CAUSE NO. DF-14-20147
IN THE MATTER OF § IN THE DISTRICT COURT
THE MARRIAGE OF §
§
CRYSTAL DIONA MARTIN §
AND § 255TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
STEPHEN LUKE MARTIN §
§
AND IN THE INTEREST OF §
S.M.M. AND C.M.M., CHILDREN § DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS
RESPONDENT’S OBJECTIONS AND ANSWERS TO
PETITIONER’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES
TO: Crystal Diona Martin, by and through her attorney of record, Lisa G. Garza, Law Office
of Lisa G. Garza, P.C., 10670 N. Central Expressway, Suite 210, Box 3, Dallas, Texas
75231
COMES NOW Stephen Luke Martin, Respondent in the above-entitled and numbered
cause, and serves these Objections and Answers to Petitioner’s First Set of Interrogatories.
Respectfully submitted,
LAW OFFICE OF WESLEY C JOHNSON
______________________________________
WESLEY C JOHNSON
State Bar No. 10803800
3960 Broadway Boulevard, Suite 220V
Garland, Texas 75043
214-328-9378
214-550-0297 (fax)
wes@wesleyjohnsonlawyer.com
ATTORNEY FOR RESPONDENT
RESPONDENT’S OBJECTIONS AND ANSWERS TO
PETITIONER’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES - Page 1
Donna Hall
FILED
DALLAS COUNTY
7/30/2015 9:33:38 AM
FELICIA PITRE
DISTRICT CLERK
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify on the 24th day of July 2015, a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been
forwarded via:
XX E-Serve
________ Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested
________ Regular US Mail
________ Facsimile
________ Hand Delivery
________ Other
to the following:
Lisa G. Garza
Law Office of Lisa G. Garza
lgarza@lisaggarzafamilylaw.com
10670 N. Central Expressway
Suite 210, Box 3
Dallas, Texas 75231
_______________________________________
WESLEY C JOHNSON
RESPONDENT’S OBJECTIONS AND ANSWERS TO
PETITIONER’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES - Page 2
OBJECTIONS AND ANSWERS
INTERROGATORY NO. 1: State where you have resided since August 17, 2007, by providing
the following:
a. the complete address of each residence address;
b. the dates you resided at that residence; and
c. the name, address, and telephone number of all individual(s) who resided with
you during each relevant time period, if any.
ANSWER:
Address Dates of Residency Individuals residing
10647 Galeena
Dallas, Texas 75226
2005 - 2007 Crystal Martin
3226 Weathervane
Dallas, Texas 75226
2007 - 2009 Crystal Martin, Stephen Max
Martin
5209 Burlingame
Garland, Texas 75043
02/2009 thru
10/2009
Crystal Martin, Stephen Max
Martin, Victoria, and Matthew
Martin
4501 Tarry
Garland, Texas 75043
10/2009 thru
10/2014
Crystal Martin, Stephen Martin,
Charles Martin
5209 Burlingame
Garland, Texas 75043
10/2014 thru Present Victoria Martin
INTERROGATORY NO. 2: If you contend that the children’s well-being is compromised
while in the possession of Crystal Diona Martin, state in general the legal theories and factual
bases that are relevent to your contention.
ANSWER:
Respondent believes the children’s well-being is compromised because Emily Lubrick is
present at Diane’s house constantly, and because Diane is a hoarder and keeps trash and
most items unless it is thrown away while she is not home. Respondent also believes
Crystal’s boyfriend, David Hardin spends too much time in the children’s presence.
INTERROGATORY NO. 3: If you intend to contend that Crystal Diona Martin is at fault in the
breakup of the marriage, please state the following:
a. In regard to Crystal Diona Martin’s fault in the breakup of the marriage
RESPONDENT’S OBJECTIONS AND ANSWERS TO
PETITIONER’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES - Page 3
contention, please identify each act of alleged fault;
b. In regard to Crystal Diona Martin’s fault in the breakup of the marriage
contention, please state the date and location of each alleged act of fault; and
c. In regard to Crystal Diona Martin’s fault in the breakup of the marriage
contention, please state each fact you contend supports the allegation(s) of fault.
ANSWER:
Objection. Respondent objects to Interrogatory No. 3 because it establishes Petitioner has
not read Respondent’s pleadings.
INTERROGATORY NO. 4: For each item of property (tangible or intangible) owned by the
community estate or the separate estate of either party, state:
a. a description of the property;
b. the percentage that each estate (that is, the community estate, your separate estate,
and your spouse’s separate estate) owns the property;
c. the value of the property; and
d. in general, the legal theories and factual bases that support your contention about
the character and value of the property.
ANSWER:
Description Ownership Value d.
2000 Dodge Durango
(not running)
100% husband $300.00 premarital property
2007 Ford Expedition community property $5,341.00
owe $7,680.00
in Husband’s name but
community property
Misc. jewelry unknown gifts to wife
Painting 100% wife unknown premarital property
Japanese knife 100% husband unknown gift to husband
Small items in garage 100% wife unknown
Christmas village 100% husband unknown premarital property
Christmas tree skirt 100% husband unknown gift from husband’s
mother to husband
RESPONDENT’S OBJECTIONS AND ANSWERS TO
PETITIONER’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES - Page 4
Description Ownership Value d.
Crystal punch bowl
(family heirloom)
husband’s mother unknown borrowed and never
returned to mother-inlaw
Black crushed velvet
stuffed bear
100% husband unknown gift to husband from
his father
Rottweiler (Gizzy) community property $500.00 purchased during
marriage
Golden Doodle (Buddy) community property $650.00 purchased during
marriage
INTERROGATORY NO. 5: List your sources of income and the approximate income generated from
each, including but not limited to all compensation generated from: self-employment; Go Fund Me or
similar type websites; social security benefits; earnings; and worker’s compensation benefits.
ANSWER:
AutoZone, $333 weekly; Octapharma, $75 weekly; GoFundMe, $20 one-time only.
INTERROGATORY NO. 6: For each sum of money owed by the community estate or the separate
estate of either party to any person or entity, state:
a. a description of the debt, including the identity and location of the creditor(s);
b. the percentage that each estate (that is, the community estate, your separate estate, and
your spouse’s separate estate) is responsible fo the payment of the debt;
c. the current balance of the debt;
d. the balance of the debt on date of marriage;
e. whether the debt was refinanced during the marriage;
f. a description of each item of property that secures the debt, if any;
g. the purpose(s) for which the debt was incurred; and
h. in general, the legal theories and factual bases that support your contention about the
character of the debt and the purpose(s) for which the debt was incurred.
ANSWER:
1. Richard McKinny, judgment, $2,450.00;
2. Nguyen, judgment, $1,250.00;
3. Dosey Lewis, judgment, $3,500.00;
RESPONDENT’S OBJECTIONS AND ANSWERS TO
PETITIONER’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES - Page 5
4. Miller, Donnie, judgment, $2,500.00;
5. Jim Wiant, loan, $5,000;
6. Carolyn Wiant, loan, $2,500.00;
7. Theresa Gray, loan, $8,000.00;
8. Mortgage, $97,000.00
INTERROGATORY NO. 7: State each item of property that the court should award to you and each
debt or obligation (including guarantees, contingent liabilities, and debts secured by property) for which
the court should require you to be responsible.
ANSWER:
Black crushed velvet bear; crystal punch bowl; Expedition; Christmas village and skirt.
Respondent accepts all debts identified above, except mortgage debt for which he will accept 50
percent of the debt.
INTERROGATORY NO. 8: If you or your business has maintained any accounts with any financial
institutions, including Pay Pal accounts, since August 17, 2007, for each account state:
a. the identity and location of the financial institution;
b. the style and number of the account;
c. the identity and location of all authorized signatories;
d. the disposition of the account; and
e. the current balance.
ANSWER:
Chase Bank, business, unknown, Crystal Martin, closed, account in negative.
INTERROGATORY NO. 9: Identify all persons other than Crystal Diona Martin with whom you have
engaged in sexual intercourse or had other sexual contact, to include, but not be limited to fondling,
sexual stimulation, or intimacy, to also include, and not be limited to, sexual stimulation or intimacy
performed online via the computer or telephone, for the period of time from August 17, 2007, to the
present time, together with dates and places of each such occurrence.
ANSWER:
To the best of Respondent’s recollection: Jennifer Sloane 4/??/2014 at 4501 Tarry, Garland,
Texas 75043; currently dating Amy Smiley beginning 6/24/2015.
INTERROGATORY NO. 10: If you or your business has employed any employee, whether as a
regular employee or on a contract or consulting basis, since August 17, 2007, for each instance state:
a. the identity and location of the person or entity;
b. the period employed;
c. the services performed; and
d. the compensation received by that employee.
RESPONDENT’S OBJECTIONS AND ANSWERS TO
PETITIONER’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES - Page 6
ANSWER:
Frankie (unknown last name), three months in maybe 2013, roofing sales, $4,300.
INTERROGATORY NO. 11: If the court orders you to pay child support, state the monthly amount of
support the court should order you to pay, and state in general the legal theories and factual bases that
support your contention.
ANSWER:
The court should apply the guidelines of the Texas Family Code.
INTERROGATORY NO. 12: If the court requires your periods of possession or access be supervised,
state your contention of how that supervised possession or access should be conducted (including the
payment of the cost of any supervisor) and state in general the legal theories and factual bases that
support your contention.
ANSWER:
The court should not order supervised possession or access.
INTERROGATORY NO. 13: State the name of any supervisor that you would request to supervise
your possession or access to the children, the address and contact information regarding such proposed
supervisor, the qualifications of such supervisor to serve in the capacity of supervising your possession
and access to the children, and all the reasons why having such supervisor would be in the best interest of
the children, if supervised possession and access is ordered by the court.
ANSWER:
See Respondent’s answer to Interrogatory 12.
INTERROGATORY NO. 14: State whether or not you have any biological children, other than the
children subject to this suit, and for each child state the identify and location, birth date, social security
number, and, if applicable, whether you have a court-ordered duty to support that child and the court of
continuing jurisdiction for that child.
ANSWER:
No.
INTERROGATORY NO. 15: If you contend that you have acted in the best interest of the children
since October 22, 2008, state in general the legal theories and factual bases that are relevant to your
contention.
ANSWER:
Respondent loves his children.
RESPONDENT’S OBJECTIONS AND ANSWERS TO
PETITIONER’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES - Page 7
INTERROGATORY NO. 16: Identify and describe each asset that you have pawned or sold to Pawn
Super Store located at 484 W. Interstate 30, Garland, Texas 75043 at any time from August 17, 2007.
This request includes anything of value, including, without limitation, personal property, coins jewelry,
gold, DVDs, CDs, games, electronics, tools, collectibles, and other household items.
ANSWER:
See Respondent’s responses to Petitioner’s Request for Production to Respondent.
INTERROGATORY NO. 17: If you have any concerns about Crystal Diona Martin’s parenting
skills, identify each separate concern that you have, and state all the factual basis for such concern,
including what happened, and the approximate date and location of that event, and the name of every
person who was present.
ANSWER:
See Respondent’s answer to Interrogatory No. 2. Respondent further states that Petitioner loses
her temper fairly quickly and will yell at the children, has berated Respondent in front of the
children multiple times over the years, and has utilized inappropriate corporeal punishment.
Witnesses include Victoria Martin, Theresa Martin, Steven Cummings, and Diane Cummings.
INTERROGATORY NO. 18: If you have any concerns about Steven Max Cummings providing child
care for the subject children, identify each separate concern that you have, and state all the factual basis
for such concern, including what happened, and the approximate date and location of that event and the
name of every person who was present.
ANSWER:
Respondent has a recording of Steven Cummings telling the children they are going to be
spanked for their behavior and then later in the recording he threatens to spank them if they do
not behave. Respondent does not believe threats of physical force should be used to make a child
behave, nor does he think it appropriate to threaten them in this way when a court order is in
place forbidding spanking.
INTERROGATORY NO. 19: Do you think the Judge should be concerned about your criminal
history? If your answer is “No,” then please explain the Judge should not be concerned about your
criminal history.
ANSWER:
Respondent has complied with the punishment sentenced by the State of Texas; he has paid for
his decisions as ordered.
INTERROGATORY NO. 20: Do you think the Judge should be concerned about the volume of
business related complaints made against you? If your answer is “No,” then please explain why the Judge
should not be concerned about the volume of business complaints and lawsuits filed against you?
RESPONDENT’S OBJECTIONS AND ANSWERS TO
PETITIONER’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES - Page 8
ANSWER:
No; complaints are complaints, not moral judgments.
INTERROGATORY NO. 21: Do you think the Judge should be concerned about the volume of
business related lawsuits filed against you?· If your answer is “No,” then please explain why the Judge
should not be concerned about the volume of business related lawsuits filed against you?
ANSWER:
Please see Respondent’s answer to Interrogatory No. 20.
INTERROGATORY NO. 22: If you or your business has any judgments or liens, for each judgment or
lien state:
a. description of the judgment or lien;
b. the identity and location of the person or entity who filed the judgment or lien against
you or your business;
c. the amount of the judgment or lien; and
d. and the court of continuing jurisdiction, if any.
ANSWER:
Please see Respondent’s answer to Interrogatory No. 6.
INTERROGATORY NO. 23: If you intend or may use impeachment evidence at trial or at any
hearing in this suit concerning any person listed by a party as having knowledge of relevant facts or
concerning any person listed by a party as a testifying expert, list each such person who may be
impeached along with the specific incident or crime and date of such incident or crime allegedly
committed by that person and/or identify and describe the impeachment evidence by which you intend to
or may impeach such person.
ANSWER:
Respondent does not possess any criminal impeachment evidence.
INTERROGATORY NO. 24: State the name, address, and telephone number of every person who is
expected to be called to testify at the trial of this lawsuit, including your experts.
ANSWER:
See persons with knowledge identified in Respondent’s Responses to Petitioner’s Request For
Disclosure.
INTERROGATORY NO. 25: For each incident where you reported Diane Cummings to GERMANIA
Insurance Company or to any police or taw enforcement agency, for any incident, including any incident
regarding stolen jewelry, state the reason for the contact, the date of contact, and a description of what
was reported.
RESPONDENT’S OBJECTIONS AND ANSWERS TO
PETITIONER’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES - Page 9
ANSWER:
In January or February 2015, Respondent called Germania to ask about and report possible fraud
on Diane Cummings’ part since he was unable to find a theft report that was required to be filed
for an insurance claim regarding theft of jewelry from Mrs. Cummings’ house. Respondent was
informed that there was such a report and the date so that he could retrieve it from the Rowlett
Police Department.
RESPONDENT’S OBJECTIONS AND ANSWERS TO
PETITIONER’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES - Page 10
Bookmarks