. Determination of the design fire shall include consideration
of the type of fuel, fuel spacing, and configuration.

[F]909.9.3 Heat-release assumptions. The analysis shall make use of best available
data from approved sources and shall not be based on excessively stringent limitations of
combustible material.

[F]909.9.4 Sprinkler effectiveness assumptions. A documented engineering analysis

shall be provided for conditions that assume fire growth is halted at the time of sprinkler
activation.

[F]909.10 Equipment. Equipment such as, but not limited to, fans, ducts, automatic
dampers and balance dampers, shall be suitable for its intended use, suitable for the
probable exposure temperatures that the rational analysis indicates, and as approved by
the fire code official.

[F]909.10.1 Exhaust fans. Components of exhaust fans shall be rated and certified by
the manufacturer for the probable temperature rise to which the components will be
exposed. This temperature rise shall be computed by:

Ts = (Qc/nic) + (Ta) (Equation 9-3)

where:

c= Specific heat of smoke at smoke layer temperature, Btu/lb °F (kJ/kg-K).

m= Exhaust rate, pounds per second (kg/s).

Qc= Convective heat output of fire, Btu/s (kW).

Ta= Ambient temperature, °F (°K).

Ts=Smoke temperature, °F (°K).

Exception: Reduced Ts as calculated based on the assurance of adequate dilution air.

[F]909.10.2 Ducts. Duct materials and joints shall be capable of withstanding the
probable temperatures and pressures to which they are exposed as determined in
accordance with Section 909.10.1 {Exhaust fans). Ducts shall be constmcted and
supported in accordance with the International Mechanical Code. Ducts shall be leak
tested to 1.5 times the maximum design pressure in accordance with nationally accepted
Page 37 of 87
practices. Measured leakage shall not exceed 5 percent of design flow. Results of such
testing shall be a part of the documentation procedure. Ducts shall be supported directly
from fire-resistance-rated stmctural elements of the building by substantial,
noncombustible supports.

Exception: Flexible connections (for the purpose of vibration isolation) complying with
the Intemational Mechanical Code, that are constmcted of approved fire-resistance-rated
materials.

[F]909.10.3. Equipment, inlets and outlets. Equipment shall be located to not expose
uninvolved portions of the building to an additional fire hazard. Outside air inlets shall be
located to minimize the potential for infroducing smoke or flame into the building.
Exhaust outlets shall be located to minimize reintroduction of smoke into the building
and to limit exposure of the building or adjacent buildings to an additionalfirehazard.

[F]909.10.4 Automatic dampers. Automatic dampers, regardless of the purpose for

which they are installed within the smoke control system, shall be listed and conform to
the requirements of approved, recognized standards.

[F]909.10.5 Fans. In addition to other requirements, belt-driven fans shall have 1.5
times the number of belts required for the design duty, with the minimum number of belts
being two. Fans shall be selected for stable performance based on normal temperature
and, where applicable, elevated temperature. Calculations and manufacturer's fan curves
shall be part of the documentation procedures. Fans shall be supported and resfrained by
noncombustible devices in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 16 (Stmctural
Design). Motors driving fans shall not be operated beyond their nameplate horsepower
(kilowatts), as determined from measurement of actual current draw, and shall have a
minimum service factor of 1.15.

[F]909.11 Power systems. The smoke control system shall be supplied with two
sources of power. Primary power shall be the normal building power systems. Secondary
power shall be from an approved standby source complying with Chapter 27 {Electrical)
of this code. The standby power source and its transfer switches shall be in a room
separate from the normal power transformers and switch gear and ventilated directly to
and from the exterior. The room shall be enclosed with not less than 1-hour fire barriers
constmcted in accordance with Section 707 {Fire Barriers) or horizontal assemblies
constmcted in accordance with Section 711 {Horizontal Assemblies), or both. The
transfer to full standby power shall be automatic and within 60 seconds of failure of the
primary power.

Page 38 of 87
[F]909.11.1 Power sources and power surges. Elements of the smoke control system
relying on volatile memories or the like shall be supplied with unintermptible power
sources of sufficient duration to span a 15-minute primary power intermption. Elements
of the smoke control system susceptible to power surges shall be suitably protected by
conditioners, suppressors or other approved means.

[F]909.12 Detection and control systems. Fire detection systems providing control
input or output signals to mechanical smoke confrol systems or elements thereof shall
comply with the requirements of Section 907 {Fire Alarm and Detection Systems). Such
systems shall be equipped with a confrol unit complying with UL 864 and listed as smoke
control equipment. Control systems for mechanical smoke control systems shall include
provisions for verification. Verification shall include positive confirmation of actuation,
testing, manual override, the presence of power downstream of all disconnects and,
through a preprogrammed weekly test sequence, report abnormal conditions audibly,
visually and by printed report.

[F]909.12.1 Wiring. In addition to meeting requirements of the National Electrical

Code, all wiring, regardless of voltage, shall be fully enclosed within continuous
raceways.

[F]909.12.2 Activation. Smoke control systems shall be activated in accordance with

this section.

[F]909.12.2.1 Pressurization, airflow or exhaust method. Mechanical smoke confrol

systems using the pressurization, airflow or exhaust method shall have completely
automatic confrol.

[F]909.12.2.2 Passive method. Passive smoke confrol systems actuated by approved

spot-type detectors listed for releasing service shall be permitted.

[F]909.12.3 Automatic control. Where completely automatic confrol is required or

used, the automatic control sequences shall be initiated from: an appropriately zoned
automatic sprinkler system complying with Section 903.3.1.1 {NFPA 13 sprinkler
systems), manual controls that are readily accessible to the fire department, and any
smoke detectors required by engineering analysis.

[F]909.13 Control air tubing. Control air tubing shall be of sufficient size to meet the
required response times. Tubing shall beflushedclean and dry prior to final connections
and shall be adequately supported and protected from damage. Tubing passing through
concrete or masonry shall be sleeved and protected from abrasion and electrolytic action.

Page 39 of 87
[F]909.13.1 Materials. Control air tubing shall be hard drawn copper. Type L, ACR in
accordance with ASTM B 42, ASTM B 43, ASTM B 68, ASTM B 88, ASTM B 251 and
ASTM B 280. Fittings shall be wrought copper or brass, solder type, in accordance with
ASME B 16.18 or ASME B 16.22. Changes in direction shall be made with appropriate
tool bends. Brass compression-type fittings shall be used at final connection to devices;
other joints shall be brazed using a BCuP5 brazing alloy with solidus above 1,100° F
(593° C) and liquids below 1,500° F (816° C). Brazing flux shall be used on copper-to-
brass joints only.

Exception: Nonmetallic tubing used within control panels and at the final connection to
devices, providing all of the following conditions are met:

1. Combustible pneumatic tubing exposed within a plenum shall have a peak optical
density not greater than 0.50, an average optical density not greater than 0.15, and a
flame spread of not greater than 5 feet (1,524 mm) when tested in accordance with
UL 1820. Combustible pneumatic tubing shall be listed and labeled.

2. Tubing and connected devices shall be completely enclosed within a galvanized or

paint-grade steel enclosure of not less than 0.0296 inch (0.7534 mm) (No. 22 gage).
Entry to the enclosure shall be by copper tubing with a protective grommet of
neoprene or teflon or by suitable brass compression to male-barbed adapter.

3. Tubing shall be identified by appropriately documented coding.

4. Tubing shall be neatly tied and supported within the enclosure. Tubing bridging
cabinet and door or moveable devices shall be of sufficient length to avoid tension
and excessive sfress. Tubing shall be protected against abrasion. Tubing serving
devices on doors shall be fastened along hinges.

[F] 909.13.2 Isolation from other functions. Control tubing serving other than smoke
control functions shall be isolated by automatic isolation valves or shall be an
independent system.

[F]909.13.3 Testing. Control air tubing shall be tested at three times the operating
pressure for not less than 30 minutes without any noticeable loss in gauge pressure prior
to final connection to devices.

[FJ909.14 Marking and identification. The detection and control systems shall be
clearly marked at all junctions, accesses and terminations.

Page 40 of 87
[F]909.15 Control diagrams. Identical control diagrams showing all devices in the
system and identifying their location and function shall be maintained current and kept on
file with the fire code official, the fire department and in the fire command center in a
format and manner approved by the fire chief

[F]909.16 Fire-fighter's smoke control panel. A fire-fighter's smoke control panel for
fire department emergency response purposes only shall be provided and shall include
manual confrol or override of automatic confrol for mechanical smoke confrol systems.
The panel shall be located in a fire command center complying with Section 911 {Fire
Command Center), and shall comply with Sections 909.16.1 {Smoke control systems)
through 909.16.3 {Control action and priorities). Thefire-fighter'ssmoke control panel
shall be designed to graphically depict the physical building arrangement, smoke-control
systems and equipment, and the areas of the building served by the equipment. Consult
the fire department engineering section for details on the confrol panel design.

[F]909.16.1 Smoke control systems. Fans within the building shall be shown on the
fire-fighter's control panel. A clear indication of the direction of airflow and the
relationship of components shall be displayed. Status indicators shall be provided for all
smoke control equipment, annunciated by fan and zone, and by pilot-lamp type indicators
as follows:

1. Fans, dampers and other operating equipment in their normal status-WHITE.

2. Fans, dampers and other operating equipment in their off or closed status-RED.

3. Fans, dampers and other operating equipment in their on or open status-

GREEN.

4. Fans, dampers and other operating equipment in a fault status-YELLOW/

AMBER.

The pilot-lamp type status indicators shall be located adjacent to the graphic symbol of
the smoke control equipment that they serve.

[F]909.16.2 Smoke control panel. Thefire-fighter'scontrol panel shall provide control

capability over the complete smoke-control system equipment within the building as
follows:

1. ON-AUTO-OFF control over each individual piece of operating smoke confrol

equipment that can also be confrolled from other sources within the building.
This includes stairway pressurization fans; smoke exhaust fans; supply retum
Page 41 of 87
 and exhaust fans, elevator shaft fans; and other operating equipment used or
intended for smoke control purposes.
2. OPEN-AUTO-CLOSE confrol over individual dampers relating to smoke
control and that are also controlled from other sources within the building.
3. ON-OFF or OPEN-CLOSE control over smoke control and other critical
equipment associated with a fire or smoke emergency and that can only be
controlled from the fire- fighter's control panel.

Exceptions:

1. Complex systems, where approved by the fire code official, where the
controls and indicators are combined to control and indicate all elements
of a single smoke zone as a unit.
2. Complex systems, where approved by the fire code official, where the
control is accomplished by computer interface using approved, plain
English commands.

[F]909.16.3 Control action and priorities. The fire- fighter's control panel actions
shall be as follows:

1. ON-OFF, OPEN-CLOSE control actions shall have the highest priority of any
control point within the building. Once issued from the fire-fighter's control
panel, no automatic or manual control from any other control point within the
building shall contradict the control action. Where automatic means are provided
to intermpt normal, non-emergency equipment operation or produce a specific
result to safeguard the building or equipment (i.e., ductfreeze-stats,duct smoke
detectors, high-temperature cutouts, temperature-actuated linkage and similar
devices), such means shall be capable of being overridden by the fire-fighter's
control panel. The last control action as indicated by eachfire-fighter'scontrol
panel switch position shall prevail. In no case shall control actions require the
smoke control system to assume more than one configuration at any one time.

Exception: Power disconnects required by the National Electrical Code.

2. Only the AUTO position of each three-position fire-fighter's control panel switch
shall allow automatic or manual confrol action from other control points within the
building. The AUTO position shall be the NORMAL, non-emergency, building
control position. Where afire-fighter'scontrol panel is in the AUTO position, the
actual status of the device (on, off, open, closed) shall continue to be indicated by
the status indicator described above. When directed by an automatic signal to
assume an emergency condition, the NORMAL position shall become the
Page 42 of 87
 emergency condition for that device or group of devices within the zone. In no
1
case shall control actions require the smoke control system to assume more than
one configuration at any one time.

[F]909.17 System response time. Smoke-control system activation shall be initiated

immediately after receipt of an appropriate automatic or manual activation command.
Smoke control systems shall activate individual components (such as dampers and fans)
in the sequence necessary to prevent physical damage to the fans, dampers, ducts and
other equipment. For purposes of smoke control, thefire-fighter'scontrol panel response
time shall be the same for automatic or manual smoke control action initiated from any
other building control point. The total response time, including that necessary for
detection, shutdown of operating equipment, and smoke control system startup, shall
allow for full operational mode to be achieved before the conditions in the space exceed
the design smoke condition. The system response time for each component and their
sequential relationships shall be detailed in the required rational analysis and verification
of their installed condition reported in the required final report.

[FJ909.18 Acceptance testing. Devices, equipment, components and sequences shall be

individually tested. These tests, in addition to those required by other provisions of this
code, shall consist of determination of function, sequence and, where applicable, capacity
of their installed condition.

[F]909.18.1 Detection devices. Smoke or fire detectors that are a part of a smoke
control system shall be tested in accordance with Chapter 9 {Fire Protection Systems) in
their installed condition. When applicable, this testing shall include verification of
airflow in both minimum and maximum conditions.

[F]909.18.2 Ducts. Ducts that are part of a smoke control system shall be traversed
using generally accepted practices to determine actual air quantities.

[F]909.18.3 Dampers. Dampers shall be tested for function in their installed condition,

[F]909.18.4 Inlets and outlets. Inlets and outlets shall be read using generally accepted
practices to determine air quantities.

[F]909.18.5 Fans. Fans shall be examined for correct rotation. Measurements of

voltage, amperage, revolutions per minute (rpm) and belt tension shall be made.

[F]909.18.6 Smoke barriers. Measurements using inclined manometers or other

approved calibrated measuring devices shall be made of the pressure differences across

Page 43 of 87
smoke barriers. The measurements shall be conducted for each possible smoke control
condition.

[F]909.18.7 Controls. Each smoke zone, equipped with an automatic-initiation device,

shall be put into operation by the actuation of one such device. Each additional device
within the zone shall be verified to cause the same sequence without requiring the
operation of fan motors in order to prevent damage. Control sequences shall be verified
throughout the system, including verification of override from the fire-fighter's control
panel and simulation of standby power conditions.

[F]909.18.8 Special inspections for smoke control. Smoke confrol systems shall be
tested by a special inspection agency that has been preapproved by the fire department
engineering section. The special inspection agency must be hired directly by the building
owner and shall not be a sub-contractor to one of the trades.

[FJ909.18.8.1 Scope of testing. Special inspections shall be conducted in accordance

with the following:

1. During erection of ductwork and prior to concealment for the purposes of leakage
testing and recording of device location.

2. Prior to occupancy and after sufficient completion for the purposes of pressure-
difference testing, flow measurements, and detection and confrol verification.

[F]909.18.8.2 Qualifications. Special inspection agencies for smoke confrol shall have
expertise in fire protection engineering, mechanical engineering and certification as air
balancers.

[F]909.18.8.3 Reports. A complete report of testing shall be prepared by the special

inspection agency. The report shall include identification of all devices by manufacturer,
nameplate data, design values, measured values, and identification tag or mark. The
special inspection agency shall provide their NEBB or AABC accreditation seal, sign,
and date the report. The report shall be reviewed by the responsible registered design
professional and, when satisfied that the design intent has been achieved, the responsible
registered design professional shall seal, sign and date the report.

[F]909.18.8.3.1 Report filing. A copy of the final report shall be filed with the fire code
official and an identical copy shall be maintained in an approved location at the building.

[F]909.18.9 Identification and documentation. Charts, drawings and other documents

identifying and locating each component of the smoke control system, and describing its
Page 44 of 87
proper function and maintenance requirements, shall be maintained on file at the building
as an attachment to the report required by Section 909.18.8.3 {Reports). Devices shall
have an approved identifying tag or mark on them consistent with the other required
documentation and shall be dated indicating the last time they were successfully tested
and by whom.

[F]909.19 System acceptance. Buildings, or portions thereof, required by this code to

comply with this section shall not be issued a certificate of occupancy until such time that
the fire code official determines that the provisions of this section have been fully
complied with, and that the fire department has received satisfactory instmction on the
operation, both automatic and manual, of the system.

Exception: In buildings of phased constmction, a temporary certificate of

occupancy, as approved by the fire code official, shall be permitted; provided that
those portions of the building to be occupied meet the requirements of this section
and that the remainder does not pose a significant hazard to the safety of the
proposed occupants or adjacent buildings.

[F]909.20 Smokeproof enclosures. Where required by Section \022.\0 {Smokeproof

enclosures and pressurized stairways and ramps), a smokeproof enclosure shall be
constmcted in accordance with this section. A smokeproof enclosure shall consist of a
pressurized enclosed exit stairway that conforms to Section 1022.1 {General) and Section
1022.2 {Construction) and a pressurized vestibule meeting the requirements of this
section. Design of pressurization systems shall be in accordance with Section 909
{Smoke Control Systems).

[F]909.20.1 Access. Access to the stair shall be by way of a vestibule. The minimum
dimension of the vestibule shall not be less than the required width of the corridor leading
to the vestibule but shall not have a width of less than 44 inches and shall not have a
length of less than 72 inches in the direction of egress travel. Refer to Section 1007.6
{Areas of refuge) for area of rescue assistance.

[F]909.20.2 Construction. The smokeproof enclosure shall be separated from the

remainder of the building by not less than a 2-hour fire-resistance-rated fire barrier
without openings other than the required means of egress doors. The vestibule shall be
separated from the stairway by not less than a 2-hourfire-resistance-ratedfirebarrier.

[F]909.20.2.1 Door closers. Doors in smokeproof enclosures shall be self-closing.

[F]909.20.3.1 Vestibule doors. The door assembly from the building into the vestibule
shall be a fire door complying with Section 716.5 {Fire door and shutter assemblies).
Page 45 of 87
The door assembly from the vestibule to the stairway shall have not less than a 90-minute
fire protection rating in accordance with Section 716.5 {Fire door and shutter
assemblies). The door from the building into the vestibule shall be provided with gaskets
or other provisions to minimize air leakage.

[F]909.20.3.2 Vestibules. The minimum pressure differences within the vestibule with
the doors closed shall be 0.05 inch water gage positive pressure relative to the fire floor
and 0.05 inch water gage negative relative to the exit enclosure. No pressure difference
is required relative to a non-fire floor.

[F]909.20.3.3 Stair pressurization system. If variable-frequency drive pressurization

fans are not used, the stair shaft shall be provided with a dampered relief opening capable
of discharging a minimum of 2,500 cubic feet per minute of air at the design pressure
difference of 0.05 inch water gage positive pressure relative to a pressurized stair
vestibule. Stair pressurization fans shall be sized to compensate for the stair shaft ground
floor exterior doors being open in addition to a minimum of three openings between the
stair shaft and the building (fire floor, floor above, and floor below).

[Fl909.21 Elevator hoistway pressurization alternative. Where elevator hoistway

pressurization is provided in lieu of enclosed elevator lobbies as required in Section
713.14.1 {Elevator lobby), the pressurization system shall comply with Sections 909.21.1
{Pressurization requirements) through 909.21.11 {System response time).

[F]909.21.1 Pressurization requirements. Elevator hoistways shall be pressurized to

maintain a minimum positive pressure of 0.10 inches of water (25 Pa) and a maximum
positive pressure of 0.25 inches of water (67 Pa) with respect to adjacent occupied space
on all floors. This pressure shall be measured at the midpoint of each hoistway door, with
all elevator cars at the floor of recall and all hoistway doors on the floor of recall open
and all other hoistway doors closed. The opening and closing of hoistway doors at each
level must be demonstrated during this test. The supply air intake shall be from an
outside, uncontaminated source located a minimum distance of 20 feet (6096 mm) from
any air exhaust system or outlet.

[F]909.21.2 Rational analysis. A rational analysis complying with Section 909.4

{Analysis) shall be submitted with the constmction documents.

[F]909.21.3 Ducts for system. Any duct system that is part of the pressurization system
shall be protected with the samefire-resistancerating as required for the elevator shaft
enclosure.

Page 46 of 87
[F]909.21.4 Fan system. The fan system provided for the pressurization system shall be
as required by Sections 909.21.4.1 {Fire resistance) through 909.21.4.4 {Fan capacity).

[F]909.21.4.1 Fire resistance. When located within the building, the fan system that
provides the pressurization shall be protected with the samefire-resistancerating required
for the elevator shaft enclosure.

[F]909.21.4.2 Smoke detection. The fan system shall be equipped with a smoke detector
that will automatically shut down the fan system when smoke is detected within the
system.

[F]909.21.4.3 Separate systems. A separate fan system shall be used for each elevator
hoistway.

[FJ909.21.4.4 Fan capacity. The supply fan shall either be adjustable with a capacity of
at least 1,000 cfm (0.4719 m3/s) per door, or that specified by a registered design
professional to meet the requirements of a designed pressurization system.

[F]909.21.5 Standby power. The pressurization system shall be provided with standby
power from the same source as other required emergency systems for the building.

[F]909.21.6 Activation of pressurization system. The elevator pressurization system

shall be activated upon activation of the building fire alarm system or upon activation of
the elevator lobby smoke detectors. Where both a building fire alarm system and elevator
lobby smoke detectors are present, each shall be independently capable of activating the
pressurization system.

[F]909.21.7 Special inspection. Special inspection for performance shall be required in

accordance with Section 909.18.8 {Special inspections for smoke control). System
acceptance shall be in accordance with Section 909.19 {System acceptance).

[F]909.21.8 Marking and identification. Detection and control systems shall be marked
in accordance with Section 909.14 {Marking and identification).

[F] 909.21.9 Control diagrams. Control diagrams shall be provided in accordance with
Section 909.15 {Control diagrams).

[F]909.21.10 Control panel. A control panel complying with Section 909.16 {Fire-
fighter's smoke control panel) shall be provided.

Page 47 of 87
[F]909.21.11 System response time. Hoistway pressurization systems shall comply with
the requirements for smoke control system response time in Section 909.17 {System
response time).

[F]909.22 Underground building smoke exhaust system. Where required in

accordance with Section 405.5 {Smoke control system) for underground buildings, a
smoke exhaust system shall be provided in accordance with this section.

[F]909.22.1 Exhaust capability. Where compartmentation is required, each

compartment shall have an independent, automatically activated smoke exhaust system
capable of manual operation. The system shall have an air supply and smoke exhaust
capability that will provide a minimum of six air changes per hour.

[F]909.22.2 Operation. The smoke exhaust system shall be operated in the

compartment of origin by the following, independently of each other:

1. Two cross-zoned smoke detectors within a single protected area or a single

smoke detector monitored by an alarm verification zone or an approved
equivalent method.

2. The automatic sprinkler system.

3. Manual confrols that are readily accessible to the fire department.

[F]909.22.3 Alarm required. Activation of the smoke exhaust system shall activate an
audible alarm at a constantly attended location.

[F]912.1 Installation. Fire department connections shall be installed in accordance with

the NFPA standard applicable to the system design and shall comply with Sections
912.1.1 {Number of Hose Connections) through 912.6 {Inspection, testing and
maintenance) of the Intemational Fire Code.
[F]912.1.1 Number of Hose Connections. Fire department connections (FDC's) shall
include a minimum of two (2) 2/4 inch (63.5 mm) female National Standard Hose Thread
(NST) inlet connections. Where system design flow rates exceed 500 gpm (1,893 1pm), a
minimum of one FDC inlet connection shall be installed for each 250 gpm (946 1pm) or
portion thereof
Exception: Where permitted by other sections of this code or associated standards,
a single VA inch or 2V2 inch FDC inlet is acceptable for residential fire sprinkler
systems installed in accordance with NFPA 13R. When an FDC is installed, a

Page 48 of 87
 singlel/4 inch inlet is acceptable for residential system installed in accordance with
NFPA 13D.
[F]912.3 Access. Immediate access to fire department connections shall be maintained at
all times and without obstmction by fences, bushes, trees, walls, or any other fixed or
moveable object for a minimum of 3 feet (914 mm). Access to fire department
connections shall be approved by the fire chief
Exception: Fences, where provided with an access gate equipped with a sign
complying with the legend requirements of Section 912.4 {Signs) and a means of
emergency operation. Locks, if installed shall be openable by use of a fire
department Knox Key. The gate and means of emergency operation shall be
approved by the fire chief and maintained operational at all times.
[FJ912.3.1 Locking fire department connection caps. The fire code official is
authorized to require locking caps on fire department connections for water-based fire
protection systems. The locking caps shall be manufactured by an approved
manufacturer and used and maintained as designed.
[F]912.3.1.2 Locking fire department connection caps in existing buildings or
structures. Thefirecode official is authorized to require locking caps on fire department
connections (FDC) for water-based fire protection systems serving existing buildings
where the fire department has observed obstmctions placed in the FDC or where the FDC
is missing caps. The locking caps shall be manufactured by an approved manufacturer
and used and maintained as designed.
[F]912.4.1 Fire Department Connection Placard - for existing structures. In addition
to the signage required in 912.4 {Signs), an all-weather, permanent, system placard shall
be placed in a visible location adjacent to the fire department connection on all stmctures
over 10 floors in height and/or stmctures with a fire department connection requiring
pressures exceeding 150 psi. The placard text shall be white reflective letters, 1 Vi inch
minimum height, on either a red or black background. The placard shall contain the
following information:
1. Required system pressure at FDC inlet.
2. Area of building served by FDC
3. System PRV locations
T A B L E 1004.1.2
M A X I M U M FLOOR A R E A A L L O W A N C E S PER OCCUPANT
FUNCTION OF SPACE OCCUPANT LOAD FACTOR"
Accessory storage areas, mechanical
equipment room 300 gross
Agricultural building 300 gross
Aircraft hangars 500 gross
Page 49 of 87
 Airport Terminal
Baggage claim 20 gross
Baggage handling 300 gross
Concourse 100 gross
Waiting areas 15 gross
Assembly
Gaming floors (keno, slots, etc.) 11 gross
Exhibit Gallery and Museum 30 net
Assembly with fixed seats See Section 1004.7
Assembly without fixed seats
Concentrated 7 net
Standing space or queuing space #7 net
Unconcentrated (tables and chairs) 15 net
Bowling centers, allow 5 persons for each
lane including 15 feet of runway, and for
additional areas 7 net
Business areas 100 gross
Courtrooms—other than fixed seating areas 40 net
Day care 35 net
Dormitories 50 gross
Educational
Classroom area 20 net
Shops and other vocational room areas 50 net
Exercise rooms 50 gross
Group H-5 Fabrication and manufacturing 200 gross
areas
Industrial areas 100 gross
Institutional areas
Inpatient treatment areas 240 gross
Outpatient areas 100 gross
Sleeping areas 120 gross
Kitchens, commercial 200 gross
Library
Reading rooms 50 net
Stack area 100 gross
Mall buildings—covered and open See section 402.8.2
Mercantile
Areas on other floors 60 gross
Basement and grade floor areas 30 gross
Storage, stock, shipping areas 300 gross
Parking garages 200 gross
Residential 200 gross
Skating rinks, swimming pools
Rink and pool 50 gross
Decks 15 gross
Stages and platforms 15 net
Warehouses 500 gross
For SI: 1 square foot = 0.0929 m2.
a. Floor area in square feet per occupant.

1005.3.1 Stairways. The capacity, in inches (mm), of means of egress stairways shall be
calculated by multiplying the occupant load served by such stairway by a means of egress
capacity factor of 0.3 inch (7.6 mm) per occupant. Where stairways serve more than one
story, only the occupant load of each story considered individually shall be used in
calculating the required capacity of the stairways serving that story.
Page 50 of 87
1005.3.2 Other egress components. The capacity, in inches (mm), of means of egress
components other than stairways shall be calculated by multiplying the occupant load
served by such component by a means of egress capacity factor of 0.2 inch (5.1 mm) per
occupant.
1007.3 Stairways. In order to be considered part of an accessible means of egress, a
stairway between stories shall have a minimum clear width of 48 inches (1219 mm)
between handrails and shall either incorporate an area of refiige within an enlarged floor-
level landing or shall be accessedfi^omeither an area of refiage complying with Section
1007.6 {Areas of refuge) or a horizontal exit. Exit access stairways that connect levels in
the same story are not permitted as part of an accessible means of egress.
Exceptions:
1. Except for a building governed by Section 403 {High-Rise Buildings)
or 405 {Underground Buildings), the minimum clear width of 48
inches (1,219 mm) between handrails is not required in buildings
equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system installed in
accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 {NFPA 13 sprinkler systems) or
903.3.1.2 {NFPA 13R sprinkler systems).
2. Except for a building governed by Section 403 {High-Rise Buildings)
or 405 {Underground Buildings), the area of refiige is not required at
stairways in buildings equipped throughout by an automatic sprinkler
system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 {NFPA 13
sprinkler systems) or 903.3.1.2 {NFPA 13R sprinkler systems).
3. The minimum clear width of 48 inches (1,219 mm) between handrails
is not required for stairways accessedfi"oma horizontal exit.
4. Areas of refiige are not required at exit stairways serving open parking
garages.
5. Areas of refiige are not required for smoke protected seating areas
complying with Section 1028.6.2 (Smoke-protected seatim).
1008.1.2 Door swing. Egress doors shall be of the pivoted or side-hinged swinging type.
Exceptions:
1. Private garages, office areas, factory and storage areas with an
occupant load of 10 or less.
2. Group 1-3 occupancies used as a place of detention.
3. Critical or intensive care patient rooms within suites of health care
facilities.
Page 51 of 87
 I
4. Doors within or serving a single dwelling unit in Groups R-2 and R-3.
5. In other than Group H occupancies, revolving doors complying with
Section 1008.1.4.1 {Revolving doors).
6. In other than Group H-1, H-2, H-3 and H-4 occupancies, horizontal
sliding doors complying with Section 1008.1.4.3 {Horizontal sliding
doors) are permitted in a means of egress.
7. Power-operated doors in accordance with Section 1008.1.4.2 {Power-
operated doors).
8. Doors serving a bathroom within an individual sleeping unit in Group
R-1.
9. In other than Group H occupancies, manually operated horizontal
sliding doors are permitted in a means of egress from spaces with an
occupant load of 10 or less.
Doors shall swing in the direction of egress travel where serving a
room or area containing an occupant load of 50 or more persons or a
Group H occupancy.
1008.1.4.3. Horizontal sliding doors. In other than H-1, H-2, H-3 and H-4 occupancies,
horizontal sliding doors permitted to be a component of a means of egress in accordance
with Exception 6 to Section 1008.1.2 {Door swing) shall comply with all of the following
criteria:
1. The doors shall be power operated and shall be capable of being operated
manually in the event of power failure.
2. The doors shall be openable by a simple method from both sides without
special knowledge or effort.
3. The force required to operate the door shall not exceed 30 pounds (133 N) to
set the door in motion and 15 pounds (67 N) to close the door or open it to
the minimum required width.
4. The door shall be openable with a force not to exceed 15 pounds (67 N)
when a force of 250 pounds (1100 N) is applied perpendicular to the door
adjacent to the operating device.
5. The door assembly shall comply with the applicable fire protection rating
and, where rated, shall be self-closing or automatic-closing by smoke
detection in accordance with Section 716.5.9.3 {Smoke-activated doors),
shall be installed in accordance with NFPA80 and shall comply with Section
716 {Opening Protectives).
Page 52 of 87
 6. The door assembly shall have an integrated standby power supply.
7. The door assembly power supply shall be electrically supervised.
8. The door shall open to the minimum required width within 10 seconds after
activation of the operating device.
1008.1.9.7 Delayed egress locks. Approved, listed, delayed egress locks shall be
permitted to be installed on doors serving any occupancy except Group A, E and H
occupancies in buildings that are equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system
in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 {NFPA 13 sprinkler systems) or an approved
automatic smoke or heat detection system installed in accordance with Section 907 {Fire
Alarm and Detection Systems), provided that the doors unlock in accordance with Items 1
through 6 below. A building occupant shall not be required to pass through more than one
door equipped with a delayed egress lock before entering an exit.
1. The doors unlock upon actuation of the automatic sprinkler system or
automatic fire detection system.
2. The doors unlock upon loss of power controlling the lock or lock
mechanism.
3. The door locks shall have the capability of being unlocked by a signal from
the fire command center.
4. The initiation of an irreversible process which will release the latch in not
more than 15 seconds when a force of not more than 15 pounds (67 N) is
applied for 1 second to the release device. Initiation of the irreversible
process shall activate an audible signal in the vicinity of the door. Once the
door lock has been released by the application of force to the releasing
device, relocking shall be by manual means only.
Exception: Where approved, a delay of not more than 30 seconds is
permitted.
5. A sign shall be provided on the door located above and within 12 inches
(305 mm) of the release device reading: PUSH UNTIL A L A R M SOUNDS.
DOOR C A N BE OPENED IN 15 (30) SECONDS. The letters on the sign
shall be 1 inch (25 mm) high and shall be on a contrasting background.
6. Emergency lighting shall be provided at the door.
1015.2.1. Two exits or exit access doorways. Where two exits or exit access doorways
are required from any portion of the exit access, the exit doors or exit access doorways
shall be placed at a distance apart equal to not less than one-half of the length of the
maximum overall diagonal dimension of the building or area to be served measured in a
Page 53 of 87
straight line between exit doors or exit access doorways. Interlocking or scissor stairs
shall be counted as one exit stairway.
Exceptions:
1. When interior exit stairways are interconnected by a 1-hour fire-
resistance-rated corridor conforming to the requirements of Section
1018 {Corridors), the required exit separation shall be measured along
the shortest direct line of travel within the corridor.
2. For an exit and exit access doorway that is not the primary exit access
into a required exit stairway and that is located in a building that is
equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system in
accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 {NFPA 13 sprinkler systems) or
903.3.1.2 {NFPA 13R sprinkler systems), the separation distance of
the exit door or exit access doorway shall be not less than one-third of
the length of the maximum overall diagonal dimension of the area
served.
1018.4 Dead ends. Where more than one exit or exit access doorway is required, the exit
access shall be arranged such that there are no dead ends in corridors more than 20 feet
(6,096 mm) in length.
Exceptions:
1. In occupancies in Group 1-3 of Occupancy Condition 2, 3 or 4 (see
Section 308.5 {Group 1-3)), the dead end in a corridor shall not exceed
30 feet (9,144 mm).
2. In occupancies in Groups B, E, F, I-l, M , R-1, R-2, R-4, S and U,
where the building is equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler
system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 {NFPA 13 sprinkler
systems), the length of the dead-end corridors shall not exceed 50 feet
(15,240 mm).
3. A dead-end corridor shall not be limited in length where the length of
the dead-end corridor is less than 2.5 times the least width of the dead-
end corridor.
1021.2 Exits from stories. Two exits, or exit access stairways or ramps providing access
to exits, from any story or occupied roof shall be provided where one of the following
conditions exists:

1. The occupant load or number of dwelling units exceeds one of the values in
Table 1021.2(1) or 1021.2(2).
Page 54 of 87
2. The exit access travel distance exceeds that specified in Table 1021.2(1) or
1021.2(2) as determined in accordance with the provisions of Section
1016.1.
3. Helistop landing areas located on buildings or stmctures shall be provided
with two exits, or exit access stairways or ramps providing access to exits.

Exceptions:

1. Rooms, areas and spaces complying with Section 1015.1 with

exits that discharge directly to the exterior at the level of exit
discharge, are permitted to have one exit.

2. Group R-3 occupancy buildings shall be permitted to have one

exit.

3. Parking garages where vehicles are mechanically parked shall

be permitted to have one exit.

4. Air traffic control towers shall be provided with the minimum

number of exits specified in Section 412.3.

5. Individual dwelling units in compliance with Section 1021.2.3.

6. Group R-3 and R-4 congregate residences shall be permitted to

have one exit.

7. Exits serving specific spaces or areas need not be accessed by

the remainder of the story when all of the following are met:

7.1. The number of exits from the entire story complies with
Section 1021.2.4;

7.2 . The access to exits from each individual space in the

story complies with Section 1015.1; and

7.3 . All spaces within each portion of a story shall have

access to the minimum number of approved independent
exits based on the occupant load of that portion of the
story, but not less than two exits.

Page 55 of 87
 An elevator lobby may have one exit if the use of the exit does
not require keys, tools, special knowledge or effort.

TABLE 1021.2(1)
STORIES WITH (DNE EXIT OR ACCESS TO ONE EXIT FOR R-2 OCCUPANCIES
STORY OCCUPANCY MAXIMUM NUMBER OF MAXIMUM EXIT
DWELLING UNITS ACCESS TRAVEL
DISTANCE
Basement, first or second R-2a,b 2 dwelling units 125 feet
story
Third story and above NP NA NA
For SI: 1 foot = 304.8 mm
NP - Not Permitted
NA - Not Applicable
a. Buildings classified as Group R-2 equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with
Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2 and provided with emergency escape and rescue openings in accordance with Section
1029.
b. This table is used for R-2 occupancies consisting of dwelling units. For R-2 occupancies consisting of sleeping
units, use Table 1021.2(2).

TABLE 1021.2(2)
STORIES WITH ON E EXIT OR ACCESS T(D ONE EXIT FOR OTHER OCCUPANCIES
STORY OCCUPANCY MAXIMUM MAXIMUM EXIT
OCCUPANTS PER ACCESS TRAVEL
STORY DISTANCE
A, Bb, E, Fb, M , U, Sb 49 occupants 75 feet
H-2, H-3 3 occupants 25 feet
First story H-4, H-5,1, R-1, 10 occupants 75 feet
R-2a,c, R-4
S 29 occupants 100 feet
Second story or basement R-1, R-2, R-4, B,F, M , S, 10 occupants 75 feet
Hd
Third story and above NP NA NA
For SI: 1 foot = 304.8 mm.
NP - Not Permitted
NA - Not Applicable
a. Buildings classified as Group R-2 equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with
Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2 and provided with emergency escape and rescue openings in accordance with Section
1029.
b. Group B, F and S occupancies in buildings equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system in accordance
with Section 903.3.1.1 shall have a maximum travel distance of 100 feet.
c. This table is used for R-2 occupancies consisting of sleeping units. For R-2 occupancies consisting of dwelling
units, use Table 1021.2(1).
d. Basement not allowed.

1026.3 Open side. Exterior exit stairways and ramps serving as an element of a required
means of egress shall be open on at least two adjacent sides. A side is open if at least 75
percent of the area isfreeof any obstmctions, including, but not limited to columns,
beams, walls, handrails, and guards.

Page 56 of 87
1101.1 Scope. The provisions of this chapter shall control the design and constmction of
facilities for accessibility to physically disabled persons. Existing buildings and facilities
shall comply with the International Existing Building Code as adopted and incorporated
into the City Code.

1101.2 Design. Buildings and facilities that are not included in the scope of the Texas
Accessibility Standards (TAS) shall be designed and constmcted to be accessible in
accordance with the Building Code and ICC A l 17.1. Buildings and facilities included in
the scope of TAS shall be designed and constmcted to be accessible in accordance with
the Texas Accessibility Standards of the Architectural Barriers Act, Article 9102, Texas
Civil Statutes, as amended.

1104.1 Site arrival points. Accessible routes within the site shall be provided from
public transportation stops, accessible parking, accessible passenger loading zones, and
public streets or sidewalks to the accessible building entrance served. An accessible route
shall be located so that a person using the route is not required to travel in a traffic lane or
behind a parked vehicle (except the vehicle the person operates or in which the person is
a passenger).

Exception: Other than in buildings or facilities containing or serving Type A or

T3^e B units, an accessible route shall not be required between site arrival points
and the building or facility entrance if the only means of access between them is a
vehicular way not providing for pedestrian access.

1106.6 Location. Accessible parking spaces shall be located on the shortest accessible
route of travel from adjacent parking to an accessible building entrance. An accessible
route shall be located so that a person using the route is not required to travel in a traffic
lane or behind a parked vehicle (except the vehicle the person operates or in which the
person is a passenger). Accessible parking spaces shall be dispersed among the various
types of parking facilities provided. In parking facilities that do not serve a particular
building, accessible parking spaces shall be located on the shortest route to an accessible
pedestrian entrance to the parking facility. Where buildings have multiple accessible
entrances with adjacent parking, accessible parking spaces shall be dispersed and located
near the accessible entrances.

Exceptions:

1. In multilevel parking stmctures, van-accessible parking spaces are

permitted on one level.

Page 57 of 87
 2, Accessible parking spaces shall be permitted to be located in different
parking facilities if substantially equivalent or greater accessibility is
provided in terms of distance from an accessible entrance or
entrances, parking fee and user convenience.

1107.6.1.2 Type B units. In stmctures with three or more dwelling units or sleeping units
intended to be occupied as a residence, every dwelling unit and sleeping unit intended to
be occupied as a residence shall be a Type B unit.

Exception: The number of Type B units is permitted to be reduced in accordance

with Section 1107.7 {General exceptions).

1107.6.2.1.2 Type B units. Where there are three or more dwelling units or sleeping
units intended to be occupied as a residence in a single stmcture, every dwelling unit and
sleeping unit intended to be occupied as a residence shall be a Type B unit.

Exception: The number of Type B units is permitted to be reduced in accordance

with Section 1107.7 {General exceptions).

1107.6.2.2.2 Type B units. Where there are three or more dwelling units or sleeping
units intended to be occupied as a residence in a single stmcture, every dwelling unit and
every sleeping unit intended to be occupied as a residence shall be a Type B unit.

Exception: The number of Type B units is permitted to be reduced in accordance

with Section 1107.7 {General exceptions).

1107.6.3 Group R-3. In Group R-3 occupancies where there are three or more dwelling
units or sleeping units intended to be occupied as a residence in a single stmcture, every
dwelling unit and sleeping unit intended to be occupied as a residence shall be a Type B
unit.

Exception: The number of Type B units is permitted to be reduced in accordance

with Section 1107.7 {General exceptions).

1107.6.4.2 Type B units. In stmctures with three or more dwelling units or sleeping units
intended to be occupied as a residence, every dwelling unit and sleeping unit intended to
be occupied as a residence shall be a Type B unit.

Exception: The number of Type B units is permitted to be reduced in accordance

with Section 1107.7 {General exceptions).

Page 58 of 87
1109.15 Recreational and sport facilities. Recreational and sport facilities shall be
provided with accessible features in accordance with Sections 1109.15.1 through
1109.15.4. Elements of recreational and sport facilities not covered by the design
standards in Section 1101.2 {Design) shall be designed in accordance with the "ADA and
ABA Accessibility Guidelines for Buildings and Facilities, Chapter 10: Recreational
Facilities", published by the United States Access Board.

1301 Energy Efficiency. Buildings shall be designed and constmcted in accordance

with the Energy Code, adopted by Chapter 25-12, Article 12 (Enersv Code).

SECTION 1512 OCCUPIED ROOFTOPS

1512.1 Construction requirements. Roofs approved for rooftop occupancy shall have a
minimum fire resistance of one-hour or the fire resistance required for the building,
whichever is greater. Occupied roofs shall be treated as a floor for the following
constmction related purposes.
1. For determining the required constmction type and minimum fire
resistance rating for the roof stmcture.
2. For calculating occupant load and building height as they relate to
exiting requirements of Chapter 10 and thresholds for fire safety
features required by Sections 903 {Automatic Sprinkler Systems),
Section 905 {Standpipe Systems), and 907 {Fire Alarm and
Detection Systems).
Exception: The occupant load of an occupied roof that
complies with this section shall not contribute to the occupant
load of the fire area below for the purposes of requiring
automatic sprinkler and/or fire alarm protection provided that:
1) all openings from below are protected with fire resistive
assemblies, and 2) the occupied roof has code compliant exits
independent of the building or buildings below.
3. For the location and installation of toilet facilities.
1512.2 Fall protection. Occupied rooftops shall be provided with guards compliant with
Section 1013 {Guards).
1512.3 Interstitial spaces. When decks or other walking surfaces are constmcted above
a roof to facilitate rooftop occupancy, the space between the roofceiling assembly and
the deck or surface shall be constmcted in a manner that precludes the accumulation of

Page 59 of 87
material between the roofi'ceiling assembly and the deck or walking surface and that
prevents the introduction of ignition sources to the space.
1512.4 Coverings above or around the occupants of an occupied rooftop. A rooftop
equipped with a horizontal or vertical covering or coverings, including weather
protection, such as a roof or a tent or membrane stmcture that exceeds the limitations of
Chapter 24 {Flammable Finishes) of the Fire Code shall be considered an additional story
and shall comply with the constmction and occupancy requirements of the City Code as a
floor.
Exceptions:
1. Small roof coverings may be approved for weather protection of
restrooms and beverage preparation areas such as bars without
requiring the rooftop to comply with all of the requirements of this
code for a story or floor. Such coverings shall comply with the
Building Code as to constmction materials and fire resistance. The
area of such coverings shall be limited to the minimum area required
to comply with sanitation and health safety regulations.
2. An open noncombustible trellis or similar overhead shading device
complying with the stmctural requirements of this code shall not be
considered as a covering or roof provided that the trellis or shade
has an evenly distributed net free area of 50 percent or greater.
1603.1.3 Roof snow load data. The ground snow load, Pg, shall be indicated. In areas
where the ground snow load, Pg, exceeds 10 pounds per square foot (psf) (0.479 kN/m2),
the following additional information shall also be provided, regardless of whether snow
loads govern the design of the roof:
1. Flat-roof snow load, Pf.
2. Snow exposure factor, Cg.
3. Snow load importance factor, /.
4. Thermal factor, C,.
Exception: Snow load information is only required when applicable.
1603.1.4 Wind design data. The following information related to wind loads shall be
shown, regardless of whether wind loads govern the design of the lateral force-resisting
system of the stmcture:
1. Ultimate design wind speed, Vuit, (3-second gust), miles per hour (km/hr) and
nominal design wind speed, Vasd, as determined in accordance with Section
1609.3.1 {Windspeed conversion).
Page 60 of 87
 2. Risk category.

3. Wind exposure. Where more than one wind exposure is utilized, the wind
exposure and applicable wind direction shall be indicated.
4. The applicable internal pressure coefficient.
5. Components and cladding. The design wind pressures in terms of psf
(kN/m2) to be used for the design of exterior component and cladding
materials not specifically designed by the registered design professional.
Exception: A note indicating that the engineer of record has reviewed and
included wind design data in accordance with this section in his design
analysis may be included in lieu of notes 1 through 5.
1607.4.1 Additional requirements.
1. Garage loadings shall not include an impact factor forfloorsor roofs.
2. Ramp loadings shall be the same as floors.
3. Garage roofs used for passenger vehicles or tmcks and bus parking shall be
designed for a non-reducible live load of 55 psf, which includes snow and
snow removal equipment. Garage roofs that provide access for fire tmcks
shall be designed for the required fire tmck loads.
4. Dining rooms and restaurants. A nonresidential kitchen shall be designed
for the same design load as the occupancy served. Use the weight of actual
equipment or stored materials when greater than the design load established
in ASCE7.
1607.8.1 Handrails and guards. Handrails and guards shall be designed to resist a
linear load of 50 pounds per linear foot (plf) (0.73 kN/m) applied in any direction at the
top and to transfer this load through the supports to the stmcture and must be in
accordance with Section 4.5.1 of ASCE 7. Glass handrail assemblies and guards shall
also comply with Section 2407 {Glass in Handrails and Guards).

1607.10.2 Alternative floor live load reduction. As an altemative to Section 1607.10.1

{Basic uniform live load reduction) and subject to the limitations of Table 1607.1
{Minimum Uniformly Distributed Live Loads, and Minimum Concentrated Love Loads),
uniformly distributed live loads are permitted to be reduced in accordance with the
following provisions. Such reductions shall apply to slab systems, beams, girders,
columns, piers, walls and foundations.

Page 61 of 87

J
1. A reduction shall not be permitted where the live load exceeds 100 psf (4.79
kN/m2) except that the design live load for members supporting two or more
floors is permitted to be reduced by a maximum 20 percent.
Exception: For uses other than storage, where approved, additional live load
reductions shall be permitted where shown by the registered design
professional that a rational approach has been used and that such reductions
are warranted.
2. A reduction shall not be permitted in passenger vehicle parking garages
except that the live loads for members supporting two or more floors are
permitted to be reduced by a maximum of 20 percent.
3. For live loads not exceeding 100 psf (4.79 kN/m2), the design live load for
any stmctural member supporting 150 square feet (13.94 m2) or more is
permitted to be reduced in accordance with Equation 16-24.
4. For one way slabs, the area. A, for use in Equation 16-24 shall not exceed
the product of the slab span and a width normal to the span of 0.5 times the
slab span.
5. For stmctural members supporting more than 150 square feet in garages
used for the storage of passenger vehicles, the reduced live load shall not be
less than 30 pounds per square foot.
R = 0.08 (A -150) (Equation 16-24)
For S L R = 0.861 (A-13.94)
Such reduction shall not exceed the smallest of:
1. 40 percent for horizontal members;
2. 60 percent for vertical members; or
3. R as determined by the following equation.
R = 23.1 (1 + D/Lo) (Equation 16-25)
where:
A = Area of floor supported by the member, square feet
(m2).
D = Dead load per square foot (m2) of area supported.
Lo = Unreduced live load per square foot (m2) of area supported.
R = Reduction in percent.
Page 62 of 87
1607.15 Fire truck loading. If fire department access requires travel over a stmcture or
loading of a stmcture by fire department vehicles, the stmcture shall be analyzed for the
three load cases indicated below. Stmctural members shall be designed for the most
severe case. Thefirevehicle geometry is shown in Figure 1607.15.
1. Basic Load Case. The front axle load shall be 21,130 pounds (10,565
pounds per tire) with a tire contact area of 12 in. x 13 in. The load on each
rear axle shall be 25,700 pounds (12,850 pounds per tire) with a tire contact
area of 14 in. x 16 in. Impact and longitudinal forces imparted by the
vehicle loads shall be in accordance with the latest edition of AASHTO
standards.
2. Static Load Case A. A load of 43,200 pounds on one outrigger. The contact
area of each outrigger is 24 in. x 24 in. The load is to be located so as to
produce the maximum stress in the member(s) being analyzed when applied
according to the geometry of Figure 1607.15.
3. Static Load Case B. A load of 28,600 pounds on each of two adjacent
outriggers (total load is 57,200 pounds). The contact area of each outrigger
is 24 in. x 24 in. The load is to be located so as to produce the maximum
stress in the member(s) being analyzed when applied according to the
geometry of Figure 1607.15.
The Fire Prevention Bureau shall determine the area around any building or stmcture for
which fire access is required and the provisions of this section are applicable.

Page 63 of 87
Figure 1607.15

2001 Pierce, Ladder 1 and Ladder 8

ED
V)

23"

Page 64 of 87
SECTION 1612 FLOOD LOADS
1612.1 General. Within flood hazard areas as established in Section 1612.3,
{Establishment offlood hazard areas) all new constmction of buildings, and alterations to
buildings and stmctures, stmctures and portions of buildings and stmctures, including
substantial improvements and restoration of substantial damage to buildings and
stmctures, shall be designed and constmcted to resist the effects of flood hazards and
flood loads. All elevation requirements noted in this ordinance shall be documented using
the Elevation Certificate, FEMA 81-31, and shall be certified by a registered professional
engineer, surveyor, or architect, and shall be submitted to the Floodplain Administrator.
1612.2 Definitions. The following terms are defined in Chapter 2:
BASE FLOOD
BASE FLOOD ELEVATION
BASEMENT
DESIGN FLOOD
DESIGN FLOOD ELEVATION
DRY FLOODPROOFING
EXISTING CONSTRUCTION
EXISTING STRUCTURE
FLOOD or FLOODING
FLOOD DAMAGE-RESISTANT MATERIALS
FLOOD HAZARD AREA
FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP (FIRM)
FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY
FLOODWAY
LOWEST FLOOR
NEW CONSTRUCTION
REGULATORY FLOOD DATUM
SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREA
START OF CONSTRUCTION

Page 65 of 87
SUBSTANTIAL DAMAGE
SUBSTANTIAL IMPROVEMENT
1612.3 Establishment of flood hazard areas. Flood hazard areas are established to
include the following:

1. the flood hazard areas identified by the Federal Emergency Management

Agency in a scientific and engineering report entitled, "The Flood Insurance
Study for Austin, Texas," dated September 26, 2008, with accompanying
Flood Insurance Rate Maps and Flood Boundary-Floodway Maps (FIRM
and FBFM) and related supporting data along with any amendments or
revisions thereto are hereby adopted by reference and declared to be a part of
this section; and
2. the 100-year and 25-yearfloodplainsbased on projected fiill development as
specified in the Austin City Code and Drainage Criteria Manual are adopted
by reference and declared to be part of this section.
1612.4 Design and construction. The design and constmction of buildings and
stmctures, and additions and alterations to buildings and stmctures located in flood
hazard areas, shall be in accordance with ASCE 24, Flood Resistant Design and
Constmction.
1612.4.1 Freeboard. A minimum freeboard of one (1) foot shall be added where the
design flood elevation or other elevation requirements are specified.
1612.4.2 Provisions of Safe Refuge.
1. Buildings or stmctures constmcted in the flood hazard area where the
ground surface is below the design flood elevation, or where flood water
velocities at the building may exceed five feet per second, shall be provided
with an enclosed refiige space one (1) foot or more above the design flood
elevation of sufficient area to provide for the occupancy load with a
minimum of 12 square feet per person. The refiige space shall be provided
to an exterior platform and stairway not less than three feet wide.
2. Existing buildings and stmctures in flood hazard areas which are enlarged,
extended, or altered, or where a change of use or occupancy is made, shall
conform to the requirements of Subsection 1.
3. No floor level or portion of a building or stmcture that is lower than one (1)
foot above the design flood elevation, regardless of the stmcture or space
classification, shall be used residentially, or for storage of any property.

Page 66 of 87
 materials, or equipment that might constitute a safety hazard when contacted
by flood waters.
1612.4.3 Means of Egress. Normal access to the building shall be by direct connection
with an area that is a minimum of one (1) foot above the design flood elevation, unless
otherwise approved by the building official.

1612.5 Flood hazard documentation. The following documentation shall be prepared

and sealed by a registered design professional and submitted to the building official:
1. For constmction in flood hazard areas:
1.1. the elevation of the lowest floor, including the basement, as required
by the lowest floor elevation inspection in Sections 110.3.1.3.1
{Lowest floor elevation) and 110.3.10.1 {Flood hazard
documentation);
1.2. for fiilly enclosed areas below the design flood elevation where
provisions to allow for the automatic entry and exit offloodwatersdo
not meet the minimum requirements in Section 2.6.2.1 of ASCE 24,
constmction documents shall include a statement that the design will
provide for equalization of hydrostatic flood forces in accordance with
Section 2.6.2.2 of ASCE 24; and
1.3. For dry flood-proofed nonresidential buildings, constmction
documents shall include a statement that the dry floodproofing is
designed in accordance with ASCE 24.
1704.2.3 Statement of special inspections. The permit applicant shall submit a
statement of special inspections prepared by the registered design professional in charge
and responsible in accordance with Section 107.1 {General) as a condition for permit
issuance. This statement shall include a complete list of materials and work requiring
special inspections by this section and the inspections to be performed. The owner or
owner's agent shall submit, for the building official's review, a list of the individuals,
agencies, orfirmsintended to be retained for conducting such inspections.
SECTION 1712 REGISTERED INDUSTRIAL PLANT
Section 1712.1 Definition. A registered industrial plant is one or more buildings
registered with the building official under Section 1712.3 {Application and fee) used for
manufacturing, processing, research and development, education, health care or service
that requires specialized buildings, utilities, and equipment.
Section 1712.2 Requirements. The following requirements apply to a registered
industrial plant:
Page 67 of 87
 1. A registered industrial plant may not have less than 100,000 square feet of
floor area in a building or buildings at locations within the city limits and
used for manufacturing, processing, research and development, or service
that requires specialized building, utilities, and equipment and where no
fewer than 200 persons are employed.
2. A registered industrial plant must employ fiill time personnel for the
operation and maintenance of buildings, utilities, and equipment; and must
comply with all requirements of the Building Code.
3. The owner of a registered industrial plant must designate a fiill time
employee (the "responsible official") who is responsible for ensuring
compliance with all code provisions enforced by the building official. The
responsible official must be a registered design professional in the State of
Texas or a person approved by the building official.
Section 1712.3 Application and fee. An applicant for registration under this section
must file an application on a form required by the building official. The application fee is
refunded if the application is denied. The application must include both the name of the
person with the authority to act for and on behalf of the owner of the plant, and the name
of the person proposed by the applicant to be the responsible official under this section.
Exception: A registered industrial plant may include leased buildings if both the
entire building is leased by the owner of the plant and the maintenance and
operation of the leased building is under the control of the responsible official.
The building official shall provide written notice to the applicant if the application
is denied or disapproved pending receipt of additional information. The notice must
include a statement of the building official's reasons for denying or disapproving the
application under this section.
A registration under this section expires on December 31 of the year it is approved. The
registration may be renewed on or before December 31 for a one year period by payment
of a renewal fee at a rate of $550 per 100,000 square feet of floor area of buildings
registered under this section.
Section 1712.4 Exemption from plan review and permit fees. The owner of a
registered industrial plant is not required to obtain a permit otherwise required by the
Building Code if the owner complies with Section 1712.5 {Work reports and inspections)
and the work:
1. does not alter a bearing wall or other stmctural elements;
2. does not require a change to an exit system;
3. does not alterfire-resistiveconstmction;
Page 68 of 87
 4. is performed on a building or stmcture for which a certificate of occupancy
for the existing occupancy had been issued by the building official;
5. does not alter natural gas piping or medical gas piping systems;
6. does not alter hazardous production material (HPM) supply or waste piping
in areas of the building not currently classified as an H occupancy;
7. does not remove, relocate, replace, or install a backflow prevention device;
8. does not increase the existing square footage of a building;
9. otherwise complies with all other applicable provisions of this title; and
10. is performed by licensed contractors under the registered industrial plant
provisions of the Plumbing Code, Electrical Code or Mechanical Code.
Section 1712.5 Work reports and inspections. A brief description of all work
performed under this section must be maintained by the responsible official and must be
available to the building official during periodic inspections. The building official shall
inspect work performed under this section at least every six months.
Section 1712.6 Change of responsible official. If the responsible official leaves the
fiill-time employment of the regisfrant, an acting responsible official who is qualified
under Section 1712.2 {Requirements) shall be designated by the registrant not later that
seven days after the employee leaves fiill-time employment fewer than seven days' notice
to the building official. An acting responsible official may serve for a period not to
exceed 45 days. If a new responsible official is not designated within the 45 day period,
registration under this section will be suspended until a new responsible official is
designated.
Section 1712.7 Revocation or termination of registration. The building official may
suspend or revoke a regisfration under this section if the registrant fails to comply with
any of the requirements of Section 1712 {Registered Industrial Plant) or with any
requirement of the City Code with respect to work performed under these sections. A
suspension or revocation is not effective until the building official has provided written
notice to the registrant of the suspension or revocation. The notice shall include a
statement of the building official's reasons for the action. A registrant may terminate its
registration by delivering written notice of termination to the building official.

SECTION 1811 EARTH RETENTION SYSTEMS

1811.1 Tieback anchors and soil and rock nails. Tieback anchors and soil and rock
nails that are allowed in the public right-of-way as components of earth retention systems
as provided in Section 3202.1.4 {Earth retention system components) shall comply with
Page 69 of 87
Sections 1811.1.1 {Depth of tiebacks anchors and soil and rock nails) through 1811.1.3
{Length of tiebacks anchors and soil and rock nails).
1811.1.1 Depth of tieback anchors and soil and rock nails. At the right-of-way line,
tieback anchors and soil and rock anchors must be at least 6 feet (1829 mm) below the
elevation of the adjacent street curb.
1811.1.2 Separation distance from buried utilities. Tieback anchors and soil and rock
nails must be below and at least five feet (1524 mm) away from the nearest outside
surface of any existing or planned buried utility in the public right-of-way.
1811.1.3 Length of tieback anchors and soil and rock nails. Tieback anchors and soil
and rock nails that extend beyond the center of the public right-of-way are prohibited.
2108.4 A C I 530/ASCE 5/TMS402, Section 3.1.7.2.2. Modify Section 3.1.7.2.2 as
follows:
3.1.7.2.2 In plane bending - For masonry subjected to in-plane loads, the modulus
of mpture, f , normal and parallel to the bed joints shall be taken from Table
3.1.7.2.1. For grouted stack bond masonry, tension parallel to the bed joints shall
be assumed to be resisted only by the continuous horizontal grout section.
2407.1 Materials. Glass used as a handrail assembly or a guard section shall be
constmcted of either laminated fiilly tempered glass or laminated heat-strengthened glass.
Glazing in railing in-fill panels shall be of an approved safety glazing material that
conforms to the provisions of Section 2406.1.1. For all glazing types, the minimum
nominal thickness shall be 1/4 inch (6.4 mm). Fully tempered glass and laminated glass
shall comply with Category II of CPSC 16 CFR Part 1201 or Class A of ANSI Z97.1.
3102.1 General. The provisions Sections 3102.1 {General) through 3102.8 {Inflation
systems) shall apply to air-supported, air-inflated, membrane-covered cable and
membrane-covered frame stmctures, collectively known as membrane stmctures
separated by at least 20 feet (6,096 mm) from any building as specified in IFC Section
3103.8.2 {Location) and erected for a period of 180 days or longer. The provisions of
this section also apply to membrane stmctures separated by less than 20 feet from any
building and erected for a period of 90 days or longer. Those erected for a shorter period
of time shall comply with the Intemational Fire Code. Membrane stmctures covering
water storage facilities, water clarifiers, water treatment plants, sewage treatment plants,
greenhouses and similar facilities not used for human occupancy, are required to meet
only the requirements of Sections 3102.3.1 {Membrane and interior liner material) and
3102.7 {Engineering design). Membrane stmctures erected on a building, balcony, deck
or other stmcture for any period of time shall comply with this section.

Page 70 of 87
3103.5 Portable classrooms. Portable classroom buildings may be moved into or within
this jurisdiction or within a public school district without conforming to the adopted
Energy Code.
3103.6 Moved residential buildings. Residential buildings or stmctures moved into or
within the City's zoning jurisdiction shall be sited in compliance with applicable
provisions of Title 25 of the City Code. Foundations of relocated residential buildings or
stmctures must comply with the provisions of the Building Code for new buildings or
stmctures. A l l other building elements must comply with the requirements of the
Intemational Residential Code.
3103.7 Moved non-residential buildings. Non-residential buildings moved into or
within the City's zoning jurisdiction must comply with the provisions of the Building
Code for new buildings or stmctures.
3109.3 Public swimming pools. Public swimming pools shall be enclosed as required
by the Texas Department of Health Standards for Swimming Pools and Spas.

3112 AERIAL PASSAGEWAYS

3112.1 Defined. An aerial passageway is a stmcture located over an alley or street
connecting two buildings on opposite sides of the alley or street.
3112.2 Requirements. An aerial passageway shall comply with this section.
1. The stmcture shall be used for access only and not for storage or occupancy.
2. The stmcture shall be constmcted entirely of non-combustible materials.
3. Self-closing Class A doors shall be placed at each end of the passageway.
4. If the stmcture interferes with any public utility facilities, all costs associated
with relocation and remediation shall be borne by the Owner.
5. No electric, gas, or water shall be attached to or be permitted to cross on or
in the aerial passageway. Telephone and other communication utilities may
be allowed subject to the execution of a license agreement.
6. Except as otherwise provided in the section, a minimum clearance of 18 feet
above the surface of the alley or street is required. The building official may
allow a height that is less than 18 feet but not less than 17 feet if he
determines that the lower height will result in an equivalent installation.
7. A license agreement required by City Code Chapter 14-11 is executed.

Page 71 of 87
3201.1 Scope. The provisions of this chapter shall govern the encroachment of stmctures
into the public right-of-way, including components of earth retention systems used to
facilitate below-grade constmction of a building or stmcture.
3202.1 Encroachments below grade. Encroachments below grade shall comply with
Sections 3202.1.1 {Structural support) through 3202.1 {Earth retention system
components).
3202.1.4 Earth retention system components. Components of earth retention systems
that are required for stmctural support of a building or stmcture are prohibited in the
public right-of-way. Components of earth retention systems that are needed only during
constmction of the below-grade portion of a building or stmcture are subject to the
following conditions:
1. Approval of the Director of the Public Works Department is required before
constmction of earth retention system components in public right-of-way
commences.
2. All components of an earth retention system are prohibited in the public
right-of-way except for (1) tieback anchors that are part of a soldier pile and
lagging system; (2) tieback anchors that are part of a diaphragm or slurry
wall system; (3) tieback anchors that are part of a sheet pile wall system; (4)
tieback anchors that are part of a secant wall system; and (5) soil or rock
nails that are part of a nail wall.
3. Tieback anchors or soil or rock nails that are necessary as functional
components of the earth retention system for longer than 12 months are
prohibited in the public right-of-way.
4. Tieback anchors and soil and rock nails allowed in the public right-of- way
must be designed according to the criteria in Section 1811 {Earth Retention
Systems).
CHAPTER 34 EXISTING STRUCTURES
(A) The International Existing Building Code, 2012 edition, published by the
Intemational Code Council is adopted and incorporated into this section with
deletions and amendments in Subsections (B) and (C).
(B) The following provisions of the 2012 Intemational Existing Building Code
are deleted:
Sec. 103 Sec. 105.1.1 Sec. 105.1.2 Sec. 105.3
Sec. 105.3.2 Sec. 105.5 Sec. 106.2.3 Sec. 106.2.5
Sec. 109.3.1 Sec. 109.3.3 Sec. 109.3.5 Sec. 111.3
Page 72 of 87
 Sec. 112
(C) The following provisions are local amendments to the 2012 Intemational
Existing Building Code. Each provision in this section is substitute for the
identically numbered provision deleted by Section (B) or is an addition to
the 2012 Intemational Existing Building Code.

103 Building official. The City Manager shall appoint a building official to administer
and interpret this Code. The building official may appoint one or more deputy building
officials.
[A] 105.3 Application for permit. To obtain a permit, the applicant shall first file a
permit application in writing on a form fiimished by the Building official for that
purpose. The permit application shall:
1. Identify and describe the work to be covered by the permit for which the
application is made.
2. Describe the land on which the proposed work is to be done by legal
description, street address, or similar description that will readily identify
and definitely locate the proposed building or work.
3. Indicate the use and occupancy for which the proposed work is intended.
4. Be accompanied by constmction documents and other information as
required in Section 106.3 {Examination of documents).
5. State the valuation of the proposed work.
6. Be signed by the applicant, or the applicant's authorized agent.
7. Give such other data and information as required by the building official.
8. Trench protection. An application must include certification by a registered
professional engineer that trench safety systems have been designed in
accordance with state law and OSHA standards.
[A] 105.5 Time Limitation on Application; Permit Expiration and Reactivation.
Time limits on permit applications and requirements for permit expiration and
reactivation, including a review fee for expired permits, are set forth in Chapter 25-12,
Article 13 {Administration of Technical Codes).

105.8 Transfer of permit. The building official is authorized to establish a building

permit transfer poHcy.

Page 73 of 87
106.2.2.1 Fire protection at penetrations. Deferred submittal shop drawings and
schedules that are submitted shall indicate the fire protective assemblies proposed for
installation at all penetrations through fire and smoke constmction in accordance with
Sections 714 {Penetrations) and 715 {Fire-Resistant Joint Systems) of the 2012
Intemational Building Code.
[A] 106.2.3 Means of Egress. The constmction documents shall show in sufficient detail
the location, constmction, size, and character of all portions of the means of egress in
compliance with the provisions of this code. The constmction documents shall designate
the number of occupants to be accommodated on every floor and in every room or space
that is part of an assembly occupancy.
[A] 106.2.5 Site plan. The constmction documents submitted with the permit application
shall be accompanied by a site plan showing to scale the size and location of new
constmction and existing stmctures on the site, distances from lot lines, the established
street grades and the proposed finished grades and, as applicable, flood hazard areas,
floodways, and design flood elevations; and it shall be drawn in accordance with an
accurate boundary line survey. In the case of demolition, the site plan shall show
constmction to be demolished and the location and size of existing stmctures and
constmction that are to remain on the site or plot. For a building or stmcture involving
below-grade constmction, the site plan shall show the location of proposed earth
retention system components allowed under Section 3202.1.4 {Earth Retention System
Components) of the 2012 Intemational Building Code. The building official is
authorized to waive or modify the requirement of the site plan when the permit
application is for alteration, repair, or when otherwise warranted.
107.5 Temporary earth retention systems. Temporary earth retention system
components used to facilitate below-grade constmction of a building or stmcture shall
conform to Sections 1811 {Earth Retention Systems) and Section 3202.1.4 {Earth
retention system components) of this code.
108.7 Plan review fees. An applicant must pay a plan review fee, adopted by separate
ordinance when plans and specifications are submitted for review under Section 106
{Construction Documents). The building official shall compute the building plan review
fees using the total value of all constmction work for which the permit is issued as well
as the value of all finish work, painting, roofing, electrical, plumbing, heating, air
conditioning, elevators, fire-extinguishing systems, and other permanent equipment. The
building official shall charge an additional plan review fee if plans are incomplete or
changed so as to require additional plan review. The plan review fees referenced in this
section are in addition to the permit fees referenced in Section 108.1 {Payment of fees).
[A] 109.3.1 Building pre-construction inspection. This is the first inspection
conducted. The inspector verifies the permits that were issued for work at a site and

Page 74 of 87
meets with the contractor or owner at the site to review plans and identify potential
issues. The inspector notifies the contractor of the inspector's work hours, identifies
required inspections, and leaves a green sign-off tag for future inspections.
[A] 109.3.1.2 Layout Inspection. A layout inspection shall be made after all foundation
forms have been erected and are in place, but before any concrete is placed.
[A] 109.3.1.3 Footing and foundation inspection. Footing and foundation inspections
shall be made after excavations for footings are complete and any required reinforcing
steel is in place. For concrete foundations, any required forms shall be in place prior to
inspection. Materials for the foundation shall be on the job, except where concrete is
ready mixed in accordance with ASTM C 94, the concrete need not be on the job.
[A] 109.3.1.3.1 Lowest floor elevation. For additions and substantial improvements to
existing buildings in flood hazard areas, upon placement of the lowest floor, including
basement, and prior to further vertical constmction, the elevation documentation required
in the Intemational Building Code shall be submitted to the building official.
[A] 109.3.5 Lath and gypsum board inspection. Lath and gypsum board inspections
shall be made after lathing and gypsum board, interior and exterior, is in place, but before
any plastering is applied or gypsum board joints and fasteners are taped and finished.
Exception: Gypsum board that is not part of a fire-resistance-rated wall, a shear
assembly, or a tub and shower surround, limited to a maximum of 32 square feet.
110.5 Maintenance of records. The building owner or the owner's authorized agent
must maintain a copy of the certificate of occupancy on the premises and provide it to an
authorized official on request.
[A] 111.3 Authority to disconnect service utilities. The building official may authorize
the disconnection of utility service to the building, stmcture, or service system regulated
by this Code and the codes referenced under this section.

111.3.1 Circumstances for which utilities may be disconnected. The building official
may authorize disconnection of utilities if the building official determines that:
1. disconnection is necessary to eliminate an immediate hazard to life or
property;
2. an owner or occupant is in violation of a stop work order;
3. electrical work has been installed without a permit;
4. plumbing or gas piping has been installed without a permit; or
5. development does not comply with the land development regulations.

Page 75 of 87
111.3.2 Notice. This section prescribes notice requirements for disconnection of utilities.
111.3.2.1 Disconnection because of an immediate threat to life or property. If
disconnection of utilities is necessary to eliminate an immediate hazard to life, the
building official shall notify the serving utility and whenever possible, the owner and
occupant of the building, stmcture, or service system of the decision prior to taking any
action. If not notified prior to disconnecting, the owner or occupant of the building,
stmcture or service system shall be notified in writing, by certified mail, retum receipt
requested, as soon as practical thereafter.
111.3.2.2 Disconnection for a reason other than an immediate threat to life or
property. If the disconnection of utilities is for a reason other than to eliminate an
immediate hazard to life, the building official shall give notice according to this section.
Notice shall first be provided for the violation in accordance with the applicable section
of Title 25 {Land Development). The notice of violation shall include a statement that the
building official may authorize the disconnection of utilities if the violation is not cured
within the timeframe established in the notice of violation. If the owner or occupant fails
to comply with the notice of violation, the building official may issue a notice to the
owner and occupant stating that utilities to the property will be disconnected not less than
one week after the date that the notice is mailed. The notice must identify each utility
that will be disconnected.
SECTION 112 BUILDING AND FIRE CODE BOARD OF APPEALS
Regulations regarding the Building and Fire Code Board of Appeals are found in Chapter
2-1 of the City Code.
APPENDIX G FLOOD-RESISTANT CONSTRUCTION
The provisions contained in this appendix are mandatory.
SECTION GlOO STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION
As a home-mle city, the City of Austin has the responsibility and power to adopt
regulations designed to minimize flood losses. The Legislature of the State of Texas has
in Sections 16.3145 and 16.315 of the Texas Water Code authorized local government
units to adopt regulations designed to minimize flood losses.
SECTION GlOl ADMINISTRATION
G l O l . l Purpose. The purpose of this appendix is to promote the public health, safety
and general welfare and to minimize public and private losses due to flood conditions in
specific flood hazard areas through the establishment of comprehensive regulations for
management of flood hazard areas designed to:

Page 76 of 87
 1. Prevent unnecessary dismption of commerce, access and public service
during times of flooding.
2. Manage the alteration of natural flood plains, stream channels and
shorelines.
3. Manage filling, grading, dredging and other development which may
increase flood damage or erosion potential.
4. Prevent or regulate the constmction of flood barriers which will divert
floodwaters or which can increase flood hazards.
5. Contribute to improved constmction techniques in the flood plain.
6. Restrict or prohibit uses that are dangerous to health, safety or property in
times of flood, or cause excessive increases in flood heights or velocities;
and
7. Require that uses vulnerable to floods, including facilities which serve such
uses, be protected against flood damage at the time of initial constmction.
G101.2 Objectives. The objectives of this appendix are to protect human life, minimize
the expenditure of public money for flood control projects, minimize the need for rescue
and relief efforts associated with flooding, minimize prolonged business intermption,
minimize damage to public facilities and utilities, help maintain a stable tax base by
providing for the sound use and development of flood-prone areas, contribute to
improved constmction techniques in the flood plain and ensure that potential owners and
occupants are notified that property is within flood hazard areas.
G101.3 Scope. The provisions of this appendix shall apply to all proposed development
in a flood hazard area established in Section 1612 {Flood Loads) of the Building Code.
G101.4 Violations. Any violation of a provision of this appendix, or failure to comply
with a permit or variance issued pursuant to this appendix or any requirement of this
appendix, shall be handled in accordance with Section 114 {Violations).
SECTION G102 APPLICABILITY
G102.1 General. This appendix, in conjunction with the Building Code, provides
minimum requirements for development located in flood hazard areas, including the
subdivision of land; installation of utilities; placement and replacement of manufactured
homes; new constmction and repair, reconstmction, rehabilitation, or additions to new
constmction and substantial improvement of existing buildings and stmctures, including
restoration after damagCT
G102.1.1 Abrogation and greater restrictions. This appendix is not intended to
repeal, abrogate, or impair any existing easements, covenants, or deed
Page 77 of 87
restrictions. However, where this appendix and another city code provision, easement,
covenant, or deed restriction conflict or overlap, whichever imposes the more stringent
restrictions shall prevail.
G102.2 Establishment of flood hazard areas. Flood hazard areas are established in
Section 1612.3 {Establishment of flood hazard areas).
G102.3. Nonconforming Uses.

A stmcture, or the use of a stmcture or premises, which was lawful before the adoption of
the Building Code, but which does not conform with the requirements of these
regulations, may be continued subject to the following conditions:

1. No such use shall be expanded, changed, enlarged, or altered in a way which

increases its nonconformity.

2. No substantial improvement of the stmcture shall be made unless the

stmcture is changed to conform to these regulations.

3. If a nonconforming use is discontinued for a period of 90 days, any future

use of the building or premises shall conform to these regulations.

4. Any nonconforming use or stmcture which is destroyed by means, including

floods, to an extent of 50 percent or more of its market value, shall not be
reconstmcted except in conformance with the provisions of these
regulations.
SECTION G103 POWERS AND DUTIES
G103.1 Permit applications. The building official shall review all permit applications to
determine whether proposed development sites will be reasonably safe from flooding. If a
proposed development site is in a flood hazard area, all site development activities
(including grading, filling, utility installation, and drainage modification), and all new
constmction and substantial improvements (including the placement of prefabricated
buildings and manufactured homes) shall, at a minimum, be designed and constmcted
with methods, practices and materials that minimize flood damage and that are in
accordance with this code and ASCE 24.
G103.2 Other permits. It shall be the responsibility of the building official to assure
that approval of a proposed development shall not be given until proof that necessary
permits have been granted by federal or state agencies having jurisdiction over such
development.
G103.3 Determination of design flood elevations. If design flood elevations are not
specified, the building official is authorized to require the applicant to:
Page 78 of 87
 1. Obtain, review and reasonably utilize data available from a federal, state or
other source, or
2. Determine the design flood elevation in accordance with the 100-year
floodplain based on projected full development in accordance with the City
of Austin Drainage Criteria Manual. Such analyses shall be performed and
sealed by a Professional Engineer licensed by the State of Texas. Studies,
analyses and computations shall be submitted in sufficient detail to allow
review and approval by the building official. The accuracy of data submitted
for such determination shall be the responsibility of the applicant.
G103.4 Activities in riverine flood hazard areas. In riverine situations, the building
official shall not permit any new constmction, substantial improvement, or other
development, including fill, unless the applicant demonsfrates that the cumulative effect
of the proposed development, when combined with all other existing and anticipated
development, will not increase the design flood elevation at any point that results in
adverse flooding impact on other property.
G103.5 Floodway encroachment. Prior to issuing a permit for any floodway
encroachment, including fill, new constmction, substantial improvements and other
development or land-disturbing activity, the building official shall require submission of
a certification by a Professional Engineer licensed by the State of Texas, along with
supporting technical data in accordance with the City of Austin Drainage Criteria
Manual, that demonstrates that such development will not cause any increase of the level
of the design flood.
G103.5.1 Floodway revisions. Afloodwayencroachment that increases the level of the
design flood may be considered for a variance only if the applicant has applied for a
conditional Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) revision and has received the approval of
the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) provided the conditional Flood
Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) revision is required by the City of Austin Drainage Criteria
Manual.
G103.6 Watercourse alteration. Prior to issuing a permit for any alteration or
relocation of any watercourse, the building official shall require the applicant to provide
notification of the proposal to the appropriate authorities of all affected adjacent
govemment jurisdictions, as well as appropriate state agencies. A copy of the notification
shall be maintained in the permit records and submitted to FEMA.
G103.6.1 Engineering analysis. The building official shall require submission of an
engineering analysis in accordance with the City of Austin Drainage Criteria Manual
performed and sealed by a Professional Engineer licensed by the State of Texas which
demonstrates that theflood-carryingcapacity of the altered or relocated portion of the

Page 79 of 87
watercourse will not be decreased. Such watercourses shall be maintained in a manner
which preserves the channel'sflood-carryingcapacity.
G103.7 Records. The building official shall maintain a permanent record of all permits
issued in flood hazard areas, including copies of inspection reports and certifications
required in Section 1612 (Flood Loads).
SECTION G104 PERMITS
G104.1 Required. Any person, owner or authorized agent who intends to conduct any
development in a flood hazard area shall first make application to the building official
and shall obtain the required permit.
G104.2 Application for permit. The applicant shall file a permit application in writing
on a form fiimished by the building official. Such application shall:
1. Identify and describe the development to be covered by the permit.
2. Describe the land on which the proposed development is to be conducted by
legal description, street address, or similar description that will readily
identify and definitely locate the site.
3. Include a site plan showing the delineation of flood hazard areas, floodway
boundaries, flood zones, design flood elevations, ground elevations,
proposed lowest floor elevation, proposed fill and excavation and drainage
pattems and facilities.
4. Indicate the use and occupancy for which the proposed development is
intended.
5. Be accompanied by constmction documents, grading and filling plans, and
other information deemed appropriate by the building official.
6. State the valuation of the proposed work.
7. Be signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized agent.
G104.3 Validity of permit. The issuance of a permit under this appendix shall not be
constmed to be a permit for, or approval of, any violation of this appendix or any other
ordinance of the jurisdiction. The issuance of a permit based on submitted documents and
information shall not prevent the building officialfromrequiring the correction of errors.
The building official is authorized to prevent occupancy or use of a stmcture or site
which is in violation of this appendix or other ordinances of the City of Austin.
G104.4 Time Limitation on Application; Permit Expiration and Reactivation. Time
limits on permit applications and requirements for permit expiration and reactivation.

Page 80 of 87
including a review fee for expired permits, are set forth in Chapter 25-12, Article 13
{Administration of Technical Codes).

G104.5 Suspension or revocation. The building official is authorized to suspend or

revoke a permit issued under this appendix wherever the permit is issued in error or on
the basis of incorrect, inaccurate, or incomplete information, or in violation of any
ordinance or code of the City of Austin.
SECTION G105 VARIANCES
G105.1 General. The City Council shall decide requests for variances from the
floodplain regulations in this code and in City Code Chapter 25-7 {Drainage) after
conducting a public hearing. The City Council shall base its determination on technical
justifications, and has the right to attach such conditions to variances as it deems
necessary to further the purposes and objectives of this appendix and Section 1612
{Flood Loads).

G105.2 Records. The building official shall maintain a permanent record of all variance
actions, including justification for their issuance.
G105.3 Historic structures. A variance may be issued for the repair or rehabilitation of
a historic stmcture upon a determination that the proposed repair or rehabilitation will not
preclude the stmcture's continued designafion as a historic stmcture, and the variance is
the minimum necessary to preserve the historic character and design of the stmcture.
Exception: Within flood hazard areas, historic stmctures that are not:
a. Listed or preliminarily determined to be eligible for listing in the
National Register of Historic Places; or
b. Determined by the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Interior as
contributing to the historical significance of a registered historic
district or a district preliminarily determined to qualify as an historic
district; or
c. Designated as historic under a state or local historic preservation
program that is approved by the Department of Interior.
G105.4 Functionally dependent facilities. A variance may be issued for the
constmction or substantial improvement of a functionally dependent facility provided the
criteria in Section 1612.1 {General) are met and the variance is the minimum necessary
to allow the constmction or substantial improvement, and that all due consideration has
been given to methods and materials that minimize flood damages during the design
flood and create no additional threats to public safety.

Page 81 of 87
G105.5 Restrictions. The City Council shall not issue a variance for any proposed
development in afloodwayif any increase in flood levels would result during the design
flood discharge.
G105.6 Considerations. In reviewing applications for variances, the City Council shall
consider all technical evaluations, all relevant factors, all other portions of this appendix,
and each of the following:
1. The danger that materials and debris may be swept onto other lands resulting
in further injury or damage.
2. The danger to life and property due to flooding or erosion damage.
3. The susceptibility of the proposed development, including contents, to flood
damage and the effect of such damage on current and future owners.
4. The importance of the services provided by the proposed development to the
community.
5. The availability of alternate locations for the proposed development that are
not subject to flooding or erosion.
6. The compatibility of the proposed development with existing and anticipated
development.
7. The relationship of the proposed development to the comprehensive plan
and flood plain management program for that area.
8. The safety of access to the property in times of flood for ordinary and
emergency vehicles.
9. The expected heights, velocity, duration, rate of rise and debris and sediment
transport of the floodwaters and the effects of wave action, if applicable,
expected at the site.
10. The costs of providing govemmental services during and after flood
conditions including maintenance and repair of public utilities and facilities
such as sewer, gas, electrical and water systems, streets and bridges.
G105.7 Conditions for issuance. Variances shall only be issued by the City Council
upon:
1. A technical showing of good and sufficient cause based on the unique
characteristics of the size, configuration or topography of the site;
2. A determination that failure to grant the variance would result in exceptional
hardship by rendering the lot undevelopable;

Page 82 of 87
 3. A determination that the granting of a variance will not result in increased
flood heights, additional threats to public safety, extraordinary public
expense, nor create nuisances, cause fraud on or victimization of the public
or conflict with existing local laws or ordinances;
4. A determination that the variance is the minimum necessary, considering the
flood hazard, to afford relief; and
5. Notification to the applicant in writing over the signature of the building
official that the issuance of a variance to constmct a stmcture below the base
flood level will result in increased premium rates for flood insurance, and
that such constmction below the base flood level increases risks to life and
property.
SECTION G201 DEFINITIONS
G201.1 General. The following words and terms shall, for the purposes of this
appendix, have the meanings shown herein. Refer to Chapter 2 for general definitions.
G201.2 Deflnitions.
DEVELOPMENT. Any man-made change to improved or unimproved real estate,
including but not limited to buildings or other stmctures, temporary or permanent storage
of materials, mining, dredging, filling, grading, paving, excavation operations, and other
land disturbing activities.
FUNCTIONALLY DEPENDENT FACILITY. A facility which cannot be used for its
intended purpose unless it is located or carried out in close proximity to water, such as a
docking or port facility necessary for the loading or unloading of cargo or passengers,
shipbuilding or ship repair. The term does not include long-term storage, manufacture,
sales or service facilities.
MANUFACTURED H O M E . A stmcture that is transportable in one or more sections,
built on a permanent chassis, designed for use with or without a permanent foundation
when attached to the required utilities, and constmcted to the Federal Mobile Home
Constmction and Safety Standards and mles and regulations promulgated by the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development. The term also includes mobile homes,
park trailers, travel trailers, and similar transportable stmctures that are placed on a site
for 180 consecutive days or longer.
MANUFACTURED H O M E P A R K OR SUBDIVISION. A parcel (or contiguous
parcels) of land divided into two or more manufactured home lots for rent or sale.
RECREATIONAL V E H I C L E . A vehicle that is built on a single chassis, 400 square
feet (37.16 m2) or less when measured at the largest horizontal projection, designed to be
self-propelled or permanently towable by a light-duty tmck, and designed primarily not
Page 83 of 87
for use as a permanent dwelling but rather as temporary living quarters for recreational,
camping, travel, or seasonal use. A recreational vehicle is ready for highway use if it is
on its wheels or jacking system, is attached to the site only by quick disconnect-type
utilities and security devices, and has no permanently attached additions.
VARIANCE. A grant of relief from the requirements of the floodplain regulations in this
code and in City Code Chapter 25-7 {Drainage) which permits constmction in a manner
otherwise prohibited by this section where specific enforcement would result in
unnecessary hardship.
VIOLATION. A development that is not fiilly compliant with this appendix or Section
1612 {Flood Loads), as applicable.
SECTION G301 SUBDIVISIONS
G301.1 General. Any subdivision proposal, including proposals for manufactured home
parks and subdivisions, or other proposed new development in a flood hazard area shall
be reviewed to assure that:
1. All such proposals are consistent with the need to minimize flood damage;
2. A l l public utilities and facilities, such as sewer, gas, electric and water
systems are located and constmcted to minimize or eliminate flood damage;
and
3. Adequate drainage is provided to reduce exposure to flood hazards.
G301.2 Subdivision requirements. The following requirements shall apply in the case
of any proposed subdivision, including proposals for manufactured home parks and
subdivisions, any portion of which lies within a flood hazard area:
1. The flood hazard area, including floodways, as appropriate, shall be
delineated on tentative and final subdivision plats;
2. Design flood elevations shall be shown on tentative and final subdivision
plats;
3. Residential building lots shall be provided with adequate buildable area
outside thefloodway;and
4. The design criteria for utilities and facilities set forth in this appendix.
Section 1612 of ASCE 24, the City of Austin Drainage Criteria Manual, and
applicable FEMA design criteria shall be met.
SECTION G401 SITE IMPROVEMENT

Page 84 of 87
G401.1 Development in floodways. Development or land disturbing activity shall not
be authorized in the floodway unless it has been demonstrated through hydrologic and
hydraulic analyses performed and sealed by a Professional Engineer licensed by the State
of Texas in accordance with the City of Austin Drainage Criteria Manual that the
proposed encroachment will not result in any increase in the level of the design flood.
G401.2 Sewer facilities. All new or replaced sanitary sewer facilities, private sewage
treatment plants (including all pumping stations and collector systems) and on-site waste
disposal systems shall be designed in accordance with Chapter 7, ASCE 24, to minimize
or eliminate infiltration offloodwatersinto the facilities and discharge from the facilities
intofloodwaters,or impairment of the facilities and systems.
G401.43 Water facilities. All new replacement water facilities shall be designed in
accordance with the provisions of Chapter 7, ASCE 24, to minimize or eliminate
infiltration offloodwatersinto the systems.
G401.54 Storm drainage. Storm drainage shall be designed to convey the flow of
surface waters to minimize or eliminate damage to persons or property.
G401.65 Streets and sidewalks. Streets and sidewalks shall be designed to minimize
potential for increasing or aggravating flood levels.
SECTION G501 MANUFACTURED HOMES
G501.1 Elevation. A l l new and replacement manufactured homes to be placed or
substantially improved in a flood hazard area shall be elevated such that the lowest floor
of the manufactured home is elevated to a minimum of one (1) foot above the design
flood elevation. Elevation certification required by Section 1612,5 {Flood hazard
documentation) shall be submitted to the building official,
G501.2 Foundations. All new and replacement manufactured homes, including
substantial improvement of existing manufactured homes, shall be placed on a
permanent, reinforced foundation that is designed in accordance with Section 1612
{Flood Loads).
G501.3 Anchoring. All new and replacement manufactured homes to be placed or
substantially improved in a flood hazard area shall be installed using methods and
practices which minimize flood damage. Manufactured homes shall be securely anchored
to an adequately anchored foundation system to resist flotation, collapse and lateral
movement. Methods of anchoring are authorized to include, but are not limited to, use of
over-the-top orframeties to ground anchors. This requirement is in addition to applicable
state and local anchoring requirements for resisting wind forces.

Page 85 of 87
SECTION G601 RECREATIONAL VEHICLES
G601.1 Placement prohibited. The placement of recreational vehicles shall not be
authorized in floodways.

G601.2 Temporary placement. Recreational vehicles in flood hazard areas shall be

fully licensed and ready for highway use, and may be placed on a site for no more than
180 consecutive days.
G601.3 Permanent placement. Recreational vehicles that are not fully licensed and
ready for highway use, or that are to be placed on a site for more than 180 consecutive
days, shall meet the requirements of Section G50\{Manufactured Homes).
SECTION G701 TANKS
G701.1 Underground tanks. Underground tanks in flood hazard areas shall be anchored
to prevent flotation, collapse or lateral movement resulting from hydrostatic loads,
including the effects of buoyancy, during conditions of the design flood.
G701.2 Above-ground tanks. Above-ground tanks in flood hazard areas shall be
elevated to or above the design flood elevation or shall be anchored or otherwise
designed and constmcted to prevent flotation, collapse or lateral movement resulting
from hydrodynamic and hydrostatic loads, including the effects of buoyancy, during
conditions of the design flood.
G701.3 Tank inlets and vents. In flood hazard areas, tank inlets, fill openings, outlets
and vents shall be:
1. At or above the design flood elevation or fitted with covers designed to
prevent the inflow of floodwater or outflow of the contents of the tanks
during conditions of the design flood.
2. Anchored to prevent lateral movement resulting from hydrodynamic and
hydrostatic loads, including the effects of buoyancy, during conditions of the
design flood.
SECTION G702 REFERENCED STANDARDS
ASCE 24-05 Flood Resistance Design G103.1 G401,3, G401,4
And Constmction
HUD 24 CFR Manufactured Home G201
Part 3280-94 Constmction and Safety Standards, 1994
IBC-2012 Intemational Building Code G102,2

Page 86 of 87
PART 2. This ordinance takes effect on September 16, 2013.

PASSED AND APPROVED

§
§
June 6 ., 2013 §
) Leffingwell
Mayor

APPROVED: ATTESTQN iu4

^aren M . J<^nnaj Jannette S. Goodall
City Attomey City Clerk

Page 87 of 87
Exhibit KK
 ORDINANCE NO. 20130926-145
AN ORDINANCE REPEALING AND REPLACING ARTICLE 9 OF CITY CODE
CHAPTER 25-12 TO ADOPT THE 2012 INTERNATIONAL PROPERTY
MAINTENANCE CODE AND LOCAL AMENDMENTS; AND AMENDING
CITY CODE SECTIONS 25-1-21 AND 2-1-122 TO CORRECT CODE
CITATIONS.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN:

PART 1. City Code Chapter 25-12 is amended to repeal Article 9 {Property

Maintenance Code) and replace it with a new Article 9 to read as follows:
ARTICLE 9. PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE.
§ 25-12-211 PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE.
(A) The International Property Maintenance Code, 2012 Edition, published by
the International Code Council ("2012 International Property Maintenance
Code") is adopted and incorporated by reference into this section with the
deletions in Subsection (B) and amendments in Section 25-12-213 (Local
Amendments to the International Property Maintenance Code).
(B) The following provisions of the 2012 International Property Maintenance
Code are deleted. A subsection contained within a deleted section or
subsection is not deleted, unless specifically listed below.
Section 101.1 Section 102.3
Section 102.7 Section 103.1 Section 103.2
Section 103.3 Section 103.4 Section 103.5
Section 104.2 Section 104.5 Section 106.2
Section 106.3 Section 107.1 Section 107.2
Section 107.3 Section 107.5 Section 107.6
Section 108.1 Section 108.2 Section 108.3
Section 108.4 Section 108.4.1 Section 108.5
Section 109.1 Section 109.2 Section 109.3
Section 109.4 Section 109.5 Section 109.6
Section 110.1 Section 110.4 Section 111.1
Section 111.2 Section 111.2.1 Section 111.2.2
Page 1 of 27
 Section 111.2.3 Section 111.2.4 Section 111.2.5
Section 111.3 Section 111.4 Section 111.4.1
Section 111.5 Section 111.6 Section 111.6.1
Section 111.6.2 Section 111.7 Section 111.8
Section 112.4 Section 201.3 Section 304.3
Section 304.14 Section 304.19 Section 305.1.1
Section 307.1 Section 307.4 Section 309.1
Section 401.3 Section 404.4 Section 404.4.1
Section 404.5 Section 404.5.1 Section 404.5.2
Section 502.5 Section 505.1 Section 505.4
Section 506.3 Section 602.2 Section 602.3
Section 602.4 Section 604.2 Section 604.3.1.1
Section 604.3.2.1 Section 605.3 Section 605.4
Section 606 Section 702.1 Section 702.2
Section 702.3 Section 702.5.1 Section 704.1
Section 704.2 Section 704.3
(C) The city clerk shall retain a copy of the 2012 International Property
Maintenance Code with the official ordinances of the City of Austin.
§ 25-12-212 CITATIONS TO THE 2012 INTERNATIONAL PROPERTY
MAINTENANCE CODE.
In the City Code, "Property Maintenance Code" means the 2012 International
Property Maintenance Code adopted by Section 25-12-211 {Property Maintenance
Code), as amended by Section 25-12-213 {Local Amendments to the International
Property Maintenance Code). In this article, "this code" means the Property
Maintenance Code.
§ 25-12-213 LOCAL AMENDMENTS TO THE INTERNATIONAL PROPERTY
MAINTENANCE CODE.
The following provisions are local amendments to the 2012 International Property
Maintenance Code. Each provision of this section is a substitute for any identically
numbered provision of the International Property Maintenance Code deleted by Section

Page 2 of 27
25-12-211(B) {International Property Maintenance Code) or is an addition to the
Property Maintenance Code.
101.1 Title. These regulations shall be known as the Property Maintenance Code of City
of Austin, hereinafter referred to as the "Property Maintenance Code" or "this code."
102.3 Application of other codes. Repairs, additions or alterations to a structure, or
changes of occupancy, shall be done in accordance with the procedures and provisions of
the technical codes adopted by the City of Austin in Chapter 25-12.
103.1 General. The City Manager shall designate the department or departments charged
with enforcement of this code.
103.2 Designation. The City Manager shall designate a code official.
103.3 Deputies. The code official shall have the authority to designate one or more
deputy code official(s) to assist with enforcement of this code. Such employees shall
have powers and duties as delegated by the code official.
104.2 Inspections. The code official shall make all of the required inspections, or shall
consider reports of inspection by approved agencies or individuals. All reports of such
inspections shall be in writing and be certified by a responsible officer of such approved
agency or by the responsible individual. The code official is authorized to engage such
expert opinion as deemed necessary to report upon unusual technical issues that arise,
subject to the approval of the designated authority.
106.2 Notice of violation. The code official shall serve a notice of violation or order in
accordance with applicable requirements of state law and City Code regarding such
notice or order.
106.3 Prosecution of violation. Any person failing to comply with a provision,
requirement, or prohibition of this code or of any notice of violation or order served in
accordance with Section 107 shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor or civil infraction,
and the violation shall be a strict liabihty offense whenever charged by a fine of $500.00
or less. If any person fails to comply with a provision, requirement, or prohibition of this
code or of any notice of violation or order served in accordance with this code,, the code
official shall institute the appropriate proceeding at law or in equity to restrain, correct or
abate such violation, or to require the removal or termination of the unlawful occupancy
of the structure or property in violation of the provisions of this code or of the order or
direction made pursuant thereto. Any action taken by the authority having jurisdiction
regarding such premises shall be in addition charged against the real estate upon which
the structure is located and shall be a lien upon such real estate.
107.1 Notice to person responsible. Whenever the code official determines that there
has been a violation of this code or has grounds to believe that a violation has occurred,
notice shall be given and served in compliance with applicable state law and City Code.
Page 3 of 27
A person has a duty to comply with the provisions, requirements, and prohibitions of this
even if the code official has not served the person with separate notice personally
informing the person of the duty to comply with this code. Violation of a notice or order
issued pursuant to this code is a separate offense.
107.5 Penalties. Penalties for noncompliance with orders and notices shall be as set forth
in this code. City Code, and applicable state law.
107.6 Transfer of ownership. Except as otherwise provided by applicable law, it shall
be unlawful for the owner or any other person in control of any property, dwelling unit,
or structure that is the subject of a compliance order or as to which a notice of violation
has been served to sell, transfer, mortgage, lease or otherwise dispose of such property,
dwelling unit, or structure to another until the provisions of the compliance order or
notice of violation have been complied with, or until such owner or any other person in
control of the unit or structure shall first furnish the grantee, transferee, mortgagee or
lessee a true copy of any compliance order or notice of violation issued by the code
official and shall furnish to the code official a signed and notarized statement from the
grantee, transferee, mortgagee or lessee, acknowledging the receipt of such compliance
order or notice of violation and fully accepting the responsibility without condition for
making the corrections or repairs required by such compliance order or notice of
violation.
108.1 General. When a structure, property, or equipment is found by the code official to
be unsafe, or when a structure or property is found unfit for human occupancy, or is found
unlawfiil, such structure, property, or equipment shall be subject to the provisions of this
code.
108.5 Prohibited occupancy. Any occupied structure or property placarded by the code
official with a notice to vacate, in accordance with section 908 of this code, shall be
vacated as ordered by the code official. Any person who shall occupy a placarded
premises or shall operate placarded equipment, and any owner or any person responsible
for the premises who shall let anyone occupy a placarded premises or operate placarded
equipment shall be liable for the penalties provided by this code.
109.1 Imminent danger. When, in the opinion of the code official, there is imminent
danger of failure or collapse of a building or structure which endangers life or property, or
when any structure or part of a structure has fallen and life or property is endangered by the
occupation of the structure, or when there is actual or potential danger to the building
occupants or those in the proximity of any structure or property_because of excavation,
explosives, explosive fumes or vapors or the presence of toxic fumes, gases or materials,
or operation of defective or dangerous equipment, the code official is hereby authorized
and empowered to order and require the occupants to vacate the premises forthwith. The
code official shall cause to be posted at each entrance to such structure or property_a notice
reading as follows: "This Structure/Property Is Unsafe and Its Occupancy Has Been
Prohibited by the Code Official." It shall be unlawful for any person to enter such structure
Page 4 of 27
or property except as authorized for the purpose of securing the structure or property,
making the required repairs, removing or abating the hazardous condition or of
demolishing the same.
109.2 Temporary safeguards. Notwithstanding other provisions of this code, whenever,
in the opinion of the code official, there is imminent danger to persons or property due to
an unsafe condition at a structure or property, the code official shall order the necessary
work to be done, including the boarding up of openings or securing of access perimeters,
to render such structure or property temporarily safe whether or not the legal procedure
herein described has been instituted; and shall cause such other action to be taken as the
code official deems necessary to meet such emergency.
110.1 General. The code official shall order the owner of any premises upon which is
located any structure, equipment, or property condition, which in the code official's
judgment after review is so deteriorated or dilapidated or has become so out of repair as
to be dangerous, unsafe, insanitary or otherwise unfit for human habitation or occupancy,
and such that it is unreasonable to repair the structure, to demolish and remove such
structure, equipment, or condition; or where there has been a cessation of normal
construction of any structure for a period of more than two years, the code official shall
order the owner to demolish and remove such structure.
110.4 Salvage materials. When any structure has been ordered demolished and removed,
the governing body or other designated officer under said contract or arrangement
aforesaid shall have the right to sell die salvage and valuable materials at the highest price
obtainable.
112.4 Failure to comply. Any person who shall continue any work after having been
served with a stop work order, except such work as that person is authorized by the City to
perform solely to remove or abate a violation or unsafe condition, shall be liable to a fine
of not less than $200 or more than $500 per violation.
201.3 Terms defined in other codes. Where terms are not defined in this code and are
defined in the Building Code, the Residential Code, the Plumbing Code, the Mechanical
Code, City of Austin Land Development Code, the Energy Conservation Code, the Fire
Code, the Solar Code or the Electrical Code, such terms shall have the meanings ascribed
to them as stated in those codes.
202.1 Supplemental and replacement definitions. The definitions in this subsection
apply throughout this code and supplement the definitions in Section 202 {General
Definitions) of the 2012 International Fire Code, as published, unless the term is defined
in both places, in which case the definition in this subsection replaces and supersedes the
definition in Section 202 of the 2012 International Property Maintenance Code.

Page 5 of 27
 BED AND BREAKFAST. The use of an owner-occupied single-family
residential structure to provided limited meal service and rooms for temporary
lodging for overnight guests in return for compensation.
BOARDING HOUSE. A building, other than a hotel, where lodging and meals
are provided for more than six unrelated persons in return for compensation.
When used in this chapter, the term Boarding House includes a transient boarding
house.
DANGEROUS BUILDING, STRUCTURE OR PREMISES. Any building,
structure or premises determined by the code official or code official's designee to
be in violation of Section 108 of this code.
HOTEL/MOTEL. A building or a part of a building, in which there are guest
rooms, rooming units, or apartments which may be rented on a daily basis and are
used primarily for transient occupancy, and for which desk service is provided. In
addition, one or more of the following services may be provided: maid, telephone,
bellboy, or furnishing of linen. When used in this chapter, the term hotel includes
a motel.
ROOMING HOUSE. A building, other than a hotel, where lodging for more than
six unrelated persons is provided without meals in return for compensation.
SUBSTANDARD BUILDING, STRUCTURE OR PREMISES. A building,
structure or premises determined by the code official or code official's designee to
be in violation of this code or any code referenced therein.
304.19 Gates. All exterior gates, gate assembhes, operator systems if provided, and
hardware shall be maintained in good condition.
305.1.1 Unsafe conditions. The following conditions shall be determined as unsafe and
shall be repaired or replaced in accordance with applicable code requirements:
1. Nominal strength of any structural member is exceeded by nominal loads,
the load effects, or the required strength;
2. Anchorage of the floor or roof to walls or columns, and of walls and
columns to foundations, is not capable of resisting all nominal loads or load
effects;
3. Structures or components thereof have reached their limit state;
4. Structural members are incapable of supporting nominal loads and load
effects;
5. Stairs, landings, balconies and all similar walking surfaces, including guards
and handrails, are not structurally sound, not properly anchored or are

Page 6 of 27
 anchored with connections not capable of supporting all nominal loads and
resisting all load effects; or
6. Foundation systems are not firmly supported by footings, are not plumb and
free from open cracks and breaks, are not properly anchored, or are not
capable of supporting all nominal loads and resisting all load effects.
Exceptions:
1. When repaired otherwise by an approved method.
2. Demolition of unsafe conditions shall be permitted when approved by the
code official.
SECTION 307
STAIRWAYS, HANDRAILS AND GUARDRAILS
307.1 General. Stairways shall be maintained in good condition and in accordance with
the building code in effect at the time of construction. Handrails and guardrails shall be
provided and maintained in good condition at stairs, landings, balconies, porches, decks,
ramps and other walking surfaces and in accordance with the building code in effect at
the time of construction.
307.2 Stairways. For buildings constructed during a time where no building code
provision related to stairways was adopted, the following provisions shall apply:
307.2.1. Riser height. The maximum riser height shall be 8 VA inches (209 mm).
The riser shall be measured vertically between leading edges of the adjacent treads.
The greatest riser height within any flight of stairs shall not exceed the smallest by
more than 3/8 inch (9.5 mm).
307.2.2. Tread depth. The minimum tread depth shall be 9 inches (228 mm). The
tread depth shall be measured horizontally between vertical planes of the foremost
projection of adjacent treads and a right angle to the treads leading edge. The
greatest tread depth within any flight of stairs shall not exceed the smallest by
more than 3/8 of an inch (9.5 mm).
307.3 Handrails. For buildings constructed during a time where no building code
provision related to handrails was adopted, the following provisions shall apply:
307.3.1 Handrails required. A handrail shall be provided on one side of the stair
for every exterior and interior flight of stairs having four or morerisers.Existing
handrails shall be allowed to remain provided such handrails are not be less than
30 inches (762 mm) high or more than 42 inches (1067mm) high measured
vertically above the nosing of the tread or above thefinishedfloorof the landing or
walking surfaces and are maintained in good condition. Where a handrail is

Page 7 of 27
 missing or does not comply with this section, a handrail shall be installed in
accordance with currentiy adopted building code requirements.
307.4 Guardrails. For buildings constructed during a time where no building code
provision related to guards was adopted, the following provisions shall apply:
307.4.1. Guards required. Every open portion of a stair, landing, balcony, porch,
deck, ramp, or other walking surface which is more than 30 inches (762 mm)
above the floor or grade below shall have guards.
Exception: Guards shall not be required where exempted by adopted building
code.
307.4.2. Guard Spacing and height. Existing intermediate guards with a
maximum spacing which does not allow the passage of a 9 inch (228 mm) sphere
(or smaller), shall be allowed to remain, provided such guards are maintained in
good condition. Guards shall not be less than 30 inches (762 mm) high above the
floor of the landing, balcony, porch, deck, or ramp or other walking surface. Where
guards are missing or do not comply with this section, guards shall be installed in
accordance with currently adopted building code requirements.
309.1 Infestation. All structures shall be kept free from insect and rodent infestation. All
structures in which insects or rodents are found shall be promptiy exterminated by
approved processes that will not be injurious to human health. After extermination,
proper precautions shall be taken to prevent reinfestation.

Exception: The keeping, maintenance or management of common domestic

honey bee colonies. Apis mellifera species, shall be in accordance with City Code
Chapter 3-6 {Beekeeping).

401.3 Alternative devices. In lieu of the means for natural hght and ventilation herein
prescribed, artificial light or mechanical ventilation complying with the Building Code
or Residential Code shall be permitted as applicable.
404.4 Minimum area. Every dwelling unit shall have at least one habitable room that
shall have not less than 120 square feet (11 m^). Every habitable room shall comply with
the requirements of Sections 404.4.1 through 404.4.5.
Exception: This does not include Efficiency Units under Section 404.6.
404.4.1 Other rooms. With the exception of qualifying Efficiency Units, every bedroom
or other habitable room shall contain at least 70 square feet (6.5 m^) of floor area. Where
more than two persons occupy a room used for sleeping purposes, the required floor area
shall be increased at the rate of 50 square feet (4.65 m2) for each occupant in excess of
two. One child per room not more than 24 months in age will be exempt from these
calculations.
Page 8 of 27
404.5 Overcrowding. The number of persons occupying a dwelUng unit shall not create
conditions that, in the opinion of the code official, endanger the life, health, safety or
welfare of the occupants.
505.1 General requirements for water systems. Every sink, lavatory, bathtub or
shower, drinking fountain, water closet or other plumbing fixture shall be property
connected to either a public water system or to an approved private water system. All
kitchen sinks, lavatories, laundry facilities, bathtubs and showers shall be supplied with
hot or tempered and cold running water in accordance with the Plumbing Code.
505.4 Water heating facilities. Water heating facilities shall be property installed,
maintained and capable of providing an adequate amount of water to be drawn at every
required sink, lavatory, bathtub, shower and laundry facihty at a temperature of not less
than 110°F (43°C). A gas-burning water heater shall not be located in any bathroom,
toilet room, bedroom or other occupied room normally kept closed, unless installed in a
sealed enclosure so that adequate combustion air is provided and will not be taken from
the living space. Direct vent water heaters are not required to be installed within an
enclosure. An approved combination temperature and pressure-relief valve and relief
valve discharge pipe shall be properly installed and maintained on water heaters.
602.2 Residential occupancies. Dwellings shall be provided with heating facilities
capable of maintaining a room temperature of 68°F (20°C) in all habitable rooms,
bathrooms and toilet rooms. Cooking appliances shall not be used, nor shall portable
unvented fuel-burning space heaters be used, as a means to provide space heating to meet
the requirements of this section.
6023 Heat supply. Every owner and operator of any building who rents, leases or lets one
or more dwelling units or sleeping units on terms, either expressed or implied, to furnish
heat to the occupants thereof shall supply heat to maintain a temperature of not less than
68°F (20°C) in all habitable rooms, bathrooms and toilet rooms.
602.4 Occupiable work spaces. Indoor occupiable work spaces shall be supplied with
heat to maintain a temperature of not less than 65°F (18°C) during the period the spaces
are occupied.
Exceptions:
1. Processing, storage and operation areas that require cooling or special
temperature conditions.
2. Areas in which persons are primarily engaged in vigorous physical activities.
604.2 Service. The size and usage of apphances and equipment shall serve as a basis for
determining the need for additional facihties in accordance with NFPA 70. Dwelling
units shall be served by an electrical service having a rating of not less than 100 amperes.

Page 9 of 27
604.3.1.1 Electrical equipment. Electrical distribution equipment, motor circuits, power
equipment, transformers, wire, cable, flexible cords, wiring devices, ground fault circuit
interrupters, surge protectors, molded case circuit breakers, low-voltage fuses, luminaires,
ballasts, motors and electronic control, signaling and communication equipment that have
been exposed to water shall be replaced in accordance with the provisions of the
Electrical Code.
Exception: The following equipment shall be allowed to be repaired where an
inspection report from the equipment manufacturer or approved manufacturer's
representative indicates that the equipment has not sustained damage that requires
replacement:
1. Enclosed switches, rated 600 volts or less;
2. Busway, rated 600 volts or less;
3. Panelboards, rated 600 volts or less;
4. Switchboards, rated 600 volts or less;
5. Fire pump controllers, rated 600 volts or less;
6. Manual and magnetic motor controllers;
7. Motor control centers;
8. Alternating current high-voltage circuit breakers;
9. Low-voltage power circuit breakers;
10. Protective relays, meters and current trans-formers;
11. Low- and medium-voltage switchgear;
12. Liquid-filled transformers;
13. Cast-resin transformers;
14. Wire or cable that is suitable for wet locations and whose ends have not been
exposed to water;
15. Wire or cable, not containing fillers, that is suitable for wet locations and
whose ends have not been exposed to water;
16. Luminaires that are listed as submersible;
17. Motors;
18. Electronic control, signaling and communication equipment.

Page 10 of 27
604.3.2.1 Electrical equipment. Electrical switches, receptacles and fixtures, including
furnace, water heating, security system and power distribution circuits that have been
exposed to fire, shall be replaced in accordance with the provisions of the Electrical
Code.
Exception: Electrical switches, receptacles andfixturesthat shall be allowed to be
repaired where an inspection report from the equipment manufacturer or approved
manufacturer's representative indicates that the equipment has not sustained
damage that requires replacement.
605.3 Luminaires. Luminaires shall be maintained in good condition and in accordance
with the applicable code(s) in effect at the time of construction. For buildings constructed
during a time where no code provision related to luminaires was adopted, the following
shall be required:
1. Every public hall, interior and exterior stairway, toilet room, kitchen, bathroom,
laundry room, boiler room and furnace room shall contain at least one electric
luminaire.
2. Pool and spa luminaries over 15 V shall have ground fault circuit interrupter
protection.
605.4 Wiring. Flexible cords, including extension cords, shall not be used for permanent
wiring, or for running through doors, windows, or cabinets, or concealed within walls,
floors, or ceilings, unless specifically approved by the cord manufacturer for such
installation, configuration, and use, and installed by a licensed electrician consistent with
the manufacturer's specifications as part of a project permitted by the City that has passed
all required inspections.
702.1 General requirements for means of egress. A safe, continuous and unobstructed
path of travel shall be provided from any point in a building or structure to the public
way. Means of egress shall comply with this code as well as provisions of the Fire Code,
the Building Code and the Residential Code as applicable.
702.2 Aisles. The required width of aisles in accordance with the Fire Code shall be
unobstructed.
7023 Locked doors. All means of egress doors shall be readily openable from the side
from which egress is to be made without the need for keys, special knowledge or effort,
except where the door hardware conforms to that permitted by the Building, Fire or
Residential Code as applicable.
702.5 Additional emergency escape and rescue opening requirements. All sleeping
rooms in R-2 and R-3, one- and two-family and multiple-family Occupancy Groups shall
have at least one emergency escape and rescue opening, unless the sleeping room(s) meet
a specific exception of the code under which the building was constructed. An existing

Page 11 of 27
emergency escape and rescue opening complies with this Code if the opening satisfies
one of the following or if the owner complies with the alternate methods of compliance
set forth in Section 702.5.1 below:
1. The existing emergency escape and rescue opening meets the minimum
height and width dimensions, openable area and the maximum sill height
requirement of the code(s) under which the building was constructed; or
2. Where no code was in effect at the time of construction, an existing
emergency escape and rescue opening satisfies this code if it has:
a. a minimum net clear openable area of 5 square feet (0.465 m ),
b. a minimum net clear opening height of 22 inches (559 mm),
c. a minimum net clear opening width of 20 inches (457 mm),
d. a sill height not greater than 48 inches (1219 mm) above the floor.
702.5.1 Alternate Method of Compliance for existing emergency escape and rescue
openings.
1. The following shall be deemed as an alternate method of compliance for a
sleeping room with an emergency escape and rescue opening that does not meet
the requirements referenced in Section 702.5:
a. Installation of hard-wired, dual chamber smoke alarms with battery
backup capability that are served with primary power from the building
wiring. The smoke alarms shall be installed inside and outside of the
sleeping room and shall be interconnected through either wired or
wireless interconnection.
704.1 General requirements for fire protection systems. All systems, devices and
equipment to detect a fire, actuate an alarm, or suppress or control a fire or any com-
bination thereof shall be maintained in an operable condition at all times in accordance
with the Building Code or the Residential Code, and the Fire Code as applicable.
704.2 Smoke alarms. Single- or multiple-station smoke alarms shall be installed and
maintained in Groups R-2, R-3, R-4 and in dwellings not regulated in Group R
occupancies, regardless of occupant load at all of the following locations:
1. On the ceiling or wall outside of each separate sleeping area in the
immediate vicinity of bedrooms.
2. In each room used for sleeping purposes.
3. In each story within a dwelling unit, including basements and cellars but not
including crawl spaces and uninhabitable attics. In dwellings or dwelling units
with split levels and without an intervening door between the adjacent levels.
Page 12 of 27
 a smoke alarm installed on the upper level shall suffice for the adjacent
lower level provided that tiie lower level is less than one full story below the
upper level.
4. Single- or multiple-station smoke alarms shall be installed and maintained in
other groups in accordance with the Fire Code.
704.3 Power source. In Group R occupancies and in dweUings not regulated as Group R
occupancies, single-station smoke alarms shall receive their primary power from the
building wiring provided that such wiring is served from a commercial source and shall
be equipped with a battery backup. Smoke alarms shall emit a signal when the batteries
are low. Wiring shall be permanent and without a disconnecting switch other than as
required for overcurrent protection.
Exceptions:
1. Smoke alarms are permitted to be solely battery operated in existing
buildings in areas or locations within such buildings where smoke alarms
were not required to be powered by the building wiring under the code in
effect at the time of construction and either:
a. there is no construction, alterations or repairs taking place, or
b. the construction, alterations or repairs in progress do not result in the
removal of interior walls or ceilingfinishesexposing the structure.
2. Smoke alarms are permitted to be solely battery operated in buildings that
are not served from a commercial power source.
CHAPTER 9 BUILDING AND STANDARDS COMMISSION
901 GENERAL
The Building and Standards Commission shall have the powers and duties under
this Code, City Code § 2-1-122 (Building and Standards Commission), and apphcable
state law. The Commission shall hear evidence from each party present concerning the
matters brought before the Commission and shall issue orders regarding the matters, as
appropriate. Orders regarding removal or relocation of occupants, or repair, securing, or
demolition of buildings shall identify the time period in which work must begin and the
time period by which work must be completed.
901.1 Powers and Duties. The Building and Standards Commission shall hear and
decide cases concerning alleged violations of the City's housing and building regulations,
including regulations that establish minimum standards for the registration, licensure,
inspection, use, occupancy and maintenance of buildings, structures and premises. The
Commission may order or initiate any action, remedy, response, security, or penalty
within its authority under applicable state law or City Code, including:
Page 13 of 27
 1. order the repair, within a fixed period, of buildings found to be in violation
of an ordinance;
2. declare a building, stincture or property to be substandard or dangerous in
accordance with the powers granted under state law and the city's
ordinances;
3. order, in an appropriate case, action as necessary to abate, repair, remedy,
alleviate, or accomphsh:
vacation of a building, structure, or property;
relocation of occupants;
removal of persons or property;
entry on private property; and
demolition or removal of any substandard building, condition, or
structure on private property.
4. order or direct any peace officer of the state, including a sheriff or constable
or the Austin Chief of Police, to enforce and carry out the lawful orders or
directives of the Commission;
5. determine the amount and duration of the civil penalty allowed under state
law;
6. hear and decide appeals which may be taken to the Conmiission; and
7. consider and recommend amendments to the City's housing and building
regulations or and ordinances.
901.2 Rules. The Commission shall adopt rules for its own procedure. The rules must
establish procedures to provide opportunity for presentation of evidence and testimony in
its hearings by persons who are alleged to have violated ordinances.
901.3 Meetings. Meetings of the Commission are held at the call of the Chairperson and
at other times as the Commission may determine. The Chairperson, or the Acting
Chairperson in the absence of the Chairperson, may administer oaths and compel the
attendance of witnesses. Four members constitute a quorum and the concurring vote of
four members is necessary to take any action under this chapter. The Commission shall
render all decisions and findings in writing to the appellant in accordance with the
applicable requirements of state law and City Code.
901.4 Records. The Commission shall keep records of its hearing, decisions and other
official actions, which shall be filed in the office of the code official. The code official
shall keep the minutes of the Commission meetings, showing the vote of each

Page 14 of 27
Commission member on each question submitted to the Commission, or the fact that a
member is absent or fails to vote.
901.5 Notice. Notice and any required recordation of all Commission hearings, orders,
or actions shall be posted, filed, served, accomplished or disseminated in accordance with
the applicable provisions of state law and City Code.
901.6 Orders. An order issued by the Commission under this section is final unless
appealed in accordance with Chapter 54 of the Texas Local Government Code.
902 FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH A COMMISSION ORDER IS AN OFFENSE
902.1 Criminal Offense and Penalty. A person commits an offense if the person fails
to comply with a final order issued by the Building and Standards Commission under this
chapter. Each day that a person fails to comply with a final order is a separate
occurrence. An offense under this section is a class C misdemeanor. The maximum
penalty shall be $500 per offense, per occurrence. Proof of a culpable mental state is not
required for conviction of an offense under this chapter.
902.2 Civil Offense and Penalty. A person must comply with a final order issued by the
Building and Standards Commission. A person who fails to comply with the
Commission's final order commits a civil offense punishable by a maximum fine of
$1,000 a day for each day that the person fails to comply with the order as provided by
Chapter 54 of the Texas Local Government Code. Criminal conviction under 902.1 does
not preclude assessment or enforcement of applicable civil penalty for violation of a
Commission Order.
902.2.1 Satisfaction of Civil Penalty.
1. This section applies to a civil penalty assessed under Section 902.2 of this
Code for violations relating to a:
1.1 structure that is designated as an historic landmark or located in a
designated historic district; or
1.2 single-family residential structure.
2. The code official shall accept as full payment of the civil penalty an amount
equal to the assessed penalty minus the cost to complete repairs or other
corrective action required by the Building and Standards Commission order
establishing the penalty if:
2.1 all repairs or other corrective action required by the Building and
Standards Commission order establishing the penalty have been
completed;
2.2 the code official has determined that all repairs or other corrective
action comply with City regulations; and
Page 15 of 27
 2.3 a lawsuit based on the Building and Standards Commission order
assessing the penalty has not been initiated by the City.
3. The person subject to the civil penalty must provide evidence to the code
official of the cost of repairs or other corrective action required by a
Building and Standards Commission order.
4. The code official shall determine whether tiie costs provided under
Subsection 3 of this section are associated with a repair or other corrective
action ordered by the Building and Standards Commission. The
determination by the code official under this subsection may not be
appealed.
903 DEFINITION OF NUISANCE
Each of the following is declared to be a nuisance for purposes of this code:
1. Any pubhc nuisance known at common law or in equity jurisprudence.
2. Any attractive nuisance which may prove detrimental to children whether in
a building, on the premises of a building, or on an unoccupied lot. This
includes any abandoned wells, shafts, basements, or excavations; abandoned
refrigerators and motor vehicles; or any structurally unsound fences or
structures; or any lumber, trash, fences, debris or vegetation which may
prove a hazard for inquisitive minors.
3. Whatever is dangerous to human health or is detrimental to health, as
determined by the health officer.
4. Uncleanliness, as determined by the health officer.
5. Whatever renders air, food or drink unwholesome or detrimental to the
health of human beings, as determined by the health officer.
6. Occupancy or use of the residential part of a mixed occupancy building if
the non-residential part of the building is classified for use as a high hazard
occupancy, or if the non-residential use is obnoxious or offensive to
residential occupancy or use.
7. A utility room not maintained free offiammableliquids, oil and grease, and
other similar materials.
8. Yards, courts, and vacant lots not maintained clean and free of holes,
excavations, dead trees and tree Umbs, sharp protrusions, and other objects,
conditions and hazards that are reasonably capable of causing injury to a
person.

Page 16 of 27
 9. Failure to maintain a manufactured residential building, mobile home, or
tourist court in accordance with the provisions of this code, the manufacturer
specifications under which the structure was constructed, or the Land
Development Code.
904 ACTION BY THE CODE OFFICIAL
904.1 General.
904.1.1 Commencement of Proceedings. Whenever the code official has inspected or
caused to be inspected any building, structure, or property and has found that the
building, structure or property is substandard or dangerous, the code official shall begin
proceedings to cause the repair, rehabiUtation, vacation, demolition, removal, boarding or
fencing or other means of closure of the building, structure, or property.
904.1.2 Notice. The code official shall issue a written notice directed to the record
owner of the building, structure or property. The notice shall:
1. identify the building, structure, property by street address, or provide a
description sufficient for identification of the property or the location of the
building or structure;
2. state that the code official has found the building, structure, or property to be
substandard or dangerous, with a summary description of the applicable
provisions of this Code and the alleged violations;
3. specify the corrective measures required to bring the building, structure, or
property into compliance with applicable provisions of this Code;
4. provide a time period for compliance;
5. include a description of the applicable appeal procedures; and
6. include a provision in Spanish stating that a Spanish translation will be
provided on request if the recipient is not able to read the notice in English.
904.1.3 Service of Notice. Notice as required shall be served in compliance with
applicable provisions of state law and City Code. Failure of the code official to serve any
person required to be served does not invalidate any proceedings as to any other person
properly served or relieve that person from any duty or obligation imposed by this Code.
904.1.4 Service of Notice. Required notice shall be served in accordance with
applicable provisions of state law and City Code.
904.1.5 Method of Service. Required notices shall be served via any method or
combination of methods permitted in accordance with applicable requirements of state
law and City Code. The code official may also provide a copy of any notice sent to a
property owner to the manager of the property. On receipt of a copy of the notice under
Page 17 of 27
this section, a property manager shall notify the owner of the specifics of the notice
within 10 days and shall make every reasonable effort to have the owner correct the
violation.
905. Appeal. A person affected by a notice may appeal the violationfindingscontained
in the notice to the Building and Standards Commission by filing a written appeal with
the code official. The appeal must be filed not later than 20 days after the date the notice
is mailed by the City of Austin. A request for additional time to comply with the notice
due to financial inability or other extenuating circumstance is not a proper basis for
appeal, but can be presented to the Commission upon hearing An appeal must contain a
brief statement identifying the notice or action being appealed, setting forth any facts
supporting the appeal, describing the relief sought, and presenting the reasons why the
appealed notice or action should be reversed, modified or otherwise set aside. Filing an
appeal stays further City action under the notice being appealed unless otherwise
provided in this code or, in the opinion of the code official, a delay would present an
immediate danger or unreasonableriskto any person or property.
906 REPAIR, BOARDING, FENCING, VACATION AND DEMOLITION
The following standards shall be followed by the code official (and by the Building
and Standards Commission if an appeal is taken) in recommending or ordering the repair,
vacation, or demolition of any substandard or dangerous building, structure, or property:
1. Any building or structure declared a substandard or dangerous building
under this Code shall be made to comply with one of the following:
1.1 The building(s) or structure(s) shall be repaired in accordance with
applicable Codes related to the type of substandard or dangerous
conditions requiring repair; or
1.2 The building or structure shall be demolished; or
2. If the building or structure is in a condition as to make it immediately
dangerous to the life, limb, property, or safety of the public or its occupants,
it shall be ordered to be vacated.
3. If the owner or other affected person does not comply with the
recommendation of the code official within the identified time period, the
code official may serve notice to the person(s) to appear before the Building
and Standards Commission to show cause why the building, structure, or
property should not be ordered repaired, boarded, fenced, vacated, or
demolished.
907 UTILITY TERMINATION
907.1 Utility Termination Authorized. The code official may initiate a request or
order for utility termination to a structure or property as provided for under the applicable
Page 18 of 27
provisions of state law and City Code. The City shall comply with applicable provisions
of state law and City Code regarding notice and appeal of utility termination.
908 NOTICE TO VACATE
908.1 Placarding. For a building, structure, or property ordered vacated by the code
official or by the Building and Standards Commission, the following shall be required:
1. In addition to any other requirements of this Code as applicable, the code official
shall placard each entrance or exit of the building, structure, or property with a
notice to vacate issued pursuant to the Code. The notice shall be in substantially
the following form:
DO NOT ENTER

UNSAFE TO OCCUPY

IT IS UNLAWFUL TO OCCUPY THIS BUILDING/PROPERTY

OR TO REMOVE OR DEFACE THIS NOTICE.

CODE OFHCIAL
CITY OF AUSTIN
908.2 Compliance. The code official shall reference the notice to vacate in the violation
letter issued under Section 904.1.2 of this Code and shall identify the conditions that
necessitate the evacuation of the building, structure, or property. No person may remain
in or enter any building, structure, or property that is posted with or subject to a notice to
vacate unless an active permit from the building official to repair, abate, demolish, or
remove a building, structure, or condition at the location is posted there and the person is
present only to perform work authorized by such permit. No person may remove or
deface the notice to vacate after it is posted by the code official until the required repair,
abatement, demolition, or removal is completed and a certificate of occupancy is
issued for the building or structure by the building official or release of the notice to
vacate is issued by the code official. No person may induce, allow, or
authorize another person to occupy a building, structure, or property subject to a notice to
vacate or a vacate order until after the required corrective action is completed and a
certificate of occupancy for the building or structure is issued by the building official or
the vacate notice or order is removed and released by the code official. That the posted
notice or order to vacate was defaced or removed by another person acting unlawfully or
by an act of nature is not a defense to prosecution for committing, allowing, or
facilitating entry or occupancy of a building, structure, or property subject to a notice or
order to vacate.
908.3 Appeal of Notice to Vacate. A determination by the code official under this
section may be appealed as provided in this Code for other code official notices, except
Page 19 of 27
that the filing of an appeal shall not stay vacation of the building, structure, or property.
A determination by the Building and Standards Commission under this section may be
appealed as provided for by state law.
909. Offenses - Criminal.
1. A person commits an offense under this section if the person does the
following:
1.1 remains in or enters any building, structure, or property that is posted
with a notice or order to vacate;
1.2 removes or defaces a notice or order to vacate that is posted until after
the required corrective action is lawfully completed and a certificate
of occupancy is issued by the building official for the structure or the
vacate notice or order is released and removed by the code official; or
1.3 leases, lets, or otherwise induces occupancy of a building, structure, or
property after a notice or order to vacate is issued and posted until
after the required corrective action is lawfully completed and a
certificate of occupancy is issued by the building official for the
structure or the vacate notice or order is released and removed by the
code official.
2. It is not a defense to prosecution under this section that a notice or order to
vacate has been removed from the premises.
3. It is an affirmative defense to prosecution under this section if a person
enters into a building, structure, or property for which a notice or order to
vacate has been issued and posted for the purpose of performing corrective
action authorized under a valid permit issued by the building official.
4. An offense under this section is a class C misdemeanor, punishable by a fine
not to exceed $500 per offense, per occurrence, unless proof of a culpable
mental state is pled and proven.
5. Each day a person commits an offense or remains in violation of a provision
of this section is a separate occurrence.
6. Proof of a culpable mental state is not required for conviction of an offense
under this section and is expressly waived for any prosecution for which a
fine of $500 or less for the offense is assessed. If proof of a culpable mental
state is established, an offense under this section is ehgible for imposition of
a fine not to exceed $2,000 for each offense.
910. Offenses - Civil.
1. A person shall not do the following:
Page 20 of 27
 1.1 remain in or enter any building, structure, or property that is posted
with a notice to vacate;
1.2 remove or deface a notice or order to vacate that is posted until after
the required corrective action such as repair, demolition, abatement, or
removal of the building, structure, or property is completed and a
certificate of occupancy for the structure is issued by the building
official or the notice or order to vacate the property is released and
removed by the code official; or
1.3 lease, let, or otherwise induce the occupancy of a building, structure,
or property after a notice or order to vacate is issued and posted until
after the required corrective action such as repair, demolition,
abatement, or removal is completed and a certificate of occupancy for
the structure is issued by the building official or the notice or order to
vacate the property is released and removed by the code official.
2. Under Chapter 54 of the Texas Local Government Code, a person who
commits any of the acts prohibited in subsection 1 of this section commits a
civil offense punishable by afinenot to exceed $1,000 a day per violation or
occurrence.
3. Criminal conviction under Section 909 does not preclude enforcement under
this section or other provisions of applicable state law and City Code.
911 EMERGENCY POWERS
911.1 Emergency Closure. The code official may secure a building, structure, or
property before a public hearing is held by the Building and Standards Commission if the
code official determines that the building, structure, or property meets one of the
following criteria:
1. violates this Code and is unoccupied; or
2. is occupied only by persons who do not have a lawfulrightof possession to
the building or structure.
911.2 Notice.
1. Not later than the 10th day after the date the building, structure, or property
is secured, the code official shall give notice of the closure to the owner by
one of the following methods:
1.1 personal service to the owner; or
1.2 notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the owner at the
owner's last known address; or

Page 21 of 27
 1.3 if personal service cannot be obtained and the owner's post office
address is unknown, either by publication at least twice within a 10
day period in a newspaper of general circulation in the county in
which the building or structure is located or by posting the notice on
or near the front door of the building or structure.
2. The notice must contain the following:
2.1 an identification, which is not required to be a legal description, of the
building or strucmre and the property on which it is located;
2.2 a description of the violations of the Code that are identified at the
building, structure, or property;
2.3 a statement that the code official has secured the building, structure,
or property; and
2.4 an explanation of the owner's right to request a hearing about any
matter relating to the securing of the building, structure, or property
by the code official.
911.3 Appeal of Emergency Closure. The owner of a building, structure, or property
may appeal an emergency closure under this section to the Building and Standards
Commission. A written appeal must be filed not later than 30 days after the date the code
official secured the building, structure, or property. A hearing on the appeal will be
scheduled on the Commission's next available agenda date following receipt of the appeal
and must be heard at the next available agenda date at which a quorum of the
Commission is present, unless the appellant in writing requests or agrees to a
postponement of the hearing on the appeal to a later Commission agenda.
911.4. Costs. The City may assess costs incurred for emergency closures under this
section against the owner of the affected property and may secure those costs with a lien
against the affected property in the manner authorized by state law.
912 LEGAL ACTION
The code official may enforce the provisions of this Code by pursuing all civil and
criminal actions, and civil and injunctive remedies available to a city under state law, or
by any other remedy or combination of remedies available at law or equity, including, in
any court action, the collection of attorney's fees and costs, and maximum interest on
liens and judgments as allowed by law. All remedies authorized under this code are
cumulative of all others unless otherwise expressly provided. The filing of a criminal
action shall not preclude the pursuit of a civil or administrative action for violation of this
Code, nor shall the fihng of a civil action preclude the pursuit of any other action or
remedy, whether administrative or criminal.
CHAPTER 10 RESTRICTION ON TRANSFER AND LEASE OF PROPERTY
Page 22 of 27
1000 TRANSFER OF PROPERTY
1000.1 Execution of Order Not Affected by Transfer. When an order has been filed in
the deed records, execution of the order is not affected by sale or other transfer of the
property. A person acquiring an interest in property after an order has been recorded is
subject to the requirements of the order. The provisions of this subsection shall be
included as part of each order.
1000.2 Transfer of Property. An owner of a building, structure, or property who has
been served with a notice, order, or other notification under this Code may not sell,
transfer, grant, mortgage, lease, or otherwise dispose of the building, structure, or
property until the owner has:
1. furnished to the purchaser, transferee, grantee, mortgagee, or lessee a true
copy of the notice, order or other notification; and
2. simultaneously provided adequate notice to the code official of the owner's
intent to enter into a transaction affecting the building, structure, or property,
including the name and address of the proposed buyer, transferee, grantee,
mortgagee, or lessee.
1000.3 Responsibility of Purchaser. A purchaser of a property on which a notice, order,
or other notification has been issued under this Code and recorded in the real property
records of the county in which the property is located is bound by the terms of the notice,
order, or other notification.
CHAPTER 11 RESTRICTION ON TRANSFER AND LEASE OF PROPERTY
1100 LEASING OF SUBSTANDARD OR DANGEROUS PREMISES IS AN
OFFENSE
1100.1 Criminal Offense and Penalty.
1. A person commits an offense if, prior to the time that the owner receives
notice in writing from the code official that all required corrections have
been made, the person does the following:
1.1 leases or causes to be leased a building, structure, property, or portion
of a building, structure, or property that is vacant at the time that the
owner receives notice from the code official that the building,
structure, or property is substandard or dangerous; or
1.2 leases or causes to be leased a building, structure, or property or
portion of a building, structure, or property that becomes vacant after
the owner receives notice from the code official that the building,
structure, or property or is substandard or dangerous.

Page 23 of 27
 2. Each day that a person commits an offense or remains in violation of this
section is a separate occurrence. An offense under this section is a class C
misdemeanor, punishable by a fine not to exceed $500 per offense, per
occurrence unless proof of a culpable mental state is pled and proven. If
proof of a culpable mental state is established, an offense under this section
is punishable by a fine not to exceed $2,000 per occurrence.
1101.2. Civil Offense and Penalty.
1. A person may not, prior to the time that the owner receives notice from the
code official that all required corrections have been made, lease or cause to
be leased a building, structure, property, or portion of a building, stiiicture,
or property that is vacant at the time that the owner receives notice from the
code official that the building or structure is substandard or dangerous; or
2. A person may not, prior to the time that the owner receives notice from the
code official that all required corrections have been made, lease or cause to
be leased a building, structure, property, or portion of a building, structure,
or property that becomes vacant after the owner receives notice from the
code official that the building or structure is substandard or dangerous.
3. Under Chapter 54 of the Texas Local Government Code, a person who
commits any of the acts prohibited in this Section 1101.2 commits a civil
offense punishable by a fme not to exceed $1,000 a day per violation, per
occurrence.
4. Criminal conviction under Section 1100.1 of this Code does not preclude
enforcement under this section or other applicable law.
CHAPTER 12 LANDLORD/TENANT RELATIONSHIPS
1201 RESPONSIBILITY OF LANDLORD
The owner of a building, structure, or property remains responsible for compliance
with this Code notwithstanding any rental or other agreement purporting to give tenants
or other third parties certain duties or responsibilities with respect to the building,
structure, or property.
1202 RETALIATION AGAINST TENANT IS AN OFFENSE
A property owner, owner's agent, management company, or other person
responsible for managing a property commits an offense if the property owner, owner's
agent, management company, or other person responsible for managing a property raises
a tenant's rent, diminishes services to the tenant, or attempts eviction for reasons other
than nonpayment of rent or other good cause for six months after a complaint is filed by
the tenant with the code official complaining of violations of this Code or for six months

Page 24 of 27
after completion of repairs required by a notice or order issued under this Code,
whichever time period is longer.
An offense under this section is a class C misdemeanor, punishable by a fine not to
exceed $500 per offense, per occurrence unless proof of a culpable mental state is pled
and proven. If proof of a culpable mental state is established, an offense under this
section is punishable by a fine not to exceed $2,000 per occurrence.
The following actions are not a violation of this section:
1. an increase in rent under an escalation clause for utilities, taxes, or insurance
in a written rental agreement;
2. an increase in rent or reduction in services against the complaining tenant
which are a part of a pattern of rental increases or service reductions
uniformly applied for an entire multifamily dwelling project of four or more
units; and
3. an increase in rent that is reasonably related to repairs or improvements
actually made by the landlord after a complaint has been filed and which do
not cause the total rent to exceed fair market value of the premises.
However, no rental increase may be made until the structure is in full
compliance with any notice or order issued under this Code.
CHAPTER 14 INTERFERENCE WITH REPAIR OR DEMOLITION WORK
PROHIBITED
1401 GENERAL
No person shall obstruct, impede, or interfere with work performed by any of the
following individuals for purposes of boarding, securing, repairing, vacating or
demolishing a building, structure, or property under the provisions of this Code, or in
performing a necessary act preliminary or incidental to work authorized under this Code:
1. an officer;
2. an employee;
3. a contractor;
4. an authorized representative of the City;
5. a person who owns or holds an estate or interest in a building, structure, or
property; or
6. a person to whom such a building has been lawfully sold under this Code.
CHAPTER 15 PERFORMANCE OF WORK REQUIRED FOR COMPLIANCE
WITH A COMMISSION ORDER
1501 GENERAL PROCEDURE

Page 25 of 27
1501.1 Demolition and Remediation authorized. In addition to any other remedy
provided in this section, and on the failure of the owner to comply with any predicate or
requirement of an order of the Building and Standards Commission, the code official may
perform, procure, or contract for any work, services, materials, accommodations, or
action required of the property owner by the Commission Order, including that the code
official may perform or obtain engineering surveys or inspections, cost estimates,
construction scheduling, asbestos testing, design services, plan preparation, permitting,
fencing, stabilization, grading, filing, draining, the closure of a building, the vacation and
relocation of occupants, the removal of personalty or disposal of debris, and the treatment
or cleaning of the premises and the lot. The expense of closing, cleaning, abatement,
remediation, relocation, or for any other work or preparation performed or obtained by
the code official because of the property owner's failure to comply with a Conmiission
order, shall be paid and recovered as provided by this Code and other applicable law.
1501.2 Personalty on the Premises. Removal of personalty from a structure ordered
vacated or demolished shall be accomplished by the property owner. Personalty
remaining on the property at the time of demolition by the city or city officer, employee,
contractor, or authorized representative is considered abandoned, and may be removed by
the city in the same manner as other rubbish or debris.
1501.3 Costs. The cost incurred by the city or city officer, employee, contractor, or
authorized representative in repairing, remediating, vacating, relocating occupants from,
closing or cleaning a structure, building, or property pursuant to action of the code
official or Building and Standards Commission following an owner's failure to comply
with a Commission Order shall be paid from demolition funds budgeted by the city
council, unless otherwise provided for or directed by Conmiission order or applicable
law. The expense incurred by the City under this section for action necessary to secure
compliance with a Commission Order because of an owner's failure to comply may be
recorded as a lien against the real property on which the building or noncompliant
condition is located, with interest on the unpaid balance to accrue at the maximum rate
established by law.
1502 GENERAL
Demolition, boarding, fencing, securing, vacation or relocation of occupants or
other closure, repair, treatment, permitting, inspection, testing, analysis, engineering
studies, assessment, or remediation of a building, structure, or property may be
accomplished by an owner or by the code official, unless otherwise provided for or as
directed by Commission order or applicable law. The City may assess the property
owner costs incurred for demolition, boarding, fencing, securing, vacation or relocation
of occupants or other closure, repair, treatment, remediation, or similar action identified
in this section. The expense incurred by the City under this section may be recorded as a
lien against the real property on which the building, structure, or noncompliant condition

Page 26 of 27
is located, with interest on the unpaid balance to accrue at the maximum rate allowed by
law, unless otherwise provided for by applicable law.
PART 2. Subsection (A) of City Code Section 2-1-122 {Building and Standards
Commission) is amended to read:
(A) The Building and Standards Commission is estabUshed to hear cases
concerning alleged violations of the City's regulations and ordinances
relating to the condition and minimum standards maintenance of existing
residential and nonresidential structures, premises, property, and
establishments Iproporty maintonanco, housing, and dangerous buildings].

PART 3. Subsection (113) of City Code Section 25-1-21 {Definitions) is amended to

read:
(113) TECHNICAL CODE means the International [Uniform] Building Code, the
National Electrical Code, the Uniform Mechanical Code, the Uniform Plumbing
Code, the International [Uniform] Fire Code, the Uniform Solar Energy Code
[Guidelines for Solar Energy Installations], or the International Property
Maintenance Code [Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings], as
adopted by the city council.

PART 4. This ordinance takes effect on January 1, 2014.

PASSED AND APPROVED

September 26 2013 §
LeeUJeffingwell
Mayor

APPROVED: ATTEST:
Jannette S. Goodall
City Attorney City Clerk

Page 27 of 27
Exhibit LL
C
City of Austin
P.O. Box 1088, Austin, TX, 78767

AUSTIN COOE
DEPARTMENT NOTICE OF VIOLATION
Case Number: CV-2017-086750
via Certified Mail #7014 3490 0000 7005 4509
July 18, 2017

Gtt Parking Lp C/O Colina West Attn David Kahn

804 Congress Ste 300
Austin, TX 78701-2630

RE: 508 BRAZOS ST AUSTIN TX 78701

Locally known as 508 BRAZOS ST AUSTIN TX 78701
Legally described as LOT 11&12 BLOCK 056 ORIGINAL CITY (TOTAL SQ FT 15640) PLUS
VAC ALLEY
Zoned as CBD-CURE
Parcel Number 0206030613

Dear Gtt Parking Lp C/O Colina West:

The City of Austin Code Department investigated the property described above. Austin City Code

C violations were found that require your immediate attention. A description of the violation(s) and
compliance timeframe(s) are provided in the attached violation report.

After receipt of this Notice, and until compliance is attained, the Austin City Code prohibits the sale, lease,
or transfer of this property unless:

• You provide the buyer, lessee, or other transferee a copy of this Notice of Violation; and
• You provide the name and address of the buyer, lessee, or other transferee to the Code Official.

For additional information, I can be reached at 512-974-6087 or John.Hale@austintexas.gov . Please

reference case number CV-2017-086750. Hours of operation are: Monday - Friday, 7:30 a.m. - 4:00
p.m .

Para obtener mas informaci6n, llame al 512-974-6087 o enviar un correo electr6nico a

John.Hale@austintexas.gov. Por favor, consulte caso numero CV-2017-086750. El horario de atenci6n
es: tunes a viemes, 7:30 a.m. - 4:00 p.m.

Sincerely,

John Hale, Austin Code Officer

City of Austin Code Department

C
Bowmer 001647
 VIOLATION REPORT
C
Date of Notice: July 18, 2017

Code Officer: John Hale

Case Number: CV-2017-086750
Property Address: 508 BRAZOS ST AUSTIN TX 78701
Locally known as 508 BRAZOS ST AUSTIN TX 78701
Zoned as CBD-CURE

The items listed below are violations of the Austin City Code, and require your immediate attention . If the
violations are not brought into compliance within the timeframes listed in this report, enforcement action
may be taken. Timeframes start from the Date of Notice.

Violation Type: EMERGENCY BOARD AND SECURE

Austin City Code Section: Emergency Powers (§25-12-213, 911 .1)

Description of Violation: The building or structure on the premises was found to be in an open and
accessible condition, which constitutes a violation of specific requirements or prohibition(s) applicable to
such building or structure provided by the building regulations of this jurisdiction, as specified in the
International Property Maintenance Code, or any law or ordinance of this jurisdiction.
Date Secured: 07/13/2017
Secured by: City Contractor

C Notes: It is the owner's responsibility to pay the cost of the emergency boarding and securing, which will
include an administrative fee. Upon receipt of the invoice, and unless an appeal is filed, please pay the
amount indicated within 30 days from the date of the invoice. If an appeal is filed, and it is withdrawn or
denied, the payment timeframe of 30 days will begin on the date it was withdrawn or denied.

If payment is not received within this timeframe, interest of 10% annually will be applied to the cost of the
abatement until the amount due is paid in full. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 512-974-
6087 or John.Hale@austintexas.gov.

Appeal: An owner may appeal an emergency closure of a building or structure to the Building and
Standards Commission. A written appeal must be filed no later than 30 days after the date the Code
Official secured the building or structure. A hearing on the appeal will be scheduled on the Commission's
agenda no later than 20 days after the date the appeal is filed.

An appeal may be delivered in person to our office located at 1520 Rutherford Lane or mailed to:
Building and Standards Commission, c/o Austin Code Department, P.O. Box 1088 Austin, Texas
78767.

C
Bowmer 001648
 Violation Type: STRUCTURE MAINTENANCE
G Austin City Code Section: Handrails and Guards (§304.12)
Description of Violation: The wire cable guards located on the 7th floor, alley side(west) of the parking
garage were severely damaged by an automobile, leaving portions with loose or missing guards.

Date Observed: 07/13/2017

Timeframe to Comply: 30 Day(s)
Recommended Resolution : Provide an engineer's report that evaluates the effect of the accident on the
structural integrity of the concrete columns that support the damaged guards. Repair or replace the
damaged guards. A permit will be required before beginning the repairs.

Notes: If the corrective action requires a permit or demolition, please contact the Development Services
Department at 512-978-4000. You can also visit http://www.austintexas.gov/department/planning for more
information.

In order to close the above code violation(s), an inspection will need to be conducted. Please
contact Austin Code Department Officer John Hale at 512-974-6087 or John.Hale@austintexas.gov
to schedule an inspection.

Si no puede leer esta notificaci6n en ingles, pida una traducci6n en espanol.

Appeal: Any structure maintenance issue indicated in this report may be appealed to the Building and
Standards Commission. The appeal must be filed no later than 20 days after the date of this notice and
contain all of the following information :

C •
•
•
a brief statement as to why the violation is being appealed
any facts that support the appeal
a description of the relief sought
• the reasons why the appealed notice or action should be reversed, changed, or set aside
• the name and address of the appellant

An appeal may be delivered in person to our office located at 1520 Rutherford Lane or mailed to:
Building and Standards Commission, c/o Austin Code Department, P.O. Box 1088 Austin, Texas
78767.

C
Bowmer 001649
 IMPORTANT INFORMATION
C Failure to Correct
If the violations are not brought into compliance within the timeframes listed in the violation report,
enforcement action may include:

• Criminal charges in the City of Austin Municipal Court subjecting you to fines of up to
$2,000 per violation, per day.
• Civil penalties in an Administrative Hearing subjecting you to fines of up to $1,000 per
violation , per day, along with additional fees.
• Suspension or cancelation of existing site plan, permit or certificate of occupancy. If the
site plan, permit or certificate of occupancy is suspended or revoked, the utility service to
this property may be disconnected.
• Civil injunctions or penalties in State court.
• For dangerous or substandard buildings, the City of Austin may also take action with the
Building and Standards Commission (BSC) to order the vacation , relocation of
occupants, securing, repair, removal or demolition of a building, and civil penalties.

Ownership Information
According to the records of the County, you own the property described in this notice. If this property has
other owners, please provide me with this information . If you no longer own this property, you must
execute an affidavit form provided by our office. This form should state that you no longer own the
property, the name of the new owner, and their last known address. The affidavit must be delivered in
person or by certified mail, with return receipt requested, to the Austin Code Department office no later
than 20 days after you receive this notice. If you do not submit an affidavit, it will be presumed that you
own the property described in this notice.

An affidavit form is available at www.austintexas.gov/code-resources, or at the Austin Code Department

office at 1520 Rutherford Lane. The completed affidavit should be mailed to: City of Austin Code
Department, P.O. Box 1088, Austin, Texas 78767.

Appeals and Complaints

You may file a written appeal of this Notice of Violation to the Austin Code Department. Refer to the
Violation Report attached to review the appeal process as it relates to the specific violation noted .
Please reference your case number and how the property is now in compliance with the Austin City Code.
An appeal may be delivered in person to our office located at 1520 Rutherford Lane or mailed to: City of
Austin Code Department, ATTN: Code Official, P.O. Box 1088, Austin, Texas 78767.

You may file a written complaint or commendation regarding an Austin Code Department Officer no later
than 3 days after you receive this notice . Please reference your case number. The complaint or
commendation should be mailed to: City of Austin Code Department, ATTN : Code Official, P.O. Box
1088, Austin, Texas 78767.

C
Bowmer 001650
Exhibit MM
C
City of Austin
P.O. Box 1088, Austin, TX, 78767

AUSTIN CODE
DEPARTMENT NOTICE OF VIOLATION
Case Number: CV-2017-086750
via Certified Mail #7014 3490 0000 7005 5094
July 26, 2017

GTT Parking LP C/O Colina West Attn David Kahn

804 Congress Ste 300
Austin, TX 78701-2630

RE: 508 BRAZOS ST AUSTIN TX 78701

Locally known as 508 BRAZOS ST AUSTIN TX 78701
Legally described as LOT 11&12 BLOCK 056 ORIGINAL CITY (TOTAL SQ FT 15640) PLUS
VAC ALLEY
Zoned as CBD-CURE
Parcel Number 0206030613

Dear GTT Parking LP C/O Colina West:

The City of Austin Code Department investigated the property described above. Austin City Code

C violations were found that require your immediate attention. A description of the violation(s) and
compliance timeframe(s) are provided in the attached violation report.

After receipt of this Notice, and until compliance is attained, the Austin City Code prohibits the sale, lease,
or transfer of this property unless:

• You provide the buyer, lessee, or other transferee a copy of this Notice of Violation; and
• You provide the name and address of the buyer, lessee, or other transferee to the Code Official.

For additional information, I can be reached at 512-974-6087 or John.Hale@austintexas.gov. Please

reference case number CV-2017-086750. Hours of operation are: Monday- Friday, 7:30 a.m . - 4:00
p.m.

Para obtener mas informaci6n, flame al 512-974-6087 o enviar un correo electr6nico a

John.Hale@austintexas.gov. Por favor, consulte caso numero CV-2017-086750. El horario de atenci6n
es: lunes a viemes, 7:30 a.m. - 4:00 p.m .

Sincerely,

John Hale, Austin Code Officer

City of Austin Code Department

C
Bowmer 001651
 VIOLATION REPORT
C Date of Notice: July 26, 2017

Code Officer: John Hale

Case Number: CV-2017-086750
Property Address: 508 BRAZOS ST AUSTIN TX 78701
Locally known as 508 BRAZOS ST AUSTIN TX 78701
Zoned as CBD-CURE

The items listed below are violations of the Austin City Code, and require your immediate attention. If the
violations are not brought into compliance within the timeframes listed in this report, enforcement action
may be taken. Timeframes start from the Date of Notice.

Violation Type: EMERGENCY BOARD AND SECURE

Austin City Code Section: Emergency Powers (§25-12-213, 911 .1)

Description of Violation: The building or structure on the premises was found to be in an open and
accessible condition, which constitutes a violation of specific requirements or prohibition(s) applicable to
such building or structure provided by the building regulations of this jurisdiction, as specified in the
International Property Maintenance Code, or any law or ordinance of this jurisdiction.
Date Secured: 07/13/2017
Secured by: City Contractor

C Notes: It is the owner's responsibility to pay the cost of the emergency boarding and securing, which will
include an administrative fee. Upon receipt of the invoice, and unless an appeal is filed , please pay the
amount indicated within 30 days from the date of the invoice. If an appeal is filed, and it is withdrawn or
denied, the payment timeframe of 30 days will begin on the date it was withdrawn or denied.

If payment is not received within this timeframe, interest of 10% annually will be applied to the cost of the
abatement until the amount due is paid in full. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 512-974-
6087 or John.Hale@austintexas.gov.

Appeal: An owner may appeal an emergency closure of a building or structure to the Building and
Standards Commission . A written appeal must be filed no later than 30 days after the date the Code
Official secured the building or structure. A hearing on the appeal will be scheduled on the Commission's
agenda no later than 20 days after the date the appeal is filed.

An appeal may be delivered in person to our office located at 1520 Rutherford Lane or mailed to:
Building and Standards Commission, c/o Austin Code Department, P.O. Box 1088 Austin, Texas
78767 .

Violation Type: STRUCTURE MAINTENANCE

Austin City Code Section: Handrails and Guards (§304.12)

Description of Violation : The wire cable guards located on the 7th floor, alley side(west) of the parking
garage were severely damaged by an automobile, leaving portions with loose or missing guards.

Date Observed: 07/13/2017

Timeframe to Comply: 30 Day(s)

C Recommended Resolution : Provide an engineer's report that evaluates the effect of the accident on the
structural integrity of the concrete columns that support the damaged guards. Repair or replace the
damaged guards. A permit will be required before beginning the repairs.

Bowmer 001652
C Austin City Code Section: Handrails and Guards (§304.12)
Description of Violation : The cable system serving as a vehicle barrier (guards) to the exterior and interior
has several loose cables, and openings that exceed 9 inches spacing that was required in the 1976
UBC.The anchor of the pedestrian guard on the southwest corner of the top floor, near the elevator/stairs
has become detached.

Date Observed: 07/19/2017

Timeframe to Comply: 30 Day(s)
Recommended Resolution: Repair, replace, or upgrade the cable system serving as a vehicle barrier
(guards) to the exterior and interior. The work will require a permit and an engineer's report showing that
the cable system meets the current code requirements (2012 IBC). Repair the anchor of the pedestrian
guard on the southwest corner of the top floor, near the elevator/stairs.

Notes: If the corrective action requires a permit or demolition, please contact the Development Services
Department at 512-978-4000. You can also visit http://www.austintexas.gov/department/planning for more
information.

In order to close the above code violation(s), an inspection will need to be conducted. Please
contact Austin Code Department Officer John Hale at 512-974-6087 or John.Hale@austintexas.gov
to schedule an inspection.

Si no puede leer esta notificaci6n en ingles, pida una traducci6n en espaiiol.

Appeal: Any structure maintenance issue indicated in this report may be appealed to the Building and
Standards Commission. The appeal must be filed no later than 20 days after the date of this notice and

C contain all of the following information:

• a brief statement as to why the violation is being appealed

• any facts that support the appeal
• a description of the relief sought
• the reasons why the appealed notice or action should be reversed, changed, or set aside
• the name and address of the appellant

An appeal may be delivered in person to our office located at 1520 Rutherford Lane or mailed to:
Building and Standards Commission, c/o Austin Code Department, P.O. Box 1088 Austin, Texas
78767.

0
Bowmer 001653
 IMPORTANT INFORMATION
C
Failure to Correct
If the violations are not brought into compliance within the timeframes listed in the violation report ,
enforcement action may include:

• Criminal charges in the City of Austin Municipal Court subjecting you to fines of up to
$2,000 per violation, per day.
• Civil penalties in an Administrative Hearing subjecting you to fines of up to $1,000 per
violation, per day, along with additional fees .
• Suspension or cancelation of existing site plan , permit or certificate of occupancy. If the
site plan, permit or certificate of occupancy is suspended or revoked, the utility service to
this property may be disconnected.
• Civil injunctions or penalties in State court.
• For dangerous or substandard buildings, the City of Austin may also take action with the
Building and Standards Commission (BSC) to order the vacation, relocation of
occupants, securing, repair, removal or demolition of a building , and civil penalties.

Ownership Information
According to the records of the County, you own the property described in this notice. If this property has
other owners, please provide me with this information. If you no longer own this property, you must
execute an affidavit form provided by our office. This form should state that you no longer own the
property, the name of the new owner, and their last known address. The affidavit must be delivered in
person or by certified mail, with return receipt requested, to the Austin Code Department office no later
than 20 days after you receive this notice. If you do not submit an affidavit, it will be presumed that you

C own the property described in this notice.

An affidavit form is available at www.austintexas.gov/code-resources, or at the Austin Code Department

office at 1520 Rutherford Lane. The completed affidavit should be mailed to: City of Austin Code
Department, P.O. Box 1088, Austin, Texas 78767 .

Appeals and Complaints

You may file a written appeal of this Notice of Violation to the Austin Code Department. Refer to the
Violation Report attached to review the appeal process as it relates to the specific violation noted.
Please reference your case number and how the property is now in compliance with the Austin City Code.
An appeal may be delivered in person to our office located at 1520 Rutherford Lane or mailed to: City of
Austin Code Department, ATTN: Code Official, P.O. Box 1088, Austin, Texas 78767.

You may file a written complaint or commendation regarding an Austin Code Department Officer no later
than 3 days after you receive this notice. Please reference your case number. The complaint or
commendation should be mailed to: City of Austin Code Department, ATTN: Code Official, P.O. Box
1088, Austin, Texas 78767.

C
Bowmer 001654
Exhibit NN
 Exhibit 1

Dilapidated, dangerous cables

in 2014 while Premier operated
Littlefield Garage
-XQH CB 0002
 CB 0007
$XJ
$XJ CB 0010
$XJ CB 0023
 CB 0021
$XJ
 Exhibit 2

Emails showing Premier, Jessica

Wright, Bob Chapman, and
Ryan Hunt were well aware of
the dilapidated barrier system;
asked VSL Structure for
substandard repair plan; VSL
refuses involvement and tell
Premier to reconsider bringing
the barrier system up to Code
to make it safe, but Premier
refused.
Mobile: 214-207-4329

wsmith@structuraltec.com
www.vsl.net
www.structural.net
From: Jessica Wright [mailto:jessica@premierparking.com]
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2014 1:37 PM
To: Wade Smith
Cc: Lance Sallis; Caitlyn Ryan; bob@premierpmc.com; 'Ryan Hunt'
Subject: Barrier Cable Repair- Littlefield Garage- Austin, TX

Wade,

Thank you very much for taking time to speak with me today. Per our conversation, we have a garage
here in Austin, TX that is in need of repairs and/or replacement of the existing barrier cables.

The cables that are presently in place are broken, corroded, and loose throughout the 9 levels of this
parking facility.

Can you come out next week to evaluate the damages and provide us a quote on what it will require to
fix them?

I'm looking forward to hearing back from you. If you have any further questions or need me to take a
couple of pictures, please do not hesitate to ask.

My contact info is provided below in my signature.

Sincerely,

Jessica Wright

Jessica Wright / General Manager / 615-339-4937 / jessica@premierparking.com

Premier Parking Office: 512-536-1145
508 Brazos Street / Austin, TX 78701 / www.premierparking.com

The information contained in this transmission and any attachments are for the sole use of the
intended recipient(s) and may be confidential, privileged, copyrighted or may constitute
intellectual property. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution of this
transmission and any attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in
error, please contact the sender and destroy all paper and/or electronic copies of this
transmission.

PREMIER-00138
From: Lance Sallis [mailto:lsallis@streamrealty.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2014 11:38 AM
To: Jessica Wright <jessica@premierparking.com>; Caitlyn Ryan <cryan@streamrealty.com>; John
Vineyard <John.Vineyard@streamrealty.com>
Cc: Brad Philp <bphilp@streamrealty.com>; Diana Marmolejo <dmarmolejo@streamrealty.com>; Nate
Simpson <nsimpson@streamrealty.com>; bob@premierpmc.com
Subject: RE: Parking Meeting- Today

That works great for us too.

______________________________

Lance Sallis
Partner
lsallis@streamrealty.com

STREAM REALTY PARTNERS

515 Congress Avenue, Suite 1300
Austin, Texas 78701
T 512.481.3034
C 512.589.1200
www.streamrealty.com

From: Jessica Wright [mailto:jessica@premierparking.com]

Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2014 10:40 AM
To: Caitlyn Ryan; Lance Sallis; John Vineyard
Cc: Brad Philp; Diana Marmolejo; Nate Simpson; bob@premierpmc.com
Subject: Parking Meeting- Today

All,

Bob and I are meeting with VSL Structural today at 1:30 to walk Littlefield and have them assess the
Barrier Cables to provide a quote for repair. We may be 10 minutes late to the meeting.

Sincerely,

Jessica

Jessica Wright / General Manager / 615-339-4937 / jessica@premierparking.com

Premier Parking Office: 512-536-1145
508 Brazos Street / Austin, TX 78701 / www.premierparking.com

PREMIER-00139
From: Jessica Wright [mailto:jessica@premierparking.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2014 10:03 AM
To: 'Wade Smith' <wsmith@structuraltec.com>
Cc: 'Bob Chapman' <bob@premierpmc.com>
Subject: RE: Barrier Cable Repair- Littlefield Garage- Austin, TX

Wade,

As a follow up, have you had a chance to compile the quote?

Sincerely,

Jessica

Jessica Wright / General Manager / 615-339-4937 / jessica@premierparking.com

Premier Parking Office: 512-536-1145
508 Brazos Street / Austin, TX 78701 / www.premierparking.com

From: Bob Chapman [mailto:bob@premierpmc.com]

Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2014 1:40 PM
To: Jessica Wright; 'Wade Smith'
Subject: RE: Barrier Cable Repair- Littlefield Garage- Austin, TX

Further to Jessica's response. We only want to replace the loose and missing cables per the owner's
direction.

Bob Chapman
Vice President

-------- Original message --------

From: Jessica Wright
Date:05/06/2014 12:54 PM (GMT-06:00)
To: 'Wade Smith'
Cc: bob@premierpmc.com
Subject: RE: Barrier Cable Repair- Littlefield Garage- Austin, TX

Wade,

It was very nice to meet with you last week. Have you had any progress on
the quote?

PREMIER-00140
From: Wade Smith [mailto:wsmith@structuraltec.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2014 10:11 AM
To: Jessica Wright <jessica@premierparking.com>
Cc: bob@premierpmc.com; Don Sees <dsees@structuraltec.com>
Subject: RE: Barrier Cable Repair- Littlefield Garage- Austin, TX

Jessica,

It was nice meeting you as well. As we discussed during our visit the current condition of the cable
system in your garage will not comply with today’s standards. In order to repair only those cables that are
laying on the ground or missing all together modifications would need to be made. Unfortunately
modifications cannot be made to a system out of compliance without bringing the whole system up to
code.

Knowing the severity of the garages current condition VSL will not be able to perform your requested
modifications. Should you and your team reconsider bringing the barrier cable system up to code, in turn
making your garage safe, please let us know.

Best Regards,

Wade Smith
Business Development
Project Manager

struc'tur'cil I OI
TECHNOI.OEi IES
A- -d.,,.JGm. ~

15600 Trinity Boulevard

Fort Worth, Texas 76155

Office: 817-545-4807
Direct: 817-545-2302
Mobile: 214-207-4329

wsmith@structuraltec.com
www.vsl.net
www.structural.net
From: Jessica Wright [mailto:jessica@premierparking.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2014 12:55 PM
To: Wade Smith
Cc: bob@premierpmc.com
Subject: RE: Barrier Cable Repair- Littlefield Garage- Austin, TX

Wade,

It was very nice to meet with you last week. Have you had any progress on the quote?

PREMIER-00147
From: Jessica Wright [mailto:jessica@premierparking.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2014 11:55 AM
To: 'Bob Chapman' <bob@premierpmc.com>
Subject: RE: Barrier Cable Repair- Littlefield Garage- Austin, TX

Thank you

Jessica Wright / General Manager / 615-339-4937 / jessica@premierparking.com

Premier Parking Office: 512-536-1145
508 Brazos Street / Austin, TX 78701 / www.premierparking.com

From: Bob Chapman [mailto:bob@premierpmc.com]

Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2014 11:50 AM
To: 'Jessica Wright'
Subject: RE: Barrier Cable Repair- Littlefield Garage- Austin, TX

Yes.

www pr~m· rpmc .com

Bob Chapman / Vice President / 713-805-0464 /bob@premierpmc.com

Premier Parking Office: 713-526-6131
1213 Hermann Drive Suite 208 / Houston, TX 77004 / www.premierparking.com

From: Jessica Wright [mailto:jessica@premierparking.com]

Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2014 10:30 AM
To: bob@premierpmc.com
Subject: RE: Barrier Cable Repair- Littlefield Garage- Austin, TX

Bob,

What should I say to this? Should I forward it onto Lance?

Jessica Wright / General Manager / 615-339-4937 / jessica@premierparking.com

PREMIER-00161
Premier Parking Office: 512-536-1145
508 Brazos Street / Austin, TX 78701 / www.premierparking.com

From: Wade Smith [mailto:wsmith@structuraltec.com]

Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2014 10:11 AM
To: Jessica Wright
Cc: bob@premierpmc.com; Don Sees
Subject: RE: Barrier Cable Repair- Littlefield Garage- Austin, TX

Jessica,

It was nice meeting you as well. As we discussed during our visit the current condition of the cable
system in your garage will not comply with today’s standards. In order to repair only those cables that are
laying on the ground or missing all together modifications would need to be made. Unfortunately
modifications cannot be made to a system out of compliance without bringing the whole system up to
code.

Knowing the severity of the garages current condition VSL will not be able to perform your requested
modifications. Should you and your team reconsider bringing the barrier cable system up to code, in turn
making your garage safe, please let us know.

Best Regards,

Wade Smith
Business Development
Project Manager

struc'tur'cil I OI
TECHNOLOG IES
A-ch,,,JC,.,...-.,_,I

15600 Trinity Boulevard

Fort Worth, Texas 76155

Office: 817-545-4807
Direct: 817-545-2302
Mobile: 214-207-4329

wsmith@structuraltec.com
www.vsl.net
www.structural.net
From: Jessica Wright [mailto:jessica@premierparking.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2014 12:55 PM
To: Wade Smith
Cc: bob@premierpmc.com
Subject: RE: Barrier Cable Repair- Littlefield Garage- Austin, TX

Wade,

It was very nice to meet with you last week. Have you had any progress on the quote?

PREMIER-00162
 Exhibit 2A

Premier provides false answers

in discovery claiming it did not
know about prior repairs or
that anything was wrong with
the barrier system
 CAUSE NO. D-1-GN-17-004456

CHRISTI J.BOWMER § IN THE DISTRICT COURT

Plaintiff, §
§
vs. §
§ 353 rd JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF
GTT PARKING, L.P. SHELDON DAVID §
KHAN,PREMlERPARKlNG OF §
TENNESSEE, LLC, and WEITZMAN §
MANAGEMENT CORPORATION §
Defendants. § TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS

DEFENDANT PREMIER PARKING OF TENNESSEE, LLC'S OBJECTIONS,

ANSWERS AND RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFF CHRISTI J. BOWMER'S FIRST SET
OF INTERROGATORIES AND FIRST REQUESTS FOR DOCUMENTS AND TmNGS

TO: Plaintiff, Christi J. Bowmer

By and through her A torneys of Record
Randy Howry Sean E. Breen and Chris Lavorato
Howry Breen & Herman, LLP
1900 Pearl Street
Austin Texas 78705-5408

Now comes Defendant, PREMlER PAR.KING OF TENNESSEE LLC and. pursuant to

the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure serves its Objections. Answers and Responses to Plaintiff

Christi l Bov,rmer's First Set ofTnterrogatories and First Requests for Documents and Things.

Respectfully submitted,
A VIK & ASSOCIATES
9601 McAllister Freeway, Suite 910
San Antonio Texas 78216
Telephone: (210) 525-2100
Facsimile: (855) 848-0737
EXHIBIT Email: CRhodes2@Trave1ers.com

lq
BY:
-- ----------
CHRISTOPHER L. RHODES
State Bar No. 16812750
ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT
PREMIER PARKING OF TENNESSEE,

DEFENDANT PREMIER PARKING OF TEN ESSEE, LLC'S OBJECTIO S,

A SWERS A D RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFF CHRISTI J. BOWMER'S FIRST SET
OF INTERROGA TORJES AND FIRST REQUESTS FOR DOCU:ME TS A D THINGS
 LLC
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that DEFENDANT PREMIER PARKING OF TENNESSEE, LLC'S

OBJECTIONS, ANSWERS AND RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFF CHRISTI J. BOWMER'S
FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND FIRST REQUESTS FOR DOCUMENTS AND
THINGS was served in accordance with the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure upon the counsel of
record on the 9th day of November, 2017, addressed as follows:

Randy Howry Via Electronic Service

Sean E. Breen
Chris Lavorato
Howry Breen & Herman, LLP
1900 Pearl St.
Austin, Texas 78705-5408

Curtis J. Kurhajec Via Electronic Service

Naman, Howell, Smith & Lee, PLLC
8310 N. Capital of Texas Hwy., Suite 490
Austin, Texas 78731

Tasha L. Barnes Via Electronic Service

Matthew J. Riley
Thompson, Coe, Cousins & Irons, LLP
701 Brazos St., Suite 1500
Austin, Texas 78701

Christopher L. Rhodes

DEFENDANT PREMIER PARKING OF TENNESSEE, LLC'S OBJECTIONS,

ANSWERS AND RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFF CHRISTI J. BOWMER'S FIRST SET
OF INTERROGATORIES AND FIRST REQUESTS FOR DOCUMENTS AND THINGS 2
Parking, L.P., through Weitzman Management Corporation, to hire them.

INTERROGATORY NO. 7: Describe in detail any maintenance, repair, or modifications

you (or any person or entity you utilized) performed on the cable barrier system from January 1,
2012 to the date of the incident, i.e. efforts to ensure cable tension strength on the cable barrier
system was sufficient, application of protective coatings, etc. In answering this question, describe
the specific location in the Littlefield garage where the maintenance, repair, or modifications took
place, and identify who performed the work.
ANSWER:

This Defendant did not have a service agreement with the previous owner of Littleton Garage
until August 20, 2013 and then entered into an agreement with GTT Parking, L.P. on
September 10, 2015. Defendant did not maintain the cable barrier system at the Littlefield
Garage. As far as this Defendant knew, there was not anything wrong with the cable barrier
system. Defendant was only allowed to hire a vendor to do work at the garage after getting
permission from the owner through the management company. After the O'Connor incident
at the garage, Defendant coordinated the scheduling of the work for the repair of that area
but did not hire the company that performed the repair. GTT Parking, L.P. instructed
Defendant to pay for the cable repair out of the net profits for that month.

INTERROGATORY NO. 8: Describe in detail any maintenance, repair, or modifications

you (or any person or entity you utilized) performed on the cable barrier system from the date of
the incident to the present. In answering this question, describe the specific location in the
Littlefield garage where the maintenance, repair, or modifications took place, and identify who
performed the work.
ANSWER:

There have been no repairs performed on the cable barrier system since the date of the
accident to the present. The area where the accident occurred has been closed since the date
of the accident.

INTERROGATORY NO. 9: Identify any and all occurrences (whether they be in

connection with automobile(s) or pedestrian(s)) where a person was injured and/or property
damaged, from January 1, 2012 to the date of the incident. In answering this question, identify the
following: the specific location in the Littlefield garage where the occurrence took place; the date
of the occurrence; the name, phone number and address of those involved in the occurrence; and
a description of the occurrence; a description of the injuries and/or property damage sustained; and
any actions you undertook after the occurrence.

ANSWER:

Defendant objects to this Interrogatory for the reason that same requests information
outside the scope of discovery and, as such, is not relevant to the subject matter of the
pending litigation and will not lead to relevant evidence or the discovery of admissible

DEFENDANT PREMIER PARKING OF TENNESSEE, LLC'S OBJECTIONS,

ANSWERS AND RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFF CHRISTI J. BOWMER'S FIRST SET
OF INTERROGATORIES AND FIRST REQUESTS FOR DOCUMENTS AND THINGS 5
evidence. TRCP 192.3(a); Axelson, Inc. v. Mcllhaney, 798 S.W.2d 550, 553 (Tex.1990).
Subject to and without waiving said objection, none known to Defendant other than the
O'Connor accident in 2016 of which Plaintiff is already aware.

INTERROGATORY NO. 10: Identify and describe any violation notices from the City of
Austin in connection with the Littlefield Garage, including but not limited to violation notices
related to the cable barrier system employed there-from January 1, 2010 to the present.
ANSWER:

Defendant objects to this Interrogatory for the reason that same requests information
outside the scope of discovery and, as such, is not relevant to the subject matter of the
pending litigation and will not lead to relevant evidence or the discovery of admissible
evidence. TRCP 192.3(a); Axelson, Inc. v. Mcllhaney, 798 S.W.2d 550, 553 (Tex.1990).
Subject to and without waiving said objection, none known to Defendant.

INTERROGATORY NO. 11: Identify and describe any steps taken by you (or any person
or entity you utilized) to rectify, resolve, and/or repair any issue related to a violation notice(s)
from the City of Austin in connection with the Littlefield Garage, from January 1, 2010 to the
present, In answering this question, identify any repair, maintenance or modifications you
conducted or ordered to be conducted; who performed the work (by company name, employee
name, phone number and address); and the date any work was performed.
ANSWER:

Defendant objects to this Interrogatory for the reason that same requests information
outside the scope of discovery and, as such, is not relevant to the subject matter of the
pending litigation and will not lead to relevant evidence or the discovery of admissible
evidence. TRCP 192.3(a); Axelson, Inc. v. Mcllhaney, 798 S.W.2d 550, 553 (Tex.1990).
Subject to and without waiving said objection, not applicable.

INTERROGATORY NO. 12: Please describe in detail any repair, maintenance, or

modification(s) that were made in connection with the cable barrier system where the incident
occurred, from January 1, 2010 to the date of the incident, and identify who performed the work
and the date(s) when the work was performed.
ANSWER:

This Defendant did not have a service agreement with the previous owner of Littleton Garage
until August 20, 2013 and then entered into an agreement with GTT Parking, L.P. on
September 10, 2015. Defendant did not maintain the cable barrier system at the Littlefield
Garage. As far as Defendant knew, there was not anything wrong with the cable barrier
system. Defendant was only allowed to hire a vendor to do work at the garage after getting
permission from the owner through the management company. After the O'Connor incident
at the garage, Defendant coordinated the scheduling of the work for the repair of that area
but did not hire the company that performed the repair. GTT Parking, L.P. instructed

DEFENDANT PREMIER PARKING OF TENNESSEE, LLC'S OBJECTIONS,

ANSWERS AND RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFF CHRISTI J. BOWMER'S FIRST SET
OF INTERROGATORIES AND FIRST REQUESTS FOR DOCUMENTS AND THINGS 6
Defendant to pay for the cable repair out of the net profits for that month.

INTERROGATORY NO. 13: Please describe in detail any repair, maintenance, or

modification(s) that were made in connection with the cable barrier system where the incident
occurred, from the date of the incident to the present, and identify who performed the work and
the date(s) when the work was performed.
ANSWER:

Defendant did not have a service agreement with the previous owner of Littleton Garage
until August 20, 2013, and then it entered into an agreement with GTT Parking, L.P. on
September 10, 2015. Defendant did not maintain the cable barrier system at the Littlefield
Garage. As far as Defendant knew, there was not anything wrong with the cable barrier
system. Defendant was only allowed to hire a vendor to do work at the garage after getting
permission from the owner through the management company. After the O'Connor incident
at the garage, Defendant coordinated the scheduling of the work for the repair of that area
but did not hire the company that performed the repair. GTT Parking, L.P. instructed
Defendant to pay for the cable repair out of the net profits for that month.

INTERROGATORY NO. 14: Please describe in detail any inspection(s) that were
conducted in connection with the cable barrier system at the Littlefield Garage, from January 1,
2010 to the present, and identify who performed the inspection and the date in which the inspection
occurred.
ANSWER:

This Defendant did not have a service agreement with the previous owner of Littleton Garage
until August 20, 2013, and then it entered into an agreement with GTT Parking, L.P. on
September 10, 2015. Defendant did not maintain the cable barrier system at the Littlefield
Garage. As far as Defendant knew, there was not anything wrong with the cable barrier
system. Defendant was only allowed to hire a vendor to do work at the garage after getting
permission from the owner through the management company. After the O'Connor incident
at the garage, Defendant coordinated the scheduling of the work for the repair of that area
but did not hire the company that performed the repair. GTT Parking, L.P. instructed this
Defendant to pay for the cable repair out of the net profits for that month. Once the post-
2016 incident repairs were made, Ms. Murray contacted City of Austin (COA) at GTT
Parking, L.P.'s direction, and made sure COA's representatives were able to access the
garage and inspect it.

INTERROGATORY NO. 16: State each and every fact that supports your assertion of
comparative responsibility (section II. of your Original Answer).

ANSWER:

Defendant objects to this Interrogatory to the extent it is premature. Defendant will timely
supplement in accordance with the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure and Evidence in the trial

DEFENDANT PREMIER PARKING OF TENNESSEE, LLC'S OBJECTIONS,

ANSWERS AND RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFF CHRISTI J. BOWMER'S FIRST SET
OF INTERROGATORIES AND FIRST REQUESTS FOR DOCUMENTS AND THINGS 7
 Exhibit 3

Maritech Engineering takes 10

minute tour and sees
dangerous, substandard
condition

Premier/Stream again refuse to

go with repair plan that
complies with the
Code/Standard of Care
(“onerous”)
10/9/2018 Gmail - Littlefield Garage Barriers

MGmaii Curtis Brown <inventit.cb@gmail.com>

Littlefield Garage Barriers

5 messages

Michael Donoghue <cmd@maritechengineering.com> Mon, Jun 16, 2014 al 9:46 AM

Reply-To: cmd@maritechengineering.com
To: eric.herron@streamrealty.oom
Cc: Curtis Brown <inventilcb@gmail.com>

Mr. Herron,

I would like to briefly follow up on our telephone conversation of last week regarding the above. As you know, Curtis Brown and I made a quick. cursory visit to the above. Curtis subsequenlly
sent
me a link to your Dropbox with the available drawings. As I believe you indicated the drawings are rather sparse and include no structural information.

Based on what we saw In a ten minute tour there are definitely numerous basic safety issues to be addressed regarding the vehicle barriers. Looking at the current IBC code there are
also potential
pedestrian and guardrail issues. The absence of structural documents only compounds the issues most likely. During our phone call I suggested the best place to start in formulating
some kind of
approach Is the conduct a survey of the existing conditions. After looking at the plan and doing a basic code review I think probably best to visit with you first to assess your goals.

I'd like lo suggest we meet either at the site or perhaps for lunch at some point later this week to sort through the issues and your objectives and constraints. If you are amenable I'd
like to propose
we meet at a convenient time this Wednesday or Thursday.

It was a pleasure meeting you if even just on the phone. If you'd like my offlce number is 512 326 3232 and cell is 512 632 0530.

and

C. Michael Donoghue, PE, LEED AP

Maritech Engineering. Inc.

Austin, Texas, USA

Eric Herron <eric.herron@streamrealty.com> Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 9:56 AM

To: "c,nd@maritechengineering.com" <crnd@maritechengineering.com>
Cc: Curtis Brown <inventit.cb@gmail.com>

Mi ke,

Let' s do lu nc h Wednesday at 11 : 30 . I have a 1 :00 meeting h e r e in my office, so if we could do it nearby, that would be best for rr.e .

As you know, I need to push tr..is solution ahea d as quick ly a s possible . The intent is not r.o bri ng this garage up to current code, bot
instead to make repairs to the e xisting c a ble-railing to bring i.t back to the condition .it was when new. The existing bui lding code allows
f or .:epai r of bui lding elememr.t s without. being bou nd by cur re n t code requirements.

Thanks and let rr.e knew if Wednesday at 11 : 30 works for you. We can meet her e and wa lk a block. o r t wo to get something t.o eat down here.

Eric

Eric A. Herron, A.IA

VP - Constr-vction , Dev elopment

en·c.heffon@streamrealty..com

STREAM RE.ALTY PARTN£RS

515 Congress Aven ue, Suite 1300

Austin , Texas 18701

T , 512 . 481. 3040

M, 512 . 694 . 7528

www.streamreally.com

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0?ik=cdd1dfd6f5&view=pt&search=all&permlhid=thread-f%3A 1471078751906493206&simpl=msg-f%3A 147107875190... 1/3

CB 0030
10/9/2018 Gmail - Littlefield Garage Barriers

From : Michael Donoghue [mailto:cmd@mar itechengineering.c om)

Sent: Monday, June 16, 2014 9:47 AM
To: Eric Herron
Cc: Curtis Brown
Subject: Littlefield Garage Barriers

(Quoted text hidden}

Mon, Jun 16, 2014 al 11:13 AM

C Michael Donoghue <cmd@maritechengineering.com>
To: Eric Herron <eric.herron@streamrealty.com>
Cc: Curtis Brown <inventit.cb@gma il.com>
standard of care. They are onerous.
Thank you for your reply. It's a relief not dealing with current requirements, not to mention the

On Wednes day, I'll come to your office at 515 Congress at 11:30.

crnd
C Michael Donoghue, PE, LEED AP
M aritech Engineering, Inc
Austin, Texas, USA

From: Stream Realty <eric.herron@s treamrealty.c om>

Date: Mon, 16 Ju n 2014 14:56:51 +0000
To: C Michael Donoghue <cmd@maritech engineenng.com >
Cc: Curtis Brown <inventit.cb@gm ail.com>
Subject: RE: Littlefield Garage Barriers
(Quoted lext h!Odenl

Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 11 :16AM

Eric Herron <eric.herron@streamreally.com>
To: C Michael Donoghue <and@maritechengineering.com>
Cc: Curtis Brown <invenut.cb@gmail.com>

See you then.

Eric IL Herron, AIA

VP - Construction & ::>evelop:ne:it

cric.herron@.streamrcalty.com

STREAM REI\L~Y PI\RT~ERS

515 Congress Ave:iue, Suite !300

Austin , Texas 1810:

T : 512.481.3040

M: 512 . 694 . 7528

www.streamrealty .com

From: C Michael Donoghue (mailto:cmd@mantechengmeering.c om]

Sent: Monday, June 16, 2014 11 :14 AM
To: Eric Herron
Cc: Curtis Brown
Subject: Re: Littlefield Garage Barriers

[Quoted te.111 hKkleri)

Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 10:35 AM

Eric Herron <eric.herron@streamrealty.com>
To: C Michael Donoghue <cmd@maritechengineering.com>
Cc: Curtis Brown <inventit.cb@gma il.com>

Mike,

My 1 0 : JO meeting is starting a bit late, so I might have to push back to 11 : 45.

Eric

Eric A. if.er ron, AlA

VP - Construction & Develop:nent

enc.herron@streamreaUy.com

$TR.SAM REALTY PAR'l'NE::lS

1471078751906 493206&simp l=msg-f%3A1471 07875190... 2/3

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0?ik=cdd 1dfd6f5&view=pt&search=all&permthid=thread-f%3A

CB 0031
10/9/2018 Gmail - Littlefield Garage Barriers
515 Congx-ess >..venue, Suite 1300

Austin, Texas 78701

T: 512.481.30 40

M: 5 1 2.694.7528

www.streamreally.com

From: C Michael Donoghue (mailto:cmd@maritechengineering.com]

Sent: Monday, June 16, 2014 11:14 AM
To: Eric Herron
Cc: Curtis Brown
Subject: Re: Littfefiek1 Garage Barriers

[Quoted te1et hlddenj

5190... 3/3
rmthid=thread-f%3A147107875190649320 6&simpl=msg-f%3A14710787
hltps://mail.google.com/mail/u/0?ik=cdd 1dfd6f5&view=pt&search=all&pe

CB 0032
 Exhibit 4
Maritech Engineering Report:
notes the dilapidated barrier
“offers little hope of vehicle
restraint”
Premier and Stream operating
garage with impunity
Stream received it. Maritech
refuses to participate in design
of remedial measures that are
Not brought up to code and
Standard of Care.
1
MARITECH ENGINEERING, Inc.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS

Kim Seibert

23 June 2014
Mr. Eric Henon, AIA
Stream Realty
515 Congress Ave,
Suite 1300
Austin. Texas,
78701

Re: Littlefield Garage Remediation. Austin, Texas

Dear Mr. Herro~

Background
Maritech Engineering. Inc. would like to offer this letter proposal in response to your request of 17
June 2014 for Structural Engineering consulting services related to the above. It is our understanding
that the intended focus and intent of the project is the remediation of the dilapidated vehicle barrier
components in the existing garage in Austin (hereinafter called the •Project•). The portion of the
project in which we are to be involved at this phase is limited to the further design development and
completion of contract documentation, and construction administration phases of the project based on
work performed to date.

To be clear on how to approach the Owner·s intended vehicle barrier restoration initiative and what
the scope of the work may entail. we feel compelled to do a basic code review. The pwpose of the
review is to establish the regulatory constraints and ethical bounds of what we. as a design
professional, can and should do.

The Littlefield Garage structure was built in the l 979 era. Sparse and spotty documentation is
available for the building. No structural documents are available. The Building code in effect at the
time is unclear but was likely the 1976 Uniform Building Code. A review of building codes from that
era indicates there were little, if any, requirements for automobile barriers in parking garages in effect.
Some requirements for pedestrian barriers were in effect

Some nominal bani.ers in the fonn of stressed wire stand spaces at approximately 12" do exist but
have fallen in to disrepair to the extent that that offer little if any hope of vehicle restrain and in several
cases virtually no pedestrian safety. In no case do the c\DTent condition rise to the level of vehicle or
pedestrian protection require.din current code and the current standard of care. To be clear we have not
conducted a review of the fire safety. life-safety, and egress conditions in the structure.

Frte: LJltlefleji;j Garage Remediation Proposal.doc Page 1 of4

1519 ALAMEDA DRIVE AUSTIN , TEXAS 78704 [51 2) 326-3232

The current City of Austin Building Code, the ICC's Int.emational Building Code 2012 has specific
provisions for the minimum criteria for the design of vehicle barriers in parking Garages. The criteria
are somewhat stringent and the standard of care practiced by many design professionals is even more
exacting based on the mechanics of realistic design scenarios.

The ICC's Existing Building Code (EBC) and by reference the International Property Management
Code (PMC) is a widely referenced and accepted document that address the common situation of
maintaining an aging, non-conforming structure. The BBC states it is applies to all existing premises
and its intent is to ensure public safety in circumstances where total rehabilitation would be cost-
prohibitive and go well beyond the value of the building. We understand the City of Austin accepts
work done under the EBC. The code states "under limited circumstances a building can be made to
comply with the laws under which the building was originally built as long as there has been no
substantial structural damage and there will be limited structural alteration".

In the case of the Littlefield garage there is little ofwhat may be styled as basic "structural damage" as
intended by the EBC - namely the primary gravity and lateral load resisting systems. As we noted
above the code at the time the structure was built was essentially silent on vehicle barriers. You can
add to that the problem of having not structural documentation with which to assess the intents and
capacities of the structure. The BBC itself leaves the matter of design criteria at the level of an
abstraction, i.e. safety. Safety, however, is a relative term. This implies the exercise ofjudgment and
the involvement of the Owner in assessing risks in balance with cost.

The EBC posits three approaches to the manager in maintaining structures with less than "substantial
damage". All end up stating any repair shall not leave the facility "less safe" or ..less conforming" than
it was pre-damage. In our opinion this allows the restoration of the vehicle barriers to their original
state. Without documents some judgment wiU be required to estimate what that "original state"
actually was or might have been as it is not evident by cursory observations to date or the existing
documents - such as they are.

The BBC approach also allows the development of other initiative to "improve" the common sense
functional risks that have always existed in the garage structure without exposure to being required to
implement maximal restoration to current code compliance and full best practices renovation. This
may involve the addition of improved pedestrian barriers and, potentially, the removal of elements that
would appear to pose unintended and un-necessary risks. This is the Owner's way forward.

Assumptions
We assume that you will furnish us with full information relevant to the project requirements,
including any special or extraordinary considerations for the Project or special services needed, and
make available all pertinent or required site related data including competent geotechnical information
and analysis as outlined on an attached sheets entitled, "General Terms and Conditions For Consulting
Services" and "Client's Responsibilities"

F•e: l..lttlefield Garage Remediation Proposal.doc Page2of4

In the development of this proposal we have assumed that your firm will participate in lhe review of
our reporting and the establishment of the criteria and definition of the ongoing risks and liabilities to
the Owner. Any work performed by Maritech Engineering does not include any site surveys or
geotechnical testing, sampling, or other subsurface exploration, design and observation phase
materials testing, or construction phase testing.

Importantly, any participation by Maritech Engineering does not include any review of Fire and life-
safety issues and conditions beyond those directly associated with the observation of the vehicle
barriers and related garage pedestrian safety.

Proposed Scope-of-Work
In our review of the structure, existing documents, and discussions with the Owner it is evident to us
that bringing the vehicle barrier system up to current standards and standard of care is not envisioned
or perhaps possible given the lack of documentation available if nothing else. It is evident that the
Owner is al some hberty to refurbish some of the existing conditions to improve safety as part of
routine facility maintenance.

It is not clear to us however that a structural engineering professional could, or should, contnbute to
that effort given the lack of documentation among other things. The task of recabling alone without
specific design criteria is pretty straightforward. It is apparent to us that some structural review of the
parking structure may be of benefit to the Owner in identifying any less than obvious conditions that
may have developing over the life of the building and perhaps identify other measures the Owner
might that to further his goals of improving safety in the parking garage and extending its useful life.

To that end, based on our current underntanding the project then, Maritecb Engineering, Inc. proposes
to provide the following consulting services:

• Project Assessment and Scope Development (PS) Phase: We work with the design team to define
the current state of the structure, Owner's intentions and budget for the project and the structural
implications. We understand the Owner intends to only restore the vehicle barrier system to a
tolerable state of safety and mitigate the perceived risk existing currently. As we have stated,
Maritech will not be of benefit to the Owner in that effort.

However, other opportunities to increase the marginal user safety and Owner's liabilities by some
definition may present themselves on a review of the structure and the condition currently
existing. If a constructor is available as a member of the design team at this point we will
collaborate with the team to develop alternates and constructability tactics. The work product of
the PS phase will include a written report of observations and recommendations.

• Remediation Documentation (RD) and Construction Administration (CA) Phases: Based on the
project background analysis above, Maritech Engineering will not be able to participate in any
design of remedial measures related to the vehicle barrier systems in the building or the

Fne: Littlefield Garage Remediation Proposal.doc Page 3of4

 development of structw-al documentation for the project beyond incidental details that add to the
mBTginal safety in the structure on a case by case basis.

Fee Estimate
Maritech Engineering, Inc. proposes to perform the above semces on an hourly basis in two basic
phases· Scope definition and execution phases. The Scope definition encompasses the above PS phase.
1bough we have proposed an hourly invoicing, based on what we know now, we can estimate the fees
and set a cap oo the PS phase work as follows:

• Project Assessment and Scope (PS) phase: $2100.00

We believe the PS phase will take approximately one week.

Our invoices will be calculated on the productive time spent oo the project over the billing period not
to exceed the above agreed design fee unless approved by the Owner at the current rates identified in
the Schedule for Charges for CoosuJting Services (attached). Any additional work beyond the scope
outlined in the above services will be calculated on the same basis. Approved out-of-pocket expenses
on items including prinbns, other than occasional coordination sets, and travel costs will be invoiced
as a direct pass through without an additional surcharge.

The estimated professional fee to complete the Scop~of-Work identified in this proposal will remain
valid for nmety days from the date of this letter. Should the Scope-of-Work change before or during
the course of the project, we reserve the nght to change our fee proposal.

If you have read. understand, and ere in agreement with the scope-of- services, costs proposal,
payment provisions, and other terms and conditions as described in this letter, please so indicate by
your s1goature below. As always we look forward to this opportunity to be of service to you.

C. Michael Donoghue. P.E.

President

Enclosures: Client's Responsibilities

edule of Charges for Consulting Services
c.....1111.n.1"1.Vlfal Terms and Conditions for Consulting Services
A~eedw
·=--ilC-?_ ___ _ _ _ _ _ __

File: Littlerield Garage Remedlal:ion Propoql.doo l'a9E!4 of4

 Exhibit 5

Stream discussion of how

several engineers and subs
refused to go with the “repair
plan” below code and so they
went with “lake guy” Curtis
Brown. Quick and Cheap.
Premier totally aware.
 EXHIBIT NO.

Kim Seibert

From: Eric Herron < eric.herron@streamrealty.com >

Sent: Monday, July 14, 2014 3:04 PM
To: Lance Sallis; David Blackbird
Subject: RE: Littlefield Mall Garage Barrier Cable Replacement

10-4 - thanks for your trust . I just wanted to make sure that everything was on the
straight and narrow since it was a "soon to be" family member .

After some exhaustive research , I have complete faith that it ' s a good price and that
he ' ll do a great job on this work and we ' ll have no trouble down the road .

Eric

Eric A, Herron , AIA

VP - Construction & Development
eric.herron@streamreal y,com

STRE:AM REALTY PARTNERS

515 Congress Avenue , Suite 1300
Austin , Texas 78701
T : 512.481.3040
M: 512.694 . 7528
www.s r mrPalt(.com

from: Lance Sallis

Sent: Monday, July 14, 2014 2:56 PM
To: Eric Herron; David Blackbird
Subject: RE: Littlefield Mall Garage Barrier Cable Replacement

Thanks for putting it all down in writing . We have looked hard for alternatives and found
none that are better than CB Construction . Given the importance of getting the work done
before we start the renovations , I think we move forward with CB as soon as possible .

Thanks ,

Lance

Lance Sallis
Partner
lsallis@st:re,w1realty.com

STREAM REALTY PARTNERS

515 Congress Avenue , Suite 1300
Austin , Texas 78701
T 512 . 481.3034
C 512 . 589 . 1200
www . streamrealty . com

From: Eric Herron

Sent: Monday, July 14, 2014 1:16 PM

127
To: Lance Sallis; David Blackbird
Subject: Littlefield Mall Garage Barrier Cable Replacement

Guys,

I would like to recommend we move forward with CB Construction for the Barrier Cable
Replacement at LF Mall Garage :

As you know I have been working on this for some time to get a price for this work. This
has been a difficult task to find someone willing to do chis work who can do it in a
reasonable timeframe, and who will do it as a repair cable replacement, and not a
complete redesign to current code .

Here are my results:

CB Construction (in the interest for full di8closure, this is my future father-in-law's
company)
Built Carlos and Charlies, built radio towers, boat lifts, dock elevators, and boat-docks
for most of his career . Can start immediately and meet all insurance requirements. He
does really good work - craftsman - that I trust completely. He' s very interested in
forming a relationship for future Stream work .
$61 , 900 +tax= $67 , 006 .75
Labor $33,000
Materials $29,000
Proposal attached
Can complete work in 4-6 weeks .
Current budget for this work is $70K+-

VSL (Ft Worth big-boys) - Wade Smith

They are doing the 501 Garage. Previously looked at this with Jessica/ Nate. Will not
do the work unless it is a fully engineered barrier system to meet current code . I
expect this will double the price and will likely cost at least $125K

Ron Bowling (Recommended by BWI)

Can get us a price in 1-2 weeks, cannot start for 1-2 months
Will charge materials cost plus min. $2/SF for labor
Est. Labor= $36K + tax (more expensive than CB)
Materials=???

Wade Prew (recommended by BWI)

Previously priced for Stream - has an attitude. Needs a week or two to give a price,
cannot start for 1-2 months .
No price or indication of price as of yet.

Let me know how you wish to move forward. I am happy to put this off for a few weeks and
get one or two more numbers from the last two GC's if you would prefer , but I don ' t feel
we can get the price down significantly, and there will be a significant delay before we
get started.

Eric

Eric A. Herron , AIA

VP - Construction & Development
er J ( . • li.,r i:on@s tn,d/t rc.,al ty . com

STREAM RE1U.TY PARTNERS

515 Congress Avenue, Suite 1300
Austin, Texas 78701
T: 512 .481.3040
M: 512 .694 . 7528
"''W . 5tte, m ealt . .om
2

128
From; Nathan Branson <n branson@streamrealty.com >
Sent: Monday, June 30, 2014 4:32 PM
To: Eric Herron
Subject: RE: NA GC contract

Very true . Do a little copy and paste , and keep one on file for jobs l ike these.

From: Eric Herron

Sent: Monday, June 30, 2014 4:30 PM
To: Nathan Branson
Subject: RE: Al.A GC contract

I guess my AIA membership could help in this case and I can get a cheaper blank AIA
contra.ct. ..

Eric

Eric A . Herron, AIA

VP - Construction & Development
eri~.herron@stream.realty . com

STREAM REALTY PARTNERS

515 Congress Avenue , Suite 1300
Austin , Texas 78701
T : 512 . 481.3040
M : 512.694.7528
www.streamrealty.com

From: Nathan Branson

Sent: Monday, June 30, 2014 4:28 PM
To: Eric Herron
Subject: RE: AIA GC contract

Gotcha. I'll check the L drive , and call Dallas to see if they have something.

From: Eric Herron

Sent: Monday, June 30, 2014 4:27 PM
To: Nathan Branson
Subject: RE: Al.A GC contract

It's a guy I know - does mostly stuff around the lake. Re built the floating portion of
Carlos and Charl ies. His name is Curtis Brown - CB Cons.truction .

We were having trouble finding someone to bid the re-cablihg of the vehicular barrier
cables at Littlefield Garage . It ' s a small $67K scope , and he is requiring no pre-
payment for materia l s, so I don't think there is much risk , but in any case - I can
probably just get an AJA contract and use it .

Eric

Eric A. Herron , AIA

VP - Construction & Development

101
eric .he.rron@s t;re.imreal ty. com

STREAM REALTY PARTNERS

515 Congress Avenue, Suite 1300
Austin, Texas 78701
T : 512. 481. 3040
M: 512 . 694 . 7528
www . strearru:eal~y.com

From: Nathan Branson

Sent: Monday, June 30, 2014 4:24 PM
To: Eric Herron
Subject: RE: AIA GC contract

Who is the sub?

From: Eric Herron

Sent: Monday, June 30, 2014 4:16 PM
To: Nathan Branson
Subject: AIA GC contract

Do you have a typical construc tion contract you use? I am trying to go to contract with
a GC to do improvements for the LF Garage , and don't know if you have access to a typical
agreement, or if you just have GC ' s prepare these every time. This is a subcontractor
that I have worked with before I am trying to get going, and I just need somewhere to
start .

I can always go to the AIA and get a blank, but thought you might have something ...

Eric A. Herrbn , AI A
VP - Construction & Development
eric .h.erron@strea1nreal ty. com

STREAM REALTY PARTNERS

515 Congress Avenue , Suite 1300
Austin , Texas 78701
T : 512 . 481. 3Q40
M: 512.694 . 7528
www . streamrealty.com

102
From: Eric Herron <eric.herron @streamrealty.com >
Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2014 2:00 PM
To: Suzanne Pfeiffer
Cc: Diana Marmolej o; l ance Sallis
Subject: RE: Cabling Contract
Attachments: Littlefield Garage 27 June DD Report.pdf

Suzanne ,

I have discussed several times with Lance and David . We have had several subs reject to
bid on repairs , based upon the fact that the garage is not up to current codes . I had an
engineer do a due diligence study and have attached it for your information . He also
found several other things that we will address later , but the cables present a safety
concern and the request put to me was to find someone who could take care of it quickly
so I did . I am happy to solicit other bids if deemed necessary , although the bidder I
have prepared to start on this has an opening in his schedule that I did not want to
miss . Otherwise - we may have to wait until he has another opening in his schedule .

Eric

Eric A. Herron, AI.A

VP - Construction & Development
cr.:c . nerronEst.,:e 111,.·e 1 } . (.Oil

STREAM REALTY PARTNERS EXHIBIT NcQ

515 Congress Avenue , Suite 1300
Austin , Texas 78701
T : 512 . 481.3040 Kim Selbert
M: 512 . 694 . 7528
1W , tre mr ' • ':Or.l

From: Suzanne Pfeiffer

Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2014 1:43 PM
To: Eric Herron
Cc: Diana Marmolejo
Subject: RE: Cabling Contract

I want to be sure Lance is ok with just one bid since our management contract requires 3
at that$$ level.

Suzanne C. Pfeiffer CPA , CPM, RPA, FMA

Partner , Property Management
!pfeifier@stream.realty . com

STREAM REALTY PARTNERS

515 Congress Avenue , Suite 1300
Austin, Texas 78701

T 512 . 481.3014
F 512 . 481.3001

106
 lty.co

From: Eric Herron

Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2014 1:30 PM
To: Suzanne pfeiffer
Cc: Diana Marmolejo
Subject: RE: Cabling Contract

<$70K Vehicular barrier cabling

Eric A. Herron , AIA

VP - Construction & Development
e,ic . n rron@streamrealy . com

STREAM RE.ALTY PARTNERS

515 Congress Avenue , Suite 1300
Austin , Texas 787 01
T: 512 . 481. 3040
M: 512 , 694 . 7528
.,sww . stt am.re l y . .om

From: Suzanne Pfeiffer

Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2014 1:29 PM
To: Eric Herron
Cc: Diana Marmolejo
Subject: Cabling Contract

Eric-

The contract you were referring to is the cabling issue at Lf? What is the value of the
proposed work?

thanks

Suzanne C. Pfeiffer CPA , CPM , RPA, FMA

Partner , Prop erty Management
spr fter@streamre~lt .com

STREAM RE.ALTY PARTNERS

515 Congress Avenue , Suite 1300
Austin , Texas 7870 1

T 512 . 4 81. 3014

f 512 . 481 . 3001
,, t r Jill. _ t .C

107
MARITECH ENGINEERING, Inc.
CONSUL TING ENGINEERS

27 June 2014
Mr. Eric Herron, AIA
Stream Realty
515 Congress Ave
Suite 1300
Austin, Texas,
78701

Re. Littlefield Parking Garage Review

Dear Mr. Herron,

Maritech Engineering would like to follow up on our 23 June 2014 proposal regarding a due diligence
survey of the above structure. We visited the structure on 26 June. Our goal with this letter report is to
discover potential means of increasing the marginal safety of the facility for the Owner to consider in
current or future planning. To be succinct we will present our observations in an outline format with
recommendations added at the end of the paragraph. We have added photographs where it seemed
helpful In Illustrating a point.

Limitations
As we stated in our proposal, we will not address matters relating to Fire and Life safety code nor
attempt an assessment of ADA and TAB compliance issues. We believe these matters are outside our
area of professional competence. To the extent that we did see something of note, we will mention it.
Consistent with our proposal we cannot directly address the design or capacity of the vehicle barriers.
Our comments are based solely on visual observations made during at floor and street level tour of the
facility. The construction documents available are very limited and Include no structural documents.

Observations and Comments

I. Vehicle Hazards
A. Roof top end of aisle visibility - At the roof level the Southwest deck traffic aisle ends with
no visible marker other than the barrier cables. The lighting In the area Is probably rather
poor. It is not unreasonable to think a driver may not perceive the presence of the edge of
the structure and inadvertently collide with the barrier cables and find the edge of the slab
before being restrained In some sense by the cables. There Is evidence that some marker
posts were In place at some point but have been removed, Figure 1.
• Recommendation: Provide a high visibility reflective marker indicating the edge hazard.
• Recommendation: Provide one or more rows of wheel stops or other physical barriers
along the entire edge.
• Recommendation: Provide additional lighting for the area

File: Littlefield Garage, 27 June Due Diligence Pa~e 1

1519 ALAMEDA DRIVE AUSTIN, T[XAS 78704 15121 326-3232

108
 B. Exposed electrical conduit - At the roof level two runs of evidently main power conduit are
placed mounted to a knee wall directly in front of parking spaces, Figure 2. There appears to
be some risk that if a vehicle collides with the wheel stops the bumper could impact the
conduits and damage the wiring with an unknown set of consequences.

Figurel
Roof top end of aisle

Figure 2
Roof top to Power conduit

File: Littlefield Garage, 27 June Due Diligence Page 2

109
 • Recommendat ion: Provide standoff dock bumpers parallel to the conduits and/or raise
the conduit at or above vehicle hood level.
C. Striping of spaces - the marking of the parking spaces appears ill considered or unplanned in
many cases. Some spaces are left rldlculously narrow, Figure 3, and generally left unused
and unusable. In the worst cases patrons are forced: or choose to park in an obviously
inappropriate and probably hazardous manner, Figure 4. We counted at least six such
instances.
• Recommendation: Consider restriping some runs of spaces to eliminate the unused
spaces and re-center the cars to improve safety and functionality.
D. Absence of wheel stops - We conducted no detailed count but perhaps 60% of or more of
the parking spaces do not have wheel stop to prevent or at least impede a vehicle from
either colliding with an adjacent wall or the barrier cabling. The absence of wheel stops only
increases the likelihood of vehicles impacting a wall or barrier cabling to either the
aggravation of the patron or the wear and tear on the building.
• Recommendation: Consider the addition of wheel stops at every space where they are
not currently provided.
E. Presence of a masonry barrier wall immediately behind barrier cabling - At the west side of
the third floor or level there is a half height unit masonry wall provided along almost the
entire length, Figure 5. The existing barrier cabling is placed approximately two inches in
front of the wall. The barrier cables are design to perform their function only when
deflected several inches beyond their static position. The degree of deflection is a function
of the size and speed of a vehicle on impact as well as the number and unrestrained length
of the cables. Deflection of a foot or more should be expected. In this case a vehicle would
impact the wall long before a vehicle is restrained in some sense by the cabling. Given the
length and height of the wall and the thinness of the slab it rests on, the capacity of the wall
to sustain a vehicle impact is very likely negligible. Worst yet, a vehicle impact would very
likely simply push the wall or its shards off the building and into the ally some twenty feet
down with disastrous consequence for anything or person below.
• Recommendation: Consider removing the wall
• Recommendation: Add wheel stops

II. Pedestrian Hazards

A. Steep slopes adjacent to parking spaces - The layout and dimensions of the garage plan left
the designers with some very steep cross gradients or slopes at the end parking spaces. In
most cases the slope are painted a bright glossy yellow in an attempt to alert the user to the
presence of a hazard, Figure 6. The problem is however in several instance the passenger
side of a parked vehicle ends up being immediately proximate to a precipitous edge.

The hazard scenario is a passenger is not paying attention to the hazards and can't actually
see the edge from the passenger seat in a dimly lit garage. On parking she opens the door

File: Littlefield Garage, 27 June Due Diligence Page 3

110
 and assumes sound foot ing. Instead find she's stepping on to a steep slippery slope. Leather
soled shoes will find little traction on the glossy paint. A fall there would place the person on
the deck and in a traffic lane. This creat es an intolerable, avoidable hazard to both the
patron and a liability to the garage Owner.
• Recommendation: Consider inst alling a code compliant guard rail along the unprotected
edges.
• Recommendation: Consider on parking aisles with unused or poorly striped spaces, as
noted above, consider re-striping to use the available space more effectively.

figure 3
A Narrow Parking Space

Figure 4
Awkward Parking

File: Littlefield Garage, 27 June Due Diligence Page4

111
 Figure 5
Masonry Wall

File: Littlefield Garage, 27 June Due Diligence Page 5

112
 Figure 6
A Fall Hazard

B. Parking on steep cross slope - Another consequence of the ineffective spacing or striping is
that some spaces seem to invite patron to park in a somewhat hazardous manner, see
Figure 4. There are at least four instance of this feature. In these instances the vehicles are
somewhat more exposed to traffic hazards, the awkward angle leaves entry and exit from
the vehicles more diffioolt, and the steep cross slope makes opening the car door without
hitting the adjacent vehicle and causing a "parking lot ding" more likely.
• Recommendation: Consider restriping the entire parking aisle to re-space or eliminate
the inappropriate end space. In most cases no spaces will be eliminated. In one case at
the roof level a re-striping would appear to add a space.

File: Littlefield Garage, 27 June Due Diligence Page 6

113
Ill. Structural Issues
A. Unprotected post-tensioning stressing pockets - The physical condition of the structure is
sound and generally unremarkable with a few exceptions. Normal concrete cracking has
occurred in places and some spalling of concrete is evident in isolate instances. The
consequences of these Items appear to be purely localized. There is however one
somewhat systematic error with broader consequences: As many as 24 post-tensioning live-
end stressing pockets were left unprotected from corrosion. This condition has most likely
existed since the structure was completed in approximately 1979. About six of the missing
stressing pocket protection can be found at the roof levels Northeast edge, Figure 7. The
remainder of the pockets we could see occur on the West face (ally side) at the fifth, sixth
and seventh levels, Figure 8.

Corrosion of a post-tensioning tendon and or its end anchor points is a serious problem. The
most serious and certain point at which the corrosion will be concentrated is the very point
where the tendon is gripped by its wedges. It is somewhat fortunate in this instance that, for
at least the visible cases, the tendons affected are what is known as the temperature and
distribution tendons. These are tendons placed with little or no drape and with the intent
on maintaining a nominal level of pre-stress in the slab orthogonal to the spanning or load
carrying direction. The purpose is to keep cracks closed and develop sufficient transverse
elastic behavior to distribute wheel loads. Loss of isolated temperature tendons is
sometimes tolerated given their secondary nature and the likely residual pre-stress in the
central part of the slab caused by the main girder pre-stress than runs parallel to the
temperature tendon. This pre-stress is, however likely ineffective near the edges of the
slabs. The problem here is several tendons in a single slab have been left in an unprotected
state. The repair and long-term corrosion protection of a tendon anchor point in an already
potentially advanced state of corrosion is a difficult matter that needs a separate study as an
incorrect repair will do more harm than good. Simply patching over the visible corroded
metals will not eliminate the problem. There are corrosion inhibiting grouts and admixtures
(Sika CNI for instance) that may slow the corrosion process on part they come in contact
with but will do nothing for the oxidation already underway. Moisture and oxygen already in
the strand, chocks, and duct will continue their work for some time to come.
• Recommendation: Commission a separate study to develop a repair plan for the pre-
stress.

IV. Other Observations

A. Visibility of Southeast exit stairwell. Depending on how you count floor on the sixth and
fourth floor the entrance to the South East Stairwell and its signage is not visible until you
are directly in front of the doorway, Figure 9. The IBC in section 1011.1 has it that the exit
should be clearly visible from any direction of egress travel.
a. Recommendation: Add appropriate signage to indicate the location of the exits at the
Southeast corner as needed.

File: Littlefield Garage, 27 June Due Diligence Page 7

114
 Figure 7
Roof Top Stressing Pocket

Figure 8
West Side Stressing Pockets

File: Littlefield Garage, 27 June Due Diligence Page 8

115
 Figure 9
Exit Visibility

B. Accessible parking. We noted three handicapped (HC) spaces on the sixth level of the garage
with one of them being marked as van accessible. We saw no signage from the garage entry
to the indicating clearly where the HC spaces were. The garage has, on rough count, about
470 spaces. The ADAAG has it that there should be about nine accessible spaces with two
van accessible spaces.
a. Recommendation: add signage clearly indicating where the HC spaces are and the
accessible route.
b. Recommendation : Consider adding HC spaces if at all possible.

The above summarizes our observations of items we feel should be brought to your attention in your
effort to maintain and improve the safety of the patrons of the Littlefield garage. Please call if you have
any questions or would like us to elaborate further on any of the above items.

Page9

116
 Exhibit 6

Premier fully aware of Curtis

Brown “repair plan” –
kick off meeting for repairs

Premier in meeting and active

all through repairs
10/9/2018 Gmail - Littlefield Mall Garage Re-Cabling Kick Off Meeting

Cu rtis Brown <invenlit.cb@gmail.com >

MGmail
Littlefield Mall Garage Re-Cabling Kick Off Meeting
1 message
Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 11:18 AM
Eric Herron <eric.herron@streamrealty.com>
com>, Curtis Brown <inventit.cb@gmail.com>, Jessica Wright
To: Lance Sallis <lsallis@streamrealty.com >, John Vineyard <John.Vineyard@streamrealty.com>, Nate Simpson <nsimpson@streamrealty.
<jessica@premierparking.com>

Attached - please find today's agenda.

We'll see everyone at 3:15.

Meeting to discuss the construction kic k- off for the Ga rage Barrier Cabl e Replacement.

Agenda:

Introductions
Construction Contract
Work Schedule
Coordination w/ garage operations
Safety / acto-protec-.:.ion
Engineer's report of a dditiona l deficie ncies
Additional work we want to ge t pricing o n
Stair s reinforcing
Stairs grinding s.nd painting
Additi onal wheel- stops
CMU block demo on 3 - alley side
Re - packing stressing pockets

'!B ~;KGarage Cabling Construction Kick-off.pd!

147389300140 . . . 1/1
https://mail .google.com/mai I/u/0?ik=cdd 1dfd6f5&v iew=pt&search=all& permthid=thread-f%3 A1473893001405628 538&si mpl=msg-f%3A

CB 0050
 Littlefield Mall Building Garage Cabling Construction Kick-Off
07/17/2014

Agenda:

• Introductions
o Eric Herron, Stream Realty Partners - CM
o Lance Sallis, Stream Realty Partners - Owners Rep
o John Vineyard, Stream Realty Partners - Property Manager
o Nate Simpson - Stream Realty Partners - Building Engineer
o Curtis Brown - CB Construction - Contractor
• Construction Contract
o Insurance in place
o Underway - to be signed by SRP and CBC today
• Work Schedule
o Review anticipated schedule
o CBC to submit to Stream and Premier prior to start of work
• Coordination w/ garage operations
o CBC / Premier
• Safety I auto-protection
o CB to describe protection
• Engineer's report of additional deficiencies
o Review report by Maritech Engineering
o Discuss which, if any of these items we want to get pricing on now.
• Additional work we want to get pricing on
o Stairs reinforcing
o Stairs grinding and painting
o Additional wheel-stops
o CMU block demo on 3 - alley side
o Re-packing stressing pockets

CB 0051
 Exhibit 7

Premier actively participated in

repair plan
 EXHIBIT NO. nl_

Kim Seibert

From: Jessica Wright <jessica@premierparking.com >

Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2014 10:20 AM
To: Eric Herron
Cc: Caitlyn Ryan
Subject: RE: Cable repair
Attachments: SalesOrd_SO18628_from_Wildflower_Meadows_LLC_4832.pdf

Eric,

I ran the numbers and I think we can perform the work in house much cheaper than having Curtis do it for llk.

Pallet of 60 rubber wheel stops for approximately

$2,147.00
Epoxy 60 tubes (28 fl. oz. each- one wheel stop requires 10 fl. oz.)
$418.80
Relocating Existing Wheel Stops and Labor
$2,160.00

$4,725.80

10% contingency

$5,198.38

OR, Can we order the wheel stops and glue and have him quote the price for labor to mount and reposition the existing
ones to see what he comes up with?

As for the spring loaded bollards. I have a price for 40 of them from Grainger for the amount of $6,230.00 and we can
install them throughout the day on regular time, unless you would rather have Curtis do it?

Jessica Wright/ General Manager/ 615-339-4937 / jessica@premierparking.com Premier Parking Office: 512-536-1145
508 Brazos Street/ Austin, TX 78701 / www.premierparking.com

-----Original Message----
From: Eric Herron [mailto:eric.herron@streamrealty.com j
Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2014 8:58 AM
To: Jessica Wright
Cc: Caitlyn Ryan
Subject: RE: Cable repair

Thanks Jessica. Did we get another price on the wheel-stops to check Curtis' bid?

Also I discussed an option for the spring bollards with Curtis of suspending them from the beams above. Can your guy
who quoted you the first time adjust his proposal as thus? Don't you agree this would be a good option to keep them
from being broken?

103
Eric

Eric A. Herron, AIA

VP • Construction & Development
eric.herron@streamrealty.com

STREAM REALTY PARTNERS

515 Congress Avenue, Suite 1300
Austin, Texas 78701
T: 512.481.3040
M: 512.694.7528
www.streamrealty.com

•····Original Message----
From: Jessica Wright {mailto:jessica@premierparking.com)
Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2014 8:48 AM
To: Curtis Brown; Eric Herron; Lance Sallis; Caitlyn Ryan; Diana Marmolejo
Subject: Cable repair

Curtis,

I have sent notice to all valet staff who park in t he garage and my guys will have all of the outer spaces blocked off
Saturday at 6am until you are finished on Sunday, in the event a car parks in the spaces that are marked, we will have
them relocated in the facility with a tow truck. We will be pressure washing as well, if the guys get in your way let me
know and I will have them move to another location of the facility.

Regards,

Jessica Wright
General Manager
Premier Parking of TN, LLC
C: 615-339-4937
0: 512-536-1145

Sent from my iPhone

104
Wildflower Meadows, LLC
14113 NE Airport Dr Sales Order
Vancouver, WA 98684 Date S.O. No.
Phone 360.989.0960
8/1212014 SO18628

Name I Address Ship To

Premier Parking-Littlefield Garage Premier Parking-Littlefield Garage

508 Brazos St Jessica 512.480.0347
Austin TX 7870 l 508 Bnw.>s St
Austin, TX 78701

P .O. No. Terms Rep Ship Via Telephone No

Quote Prepay KV Roadrunner

Qty Item Description Rate Amount

I 6FTRCSPALLET... Pallet of 60 six ft Rubber Car Stops or Parking Stops with 1,557.00 1.557.00
4 yellow stripes on each side and 4 hardware mounting
holes. Hardware sold separately. Weight 40 lbs.
Oimensions 6 in W x 4.25 in H x 6 ft L.
Freight Out for Cu... Freight out to zip code 78701 . Parking Garage. Lifigate 590.07 590.07
truck requested. Delivery hours R-5, Mon-Fri.

Customer does not need any hardwnre.

Subtotal $2,147.07

Email: sales@orangc-traffic-cones.com Sales Tax (0.0%) $0.00

Website: www.orange-traffic-cones.com

Total $2, 147.07

Phone# Fax#

360.989.0960 866.964.4637

105
From: Jessica Wright <jessica@premierparking.com >
Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2014 11:07 AM
To: Eric Herron
Cc: Lance Sallis; Cait lyn Ryan
Subject: RE: Curtis Brown

Eric,

I have time today after the parking meeting to walk the Garage, if you are available.

I can also call Curtis to see if he can be available at this time, if you would like me to.

There are several items that I would like to address as we walk the garage:
1) NE corner indentations- ALL Levels (enclose them or run railing from ceiling to floor)
2) Elevator Landings- ALL Levels (areas that have been patched with chicken wire and rubber as well as tripping
hazards)
3) Man or Crane Hole from when the garage was built- L7 Up ramp (wood is still there, I do not know if the
concrete above the wood has been reinforced so we can remove it)
4) Several Areas along the walls and floors that have exposed post tension cable or structural cable
5) Breaker Boxes- LS (need to encase with a cage or railing that has a door for access)
6) Trip Hazards and exposed wiring- L9

The stairs in the NW corner are being addressed by Curtis. Is he addressing the weak areas in the railing as well?

ALL,

I am gat hering bids for new lighting for Littlefield Garage and Bank of America Garage.

The lighting we have works, however, there are more options for better installments, better footcandles, energy savings,
cost savings on light bulb replacement and ballast replacement as well as TVA rebates. We also can have the outer lights
(towards the open areas) of the Littlefield Garage and 501 Garage be placed on a timer so we are not running more
electricity than we need during the day.

What type of lighting are we going with for 501 Garage?

Have you all addressed signage for 501 and LF, if so, I would like to go over the mock ups to ensure the correct language
and the deliverance of the message to the parker is being met appropriately with my team. I just wanted to follow up
with you all on this because in my experience, all new signage takes a while for a decision on the style, making the
necessary corrections to language, production and installation. I have managed in two redevelopments totaling in over
$3 million dollars of our own in Nashville and we spent over three months to decide on which style of signage we were
going to go with alone. Having exterior signage such as our Littlfield sign that encroaches over the sidewalk may need to
have permits issued and that can take a while as well. I am sure you all are aware of this, however, if our tentative
completion date is January 2015 for 501 Garage, I wanted to make sure we all have dotted our l's and crossed our T' s.

Sincerely,

Jessica

117
Jessica Wright/ General Manager/ 615-339-4937 / iessica@premierparking.com
Premier Parking Office: 512-536-1145
508 Brazos Street/ Austin, TX 78701 / www.premierparking.com

From: Jessica Wright [mailto:jessica@premierparking.com]

Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2014 2:24 PM
To: 'Eric Herron'
Cc: 'Lance Sallis'; 'Caitlyn Ryan'
Subject: RE: Curtis Brown

Eric,

I can be available Friday if this works for you?

Jessica Wright/ General Manager/ 615-339-4937 / jessica@premierparking.com

Premier Parking Office: 512-536-1145
508 Brazos Street/ Austin, TX 78701 / www.premierparking.com

From: Eric Herron [mailto:eric.herron@st reamrealty.com]

Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2014 2:22 PM
To: Jessica Wright
Cc: Lance Sallis; Caitlyn Ryan
Subject: RE: Curtis Brown

Jessica , Can you walk the punch list with mysel f and Curtis? We need to do this later
this week .

We need to l ist a l l of these "finish-up" items at this time .

Eric

Eric A . Herron , AIA

VP - Construction & Development
eric . herron@streamrealty . com

STREAM REALTY PARTNERS

515 Congress Avenue , Suite 1300
Austin , Texas 78701
T : 512 . 481.3040
M: 512.694 . 7528
www . streamrealty.com

From: Jessica Wright [mailto:jessica@premierparking.com]

Sent: Tuesday, Oct ober 07, 2014 2:03 PM
2

118
To: Eric Herron
Cc: Lance Sallis; Caitlyn Ryan
Subject: RE: Curtis Brown

Eric,

I wanted to follow up with you in regards of my email below. Do you have time to meet next week to walk the garage? I
would like to show you areas that post tension cable is exposed along the walls and floors that may need to be
addressed, can Curtis address these as he is addressing the stairwells?

Would you like for me to have them assessed by a professional in this area?

Sincerely,

Jessica

Jessica Wright/ General Manager/ 615-339-4937 / jessica@premierparking.com

Premier Parking Office: 512-536-1145
508 Brazos Street/ Austin, TX 78701 / www.premierparking.com

From: Jessica Wright [mailto:jessica@premieroarking.com]

Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2014 3:30 PM
To: 'Eric Herron'; 'Nate Simpson'
Subject: RE: Curtis Brown

Eric,

I will follow up with him on the stairs for you, he was in the office a few minutes ago and told me he is stilt mounting the
wheel stops and should be finished by the middle of next week, he ran into issues with the concrete stops and epoxy
adhering to t he floor, so he will be anchoring them by drilling in by an inch.

As for the delineators, he is still awaiting the mounting portion of the 8 posts left to install.

Also, I would like to walk the garage with you at some point, we have some exposed cables along the wall that may need
to be addressed, I would like your opinion.

Sincerely,

Jessica

Jessica Wright/ General Manager/ 615-339-4937 / jessica@premierparking.com

3

119
Premier Parking Office: 512-536-1145
508 Brazos Street/ Austin, TX 78701 / www.premierparking.com

From: Eric Herron [mailto:eric.herron@streamrealty.com]

Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2014 2:49 PM
To: Nate Simpson
Cc: Jessica Wright
Subject: RE: Curtis Brown

Ok - thanks. Appreciate it. I know Lance is frustrated with the progress, and he and I
walked i t earlier .

Jessica does Curtis lack any other work? I asked him to do some reinforcing of the
stairs, but he never got me a price for this work.

E:dc

Eric A . Herron , AIA

VP - Construction & Development
eric.he.r.ron@streamrealty.com

STREAM REALTY PARTNERS

515 Congress Avenue , Suite 1300
Austin, Texas 78701
T : 512.481.3040
M: 512 . 694 . 7528
www . streamrealty . com

From: Nate Simpson

Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2014 2:46 PM
To: Eric Herron
Cc: Jessica Wright
Subject: RE: Curtis Brown

I apologize you weren' t looped on the electrician' s progress. I gave a full update in our
team meeting yesterday.

They are replacing all of the wire to each fixture which is slowing them down . They are
now projecting a completion end of next week or the following. They electrician he has
had working on the project has been sick the last few days, but he pulled in another guy
today to work for a while ; he must have been gone when you were there . They found the
original voltage issue was coming from the transformers on the top floor near the roof.
So the danger has been mitigated and they are continuing the replacement of the old
wiring to the fixtures .

Thanks ,

Nate Simpson
Operations Manager
nsimpson@streamrealty . com

STREAM REALTY PARTNERS

515 Congress Avenue , Suite 2240
Aust in , Texas 78701
T 512 . 498 . 4403
www . st~eamrealt y . c om

120
 2014 1pm - 2:30pm (Curtis Brown)
10/9/2018 Gma il - Reminder: Punch List - Littlefield Garage Improvements - CB Constru ... @ Fri Oct 10,

Curtis Brown <inventiLcb@gm ail.com>

MGma il
20141pm - 2:30pm (Curtis Brown)
Reminder: Punch List - Littlefield Garage Improvemen ts - CB Constru ... @ Fri Oct 10,
1 message
Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 12:30 PM
Google Calendar <calendar-notification@google.com >
Reply-To; Eric Herron <eric.herron@streamrealty.com>
To: Curtis Brown <inventit.cb@gmail.com>

more details •
Punch List - Littlefield Garage Improvement s • CB Construction
only 3 required to attend.
Punch List for CB Construction, if you wish to be included. Myself, Jessica, and Curtis are the

Eric

When Fri Oct 10, 2014 1pm-2:30pm Central Time

Where Meet at Garage Parking Office (map)

Calendar Curtis Brown

Who Eric Herron - organizer

Curtis Brown - creator
Nate Simpson
Lance Sallis
Jessica Wlight
Diana Marmolejo
Haleigh Nichols

Going? Yes - Maybe - No more options •

Invitation from Google Calendar

You are receiving this email at the account 1nventil.cb@gmail.com because you are subscribed
fOf reminders on calendar Curtis Brown.

Change yoor no1.1fication settings for this calendar.

To stop receiving these nolificatioos, please log in to https://www.google.c omlcalcndarl and

A 14815982584 86204778&simpl=msg-f%3 A1481 59825848 .. . 1/1

https://mail.go ogle.com/mail/u/O?ik=cdd 1dfd6f5&view=pt&sear ch=all&permth id=thread-f%3

CB 0115
 Exhibit 8

Premier’s lead employee on the

garage with Stream and Brown
repairs:
Jessica Wright

Currently wanted for bail

jumping
Woman uses duplicate keys to steal $7K from
downtown Austin parking meters
bvkrrodAKincery I Mond,v,All"-cus: 10th201S

A woman was arrested for stealing more than $7,000 from downtown Austin parking meters
using duplicate keys from her former job as general manager of a parking company. According
to an affidavit, Jessica Wright resigned from her position as general manager of Premeir Parking
on June 4, 2015. At this time is was believed that Jessica turned over all access cards and keys
belonging to Premier Parking. The woman charged with collecting revenue from two automated
parking meters in the 500 block of Brazos St. in Wright's absence performed her duties as normal
on June 29 and reset the meters. On July 2, the keys to the Brazos parking meters inexplicably
went missing. The woman and her co-workers believed they may have been lost in the office, but
never found. She contacted the manufacturer and requested additional keys be made for the 2
meters. The manufacturer informed her that Premier Parking should be in possession of 2
additional sets of keys to the aforementioned meters. The Premier Parking staff searched the
office and found those keys were missing as well. The woman then ordered additional keys from
the manufacturer, with an expected turnaround time of 2 weeks. When the replacement keys
arrived on July 20, the woman went to the Brazos parking meters to collect the revenue. One of
them had only $10 while the other had no money. As this was a shockingly low amount of
revenue, the woman reviewed revenue reports on the meters and discovered they were more than
$6,000 short. According to the affidavit, the woman cross-referenced the reports of the meters
being opened with security video from her nearby office building. Upon review, she recognized
Wright making unauthorized collections from at least one of the meters on multiple occasions.
The woman informed Austin Police that no alarms were ever triggered on the meters and that
they were secured in a proper manner allowing the meters to continue collecting money,
demonstrating that the person making the unauthorized withdrawals had ample knowledge of
how the meters worked.

"It is kind of crazy," said Robert Schultz. Schultz would rather walk than pay for parking and he
doesn't exactly feel bad that money going in was allegedly stolen from a former Premier Parking
employee. "That's their fault that they let that much money be stored in the machine like that,"
said Schultz.

"You definitely feel bad anytime someone is robbed ... I still feel bad for them," said Rebecca
Suemnicht.

https://cbsaustin.com/news/local/woman-uses-duplicate-keys-to-steal-7k-from-downtown-austin-
parking-meters
 Exhibit 9

July 25, 2015

GTT purchases building “as-is”

GTT performs no inspection

Releases Stream from any and

all claims

Means RTP against Stream is

barred
 CONFIDENTIAL

AGREEMENTOFPURCHASEANDSALE

BY AND BETWEEN

6th & CONGRESS PROPERTIES, LLC

AND

GTT PARKING LP

Date: July 27, 2015

Property: Littlefield Retail/Residential

Austin, Texas

GTT 001000
 CONFIDENTIAL

4.2.6, Purchaser shall be responsible for all other leasing commissions and leasing costs. If
Seller has, prior to the Closing, paid any leasing commissions or other leasing costs which
are Purchaser' s responsibility hereunder, Seller will receive a credit for same from Purchaser
at the Closing. If Seller has failed to pay any leasing commissions or other leasing costs
which are Seller's responsibility hereunder, Seller will provide Purchaser with a credit for
the unpaid portion thereof and, in such event, Purchaser shall assume Seller's obligation to
pay same when due and Purchaser shall also indemnify, protect, defend and hold Seller from
any and against any loss, costs, expense or liability incurred by, or asserted against, Seller as
a result of Purchaser's failure to pay same when due.

The provisions of this Section 4.2 shall survive the Closing.

4.3. Closing Costs. Purchaser shall pay (a) the cost of any endorsements to the
Owner's Policy, and (b) the cost of any update or other changes requested by Purchaser to
the Survey, including the cost of any updates or changes to the ALT A Table A i terns or other
certifications.Purchaser shall also pay all costs associated with Purchaser's due diligence,
except as otherwise set forth herein. Each party sha11 be responsible for its own attorney's
fees. Seller shall pay the basic title insurance premium for the Owner's Policy.

ARTICLE V.

Purchaser's Right of Inspection

5.1. Right to Evaluate. Prior to the Effective Date, Purchaser successfully

completed Purchaser's engineering, environmental, financial and other investigations
of the Property and, as a result, Purchaser has no right to terminate this Agreement ( or
receive the return of the Deposit) due to Purchaser's non-approval of such matters.
Purchaser has no further right to conduct any physical testing, drilling, boring, sampling or
removal of, on or through the surface of the Property (or any part or portion thereof)
including, without limitation, any ground borings or invasive testing of the Improvements
(collectively, "Physical Testing"), without Seller's prior written consent, which consent may
be given or withheld in Seller's sole and absolute discretion. After making such tests and
inspections, Purchaser agrees to promptly restore the Improvements and surface of the Real
Property to its condition prior to such tests and inspections (which obligation shall survive
the Closing or any termination of this Agreement). Prior to Purchaser entering the Property
to conduct the inspections and tests described above, Purchaser shall obtain and maintain, at
Purchaser's sole cost and expense, and shall deliver to Seller evidence of, the following
insurance coverage, and shall cause each of its agents and contractors to obtain and
maintain, and, upon request of Seller, shall deliver to Seller evidence of, the following
insurance coverage: general liability insurance, from an insurer reasonably acceptable to
Setler, in the amount of Two Million and No/100 Dollars ($2,000,000.00) combined single
limit for personal injury and property damage per occurrence, such policy to name Seller as
an additional insured party, which insurance shall provide coverage against any claim for
personal liability or property damage caused by Purchaser or its agents, employees or

-7-

GTT 001007
 CONFIDENTIAL

obtain any Documents not in the possession of Seller or its managing agent and, except as
otherwise expressly set forth in Section 7.1 hereof, Seller makes no representations or
warranties of any kind regarding the accuracy, thoroughness or completeness of or
conclusions drawn in the information contained in such documents, if any, relating to the
Property. Except as otherwise expressly set forth herein, Purchaser hereby waives any and
all claims against Seller arising out of the accuracy, completeness, conclusions or statements
expressed in materials so furnished and any and all claims arising out of any duty of Seller
to acquire, seek or obtain such materials. Notwithstanding anything contained in the
preceding sentence, Seller shall not deliver or make available to Purchaser Seller's internal
memoranda, attorney-client privileged materials, roof or physical inspection reports, internal
appraisals and economic evaluations of the Property, and reports regarding the Property
prepared by Seller or its affiliates solely for internal use or for the information of the
investors in Seller. Purchaser acknowledges that any and all of the Documents that are not
otherwise known by or available to the public are proprietary and confidential in nature and
will be delivered to Purchaser solely to assist Purchaser in determining the feasibility of
purchasing the Property. Purchaser agrees not to disclose such non-public Documents, or
any of the provisions, terms or conditions thereof, to any party outside of Purchaser's
organization other than its agents, consultants, representatives, lenders and financial partners
and their agents, consultants and representatives. Purchaser shall return all of the
Documents, on or before three (3) business days after the first to occur of (a) such time as
Purchaser notifies Seller in writing that it shall not acquire the Property, or (b) such time as
this Agreement is terminated for any reason. This Section 5.3 shall survive any termination
of this Agreement without limitation.

5.4. Independent Examination. Purchaser hereby acknowledges that, prior to the

Effective Date, it has been a full, complete and adequate opportunity to make such legal,
factual and other determinations, analyses, inquiries and investigations as Purchaser deems
necessary or appropriate in connection with the acquisition of the Property. Purchaser is
relying upon its own independent examination of the Property and all matters relating
thereto and not upon any statements of Seller (excluding the limited matters expressly
represented by Seller in Article VII hereof) or of any officer, director, employee, agent or
attorney of Seller with respect to acquiring the Property. Except for such representations
and warranties expressly set forth herein, Seller shall not be deemed to have represented or
warranted the completeness or accuracy of any studies, investigations and reports heretofore
or hereafter furnished to Purchaser. The provisions of this Section 5.4 shall survive Closing
and/or termination of this Agreement.

5.5. Copies of Reports. As additional consideration for the transaction

contemplated herein, Purchaser agrees that it will provide to Seller, within five (5) days
following a written request therefor, copies of any and all third (3 rd) party reports, tests or
studies relating to the Property in Purchaser's possession, including but not limited to those
involving environmental matters. The terms and provisions of this Section 5.5 shall survive
any termination of this Agreement.

GTT 001009
 CONFIDENTIAL

9.2. Purchaser's Release. Purchaser on behalf of itself and its successors and
assigns waives its right to recover from, and forever releases and discharges, Seller, Seller's
affiliates, Seller's investment manager, property manager, the partners, trustees,
shareholders, beneficiaries, directors, officers, employees, attorneys and agents of each of
them, and their respective heirs, successors, personal representatives and assigns from any
and all demands, claims, legal or administrative proceedings, losses, liabilities, damages,
penalties, fines, liens, judgments, costs or expenses known or unknown, foreseen or
unforeseen, that may arise on account of or in any way be connected with (i) the physical
condition of the Property, (ii) the condition of title to the Property, (iii) the presence on,
under or about the Property of any hazardous or regulated substance, (iv) the Property's
compliance with any applicable federal, state or local law, rule or regulation, or (v) any other
aspect of the Property; provided, however, this release does not apply to Seller's breach of
any of the representations and warranties of Seller set forth in Article VII which breach,
however, shall be subject to the other limitations set forth in this Agreement including
Section 9.3 below. The terms and provisions of this Section 9.2 shall survive Closing and/or
termination of this Agreement.

9.3. Limitation on Seller's Liability. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary

contained in this Agreement or any documents executed in connection herewith, if the
Closing of this transaction shall have occurred, (i) the aggregate liability of Seller arising
pursuant to or in connection with the representations, warranties, indemnifications,
covenants or other obligations (whether express or implied) of Seller under this Agreement
or any document or certificate executed or delivered in connection herewith shall not exceed
Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000) (the "Liability Ceiling"), and (ii) in no event
shall Seller have any liability to Purchaser unless and until the aggregate liability of Seller
arising pursuant to or in connection with the representations, warranties, indemnifications,
covenants or other obligations (whether express or implied) of Seller under this Agreement
or any document or certificate executed or delivered in connection herewith shall exceed
Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000) (the "Liability Floor"). If Seller's aggregate liability to
Purchaser shall exceed the Liability Floor, Seller shall be liable for only that portion
exceeding the Liability Floor, up to but not exceeding the Liability Ceiling. The terms and
provisions of this Section 9.3 shall survive Closing and/or termination of this Agreement.

9.4. No Reliance on Documents. Except as expressly stated in Section 7.1, Seller

makes no representation or warranty as to the truth, accuracy or completeness of any
materials, data or information delivered by Seller to Purchaser in connection with the
transaction contemplated hereby. Purchaser acknowledges and agrees that all materials, data
and information delivered by Seller to Purchaser in connection with the transaction
contemplated hereby are provided to Purchaser as a convenience only and that any reliance
on or use of such materials, data or information by Purchaser shall be at the sole risk of
Purchaser, except as otherwise expressly stated herein. Without limiting the generality of
the foregoing provisions, Purchaser acknowledges and agrees that (a) any environmental or
other report with respect to the Property which is delivered by Seller to Purchaser shall be

- 17 -

GTT 001017
 CONFIDENTIAL

for general informational purposes only, (b) Purchaser shall not have any right to rely on any
such report delivered by Seller to Purchaser, but rather will rely on its own inspections and
investigations of the Property and any reports commissioned by Purchaser with respect
thereto, and (c) neither Seller, any affiliate of Seller nor the person or entity which prepared
any such report delivered by Seller to Purchaser shall have any liability to Purchaser for any
inaccuracy in or omission from any such report. The terms and provisions of this Section
9.4 shall survive Closing and/or termination of this Agreement.

9.5. Disclaimer Consideration. Purchaser acknowledges that Seller would not have
entered into this Agreement in the absence of, and S ler has given Purchaser material
concessions regarding this transaction in exchange for, c aser agreeing to the provisions of
this Article IX. Seller and Purchaser have each initial 6 s ection 9.5 to further indicate their

ARTICLEX.

Seller's Interim Operating Covenants.

10.1. Operations. Seller agrees to continue to operate, manage and maintain the
Improvements through the Closing Date in the ordinary course of Seller's business and
substantially in accordance with Seller's present practice, subject to ordinary wear and tear
and further subject to Article XIII of this Agreement; provided, however, Seller shall not be
obligated to perform any capital improvements or to make any deferred maintenance or other
repairs except as specified in Section 10.7 below. Purchaser hereby agrees that, except for
breaches of this Section 10.1, Purchaser, shall accept the Property subject to, and Seller shall
have no obligation to cure, (a) any violations of Laws, or (b) any physical conditions which
would give rise to violations of Laws, whether the same now exist or arise prior to Closing.
Between the Effective Date and the Closing, Seller will advise Purchaser of any written
notice Seller receives after the Effective Date from any governmental authority of the
violation of any Laws regulating the condition or use of the Property.

10.2. Maintain Insurance. Seller agrees to maintain until the Closing Date fire
and extended coverage insurance on the Property which is at least equivalent in all material
respects to the insurance policies covering the Real Property and the Improvements as of the
Effective Date.

10.3. Personal Property. Seller agrees not to transfer or remove any Personal
Property from the Improvements after the Effective Date except for repair or replacement
thereof. Any items of Personal Property replaced after the Effective Date shall be promptly

- 18 ·

GTT 001018
 Exhibit 10
System fails in O’Connor
incident
Widely publicized after
O’Connor incident that cable
system is old and defective.
GTT and Premier ignore.
35-year-old cables played key role in
Austin's 'dangling car' mishap
•M,r#-►i&i•i f
By Ben Wear • American-Statesman Staff

Posted: 1 :◄ 5 p.m Tuesday, September 13, 2016

EXHIBIT

I 1-
The steel cables in a •downtown Austin parking garage most likely had been in
place for 35 years before an SUV broke through them Friday, then improbably
held the vehicle suspended nine stories above an alley for about three hours.

The city, which inspects buildings after construction is complete, has no record
of having inspected those cables since the garage at Brazos and East Sixth
streets was finished In 1981 , city spokeswoman Sylvia Arzola said.

INTERACTIVE: Bystander captures 360-degree view of dangling car

Using multiple strings of high-tension, half-inch cables as a parking lot barrier in

lieu of concrete walls is increasingly common . according to an Austin structural
engineer. and is listed as an acceptable alternative in city and international
building standards. But such cables can rust and loosen over time. either of
which could contribute to the barrier failing if hit by enough force, said Jamie
Buchanan with JQ Engineering's Austin office.

"Those cables will tend to loosen over time. develop some give," Buchanan
said, and that movement increases the chance of the cables breaking in an
impact. UThey'II move more before they resist."

The silver Toyota 4Runner driven by William O'Connor, 23, broke through five
½-inch cables that were attached to concrete pylons on the top floor of the
Littl.efield Parking Garage, according to Austin police.

Palmer Buck, an Austin Fire Department division chief, said the vehicle then
flipped "end over endn and would have dropped to the alley below but for a
stroke of good fortune for O'Connor.
Three of the cables, which according to the International Building Code are
each designed to resist a 6,000-pound static load, wrapped around one of the
SUV's front wheels and held the 5,000-pound vehicle dangling outside the
garage's seventh floor. The odd predicament drew instant, widespread play on
the internet.

Firefighters, using two pulley-like devices that Buck described as "giant come-
alongs" chained to columns on the garage's top floor, managed to lower the car
to within 20 feet of the ground. At that point, a wrecker with a tall boom and a
winch took hold of the car and lowered it to the ground.

BE lHE FIRST TO KNOW: When big news breaks, we send Breaking

News emails. Click to sign up

The 4Runner, Buck said, had roof dents as deep as 3 inches (it smashed
against the parking garage wall after flippirng), door damage that was later
exacerbated when firefighters had to break in to retrieve materials O'Connor
had left behind. and damage to the wheel and axle.

O'Connor, who according to accounts from the scene had been wearing a seat
belt during the harrowing incident, managed to climb out through a window and
escape to the parking garage uninjured.

O'Connor couldn't be reached for comment.

That leaves unexplained how the vehicle generated enough force to break
through the cable barrier. O'Connor told authorities at the scene that he was
parking the vehicle and tried to stop, but that the car kept going. It is unclear
how fast the SUV was moving when it struck the cables.

Buck said firefighters spoke to him only briefly, affer determining he was
uninjured. A police report on the incident, whiCh the Ameri.can-statesman
requested from the department, hadn't been released by press time Tuesday.
As for why there had been no follow-up inspections of the garage: "Defects
after construction are handled by Code Department on a complaint basis only,"
city spokeswoman Arzola wrote in an email.

The parking garage, according to Travis Central Appraisal District records, has
been owned for at least the past year by GTT Parking LP. If that company, as is
likely, repairs the damage to the top floor, Arzola said that would require a
building permit and a sign-off from an engineer "certifying the system and the
loading requirements."

Buchanan, the structural engineer, said concrete, precast panels are "typically
what you see" in parking garage design now.

"But the cables are becoming more popular because they open up the parking
garage, making it more airy," he said.

Buchanan said the typical design these days, rather than having five cables as
is the case with the Littlefield garage, usually has seven or eight cables more
closely spaced over 42 inches of height.

That requirement for a 6,000-pound static load, he said, is meant to stop a

2,000-pound passenger vehicle moving at the slower speeds expected when a
vehicle is pulling into a parking space.
., '
~
Driver recalls 'sheer terror' of
hanging off 9-story Austin garage
iNiiNHfoii
By Tony Plohetski - Amer1can-S1atesman Slaff, KVUE News

Driver describes terror of dangling oft a-story Austin garage

► ::.:r

At the end of what had been a routine wee); .at Ute office, 23-year-old
Wi:11.fam o ·connor was heading to the downt,own Gold"s Gym for .a
workout, hvisting his way to the hig nest tevel o1i a pming garage next
door.

He saw a vacant SJ>Ot and began easing his Toyota 4Runner SUV
toward irt.

T he next thing he remembers rs hrs car j umping violently over a

cona;ete pming barrier, ri ppi.ng th.rough steel cables designed to bl'oct
ca:rs from falling, and the soundl of hwi5ti ng metal. What caused the
.accident might never be known, but O'Connor says he wasn't impa ired
and wasn't texting or talking on the p hone.

He recalls screaming for hrs liife - W irt w as lite a pure ani.m alistic
r,e sponse to terror,· he sai d - as he real ized he was dangling nine
stories from t he Little fi e ld Psn::ing GasagE-, still strapped in the driver's
seat as a crowd of onl'oot.ers began reCDJiding what w oul'd beoome video
beamed around Ute world.
EXHIBIT

j 3
INTERACTIV E: By stander captures 3£0-de.gree view of dangling, car

"You t now t tlat you·re about to d ie: o ·connor said . Ml feer I ih:! whenever
~ d escribe irt, Ute words lim using ar,e i na d equate to d escri be ju st the
sheer terror.

UAs I w.as fal!UillQ, tllere w ere t houghts g,o ing t hrough my head, lil:e , ·1
can"t believ e this is how rm dying,- he told t he American-Stat esman
.and KVUE-liV.

In his fl'.rst intEil'Vrew in t ne two w ee1(s since the scene caught the
atte ntion of AU::ii:in and much of t he natron - neh-Ymt TV newscasts
a lso broad cast th-e video - o ·c onna.r reoounte d Ute crash that re mai ns
under in~·est:i:g.afion by Austin pollice. Last week, the Statesma n reporte d
that tl"le steel cables that held the car lit e ly had been in place 3.5 years.

o ·conn:or said that, after his ca:r pf owed through t he ba:rri:ers a nd cam e
to l'est, he reaEi~e d a p iece of ,we dcag e might have homed his S W
onto the garage. He sacd he knew he had to g:et out - fast.

"Once ~ sto ppe d mov i ng a nd th-ere becam e a chance that I wasn·t going
to d ie , that thought drdn"t ,c ross my m illd. I was never C~e. 'Oh my G od,
rrm sctua ury not g:oing to die: It was tile my brain hadl arrea~ • just guft
aru:I n ·~\\BS Just pwe cnsfrnct, a nd I started ye mng out, 'Hetp!-

o ·c cmn-Dr; a mobi te a pplication d eve toper a nd recent Southern

M etnodi;st Unii¥ ersiity g,radlfSte, said tte was onl¥ hanging tl'teJie fm a fal'
minutes w hen Ile saw a man comrng to his rescue. He later l emned the1

m an W BS visiiting fiom A rabama, had just arriived in Austrn a nd was

staying at .a rtearby y-0uth hostel'.

· He g-1abs one of my nands, an-d tellls m e to swrng both ,of my feet up at

the sa m e time , so U curved bot h of my feet up , a nd sw1.m g t he m out,
and h.e pullledl m e up, [i)ie you·r,e llel'ping somebody ,o ff the ground,· tle
sai d ...An.d t hat was ttmt·
BE THE FIRST TO l{l~OW : W hen big1news breaks , we send Breaking
News emails. C lick to sign up

After bei llQ save d, o ·c-onnor sai d he stood in tne g ar.age several
m inutes trying to g,r.asp what had happene d. He ha.s 110 r,e cortedion or
understanding of what went wrong when h:e tried to 1)8.DC.

Stinll wobbl!Y, he said Ile shuffle d down the g,arage·s stairs, ,o nly to see
the spedsd'e on the street.

· 1 ooul'dn"t bellieve it whe n Ii saw t he hundre ds oft peopl'e tnat had

gatl"lered around in l ~ e the two minut,es ,o.r whatever iit had been. So
many peopfe .and cameras: he said.

For days, O'Connor didn't want anyone to t.now he w as the SUV's d river.
He di:dn"t teEI ev e n his closest friends. But this week. h.e posted a
messa:ge on Facebook d e:sc-i bing his experience.

He .afso we nt bad: to the garage fDf t he fust time.

"Oh my God, II csn"t belli eve it: he sai d, lool:i ng up at yell'o w po lice
tape swmunding the spot wheJ;e his car had been. · That is ...Wow:

O"Connor sai d he is a l',;eady S\\lare of tlow Ut e accid ent rs changing h is

lliife.

·n,e bfGQest difference behween then a nd nO\\I is ttte type of things that
register as rm pllrtarrt or stressful!: tte saidl. -Whether it is mme accurate
or less. II thrn.J: iit llas recaUibrated my percepti on.·

Th.at Fri day, several hours aft,er his ordea~ began, after he tlsd met with
poEcce a nd the crowc:I c:lisper.se dl, o ·connm sai:d he g:ot a liift home from
a ricfe--naHing service.

He saidi hio driver .asted if he had seen the ca:r that had g o ne over the
gm.ag e. S h-e won dered irf a nyone w.as hwt.

· Peopte .8Jie crazy: O'Oormor r emembers her sayi.n,g.

""Yep, l irfe is crazy.- he says he repllfedl.

https://www.mystatesman.com/news/driver-recalls-sheer-terror-hanging-off-story-austin-
ga rage/ nsWQTSAbVSVWBu470YTo3 K/
 Exhibit 11

Sept. 10, 2016

O’Connor dangles off 9th Floor
after the barrier fails. Post
incident Engineer instructs GTT
to have all cables reviewed
closely by barrier cable
installer. GTT ignores.
Engineer instructs GTT to
conduct thorough
investigation. GTT ignores.
l~.J STRUCTURES

September 10, 2016

EXHIBIT

David Kahn
I
Colina West, Ltd.
804 Congress Avenue, Suite 300
Austin, Texsas 78701

Preliminary Structural Damage Assessment at Littlefield Garage

508 Brazos Street, Austin, Texas

David,

Yesterday afternoon, a Toyota Forerunner was driven through the barrier cables and over the edge of
the 9th floor roof level of the parking garage, The vehicle became tangled in barrier cable which
suspended it in the air. The vehicle was later was lowered to the ground off the building.

The barrier system consists of 5 horizontal half inch steel cables that are anchored into concrete
columns at the south west and north west corners of the building. The end of the top cable was pulled
free from the embedded anchor in the north west column and rested at the next column to the south .
The end of the second cable from the top was pulled free from the embedded anchor in the south west
colutnn and was pulled through the next 2 columns rested in the third column to the north with the
frayed end hanging over the side of the building. The end of the third cable from the top was pulled free
from the external anchor at the south west column and was pulled through the next column and
remained in the second column to the north with a clean cut end hanging along the building edge. The
external anchor on the fourth cable from the top was pulled out of the south west cohcrete column and
became lodged in the next column to the north with the cable end remaining in the anchor. The bottom
cable remained intact and anchored at both ends. All five cab les should be removed and replaced with
new cables and new anchors.

There is a small hairline crack visible in the bottom of the 9th floor concrete slab near midspan at the
edge extending 3 or 4 feet to the interior. This crack appears to be new and was likely created from the
vehicle impact. This crack appears minor and does not significantly reduce the load carrying capacity of
the structure. This crack shou ld be reviewed more closely and then sealed to prevent water intrusion
which could lead to corrosion of reinforcing steel.

On the underside of the 8 th floor concrete slab, there are three spots where concrete has spalled from
the bottom surface. This appears to be the slab edge that the vehicle most directly impacted as it swung
over the edge and back toward the bu ilding. This slab appears to be generally in satisfactory condition
and does not appear to have reduced load carrying capacity. This should be reviewed more closely for
long term performance and the spalls should be patched with appropriate over head repair mortar.
 Preliminary Structural Damage Assessment at Littlefield Garage
September 10, 2016

None of the columns or beams in the frame appear to have any significant visible damage. A closer
review should be performed to verify long term performance.
The barrier cables at all of the levels below where the vehicle was suspended appear to be intact and
anchored. These should be reviewed more closely by a barrier cable installer and adjusted as needed.

There are spalls around several of the cable penetration holes in the concrete columns that were likely
caused by the vehicle impacting the cables from the exterior as it swung into the building, and the
cables pressing the inside face of the concrete holes. These areas should be patched with an appropriate
concrete repair mortar for long term protection.

Based on my visual assessment yesterday, the parking garage is safe for continued use, except for the
area of the 9th floor where barrier cables are pulled free. As we discussed yesterday, barricades must be
installed to securely prevent vehicles and pedestrians from entering the area of the 9th floor where the
barrier cables have been pulled out.

This report documents my findings of structural damage caused to the parking structure from the
vehicle accident at the Littlefield Garage based on my visual observation from a visit to the building
yesterday and is a follow up from my email summary I sent last night. This evaluation is preliminary in
nature and limited to visual observations. A more thorough investigation should be performed to
identify the full nature of damage and repairs required.

Please contact me with any questions.

Sincerely,
~'''''"'''''111
OF 1 ,..,_,,
$'~.........
.=>..._'\
-,._r
;'c-:, ....-
::;* .·
.•*··"-,_ *~ I
···.;'i'J'.I~
·.
f~ ..,: ..................... ':-..~.~
~ RICHARD ANDRt MARTIN ~
~·:.o·, ..................... ':.ii:J
~ -,;i·.. 89384 ,:ti:;
~ CJc--·.• t. .::<;:, ..-~.:::
11, <!',s·• . .{C~~·:;r,"-::
l1,:-l81 . .... ~'-'-:--=-
Richard A. Martin, PE df_(l';J/~,,~~~~'''~
Principal
MJ STRUCTURES, PLLC

Page 2 of 2

GTT065
 Exhibit 12

GTT and Premier make claim

against O’Connor (who they
claim was “milking” his 15
minutes of fame); Premier/GTT
get lost profits and do nothing
to bring the barrier system up
to Code or Standard of Care
 •
From: David Kahn dav,dkahnaustin@gmail.com cf
Subject:Re: Exclusive: Driver recalls car dangling off Austin garage I www.mystatesman.com
Date: September 21, 2016 at 5:46 PM
To: Christina Murray christiriamurray@prernierparking.com
Cc: Carla Salas csalas@cencorrealty.com, Sean O'Brien seanobr1en@collnawest.com

Cruistina - lets try in the next couple of weeks to put together a claim to his insurance company, Allstate.
Tb.x.

On Sep 21.2016, at 4:21 PM. Christina Murray <clu-istinamLu-ray@premjergarking.com> wrote:

This kid is really milking his 15 minutes! Photo shoot and all!

Christina Murray
Austin Operations Manager
508 Bra1..os Street
Austin. TX 7870 I
Office: (512) 536-1145
Mobile: (615) 339-4937
EXHIBIT
www.P-remierparking.com
I t7
On Sep 21. 2016. at 4:19 PM. Curia Salas <csalas@cencorrealty.com> wrote:

ln case you didn't see fhi~ in the Statesman.

http://www.mystatesmm1.com/news/news/driver-recaJls-sheer-terror-of-hanging-off-8-story/nscXQ/

l■l
COLtNAWEST
REAL ESTATE

DAVID KA HN
MANAGING PART ER

15 12 ) 426-5136 804 CONGRESS AV SUI,£ 300

DAVIOKAHN@COLINAWEST COM AUSTI N TEXA6 7B701

CTf 07U
 Exhibit 13
Post O’Connor incident, Ryan
Hunt/Premier asks GTT if
Premier should get details on
cabling work done by
Premier/Stream and Curtis
Brown; Premier concerned
about liability. No response
from GTT.
Premier obviously knew exactly
what the repairs and defects
were.
 EXHIBIT
From: Christina Murray christinamurray@premierparking.com #
Subject:
Date:
Re: Littlefield cable work
September 15, 2016 at 9 :53 AM
I){
To: Ryan Hunt ryanhunt@premierparking.com
Cc: Sean O'Brien seanobrien@colinawest.com , Wi lliam Clay wclay@premierparking.com

Makes sense to me! Thanks!

Christina Murray
Austin Operations Manager
508 Brazos Street
Austin, TX 78701
Office: (512) 536-1145
Mobile: (615) 339-4937
~P.remiergarking.com

On Sep 15, 2016, al 9:52 AM , Ryan Hunt <IY.anhunt @premierparking .com> wrote:

Thanks Christina . I am more concerned from a liability perspective on who completed the work
previously.

<image00l.png>
Ryan Hunt/ COO - Partner/ 615-554-7472 / r.v.anhunt@.grem ieq;!arking.com
Premier Parking Office: 615-238-2250
421 Church Street/ Nashville, TN 37219 / www.premierr2arking.com

From: Christina Murray

Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2016 8:41 AM
To: Ryan Hunt <r.v.anhunt@P-remieq;iarking.com>; Sean O'Brien <seanobrien@colinawest.com>
Cc: William Clay <wclay_@P-remierP-arking.com>
Subject: RE : Littlefield cable work

Ryan,

Just as an FYI, the work is repair is scheduled for Monday.

<image002 .png>
Christina Murray/ Austin Operations Manager/ 615-339-4937 / christinamu rray_@gremiergarki ng.com
Premier Parking Office: 512-536-1145
508 Brazos Street/ Austin, TX 78701 / www.gremierQarking.com
<image003.jP-g~

From: Ryan Hunt

Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2016 11:49 PM
To: Sean O'Brien <seanobrien@colinawest.com>
Cc: Christina Murray <christinamurray_@P-remieq;iarking.com>; William Clay
<wclay_@12remier12arking.com>
Subject: Littlefield cable work

Sean,

Do you want me to reach out to Stream and get the deta ils on the cabling work they performed
in early 2015? I believe it was performed by someone Eric Herron knew well and had worked

GTT054
w ith before .

Ryan

<image001.png>
Ryan Hunt/ COO - Partner/ 615-554-7472 / rv.anhunt@_Qremieq;iarking.com
Premier Parking Office: 615-238-2250
421 Church Street/ Nashville, TN 37219 / www.wemierQarking.com

Fol"""' U•O

Linkedml
 Exhibit 14

After O’Connor and before

Bowmer, cable problems are
evident and persistent; GTT and
Premier are well aware but do
nothing; witnesses concede
pictures show dangerous,
dilapidated restraint system.
Begin forwarded message:

From: Christina Murray

<christinamurray@premierparking.com>
Subject: RE: Littlefield guardrail
Date: March 22, 2017 at 10:54:33 AM CDT
To: Sean O'Brien <sean.obrien.austin@gmail.com>

I'm not aware of that either!  On it now.  

Christina Murray | Austin Operations Manager | 615-339-4937

| christinamurray@premierparking.com
Premier Parking Office: 512-536-1145
508 Brazos Street | Austin, TX 78701 |
www.premierparking.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Sean O'Brien [mailto:sean.obrien.austin@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2017 10:54 AM
To: Christina Murray <christinamurray@premierparking.com>
Subject: Littlefield guardrail

From a garage tenants... you are probably already aware of

this, but several guardrails are broken on level 8 at the center
of the garage, i don’t remember seeing them like that
yesterday...

Sean O'Brien
512.565.4477

GTT 000187
From: Brian Bonniwell <BBonniwell@blueconstruction.com>
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2017 7:29 AM
To: 'Gib Jones'; 'Ed Sides'; 'Don Jay'
Cc: ap@blueconstruction.com
Subject: FW: Littlefield Garage Cable Wires

Team, 
 
Last year we repaired the Littlefield parking garage incident when the car jumped a curb and flew over the west side of 
the garage.  Since we did a spectacular job executing this we have been asked to repair two more cables where the 
retrofit assembly has come apart.  I have the contact to the manufacturer of the GRAB IT anchors and will get a visual on 
the current situation, and write a scope, as well as generate hours to compete the operation overall.   
 
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ 
From: Christina Murray [mailto:christinamurray@premierparking.com] 
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2017 2:42 PM 
To: bbonniwell 
Subject: Littlefield Garage Cable Wires 
 
 Brian  
 
In addition to the level we spoke of previously, level 7 up now also has wide cabling out. I called your office but the 
suggested I reach out to you. 
 
 
Christina Murray 
Austin Operations Manager 
508 Brazos Street 
Austin, TX 78701 
Office:  (512) 536‐1145 
Mobile:  (615) 339‐4937 
www.premierparking.com 
 
 

1
 EXHIBIT

I q
Figure 10. Loose exterior barrier cable photographed by ACD (fro,n
ACD Co111plaint CC-2017-085979).

8/2./,1 (~) [
Figure 9. Loose interior barrier cable photographed by ACD (Jro,n ACD
Co,nplaint CC-201 7-085979).

'6/1,/ l 1 (~)
~
Figure 19. Dislodged cable observed at interior barrier on eighth level.

€,/2-,/ 11 (c.J~)
 .........__
-
"-

/
J,
¥,I

,,
~--
'> '

F;gure 18. Loose cable observed at interior barrier on s;xth level.

~/~/ l1 (US~
Bil I ,, (\-\-SM)
 Exhibit 15

Failure of barrier cables that

GTT/Premier know are violation
of Code, below Standard of
Care, ill-repaired and
dangerous.

Cables fail to restrain Bowmer’s

vehicle; plunges 7 stories
causing massive injuries
 Exhibit 16

City finds entire cable barrier

system is dangerous, out-of-
Code, and needs to be within
current Code, Entire garage
should be closed until
temp/permanent safety
measures are taken.
 f A
..... > ..
(,
. -z.
. City of Austin
b"°DI D ,.-. ' P.O. Box 1088, Austin, TX, 78767

AUSTIN CO OE
DEPARTMENT Sent v ia email t o:
Case Number: CV -2017-086750
August 21 , 2017

GTT Parking LP C/O Colina West Attn David Kahn

804 Congress Ste 300
Austin, TX 78701 -2630

RE: 508 BRAZOS ST AUSTIN TX 78701

Locally known as 508 BRAZOS ST AUSTIN TX 78701
Legally described as LOT 11&12 BLOCK 056 ORIGINAL CITY (TOTAL SQ FT 15640) PLUS
VACALLEY
Zoned as CBD-CURE
Parcel Number 0206030613

Dear GTT Parking LP C/O Colina West:

The City of Austin Code Department received your request to clarify the Structure Violation included in
the Violation Report on the Notice of Violation dated July 26, 2017 (sent certified mail #7014 3490 0000
7005 5094). This supplement does not change the timeframe to comply indicated in the July 26,
2017 Notice of Violation, which is 30 days from the date of that Notice of Violation {attached for
reference). Please see below for an expanded description of the violation and resolution:

Description of Violation: The cable system serving as a vehicle barrier (guards) to the exterior and
interior described in the Violation Report refers to all floors and all sides of the exterior and interior of the
parking garage structure where vehicle barriers (guards) utilize cables as a barrier.

Recommended Resolution: The work will require a permit and an engineer's report showing that the
cable system meets the current code requirements (2012 International Building Code) in the Violation
Report refers to the determination by the Building Official that dangerous conditions exist related to
vehicle barriers (guards) that utilize cables as a barrier in the parking garage. His determination was
based on his inspection and Section 606.1 of the 2012 International Existing Building Code that states:
"Regardless of the extent of structural or nonstructural damage, dangerous conditions shall be eliminated.
Regardless of the scope of repair, new structural members and connections used for repair or
rehabilitation shall comply with the detailing provisions of the International Building Code for new
buildings of similar structure, purpose and location."

For additional information, I can be reached at 512-974-6087 or John.Hale@austintexas.gov. Please

reference case number CV-2017-086750. Hours of operation are: Monday - Friday, 7:30 a .m. - 4:00
p.m.

Sincerely,

l)
John Hale, Austin Code Officer
City of Austin Code Department

Bowmer 001689
 Exhibit 17

Synopsis of major safety

violations found by City,
including unpermitted and un-
engineered repairs by GTT and
Premier.
From: Hale, John
To: "Hylton Cruickshank"
Subject: RE: Case Number: CV-2017-086750 - Littlefield Garage
Date: Wednesday, January 03, 2018 8:17:00 AM
Attachments: image003.png
image004.png
image005.png

Hylton,
 
Following an inspection by the Building Official, it was determined that the cable system as whole
did not meet the City Code for when it was built. Additionally, the cable system was found to be
hazardous because of loose cables, guard spacing, and previously unpermitted repairs on various
levels. Because of the hazardous conditions, the Building Official is requiring that the entire cable
system will need to be brought into compliance with the 2012 International Building Code. Please
see his determination below as it was sent to the owner’s agent, Sean O’Brien on 7/24/2017:
 
•             The garage was originally built in 1979, under the 1976 UBC as adopted by the City of
Austin.  There were no specific requirements for guardrails used as a vehicle barriers on an open
parking garage. The code only stated that “Adequate curbs and railings shall be provided at every
opening.”  The guardrail requirements also stated the openings shall not allow a 9” sphere to pass
through and that guardrails shall be no less than 42” in height.
•             As per our inspection yesterday, it was noticeable that several of the cable-system railings
do not even meet these requirements.  In addition to that, there is evidence of repairs and cables
are loose on several locations.
•             The repairs done last year on level 9 were not permitted.  We did not receive any request
for permit or engineering details on the repairs.  The engineer letter provided to ACD on those
repairs states that repairs were done in accordance and compliance with the 2012 Existing Building
Code, that damaged cables and end anchors were removed and replaced with new cables and
anchors and that the barrier system has been constructed in general conformance with the
requirements  of the structural specifications and meet the requirements of applicable laws,
building codes and ordinances relating to repairs of existing buildings.
•             Per our visit and observation on the cables on the 9th floor, it does not appear that the
cables were replaced and they are also loose.
•             The 2012 International Existing Building Code requires in Section 606.1 that “Regardless of
the extent of structural or nonstructural damage, dangerous conditions shall be eliminated.
Regardless of the scope of repair, new structural members and connections used for repair or
rehabilitation shall comply with the detailing provisions of the International Building Code for new
buildings of similar structure, purpose and location.”
•             Repairs to the cable system must be in accordance with new codes and dangerous
conditions must be eliminated, and this was not the case with the repairs on the 9th floor.  The
2012 International Building Code provides structural design criteria for “vehicle barriers” and all
repairs must be in compliance with these requirements.  Also, since this will require replacement of
the system, the openings must be reduced to 4”.
•             The engineer will have to demonstrate that the new system is capable of supporting the
loads required for vehicle barriers as per the 2012 IBC, Section 1607.8.3 Vehicle barriers.  Vehicle
barriers for passenger vehicles shall be designed to resist a concentrated load of 6,000 pounds

Bowmer 001677
(26.70 kN) in accordance with Section 4.5.3 of ASCE 7. Garages accommodating trucks and buses
shall be designed in accordance with an approved method that contains provisions for traffic
railings.
• All areas that have cable system must be closed for parking. An evaluation must be
completed by the engineer on the whole cabling system and all repairs must be reviewed and
approved for permit by DSD.

Please let me know if you have any questions,

John Hale
Investigator
City of Austin, Code Department
P: 512-974-60871 E: john.hale@austintexas.gov
"Preserving Austin's Quality of life"

From: Hylton Cruickshank [mailt o

Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2018 4:55 PM
To: Hale, John <.lohn.Hale@austintexas.gov>
Subject: Case Number : CV-2017-086750 - Littlefield Garage

Good afternoon Mr. Hale,

We have been req uest ed to assist on an insurance claim regarding t he above case file and am
hoping you can help me with a few questions.

Does t he cu rrent cable system (5 No. seven strand cable barrier system) meet wit h the City Code?
Does the" repairs, replace o r upgrade" relat e only t o the damaged sect ion as not ed in your
correspondence dated 7/26/ 17?

I ask because I had noted a few previous repairs/ replacements of cables during a recent sit e visit.

Appreciate your time in advance.

Kind regards

Hylton

Hylton A. Cruickshank, MCIOB, CCM

Madsen, Kneppers & Associates, Inc.

1 Chisholm Trail, Suite 310
Cons h-uction Round Rock, TX 78681

Bowmer 001678
 Consultants
& Engineers O 512.649.9996 | C 512.626.2610 | F 972.387.0616 |

www.mkainc.com

MADSEN, KNEPPERS & ASSOCIATES USA WARNING/CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message

may be confidential and/or privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender
immediately then delete it - you should not copy or use it for any purpose or disclose its content to any
other person. Internet communications are not secure. You should scan this message and any
attachments for viruses. Any unauthorized use or interception of this e-mail is illegal.

Bowmer 001679
 Exhibit 18

Injury Photos
Exhibit OO
Placeholder for video