Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
in Re: Roger Arash Farahmand
Citation: Not availableDocket: 05-15-00861-CV
Court: Court of Appeals of Texas; July 16, 2015; Texas; State Appellate Court
Original Court Document: View Document
Roger Arash Farahmand files a response to a hybrid motion for partial summary judgment concerning the prior marriage of the respondent, Maryam Farahmand, in a case aimed at declaring their marriage void. The response, submitted to the 417th Judicial District Court of Collin County, Texas, includes various supporting documents and affidavits, which are attached and referenced. Key pieces of evidence presented include: 1. An affidavit from Roger Arash Farahmand. 2. Excerpts from Maryam Farahmand's deposition, detailing specific lines and exhibits relevant to the case. 3. A foreign language translation and affidavit regarding the wedding video transcript. 4. A marriage license for Maryam Farahmand and Amir Bagherkalantari. 5. Excerpts from the deposition of Shahrbanoo Khanipour (Mahnaz Keyani). 6. A deposition by written questions from Dr. Alsan Ghaffari. 7. A transcript of the temporary orders hearing. The response was filed on October 24, 2014, as part of the ongoing legal proceedings, and includes sensitive data as noted in the documentation. Roger and Maryam Farahmand were allegedly married on July 28, 2012. Roger filed for divorce on December 30, 2013, only to discover that Maryam had been previously married to Amir Bagherkalantari since approximately December 12, 2009, and had never divorced him. During a deposition on March 4, 2014, Maryam confirmed that neither she nor Amir had sought a divorce or annulment. Roger later found a wedding video and marriage license from Maryam and Amir's wedding, which was never filed due to a misunderstanding by a guest. The marriage license was executed and signed by the officiant, Dr. Asian Ghaffari, who confirmed he conducted their wedding in a deposition. After their marriage, Amir identified Maryam as his wife in an apartment application, where Maryam indicated she was moving due to getting married. Following these discoveries, Roger filed a petition to declare the marriage void and a second amended petition for divorce. In response, Maryam filed a hybrid motion for partial summary judgment, arguing that Roger lacked evidence of a ceremonial or informal marriage between them. The standard for a no-evidence summary judgment in Texas requires the nonmovant to produce evidence that raises a genuine issue of material fact, with the trial court resolving any reasonable doubt in favor of the nonmovant. The adequacy of the discovery time under Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 166a is case-dependent, with appellate courts evaluating several factors: the nature of the case, the evidence needed to challenge the no-evidence summary judgment, the duration the case has been active, the time the no-evidence motion has been filed, any requests for stricter discovery guidelines, and the specificity of the discovery deadlines. For ceremonial marriage in Texas, a valid marriage requires obtaining a marriage license and participating in a ceremony conducted by an authorized person, which may include a religious officer or someone with apparent authority. There are no specific requirements for the ceremony format or wording. The officiant must record the ceremony details on the license within 30 days and return it to the county clerk. However, failure to adhere to these formalities does not invalidate the marriage, which can be established through a marriage license, certificate, or testimony. Informal or common-law marriage exists if the parties agree to marry, cohabit as spouses, and represent themselves as married. The burden of proof lies with the party claiming the existence of the marriage, which can be supported by direct or circumstantial evidence, with each case evaluated on its own facts. Maryam's marriage to Amir occurred before her marriage to Roger, adhering to the requirements set forth for ceremonial marriage in Texas. Evidence of non-compliance with statutory marriage formalities, such as failing to obtain a marriage license or properly recording it, does not invalidate the existence of a ceremonial marriage. A ceremonial marriage can be established through the presentation of a marriage license and certificate, or through testimony from the involved parties, witnesses, or the officiant. In the case of Williams v. White, a court found that regulations requiring parental consent and a marriage license are directory rather than mandatory, meaning a marriage remains valid even if entered into without adherence to these requirements, unless a statute explicitly states otherwise. The same principle applies to Maryam and Amir's marriage; they obtained a marriage license from the county clerk and were married by Dr. Ghaffari, a recognized officiant under Persian Shiite traditions, despite the license not being filed. The lack of filing does not invalidate their marriage, as Texas law does not specify that failure to file renders a marriage void. The evidence presented also supports their informal marriage claim, showing they agreed to marry, lived together, and represented themselves as married to others. Maryam's lease application further confirms her marital status with Amir. Maryam's marriage to Amir remains valid as it was never dissolved. To establish this, evidence must demonstrate that the marriage was not terminated by death, divorce, or annulment. 1. **Not Dissolved by Death**: Amir is alive, confirming that the marriage was not dissolved by death. 2. **Not Dissolved by Divorce or Annulment**: Evidence must show that reasonable searches for any divorce or annulment filings were conducted in relevant jurisdictions. Roger engaged a private investigator to confirm that Maryam and Amir only resided in Texas and California. Searches in both states from December 12, 2009, to July 28, 2012, revealed no dissolution proceedings. Additionally, Maryam testified that neither she nor Amir pursued a divorce or annulment, supporting Roger’s claims. 3. **Roger's Lack of Knowledge**: Roger was unaware of Maryam’s prior marriage at the time of their marriage in 2012, a fact he discovered only after initiating divorce proceedings. Maryam challenges Roger's attempt to void their marriage based on his ignorance of her previous marriage status. The legal standard for summary judgment requires the movant to demonstrate no genuine issue of material fact exists. The court must assume the nonmovant's evidence is true and resolve any doubts in their favor. Roger’s evidence raises a substantial issue regarding whether Maryam was still married to Amir when she married Roger, which counters Maryam's claim for summary judgment. Roger requests the Court to deny Maryam's Motion for Summary Judgment, arguing that he has provided sufficient evidence to support his claims. He asserts that the no-evidence motion should be rejected because he has presented more than a minimal amount of evidence for each element he must prove. Additionally, he contends that the traditional motion for summary judgment should be denied due to the existence of a material fact dispute regarding whether Maryam was married to Amir at the time she married Roger. Roger's affidavit states his personal knowledge of the case and confirms he is competent to testify. He identifies Amir Bagherkalantari, currently a student at the University of Southern California, and indicates that Amir is not deceased. Roger emphasizes that he found no record of divorce between Amir and Maryam, aligning with Maryam's deposition testimony that no divorce or annulment has been filed. He mentions discovering Maryam's prior marriage only after filing for divorce. Included in his evidence are an original marriage license (Exhibit D) received from Mahnaz Keyani, a transcript of the wedding video from December 12, 2009 (Exhibit C), and a handwriting sample from Maryam's application (Exhibit G). Roger concludes his affidavit without further statements. The document is a legal deposition of Maryam Farahmand, taken on March 4, 2014, in the context of the marriage dissolution case involving her and Roger Arash Farahmand, concerning the interests of a minor child in Collin County, Texas. The deposition was conducted by Pennie Futrell, CSR, and recorded at the Law Offices of Richard J. Corbitt, P.C. Key appearances include Mr. Bradford Nace representing the Petitioner and Mr. Richard J. Corbitt for the Respondent, with videographer Mr. Randy Johnson present. During the deposition, Maryam identifies a marriage license issued on December 4, 2009, between herself and Amir, though she cannot recall if she has seen it before. She acknowledges receiving gifts on December 12, 2009, but does not remember the exact number. Maryam also identifies photographs from the event but lacks evidence of communication with the photographer. When questioned about returning a ring to Amir, she states that she lost it. She confirms that no marital vows were exchanged on December 12, 2009, and clarifies that the event was an engagement party. The deposition reveals that she and Amir lived together in Plano during their roughly one-year relationship but she struggles to recall specific addresses. Both parties did not file for divorce or annulment. The document concludes with Maryam affirming the accuracy of the deposition before signing it. Additionally, there is a certification confirming the accuracy of the translation from Farsi to English. File number TR16825_Petitioner's_Exhibit_2_Cause_No._401-56531-2010/IM0M_Farahmand_English Translation pertains to a marriage ceremony in the State of Texas, County of Dallas, notarized by Rosa Remdez, whose commission expired on November 25, 2016. The document includes a declaration by Joe Hedderich affirming his execution of the instrument for its intended purposes. The marriage ceremony involves Ms. Maryam Parvfz granting her agent and proxy the authority to marry her to Mr. Amir Bagher Kalantary, with a marriage-portion specified as one volume of the Holy Quran and intentions invoking fourteen Saints. The officiant, referred to as "Conductor," repeatedly asks for Ms. Maryam's consent, which she affirms, stating she has her parents' permission. Mr. Amir Bagher Kalantary also confirms his consent with parental approval. The officiant then pronounces the couple as legally married, wishing them happiness and prosperity. The ceremony includes a reading of a poem by Hafez, highlighting its significance in Islamic tradition, which is received with cheers and applause from family and friends present. The excerpt details a celebratory event, likely a wedding, featuring various speakers and guests expressing congratulations and best wishes to Maryam and Amir. Highlights include: - The maid of honor, who is Maryam's sister, humorously suggests that cash is the best way to receive a ceremonial knife for the couple. - Mahsa, presumably a close friend or family member, shares heartfelt sentiments about her relationship with Maryam, wishing the couple a happy marriage while playfully mentioning past sibling disputes. - A parent of the bride expresses gratitude to attendees, acknowledges Amir's family in Iran who could not attend, and reads a verse from Hafez, wishing for peace and stability for the newlyweds. - Additional guests congratulate the couple, noting Maryam's accomplishments and praising her wedding attire, expressing hopes for a joyful future together. - The atmosphere is light-hearted, with guests engaging in playful banter and expressing excitement about the festivities, culminating in a wish for good luck and blessings for the couple's marriage. The speaker conveys heartfelt congratulations to Maryam and Amir on their wedding, expressing wishes for a long, happy, and prosperous life together. Emphasizing the importance of marriage as a commitment requiring devotion and self-sacrifice, the speaker hopes the couple will celebrate many anniversaries and enjoy a family life where their children will affectionately call the speaker "aunty." Gratitude is also expressed towards those who contributed to the wedding, highlighting the joy of the occasion and the speaker's emotional connection to Maryam. The speaker concludes with personal memories and a reaffirmation of love and support for the couple. Additionally, the document references legal details regarding the marriage license, including the issuing authority and relevant family code sections, confirming the license's validity and the requirements for its use. The legal document pertains to the deposition of Shahbanoo Khanipour, conducted on May 22, 2014, related to the marriage of Roger Arash Farahmand and Maryam Farahmand, as well as the interests of a minor child, in the 401st Judicial District of Collin County, Texas. The deposition took place from 9:38 a.m. to 11:46 a.m. at the Law Offices of Koons, Fuller, Vanden Eykel, and Robertson, with Melissa English serving as the court reporter. Representatives for the petitioner and respondent were present, including Ms. Rebecca Tillery for the petitioner and Mr. Bob Widner for the respondent. The witness, Shahbanoo Khanipour, was sworn in and provided testimony regarding her involvement in the wedding of Amir and Maryam. She confirmed receiving an invitation to the wedding, which was handed to her directly by Shamsi, and clarified that she knew about the wedding plans through regular communication with Shamsi. Khanipour indicated she did not know Amir prior to the wedding and believed he was not a U.S. citizen at that time. When asked about Amir's marriage to Maryam, Khanipour suggested that she believed it might have been for visa purposes, but this was a personal belief rather than a confirmed fact. She also estimated that Amir and Maryam met approximately two to three months before their marriage. In December 2009, a gathering attended by the witness was identified as a wedding for Maryam and Amir, despite Maryam's current claim that it was not a wedding. The witness affirmed the event's status as a Persian wedding, noting that both Maryam and Amir, along with their families, are Persian. Maryam's parents arranged the event at a venue on Arapaho, and a caterer, referred to as Asam Namate Pour, was hired to provide food. Maryam wore a traditional white wedding dress and veil. Dr. Ghaffari, who had previously officiated the weddings of the witness's sisters and friends, was requested to officiate this ceremony by a person named Shamsi. The witness assisted in preparing for the wedding by managing gifts, which typically consisted of gold and money, and arranging the dinner tables, collaborating closely with the caterer. Regarding documentation, the witness stated that typically the bride and groom would possess a written document about the ceremony. However, this time the document was initially with Dr. Ghaffari due to a need for signatures. The witness later took the document to Dr. Ghaffari for signing. The witness confirmed seeing a signed document, but it was not signed by all parties involved, only by Dr. Ghaffari and the witness's sister. The document in Dr. Ghaffari's possession was described as unsigned. Shahrbanoo Khanipour's deposition was conducted on May 22, 2014, in the District Court of Collin County, Texas, under Cause No. 401-56531-2013 concerning the marriage of Arash Farahmand and Aryam Farahmand, specifically regarding the interest of a minor child. The deposition was certified by Melissa English, a Certified Shorthand Reporter (CSR), who confirmed that Khanipour was duly sworn and that the transcript accurately reflects her testimony. The parties present included Rebecca Tillery, attorney for the petitioner, and Bob Widner, attorney for the respondent. Time spent by each attorney during the deposition was recorded, with Tillery using 56 minutes and Widner 47 minutes. English stated that she has no affiliation with any party involved in the case and is not financially interested in the outcome. Further certification requirements under Texas Rules of Civil Procedure (TRCP) Rule 203 will be completed after they occur. The document also includes details about the delivery and charges related to the deposition transcript. Court documents filed on April 23, 2014, in the 401st Judicial District Court of Collin County, Texas, involve a suit to declare the marriage of Roger Arash Farahmand and Maryam Farahmand void, with proceedings concerning the interests of a minor child (Case No. 401-56531-2013). Service of legal documents was executed by Gary Shemrat, authorized by the Supreme Court of Texas, on April 21, 2014. Shemrat personally delivered the Notices of Intention to Take Deposition by Written Questions in both English and Farsi to Dr. Asian Ghaffari at his residence. The affidavit states Shemrat is over 18, of sound mind, and has no vested interest in the case outcome. A Notice of Intention to Take Deposition by Written Questions was issued to Dr. Ghaffari and to Maryam Farahmand's attorney, Richard J. Corbitt, indicating that the deposition would occur on May 12, 2014, after a 20-day notice period. The deposition will be conducted by a Notary Public or Certified Court Reporter and may be used as evidence in the ongoing case. The document is submitted by attorneys Rebecca Tillery and Ike Vande Eykel of KoonsFuller, representing Roger Arash Farahmand. A certificate of service confirms that copies of the document were sent to the attorneys of record via certified mail on April 21, 2014. Motley LLC and Richard J. Corbitt Associates, P.C., representing the petitioner, Rebecca Tillery, filed a notice to take a deposition by written questions in a case (Cause No. 401-56531-2013) concerning the marriage of Roger Arashfar and Maryam Farahmand in the 401st Judicial District of Collin County, Texas. The deposition targets Dr. Asian Ghaffari, who is asked a series of questions regarding his experience officiating marriage ceremonies, particularly under Shiite law, and his familiarity with Persian wedding traditions. Key inquiries include Dr. Ghaffari's name, contact information, and professional background related to marriage ceremonies. He confirms officiating several Shiite-Persian weddings, both domestically and internationally, and expresses familiarity with traditional Persian ceremonies, specifically the "Sofreh." The deposition includes questions about specific exhibits depicting Dr. Ghaffari officiating a wedding for Maryam Parviz Khyavi and Amir Bagherkalantari, confirming his role and the nature of the ceremony. He acknowledges the presence of a Quran during the event and affirms the authenticity of the images provided. The deposition aims to establish the legitimacy of the wedding ceremony that took place around December 2009, with additional references to his wife's attendance and knowledge of the event. Attendance at the wedding of Maryam Parviz Khyavi and Amir Bagherkalantari is questioned, specifically who the respondent recognized as attendees. The respondent is asked about the customs surrounding engagement contracts, including whether such contracts can be concluded while still being referred to as engagements, particularly in the context of the Muslim Shiite religion, where any Muslim can officiate a marriage with two witnesses without a special permit. The respondent affirms recognition of Exhibit "D" as a marriage license for Maryam Parviz Khyavi and Amir Bagherkalantari, confirming its condition and their signature on the document. They are also asked about prior knowledge of Maryam and her family members before the wedding, detailing any interactions or attempts at contact by Maryam, her mother Shamsi Damavandi, and her father Bahman Parviz Khyavi over the past year. The respondent notes no recent contacts from the family regarding the nature of the ceremony and confirms a call from Fadeyeh Ghadamipour on or about March 3, 2014, although details regarding the purpose of that call are unclear. The respondent also acknowledges prior knowledge of Ghadamipour but does not specify the reason for her call. Overall, the deposition seeks to clarify relationships and communications related to the wedding and the nature of the marriage ceremony. The document includes a series of written deposition questions and answers. Key points include: 1. **Wedding Attire**: The witness confirms that the attire depicted in Exhibit "E" is typical wedding attire and that Maryam Parviz Khyavi was indeed wearing a wedding dress in that exhibit. 2. **Engagement Parties**: The witness has attended multiple Shiite-Persian engagement parties but states that no one has worn a wedding dress to such events. 3. **Personal Connection**: The witness affirms their attendance at the wedding of Maryam Parviz Khyavi and Amir Bagherkalantari on December 12, 2009. 4. **Verification**: The witness swears that their answers are truthful and are recorded accurately. A notary public certifies the witness's testimony, confirming it was duly sworn. 5. **Licensing Information**: The document references the Family Code regarding marriage licenses, indicating specific sections that govern the use of the marriage license in question, including issuance dates and authorized personnel. Overall, the deposition establishes the witness's perspective on wedding attire, their personal experiences with engagement parties, and confirms their attendance at a specific wedding, all under official notarization. The document appears to contain a series of fragmented text and symbols that lack coherent structure or clear meaning. There are repeated references to page numbers, indications of various sections, and a scattering of letters and characters that do not form intelligible sentences or legal concepts. The content does not convey specific legal principles, case law, statutes, or arguments relevant to any legal issue. The overall impression is one of disorganization and a lack of substantive legal content. Further clarification or context would be necessary to provide a meaningful summary or analysis. A. Jiu, a Notary Public in Texas, certifies that the witness's testimony was duly sworn and recorded accurately in a written deposition. The notarization occurred on a specified date in 2014, and the notary's commission expiration is noted. The document details the marriage license's issuance and restrictions according to the Family Code, including relevant sections and dates. It also references a legal case (Cause No. 401-56531-2013) involving Roger Arash Farahmand and Mary Am Farahmand in Collin County, Texas, with a focus on a minor child. The deposition was obtained from Dr. Aslan Ghaffari, confirming that it was accurately recorded and sworn. The taxable cost for document preparation is stated as $141.00, payable by attorney Ike Vanden Eykel, with copies of the certificate sent to all parties as per legal requirements. Documents were hand-delivered or transferred by telephone to Richard J. Corbitt, Attorney for Respondent Brad Nace, in accordance with Texas Rules of Civil Procedure 203. A Notary Public certifies the accuracy of the document. The court proceedings took place on March 10, 2014, before Judge Mark J. Rusch in Collin County, Texas, regarding the marriage dissolution of Roger Arash Farahmand and Maryam Farahmand. The hearing's appearances included Bradford Winston Nace representing the Petitioner, Roger Farahmand, and Richard J. Corbitt representing the Respondent, Maryam Farahmand. Kimberly Tinsley served as the court reporter. Witnesses were examined, including Aslan Ghaffari, who was subpoenaed, and he testified about performing marriages in Texas and recognized individuals present in the courtroom. Exhibits were offered by the Petitioner, including a marriage license dated December 12, 2009, a video of the same date, and a supporting affidavit from Roger Farahmand. The proceedings were documented in shorthand by the court reporter. The witness, Mr. Ghaffari, identified Mrs. Farahmand by her black jacket during court proceedings. He confirmed that he performed a wedding for Ms. Farahmand (formerly Parviz) on December 12, 2009, in a public place with an unspecified number of attendees, asserting that it was indeed a wedding. Mr. Nace questioned Mr. Ghaffari about his qualifications to perform marriages in Texas. After an objection from Mr. Corbitt regarding speculation, the court allowed a voir dire examination. During this examination, Mr. Ghaffari clarified that he is not a licensed minister, priest, rabbi, or judge. He affirmed his belief that the event was a wedding, and when questioned about his phrasing, he corrected himself to state that he "saw it was a wedding." Mr. Corbitt sought clarification on the witness's exact words, but the court ruled that the issue was more about the weight of the testimony rather than its admissibility. The voir dire concluded without further questioning of the witness. An objection was raised under Family Code 2.202 regarding Mr. Ghaffari's qualifications to conduct a wedding in Texas. The court acknowledged Mr. Farahmand as the Petitioner, noting his petition was filed on December 30, 2013, stating the parties were married on July 28, 2012. The court agreed to take judicial notice of the pleadings. Mr. Ghaffari claimed that Islamic law does not require permission to perform weddings and indicated he is not an Imam but believed anyone under Islamic law could conduct a wedding. The court sought clarification on Mr. Ghaffari's Islamic denomination, confirming he is Shi'ite, which the court regarded as sufficient authority under Family Code 2.202 for now. During direct examination, Mr. Nace questioned Mr. Ghaffari about who initially contacted him for the wedding, to which he vaguely recalled that it could have been a family member. Mr. Nace presented a document for identification, which Mr. Ghaffari acknowledged as his handwriting but stated he did not remember it well. The document titled "Rights of Matrimony" faced an objection from Mr. Corbitt for not being introduced into evidence, which the court sustained. Mr. Nace indicated they had the original document but could not provide it at that moment, leading the court to express concerns about the absence of a marriage license in the clerk's office. The objection regarding the document's introduction was sustained at this time. The court allows Mr. Nace to re-approach witness Mr. Ghaffari regarding his past wedding ceremonies. Mr. Ghaffari confirms that he typically signs and certifies the marriage of the couples he marries. He identifies his signature on a document presented as Exhibit 1. Mr. Corbitt raises an objection about the relevance of Mr. Ghaffari's previous actions, which the court overrules. During cross-examination, Mr. Corbitt questions the wording of Mr. Ghaffari’s qualifications, clarifying it includes a Ph.D. in Economy. Mr. Ghaffari acknowledges that some weddings took place in the United States. In redirect examination, Mr. Nace asks about a specific wedding date, which Mr. Ghaffari confirms as December 12, 2009. When asked if he would ever write a different date for a wedding ceremony, Mr. Corbitt objects, and the court sustains the objection. The court then poses additional questions to Mr. Ghaffari, confirming he does not know the man involved in the wedding discussed. After this questioning, Mr. Ghaffari is excused, and Mr. Nace indicates he will call another witness, Farid Rastegar, requiring the translator’s assistance again. The excerpt outlines a legal proceeding involving Roger Arash Farahmand and Maryam Farahmand, concerning the declaration of their marriage as void and the interest of a minor child in Collin County, Texas. The petitioner, Roger Farahmand, submits business records from Post Legacy Apartments along with an affidavit from Vicki Chalker, the custodian of those records. These documents are intended for use as evidence in the trial. The text specifies that under Rule 902(10)(a) of the Texas Rules of Evidence, these records can be made available for inspection and copying by the court clerk at the requesting party's expense. The excerpt also includes details about the attorneys representing Roger Farahmand, including their contact information and affiliations. Additionally, an affidavit is presented, confirming the authenticity of the attached records, which are stated to be kept in the regular course of business. The custodian, identified only as "L.K. Chalker," attests to the factual accuracy of these records, underscoring their reliability and proper maintenance. The Post Residential Rental Agreement, effective December 1, 2009, is between Post Legacy, L.P. (through Post Apartment Homes, L.P.) and residents Amlr Bagherkalantarii and Maryam Parviz-Khyavi for apartment no. 2262 located at 5725 Marlin Rd, Plano, TX. Key terms include: 1. **Term**: The agreement begins at noon on December 1, 2009, and ends at noon on November 30 of the following year. 2. **Possession**: If possession is delayed, rent will be abated daily until possession is granted. If possession is not granted within seven days, the resident may terminate the agreement and receive a full deposit refund. Post is not liable for possession delays. 3. **Rent**: Monthly rent is $665, payable in advance on the first of each month via approved payment methods. Rent payments must include any additional charges for damages or violations. Cash payments can be refused. 4. **Late Payments and Returned Checks**: Rent is late after the third day of the month, incurring a 10% late fee. Late payments must be made by cashier's check, certified check, or money order. A $30 service charge applies for any dishonored checks. Future payments must also be made by these methods after any dishonored payment. 5. **Security Deposit**: A $0.00 security deposit is required before taking possession, refundable within 30 days after the apartment is surrendered, provided certain conditions are met, including the absence of damage beyond normal wear and tear. The deposit cannot be used for rent payment and may be applied to cover unpaid obligations. Residents are responsible for additional charges for damages or violations exceeding normal wear and tear. Lawful deductions from the security deposit include unpaid rent, accelerated rent, unpaid utilities, unreimbursed service charges, early termination and cancellation fees, revoked concession credits, repair costs for damages from negligence or abuse, replacement costs for missing property, costs for replacing smoke detector batteries, utilities for repairs or cleaning, charges for unreturned keys, and fees for removing unauthorized security devices. If the apartment is abandoned, the security deposit will be returned within thirty days, minus lawful deductions. Abandonment or surrender terminates the right of possession and allows the landlord to clean, make repairs, relet the apartment, determine deductions, and remove property left behind. A $25 fee applies for re-keying if all keys are not returned. Termination of the lease requires a 60-day written notice from either party before the end of the initial term. Without such notice, the lease will automatically extend for 60-day increments under the same terms. Rent may be increased with 75 days' written notice. It is emphasized that verbal notices regarding lease non-renewal or termination are not accepted; written notice must be dated, signed by all residents, and specify the move-out date. Residents should keep a signed receipt of this notice for proof. Additionally, the landlord may conduct background checks, which could affect lease renewal. Early termination is permitted if written notice is given 30 days in advance and the tenant is not in default. Termination of the lease requires a written notice to Post, effective 30 days after receipt. Obligations prior to termination include: (a) payment of all amounts due, including prorated rent and any rent concession credits; (b) an early termination fee equal to two months' rent plus the security deposit. All conditions must be met for lease termination; failure to comply maintains the tenant's liability under the agreement. Early termination does not absolve responsibilities for damages beyond normal wear and tear. Subletting or assignment of the lease is prohibited without Post's written consent. Post Apartment Management acts as the authorized agent for the premises owner and is responsible for managing the apartment. Tenants must pay for all utilities, including deposits and fees, and must have utilities in their name immediately upon signing. Disconnection of utilities constitutes a material default. Any utility charges incurred by Post due to tenant non-compliance will be added to rent. Post may change billing methodologies with 30 days' notice and reserves the right to designate utility providers. In case of fire rendering the apartment uninhabitable, the lease will be terminated if the tenant is not at fault. Upon lease termination, tenants must vacate and return the apartment in good condition. Failure to vacate will result in charges of double the rent for each day beyond the lease term, in addition to any damages incurred. After lease termination, tenants will be considered tenants at sufferance. Post has the authority to store or dispose of any tenant's belongings left on the premises after the termination of the lease. The tenant consents to allow Post access to the apartment for inspections and maintenance during reasonable hours and grants Post the right to enter at any time in emergencies to protect life or property. The apartment is designated for residential use only, occupied solely by individuals named in the lease application, with any substitutions or additions requiring prior written consent from Post. Occupants and guests are prohibited from using the apartment for unlawful purposes or in a manner that disrupts other residents' quiet enjoyment. Violations of laws or ordinances by any occupant or guest can result in a material breach of the lease, leading to eviction. Specifically, any criminal activity, including drug-related offenses, is strictly forbidden, along with acts of violence. The tenant agrees to maintain comprehensive insurance for personal property and liability, looking solely to their insurance for any losses, which also protects the interests of Post. Post is not liable for any damage, theft, vandalism, or loss to personal property unless caused by its gross negligence or intentional misconduct. It is not responsible for damages from the actions of occupants of adjacent properties or third parties, including independent contractors. Post may request proof of insurance at any time, and failure to provide it within five business days constitutes a material breach of the lease. Pets are prohibited without prior written consent from Post, with exceptions for trained service animals. Allowing a pet to stay for more than fourteen days without permission results in a material breach. Indemnification is required from the tenant for losses incurred by Post due to tenant's non-compliance with the lease, damage caused by the tenant or their guests, or any governmental violations. Failure to enforce lease terms does not waive Post's rights. Remedies available for breaches are cumulative, and the prevailing party in legal proceedings is entitled to attorney's fees and litigation costs. Notices must be in writing and delivered personally or via registered mail to the respective parties’ addresses. The tenant accepts the apartment in "as is" condition and agrees to maintain it in a clean and sanitary state. Post will make necessary repairs promptly after receiving notice from the tenant. Verbal notice is insufficient for any damage caused by the tenant or their guests beyond normal wear and tear; the tenant must pay for repairs as additional rent with the next payment. Remodeling or structural changes to the apartment require prior written consent from Post. Tenants may issue written notices to Post for repairs affecting health or safety if they are not behind on rent; if Post fails to address the issue within seven days, tenants may have non-judicial remedies including lease termination or repair and rent deduction, subject to conditions in Sections 92.056 and 92.0561 of the Texas Property Code. Eligible tenants may receive a prorated rent refund or a deduction from their security deposit. Specific requirements exist for repair deductions, including notice delivery and limits on repair costs. Judicial remedies may also be available under Section 92.0563. Residents are informed that maintenance and rehabilitation projects may occur during the lease term, potentially causing inconveniences such as obstructions, noise, and dust. Such conditions do not constitute a breach of the lease or grounds for claims against Post. If tenants attempt to remove personal property without settling all dues, or after the lease ends, the property may be deemed abandoned, allowing Post to dispose of it according to Texas law. Any property left in the apartment, garage, or storage bin will be deemed the property of Post, which retains the right to determine abandonment based on specific criteria such as non-payment of rent, utility service discontinuation, lack of communication, or removal of personal belongings. In cases of abandonment, Post can secure the premises with new locks, store or dispose of personal items left behind, or re-rent the space without prior notice. Post will not be liable for actions taken under these circumstances, and such actions are considered contractual agreements, not grounds for tort claims or punitive damages. Additionally, the rights of the tenant are subordinate to any existing or future security interests on the property. If the tenant defaults by failing to pay rent, abandoning the premises, violating any agreement terms, or providing misleading information in the rental application, Post may either terminate the lease or the tenant's possession rights through written notice. Upon notice, the tenant must vacate the premises and is liable for any losses or expenses incurred by Post due to the default and termination, including costs associated with re-letting the property. The application of any security deposit does not exempt the tenant from additional liabilities. Damages or costs are applicable until the lease agreement expires or the apartment is re-rented, whichever occurs first. After vacating, a deposit statement will be sent, and any outstanding balance 30 days post-statement will accrue interest at 16% per annum, subject to legal limits on non-usurious interest. Any excess interest will be applied to the principal or refunded if already paid. Despite eviction proceedings, the tenant remains liable for rent and charges until either the lease term ends or the apartment is re-rented. Management's consent for any actions stipulated in the agreement must be in writing, can be granted or withheld at management's discretion, and may include conditions that must be adhered to. Management reserves the right to modify or revoke consent upon notice. The tenant authorizes management to accept packages delivered to the property, acknowledging that management will not accept packages with postage due. Management is not responsible for the condition or contents of accepted packages and is released from liability for any loss or damage, even if due to negligence. The tenant assumes all risks associated with package delivery and agrees to indemnify management against third-party claims. Specific rules prohibit displaying signs, obstructing public areas, and installing antennas or satellite dishes beyond defined parameters. The tenant must comply with all parking regulations established by management. Acknowledgment of prior receipt of parking and towing regulations is confirmed. No campers, recreational vehicles, boats, trailers, mobile homes, buses, commercial vehicles, or mechanized equipment are allowed on the premises without prior written approval from Post. Designated parking spaces must be used, and non-operable, abandoned, or unauthorized vehicles may be removed at the owner's expense. Definitions of such vehicles are broadly interpreted, including those that are offensive, cause damage, are improperly parked, block access, appear in disrepair, lack proper licensing, or are not owned by the resident. Abandoned vehicles are defined as those left unattended for 30 days. Vehicle repairs or washing are only permitted in designated areas. Storage of combustible materials or heaters in apartments, balconies, patios, or garages is prohibited. Only built-in heating systems may be used. Balconies and patios must be kept clean, with no items stored or hung on railings, and no grilling or cooking devices allowed in violation of laws. Recreation, storage, service, and amenities areas are not guaranteed services under this agreement, and Post reserves the right to curtail or eliminate such amenities without affecting the agreement's terms or rent obligations. Agreement to adhere to rules and regulations for recreational, storage, service, and amenity areas established by Posl Rev.TX2009-1103 Post Properties is mandatory. The resident is responsible for the actions of their occupants, guests, or invitees, and any violations by these parties may be treated as breaches of the agreement by the resident. Residents must communicate and explain all terms of the lease and associated rules to their guests. Specific provisions include: - Drapes and shades must have a uniform exterior appearance. - Water beds and hot tubs are prohibited without prior written permission. - Conduct towards management and others must be lawful and courteous, prohibiting abusive behavior, which could lead to lease termination. - Residents are liable for any damages caused by themselves or their guests, beyond normal wear and tear, and must pay for repairs promptly. - A signed list of existing damages must be acknowledged upon moving in. - Keys to the apartment can only be checked out with written permission, and residents must return them on the same day or cover lock change costs. - Mechanical closets cannot be used for storage. - Smoke detectors will be provided and initially maintained by Post, but residents are responsible for battery replacements thereafter. - Additional rules may be established by Post during the lease term, effective five days after notification, and amenity availability is subject to change at Post's discretion without constituting a breach of the agreement. Gender references within the agreement apply equally to all individuals. The document stipulates that singular terms are intended to include plural forms as necessary, and gender references are meant to be gender-neutral. It establishes a landlord-tenant relationship between Post and the tenant, granting only a usufruct without transferring any estate in land. The agreement constitutes the entire contract between the parties, overriding any prior or concurrent oral statements, and includes a severability clause ensuring that invalid provisions do not affect the remaining terms. Each signatory is jointly and severally liable, meaning they share collective responsibility for the agreement's obligations. Additionally, the provisions are binding on the successors and assigns of Post. The document includes an acknowledgment of security responsibilities, clarifying that Post is not liable for the personal safety or property of tenants, their guests, or invitees. It states that tenants must inspect safety items like smoke detectors and locks and notify Post of any needed repairs. Post's provision of safety-related items does not imply a duty to ensure security. Tenants are advised to rely on public police for protection and to hold Post harmless for any claims related to criminal activity. If the tenant has an independent security system, Post disclaims any responsibility for its operation or effectiveness, leaving activation and maintenance to the tenant. Responsibility for operating the security system lies with you, as is the obligation to pay any charges imposed by the security company directly, with Post being exempt from any liabilities related to the security services. You agree to indemnify Post against any claims arising from the security system, and to rely on personal insurance for any incidents involving injury, death, or property damage. Regarding mold, you are informed that mold or mildew may develop if the premises are not properly maintained, particularly in the event of water damage or excessive moisture. While many molds are not harmful to healthy individuals, prolonged exposure can lead to health issues, especially for sensitive individuals. To mitigate mold risks, you must take preventive measures, including: 1. Reporting any water intrusion or damage to Post immediately. 2. Reducing indoor humidity through ventilation and warming cold surfaces. 3. Using bathroom fans during showers and reporting any malfunctions. 4. Securing windows and openings to prevent water entry. 5. Utilizing exhaust fans while cooking or cleaning. 6. Cleaning and drying personal items within 24 to 48 hours of water exposure. 7. Notifying Post promptly of any damp building materials. 8. Conducting monthly inspections for mold and moisture. You are required to maintain the premises to prevent mold infestations and follow the guidelines provided in the agreement. Immediate reporting to Post is required if mold or mildew is observed inside the premises, particularly if it affects an area larger than one square foot. Minor mold issues can typically be addressed with water, detergent, or bleach, and should be dried completely. If there’s uncertainty regarding the size or the ability to clean it, residents must report it to Post. Additionally, any signs of mold, mildew, leaks, or water damage elsewhere in the complex must also be reported. Residents are prohibited from bringing personal property suspected of containing mold into the unit, especially soft furnishings. If mold is found on such items, residents should notify Post for disposal assistance. Residents agree to indemnify Post against any claims related to health-affecting substances brought into the premises due to their negligence or that of their guests. Violations of this mold provision are considered a material breach of the agreement. Furthermore, residents agree to disseminate safety information to visitors, including fire safety tips, such as not smoking in bed and knowing emergency exits. Regarding contractual obligations, if rent is delinquent, Post may enter the apartment to remove property subject to lien. Similarly, property may be removed after judicial eviction, surrender, or abandonment, with reasonable storage fees applicable. Post has a lien on the removed property for outstanding debts and may dispose of unclaimed items left after surrender or eviction, except for animals, which may be transferred to local authorities or humane societies. Additionally, residents will be billed for submetered or allocated utility services as applicable. Water and wastewater services for the OvJelling Unit will be reflected in bills issued by Post. In 2007, the average monthly bill for all units was $13.62, with the highest at $123.34 and the lowest at $0.00. Bill amounts may fluctuate based on usage, utility rate changes, and other factors. Payments are due 16 days after billing, or the next business day if the due date falls on a weekend or holiday, and should be sent to the on-site management office. Post is responsible for repairing leaks in residents' units and common areas within eight hours, barring unforeseen circumstances. Submetering issues, including billing disputes and service interruptions, will be governed by Subchapter H of Chapter 291, Title 30, Texas Administrative Code. Any conflicts between this Addendum and applicable regulations will defer to those regulations. Residents may request verification of utility bills, and Post must provide access to submetering records within specified timeframes. If records are not maintained on-site, they will be made available within 15 days, or at the resident's unit within 30 days. Disputes over billing calculations or submeter accuracy will be resolved between the resident and Post. If the retail utility's rate structure includes a dwelling unit base charge, Post will bill each unit for its applicable charge, but will not charge residents for base charges related to unoccupied units. The retail public utility's rate structure includes a customer service charge, which Post will allocate to each dwelling unit by dividing the total charge by the number of units served by the master meter, including vacant units. For submetered utility service, charges will consist of any applicable dwelling unit base charge and customer service charge. The monthly charges will be calculated by taking the utility's total charges, subtracting any base or customer service charges, and dividing this by total monthly water consumption, then multiplying by the resident's consumption. In cases of allocated service, the master meter bill is adjusted by deducting applicable charges and common area usage, with the remaining amount allocated based on the average number of occupants per bedroom as determined by a specified formula. All irrigation water usage is metered or submetered, and if common areas are not metered, 5% of the utility bill is deducted from the allocation calculation. Residents acknowledge receipt of information regarding their rights and Post's responsibilities under Texas utility submetering and allocation regulations. Tenants have special rights to terminate the lease early in situations involving family violence or military deployment. Additionally, during the first three months of occupancy, residents are entitled to a conditional credit of $0.00 per month on rent, which will expire at the end of a specified period. If the resident vacates prematurely or fails to comply with lease terms, the credit will be revoked, and the previously credited amount will become due as additional rent, with any violations potentially constituting a material breach of the agreement. No pets are currently owned, and the individual acknowledges understanding the pet regulations set by management. They agree to notify management if a pet is acquired and comply with all pet ownership requirements. Violations of this provision may constitute a material breach of the lease agreement. A non-refundable deposit is mentioned, which cannot be applied to rent, and specifics about gate access, including remote control details, are provided. The gate must be used by one car at a time, and the resident assumes liability for any damages caused by improper use. A $350 transfer fee applies if the resident moves to another Post Apartment Home during the lease term, and any concessions received must be repaid as additional rent before transferring. A monthly $5 trash collection fee is also stipulated. There are no special stipulations. By signing, the resident confirms they have fully reviewed the lease terms and agrees to comply with all conditions outlined. The document outlines the requirements for applicants seeking to lease a property. Applicants must disclose their annual income sources, including employment, child support, parental support, and investments, and provide a recent tax return and a detailed income statement. They are also required to list any vehicle ownership, including motorcycles and boats, by specifying their type and registration details. Acknowledgment of potential credit and criminal history checks is necessary. The applicant must agree to provide accurate and complete information, understanding that any discrepancies could result in denial of the application or forfeiture of fees. A non-refundable application fee and various other fees (leasing, pet, etc.) are stipulated, with descriptions of their non-refundability. The document specifies that the application does not constitute a lease agreement and outlines the applicant's responsibilities related to submitting the application and potential penalties for failure to comply. It requires signatures and contact information from both the applicant and co-applicant. Finally, it emphasizes that the applicant acknowledges all terms and conditions presented in the application process. The document outlines the application process for a state driver's license, requiring personal information such as names, dates of birth, current and previous addresses, employment details, and annual income. It specifies the need for a notarized statement if self-employed and includes inquiries about vehicle ownership and pets. The applicant must acknowledge the potential for a background check, which may include criminal history, and understand that the application could be rejected based on this information. There are non-refundable fees associated with the application, including an application fee, legal fee, reservation fee, and pet fees. The applicant agrees that these fees will not be refunded if the application is canceled, and that the property management may retain fees if the applicant fails to occupy the premises as agreed. The document outlines key terms related to the application process for renting a property from Post Apartment Homes, L.P. It specifies that the application includes a non-refundable fee intended to cover the costs of a credit and background check. If a landlord charges any fees beyond a security deposit that exceed $25, these fees must be returned within 15 days of the tenant occupying the premises or if it is decided that no tenancy will occur; failure to do so makes the landlord liable for twice the amount charged. The application fee is retained by Post to cover minimum costs associated with processing the application. Additionally, it notes that certain landlords offering fewer than four dwelling units or seasonal rentals are exempt from these provisions. The document also includes a clause about payment by check, authorizing electronic fund transfers for payment processing. Finally, it emphasizes that this application is not a lease agreement and contains specific legal language pertaining to properties located in Maryland.