The City of Eagle Pass has formally petitioned a Maverick County district court for authorization to conduct pre-suit discovery related to a financial dispute stemming from a city-sponsored event held in April 2024.

Court filings show the city submitted a Rule 202 petition seeking documents and sworn testimony from Jesse A. Minton, both individually and in his role as president of Just 1 Management, LLC, along with associated entities. The request is intended to allow the city to determine whether grounds exist for formal litigation.

According to the filing, Just 1 Management was contracted to manage the event, including ticket sales and related revenue collection. The city maintains that under the agreement, it was entitled to receive a share of the proceeds generated by the event. However, the petition states that the City of Eagle Pass has not received any of the expected revenue.

Based on preliminary estimates included in the filing, city officials believe the amount in question may approach $100,000. The exact figure remains unknown because detailed financial records have not been produced. The city asserts that multiple attempts were made to obtain accounting documentation before pursuing court involvement.

READ: EPISD Food Service Supervisor Domingo Rodriguez Earns Over $70,000, Records Show

Previous reporting by The Maverick Times has documented ongoing concerns raised by city officials regarding transparency, financial accountability, and the safeguarding of public funds tied to contracted services. The outlet has reported that the city’s leadership views the Rule 202 request as a mechanism to obtain clarity before committing taxpayer resources to full litigation.

What the Court Filing Means

The filing at issue is a Rule 202 petition, a procedural tool under Texas law that allows a party to request limited, court-approved discovery before a lawsuit is filed. It is used when access to records or testimony is needed to determine whether formal litigation is warranted. Because no lawsuit has been filed, courts apply heightened scrutiny to ensure the request is reasonable and not used as a fishing expedition. In this case, the Honorable Judge Abascal recused himself, a routine legal safeguard meant to avoid any appearance of bias and not an indication of wrongdoing. The matter will be reassigned to another judge for review. At this stage, no court ruling has been issued and no criminal allegations have been made.

The petition outlines that the requested discovery includes financial statements, ticket revenue records, payment logs, marketing materials, and related business documentation connected to the event. City officials state the information is necessary to complete internal reviews and meet auditing obligations.

The filing emphasizes that Rule 202 discovery is not a lawsuit and does not allege wrongdoing. Instead, it allows a party to evaluate potential claims and assess whether litigation is warranted or whether the matter can be resolved without court proceedings.

READ: EPISD Seeks Attorney General Ruling on Food Vendor Records Request

As part of the case, Judge Abascal issued an Order of Formal Voluntary Recusal. The order cites compliance with the Texas Constitution and judicial ethics requirements. The recusal clears the way for the case to be reassigned to another judge.

The city’s petition notes that without access to the requested records, it may be unable to determine whether contractual obligations were met. Officials state that failure to resolve the issue through pre-suit discovery could lead to formal litigation, which would increase legal costs for all parties involved.

At this stage, no court ruling has been issued on the discovery request, and no lawsuit has been filed. The matter remains pending before the court following the judicial recusal.

READ: Maverick County Invests $1.5 Million in Housing and Community Improvements Through Equity CDC

SEE COURT DOCUMENT BELOW:

doc01939220260122150734 (1)Download