Ezequiel Reyna AC Cuellar

Ezequiel Reyna, Jr. Calls A.C. Cuellar A Loser 7 Times In Lawsuit Motion.

in RGV/The News

Last week, Ezequiel Reyna Jr. and his attorneys filed a motion to dismiss on the grounds of a baseless cause of action after Reyna was added as a member of a lawsuit between A.C. Cuellar and newly elected County Commissioner David Fuentes in regards to improper finance contributions.

Reyna and his teams basically flipped off A.C. Cuellar’s allegations and proceeded to call the guy a loser SEVEN times in the motion.

1. A.C. Cuellar (“Cueller”) has sued David Fuentes (“Fuentes”) who fairly defeated him in the election for the Hidalgo County Commissioner’s Court. Cuellar does not contest the result of the lawful election, nor the fact that he lost. Rather than accept defeat graciously, however, Cuellar seeks a consolation prize of sizeable monetary damages, claiming that Fuentes allegedly violated certain reporting provisions of the Texas Election Code, including failing to report loans made to him by his uncle, Ezequiel Reyna, Jr

9. Cuellar’s proposed revisions make three drastic changes to the statute: First, § 254.231 allows an election loser such as Cuellar to sue the winner only if the winner fails to report (1) campaign contributions, or (2) campaign expenditures. Cuellar’s proposed revision to § 254.231 expands the statute to also allow the loser to sue the winner based on the winner’s alleged failure to report loans to his campaign. If the Texas Legislature had wanted the statute to allow that kind of claim to include loans, however, it could and would have written the statute to say so. After all, as seen below in the next paragraph, the Texas legislature knows how to use the word “loans” when it chooses to do so.

Third, § 245.231 allows losers such as Cuellar to sue only three entities: (1) his opposing candidate, (2) the candidate’s campaign treasurer, and (3) the candidate’s assistant campaign treasurer. This statute does not provide a right of action against a candidate’s uncle, nor against a third-party making a loan to a candidate. Cuellar’s proposed statutory revision dramatically expands the scope of the statute to allow Cuellar and other losers to sue innocent third persons (such as Reyna) who in good faith contribute to their opponent’s campaign, loan their opponent money, or who allow their opponent to use real or personal property in a successful campaign. A list of campaign donors or supporters could potentially include tens of thousands of people, particularly in a statewide election. Cuellar’s proposed revision would make the scope of the stature virtually limitless, and allow him and other losers to sue thousands of innocent people who contribute to a campaign or provide loans to candidates. In the unlikely event the Texas Legislature had intended that absurd result, it would have written the statute to say so.

11. There is no legal basis for any court to re-write the clear and unambiguous language of § 254.231 to say what Cuellar wants, which is dramatically different from what it actually says. Texas courts have rejected similar efforts by sore losers such as Cuellar to re-write the Texas Election Code to say what it specifically omits. Sylvester v. Texas Association of Business, 453 S.W.3d 519, 531 (Tex. App.—Austin 2014) (“Given the plain language of former section 253.062, we decline to expand the meaning of “individual” to subject a corporation to liability for failing to report direct campaign expenditures in 2002.”).

Reyna and his attorney’s arguments rely on an explicit interpretation of the statute that they’re being sued under, which when read, penalizes only candidates who receive improper contributions, not persons who make the contributions as well as the interpretation of the word “contribution.”

The motion to dismiss is set to be heard on 4/6.

AC Cuellar v David Fuentes, Motion by Ezequiel Reyna, Jr. to Dismiss Baseless Cause of Action by The Bench Wire on Scribd

4 Comments

  1. Methinks you doth protest too much. The term loser in proper Englishs is being used correctly to indicate a person who does not “win” something. Quit trying to reflect a persons “worth” by changing the correct usage of the language to idioms.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

*

Latest from RGV

Go to Top