Opinion

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER

Appellate case name: Shatish Patel, M.D., Hemalatha Vijayan, M.D., Subodh

Sonwalkar, M.D., Wolley Oladut M.D. v. St. Luke’s

Sugar Land Partnership, L.L.P. and St. Luke’s

Community Development Corporation-Sugar Land

Appellate case number: 01-13-00273-CV

Trial court case number: 2011-24016

Trial court: 152nd District Court of Harris County

Appellants Shatish Patel, M.D., Hemalatha Vijayan, M.D., Subodh

Sonwalkar, M.D., and Wolley Oladut, M.D. have moved for immediate issuance of

the mandate in this case and, in the alternative, for temporary relief pending the

resolution of the motions for rehearing and reconsideration en banc filed by

appellees St. Luke’s Sugar Land Partnership, L.L.P. and St. Luke’s Community

Development Corporation-Sugar Land.

The motion for temporary relief pending the resolution of the motions for

rehearing and reconsideration en banc is GRANTED, as follows, and appellees St.

Luke’s Sugar Land Partnership, L.L.P. and St. Luke’s Community Development

Corporation-Sugar Land are hereby ordered to refrain from:

a. Taking any action to terminate the Partnership Interests or

ownership interest of Shatish Patel, M.D., Hemalatha Vijayan,

M.D., Subodh Sonwalkar, M.D., and Wolley Oladut, M.D.

b. Except pursuant to a vote of the partners where Class A Unit

holders have the ability to vote, collectively, 49% of the

partnership interest, taking any action identified in Paragraph

8.03(h) of the Amended Partnership Agreement, including

actions to:

i. Reorganize the Partnership;

ii. Take any action in contravention of the Amended

Partnership Agreement;

iii. Make an assignment for the benefit of creditors of the

Partnership or file a voluntary petition under the federal

Bankruptcy Code or any state insolvency law;

iv. Confess any judgment against the Partnership; or

v. Amend or otherwise change the Amended and Restated

Partnership Agreement.

c. Except pursuant to a vote of the Governing Board that includes

representatives of Class A Unit holders who are permitted,

collectively, to vote 49% of the Voting Interest, taking any

action identified in Paragraphs 8.09(a)–(f) of the Amended

Partnership Agreement, including actions to:

i. Issue new Units, admit new partners, or substitute

partners in the Partnership;

ii. Borrow money in an amount exceeding $250,000 from

any third party for any purpose;

iii. Sell, transfer, assign, dispose of, trade, exchange,

quitclaim, surrender, release or abandon any Partnership

property or interests therein other than in an amount less

than $250,000;

iv. Purchase any real property or make, execute, or deliver

any deed or long-term ground lease for any real property;

v. Require or call for any additional capital contributions by

the partners or approve the amounts and proportions of

such additional capital contributions; or

vi. Impose or approve any fundamental or material change

to the general business objectives and purpose of the

Partnership.

d. Calling a Meeting of Governing Board without providing notice

to the Class A Governing Board representatives elected by

Class A Unit holders.

Appellants Shatish Patel, M.D., Hemalatha Vijayan, M.D., Subodh

Sonwalkar, M.D., and Wolley Oladut, M.D. are ordered, jointly and severally, to

either (1) execute and file with the trial court clerk a bond payable to the appellees,

to be approved by the trial court clerk, in the amount of $10,000, or (2) deposit

cash in lieu of the bond into the registry of the trial court. This order is made

without prejudice to the appellees presenting any further argument, supported by

evidence, to justify requiring additional security. See TEX. R. APP. P. 29.3.

Appellants must immediately inform this court in writing when the bond has

been filed or the cash has been deposited. This order shall take effect upon the

filing of the bond or deposit of the cash in lieu of bond with the district clerk, and it

shall terminate upon expiration of this court’s plenary power, see TEX. R. APP. P.

19.1.

The motion for immediate issuance of the mandate is DENIED.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Michael Massengale

Acting individually

Date: December 13, 2013