It’s Over!
For Vietnam Era Veteran helicopter pilot Larry Bates, he thought his days at Heritage Seniors apartments were numbered, all based on a settlement in his eviction case that stemmed from his August 13th trial date at the Montgomery County Courthouse in Conroe, in the Courtroom of Judge Scharlene W. Valdez, of the County Court at Law #6. The plaintiff in the case, NH Heritage LP, aka Heritage Seniors, owned by Blazer Real Estate Services, LLC in Houston, was represented at the time by Hoover-Slovacek for the trial, Ms Brianna Lans, lead counsel, accompanied by her co-counsel Mr Daniel Edmunds, argued on behalf of NH Heritage. While arguing for the Defendant Bates, was his pro-bono counsel John Paul Hopkins, of the Hopkins Law Firm in Conroe. Following the trial date earlier in August, Judge Valdez urged the two groups to talk and see if an agreement could be hashed out outside of a court setting. Initially, the parties agreed on a settlement, but it was Hopkin’s researcher Dr. Wendi Hunter, who delved into the case again, this time asking questions of Veteran tenants with similar leases to that of Bates, coming to find out that Bates was never provided with all addendums to his lease that would have strengthened his case against the plaintiff.
Shortly afterwards, Hopkins notified all parties that they were withdrawing their commitment to the settlement based on new evidence, with the document having never been ruled on by Valdez. On the afternoon of August 20th, both Heritage and Hopkins counsels were called to Judge Valdez’s court, to explain themselves, but both lawyers for the plaintiff, thinking the case had concluded, were in different parts of the state arguing cases in separate jurisdictions. A continuance was granted for the morning of August 27th, with Daniel Edmunds solely arguing for Heritage, and Hopkins for Bates, also minus his partner Wendi Hunter. At 8:07am that morning, Hoover-Slovacek filed a motion to the Court to enforce Rule 11, or an Agreement in Writing (settlement). Valdez heard the arguments from both sides, with Hopkins citing the new evidence of the missing lease addendum, while Heritage argued the “or” clause of Rule 11, demanding an immediate judgment. The Judge wasn’t convinced and denied the motion, ordering an immediate resumption to the trial.
The plaintiff’s witness from the first trial day Diane Capistran, the Regional Property Manager for Blazer Real Estate Services, was again sworn-in, and retook the stand, with Judge Valdez warning Edmunds not to rehash anything from Ms Capistran’s previous testimony of August 13th, which is exactly what he did. The Judge continued to grow in irritation during the third trial day, although clearly maintaining her strength, composure, and professionalism, while recognizing inconsistencies in the testimony, such as the fraudulent non-disclosure (not providing the additional addendum), as noted by Hopkins, on the part of Heritage from the day earlier arguments.
Hopkins again reasserted the changing nature of the case with Heritage, initially alleging a roach infestation in the inside panel of the apartment unit’s dishwasher, which could not be seen unless taken apart, and then the secondary attempt to force Bates vacating the unit with additional charges including a dishwasher charge and roach infestation fee, totalling approximately $475.00 dollars, which amounted to a February balance to his rent ledger at approximately $888.00. Bates monthly portion of his rent is $333.00, while Heritage accepts the Housing and Urban Development’s Veterans Administration Supportive Houston, or HUD-VASH portion of $655.00 the rent, that is paid via the Montgomery County Housing Authority. Heritage, via Capistran in first day testimony argued that they are required NOT to accept partial payments for rent, but clearly demonstrated that they did accept the VASH payments, which also is an indicator to HUD that by Heritage accepting the funds, that the unit is a livable habitat without health concerns. Which is a position that Heritage was not clearly presenting to the MCHA. That realization sunk Heritage’s case at the Justice of the Peace small claims court level.
Edmunds noted to Judge Valdez, that Heritage seeked $2331.00 in back rent, with the return of the $500.00 appeal bond and Bates vacating the unit at the end of the lease date on November 30th. Hopkins, in cross examination, cornered Capistran in her admission that the lease was not complete. He also pressed for the actual date Heritage received Bates’ February rent check, which apartment manager Rosie Perez noted as January 29th. Hopkins provided a certified mail receipt from January 16, 2025 with tracking data showing that the check had in fact been received on January 22nd, a full week before the 29th, and possibly prompted the issuance of an immediate statement of charges on the same day for $475.00, the apparent dishwasher fee and roach clean-out fee that was assessed. All of this was done after Bates’ first attempt at paying his February rent on January 10th, as noted on the first day of the trial.
Heritage’s final witness Rosie Perez, was called by Edmunds, in reference to posting the notice, which was done to the rear of the front door, inside of the apartment as testified to by the apartment manager. In cross examination of Ms Perez, Hopkins noted the initial date of inspection, 10/14/24, asking Perez on a letter she sent that stated she conversed in-person with Bates on the date about the failed October 14th inspection and wanted to know the date of the conversation.
Judge Valdez had to intervene asking Ms Perez if she had a conversation with Bates on the 14th, pressing for a Yes or No answer.
“Yes, on the 14th,” said Perez, about speaking with Bates in her office on the date.
“Were you aware that Mr. Bates was in the hospital on that date?” replied Hopkins.
Larry Bates was admitted to the hospital on October 9th, for heart surgery shortly afterwards, and was recovering from his surgery on the date in question. The admission from the apartment manager raised eyebrows, and the assertion from Ms Perez, speaking to the judge that she spoke with Bates in her office on the 14th, harbored a few silent gasps. One spectator in the gallery stated that when Capistran was on the stand, she looked to Perez who, according to the gentleman, noted Perez’s miniscule head movements either yeahing or naying when the regional manager was being cross examined.
During a short recess once the plaintiff rested their case, Hopkins conversed with his intended witness, Gary, the brother of Larry Bates, who had witnessed multiple payment attempts. He was there to attest that there was no mention of the $666.00 to be paid to clear up the matter, following the removal of the $475.00 dishwasher replacement and roach infestation fee, which had later been dropped by Capistran in testimony, but were never dropped by the apartments online payment portal.
Bates’ defense counsel John Paul Hopkins, having read the judge’s demeanor correctly, did not feel a need to call Gary Bates. In his closing statement Hopkins demonstrated that the whole case hinged on the dishwasher and roach infestation fee, that the defense felt unfair, and that Bates demonstrated payment attempts of his rightful rent each month, all funds held in a Hopkins Law Firm trust account.
“It’s just not honest, the way the plaintiff has treated this man,” said Hopkins of his client. “And he has every right to remain in that building, in his home.”
Edmunds tried a hail-mary statement to Judge Valdez countering Hopkins, with raised voice in an aggressive tone and at times rambling, insisting on return of the unit to Heritage. He stated that if the dishwasher fee had been removed in February, they would not be there, which put the onus on his client.
Judge Valdez in submitting her judgement on the matter, found that the court has jurisdiction in the matter. She determined that the plaintiff did not demonstrate a forcible detainer action, and the submission of the January check for the February and subsequent months was wrongfully refused. Further, there should have been disclosures made in person that did not take place, and it perplexed her in how such a charge could be placed on top of the rent the Veteran religiously paid each month.
“It was wrongful to charge him for the dishwasher,” said Valdez. “It was wrongful to charge for the pest control.”
The Judge went on to say that the refusal to accept Bates’ rent allowed a domino effect of delinquency to be created, of which the plaintiff built its case.
“Mr Bates is entitled and has a superior right to possession of the unit,” said the Judge.
She ordered that Mr Bates pay rent, through the Hopkins Trust Account, the January – August rent payments in the amount of $2331.00, to Heritage by August 30th. She further ordered Heritage to accept the check rendering the ledger balanced zeroed out for the said months.
“Mr Bates checks will no longer be refused, even if they are a week or two early, in addition Heritage cannot go back and charge him for the dishwasher or roach fees in the future,” said Valdez.
She noted the six months he was without a dishwasher was uncalled for. Attorney’s fees were denied.
“I hope that this is finally over,” said Larry Bates. “John Paul is setting up my rent so I can avoid handing in monthly checks to the Heritage Seniors office.”