DF-24-18010 Litigation Record Search

5/29/2026 3:42 PM DALLAS CO., TEXAS NO. DF-24-18010 THE MARRIAGE OF GWENDOLYN ULIJASZ-MCKEMIE JASON MCKEMIE PETITIONER'S RESPONSE TO RESPONDENT'S MOTION FOR ENFORCEMENT, SANCTIONS, CONTINUANCE, AND LEAVE TO ISSUE THIRD-PARTY SUBPOENAS, AND COUNTER-MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AND FOR OTHER APPROPRIATE RELIEF TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT: Petitioner Gwendolyn Ulijasz-McKemie ("Petitioner" or "Gwen") files this Response to Respondent Jason McKemie's May 26, 2026 Motion for Enforcement, Sanctions, Continuance, and Leave to Issue Third-Party Subpoenas...

subpoenas because he says the records he wants are not in his hands today. He asks to reserve sanctions, adverse inferences, estate reconstitution, property-return remedies, and April 16 remedies because he says those issues should be revisited after subpoena returns that do not yet a continuance exist. A party who sat on the discovery tools available to him cannot manufacture by pointing to the discovery he chose not to pursue. Granting the Motion would transform a final-trial setting into a new third-party investigation, without proposed subpoenas, wit...

1. continue the June 11, 2026 trial setting; 2. grant leave to issue third-party subpoenas for financial accounts, VEIP/equity, tax records, loans, San Antonio housing/rent, lease payoff, QLE/benefits, Accenture records, legal retainers, third-party contractors, April 16 theft, movers, security contractors, All My Sons, Merritt McClayton, Decisive Resources, Jetty Partners, and all related custodians; 3. modify the discovery deadline for third-party source-record discovery and related follow- up discovery; 4. enforce alleged prior discovery rulings and o...

...ted within 18, 2024. This case has now been pending for roughly eighteen months and has moved through multiple settings and courts. It is set for final trial on June 11, 2026. A marriage of roughly five months has generated roughly eighteen months of litigation. The discovery period has run its course. Rather than try the case on the developed record, Respondent's May 26 Motion seeks to reopen discovery and reset the trial so he can begin a new third-party investigation, without proposed subpoenas, without custodian-specific requests, and without the dil...

February noncompliance without attaching obligations, and proof of signed orders establishing exact obligations. violation. "No source records" slogan Petitioner has produced records. Respondent's Reject slogan; require complaint is alleged incompleteness, not zero chart and underlying production. The Rule 1006 chart referenced in records before any Rule the Motion is not a substitute for authenticated 1006 reliance. underlying records. VEIP/equity theory No custodian declaration, CPA opinion, Treat as trial merits issue, forensic accounting report, payr...

...to prevent undue burden, unnecessary expense, harassment, annoyance, and invasion ofpersonal, constitutional, or property rights. Nonparty discovery under Rules 176 and 205.3 requires an actual notice and subpoena identifying the nonparty, the time and place for production, and the items or categories sought with reasonable particularity. Rule 176.7 requires the issuing party to take reasonable steps to avoid undue burden or expense on the person served and requires the Court to protect nonparties from undue burden, expense, and privilege invasion. Texas...

that functions as investigation rather than targeted discovery. See Texaco, Inc. v. Sanderson, 898 S.W.2d 813, 815 (Tex. 1995); In re American Optical Corp., 988 S.W.2d711, 713 (Tex. 1998); In re CSX Corp., 124 $.W.3d 149, 152-53 (Tex. 2003); In re State Farm Lloyds, 520 S.W.3d 595, 599-610 (Tex. 2017). C. Litigation-vendor, law-firm, and work-product protection. Rule 192.5 protects work product, including material prepared and communications made in anticipation of litigation or for trial by or for a party or a party's representatives, including attorne...

...umber alone. Those orders include an order terminating the automatic stay to permit the landlord to pursue eviction remedies; an order entered the afternoon of April 16, 2026 reinstating the automatic stay and directing that writ enforcement cease; and a later order extending Respondent's move-out deadline and expressly reserving claims for rent, expenses, damages, and automatic-stay violations for separate motion or adversary proceeding. The Bankruptcy Code excepts certain domestic-relations matters from the automatic stay, including dissolution proceed...

...y is closed and Respondent was not diligent. The dispositive point is the simplest one. Discovery closed. During the discovery period, Respondent could have served Rule 205 notices and applied to this Court for leave to subpoena any bank, Accenture, the taxing authorities, the landlord, the moving company, or any other custodian he now claims he needs. Nothing prevented him from following that procedure. He did not. A continuance sought to conduct discovery that the movant could have pursued earlier, through available procedure, is not supported by the d...

...a Level 3 or custom discovery-control order changing the deadline, default Level 2 discovery in a Family Code suit ends thirty days before trial. With trial set June 11, 2026, Respondent's May 26 request is facially outside ordinary nonparty-discovery timing. Petitioner is confirming whether a September 8, 2025 302nd District Court pretrial order modified the default schedule; either way, Respondent has not supplied the proposed subpoenas or the diligence record required to reopen discovery on the eve of trial. The interest of justice does not favor reop...

Respondent has previously included characterizations of Petitioner's finances in PHV-objection or related briefing, including alleged credit-card overpayments and alleged missing funds, such as $67,000 and $650,000 figures. Those figures appear only in Respondent's PHV-objection briefing and are not tied to any produced source document in the May 26 Motion. To the extent Respondent attempts to introduce those characterizations at this hearing, Petitioner objects on grounds including foundation, authentication, hearsay, relevance, Rule 403, and lack of co...

...k for themselves. One order terminated the automatic stay to permit the landlord to pursue forcible-detainer remedies. A second order, entered the afternoon of April 16, 2026, reinstated the automatic stay and directed that writ enforcement cease. A third order extended Respondent's move-out deadline and expressly reserved claims for rent, expenses, damages, and automatic-stay violations for separate motion or adversary proceeding. No bankruptcy order adjudicated theft, spoliation, stay violation, damages, property ownership, or turnover against Petition...

...supported motion demonstrating diligence, materiality, proportionality, and good cause to reopen discovery, and absent service of the actual proposed subpoena and Rule 205 notice identifying the named custodian, the account or precise subject matter, the date range, the document categories, and the return date. No subpoena should issue on open-ended terms such as "all related custodians, wont any person, any entity, "any contractor, "all communications," or "all documents." All objections, Page 13 of 17 Copy from re:SearchTX

motions to quash, motions for protection, privilege and work-product claims, confidentiality objections, cost and proportionality objections, and bankruptcy-estate objections are preserved. B. Litigation-vendor and law-firm protection. No subpoena should issue to any opposing counsel, law firm, legal-retainer custodian, litigation consultant, investigator, security vendor, communications vendor, reputation vendor, OSINT or cyber vendor, witness-preparation participant, consulting expert, or litigation-support vendor absent prior leave of Court, a specifi...

...mount be determined by further submission or hearing. VIII. Prayer Petitioner respectfully requests that the Court: 1. deny Respondent's request to continue the June 11, 2026 trial setting; 2. deny Respondent's request for leave to issue third-party subpoenas; 3. deny Respondent's request to modify discovery deadlines; 4. deny Respondent's request to enforce alleged prior discovery rulings absent signed orders, exact obligations, service, deadlines, and proof of violation; 5. deny Respondent's requests for sanctions, fee shifting, adverse inferences, est...

8A.in the alternative, if the Court determines that the property division portion of the June 11, 2026 trial requires coordination with the Chapter 7 trustee or further bankruptcy-court action, sever and reserve the property division portion only, with the dissolution of marriage and any matters expressly excepted from the automatic stay under 11 U.S.C. § 362(b)(2) proceeding on June 11, 2026 as scheduled; 9. award Petitioner reasonable attorney's fees, court costs, expenses, and protective expenses incurred in responding to the Motion and obtaining prot...

By: /s/ Jonathan D. Steele JONATHAN D. STEELE Page 17 of 17 Copy from re:SearchTX

...texas.com Envelope ID: 115516576 Filing Code Description: Response Filing Description: TO MOTION FOR ENFORCEMENT AND COUNTER MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER Status as of 6/1/2026 10:16 AM CST Case Contacts Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status Kim Jones kjones@sullivancook.com 5/29/2026 3:42:21 PM SENT Jeffrey ECook jcook@sullivancook.com 5/29/2026 3:42:21 PM SENT Tiffany Castenada tcastenada@sullivancook.com 5/29/2026 3:42:21 PM SENT William CCook wcook@sullivancook.com 5/29/2026 3:42:21 PM SENT Rebecca LArmstrong rebecca@armstronglawtexas.com 5/29...

5/29/2026 3:42 PM DALLAS CO., TEXAS NO. DF-24-18010 THE MARRIAGE OF GWENDOLYN ULIJASZ-MCKEMIE JASON MCKEMIE AFFIDAVIT OF JJONATHAN D. STEELE REGARDING PRODUCTION RECORD, BANKRUPTCY ORDERS, ABSENCE OF ATTACHED ORDERS, PROTECTIVE- ORDER NEED, AND FEES STATE OF ILLINOIS COUNTY OF COOK BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, on this day personally appeared Jonathan D. Steele, who, being by me duly sworn, stated under oath as follows: 1. My name is Jonathan D. Steele. I am over eighteen years of age, of sound mind, competent to make this affidavit, and authoriz...

4. Attached as Exhibit A is a true and correct copy of the production index and Bates log reflecting those productions. 5. I have reviewed Respondent's May 26, 2026 Motion. The Motion does not attach any proposed nonparty subpoena or Rule 205.3 notice, and based on my review of the file, Respondent did not, during the discovery period, serve on Petitioner any Rule 205 notice or proposed subpoena for the third-party records he now says he requires. 6. Respondent's May 26, 2026 Motion does not attach a signed January 6, 2026 discovery order, a signed Janua...

related protective relief to avoid a continuance, subpoena leave, and privilege-invasive discovery sixteen days before the June 11, 2026 trial setting. 10. Petitioner requests an award of reasonable attorney's fees, court costs, expenses, and protective expenses incurred in responding to Respondent's Motion and obtaining protective relief. The amount of fees, costs, expenses, and protective expenses is reserved for later prove-up by separate submission or hearing. 11. If the Court requires fee proof as to amount, Petitioner will submit lodestar detail, i...

...texas.com Envelope ID: 115516576 Filing Code Description: Response Filing Description: TO MOTION FOR ENFORCEMENT AND COUNTER MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER Status as of 6/1/2026 10:16 AM CST Case Contacts Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status Kim Jones kjones@sullivancook.com 5/29/2026 3:42:21 PM SENT Jeffrey ECook jcook@sullivancook.com 5/29/2026 3:42:21 PM SENT Tiffany Castenada tcastenada@sullivancook.com 5/29/2026 3:42:21 PM SENT William CCook wcook@sullivancook.com 5/29/2026 3:42:21 PM SENT Rebecca LArmstrong rebecca@armstronglawtexas.com 5/29...