aL po3e a IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OKALHOMA LAMARIO DEWAYNE STILLWELL BENEFICIARY OF THE PUBLIC TRUST & ESTATE, EQUITY & TITLE HOLDER IN THIS INSTANT MATTE! Plaintiff, vs, AUSTIN PIERATT & PIERATT LAW, PLLC; OKLAHOMA HEALTH CARE AUTHORITY; STATE OF OXLAHOMA CHILD; SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT; TRAD) CURE INSURANCE COMPANY; GEICO SECURE INSURANCE COMPANY; AMERICAN MERCURY INSURANCE COMPANY; PROGRESSIVE NORTHERN INSURANCE, COMPANY, Defendants. FILED state oP Sx aHOMA MAY ~4 2023 JOHN D. HADDEN Case No.: 121213 CLERK District Court Case No. CJ-22-2660 FILED IN DISTRICT COURT OKLAHOMA COUNTY MAY = 8 2023 oe DEFENDANT GEICO SECURE INSURANCE COMPANY’S RESPONSE, ‘TO PETITIONER'S APPLICATION TO ASSUME ORIGINAL JURISDICITON FOR WRIT OF PROHIBITION GEICO Secure Insurance Company (“GEICO”) for its Response to Petitioner's ‘Application to Assume Original Jurisdiction for Writ of Prohibition (“Application”), generally denies each materiel allegation against GEICO, and further requests the Court dismiss Petitioner's ‘Application as the matter is not a matter of public concer, nor is there a matter of urgency requiring this Court to assume original jurisdiction and issue a writ of prohibition. In support GEICO states: Petitioner's only claim for relief, namely “seeking release of his full settlement money to be released to Stillwell [Petitioner] and to dismiss all claims against the said settlement money and Stillwell with extreme prejudice” (App. P. 15 935) does not involve the various allegations made against GEICO in Petitioner's Application. Indeed, Petitioner makes vague allegations against GEICO and other named Defendants of various actions Petitioner frames generally as fraud but 1makes no request to this Court to address those various and vague allegations. Petitioner generally alleges that GEICO committed or was party to the following alleged conduet, without asking this Count for relief regarding any of the actions Petitioner alleges GEICO did or was a party to: “fraud of behalf of GEICO” for receiving drafts of a settlement breakdown (App. P. 8, qi) = “violation of 37 CFR § 11.18(0)” for attempting to settle the matter (App. P. 8, $19); = “knowingly us{ing] false writing or documentation throughout” the underlying case by, e.g. “using the court seal to authenticate their fraudulent documents” (App. P. 9, 20); = “acted and were a party to fraud amongst many others” by referring to Oklahoma Case No, FID-2005-8739, which is not before this Court, and alleging Special Judge Barry Hafer was not “legally entitled to preside over [the] case” (App. P. 12, 27); ted knowingly and in bad faith and committed fraud and deprivation of rights against Stillwell” by, it appears, “filing lawsuits and counterclaims against Stillwell” (App. P. 12, $128); end - “engaged in collusion with Third Party entities in breach of their agreement and obligations” by “informing third-party entities of confidential information about the defendant [Petitioner]” (App. P. 13-14, § 29). Petitioner’s Application does not request that any of the above-referenced allegations of misconduct be remedied by this Court by the issuance of a Writ of Prohibition; rather, Petitioner’s Application only asks this Court to reach into Oklahoma County’s district courthouse and telease...full settlement authority money...to Stillwell [Petitioner}” and “to dismiss all claims against the said settlement money and Stillwell with extreme prejudice.” App. P. 1535. While it js not clear what the claims are that were allegedly made against Petitioner and that Petitionerseeks to be dismissed, GEICO has no elaims to the underlying insurance proceeds, and only seeks to disburse the same either by (1) depositing the same in the Oklahoma County District Court’s funds to await further distribution by order of the Oklahoma County District Court, or 2) disbursing pursuant to a settlement agreement of final judgment. Even if this Court were to grant Petitioner's request for relief, the aforementioned allegations contained in Petitioner's Application against GEICO would not be addressed, nor should they be. None of the acts alleged against GEICO or any of the other Defendants in this ‘Application warrant this Court to assume the “extraordinary remedy” of a writ of prohibition. See Umholtz ¥. City of Tulsa, 1977 OK 98, 565 P.2d 15,18 (stating the three elements necessarily present for the Court to issue a writ of prohibition are: 1. a court, officer, or person has or is about to exercise judicial or quasi-judicial power; 2. the exercise of said power is unauthorized by laws 3, and the exercise of that power will result in injury for which there is no other adequate remedy). Certainly, Petitioner has adequate remedies at law that do not require this Court to issue a Writ of Prohibition; namely, Petition can adjudicate the claims at issue in the underlying case and, ‘once a final order is issued that is adverse to Petitioner's alleged interests, Petitioner can appeal that decision through the ordinary process. See Ellison v, Ellison, 1996 OK 64, 919 P.2d 1, 2 (“prohibition does not ordinarily take the place of an appeal that is adequate”). CONCLUSION ‘The foregoing considered, Defendant GEICO respectfully requests the Court deny both Petitioner's Application to Assume Original Jurisdiction and Petitioner's request for Writ of Prohibition, The underlying case can proceed eecordingly, and Petitioner can appeal when and if he so desires through the normal process without this Court exercising the extraordinary relief sought by Petitioner,Respectfully submitted, RARD F. i OBA #11473 JOSHUA K. HEFNER, OBA #30870 RYAN WHALEY 400 North Walnut Avenue Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73104 (405) 239-6040 (405) 239-6766 FAX. jerry @ryanwhaley.com jnefner@ryanwhaley.com ‘Attorney for GEICOCERTIFI 1 hereby certi y that a true and correct copy of Defendant GEICO Secure Insurance Company's Response to Petitioner’s Application to Assume Original Jurisdiction for Writ of Prohibition was mailed this 4% day of May, 2023, to the following by depositing it in the U.S. Mail, postage prepaid. Austin Pieratt, Esquire PIERATT LAW PLLC 512 Northwest 12th Street Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73103 Telephone: Facsimile: Email: oktlaw@gmail.com ATTORNEY FOR PLAINI Anthony L. Jackson, Esquire OKDHSICSS Post Office Box 248822 Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73124 Telephone: (40S) 522-2674 Facsimile: (405) 522-4570 ATTORNEY FOR OKDHS/CSS Josh Holloway, Esquire Deputy General Counsel Oklahoma Health Care Authority Post Office Drawer 18497 Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73154-0497 Telephone: (405) 522-7090 Facsimile: (405) 530-3444 Email: Josh.Holloway @okhca.org, ATTORNEY OKLAHOMA HEALTH CARE AUTHORITY Kaitlyn T. O'Hara, Esquire Breror, Lutz & STELE 13620 N FM 620, Building B, Suite 125 Austin, Texas 78717 Telephone: (512) 231-4701 Facsimile: (512) 231-4704 Email:austinlegal@mereuryinsurance.com [ATTORNEY FOR DEPENDANT, “AMERICAN MERCURY INSURANCE COMPANY Mr. Lamario Dewayne Stillwell 808 Keylin Cirele Blackwell, Oklahoma 74631 Telephone: (580) 304-9045 Email: lamariostillwell189@email.com PROSE Christopher C. King, Esquire Bradley E. Bowlby, Esquire 1800 South Baltimore Avenue, Suite 550 Tulsa, Oklahoma 74119 Yelephone: (918) 872-0373 Email: kris.king@tulsalawyer.org rad. bowlby@tulsalawyer.org ATTORNEYS POR DEFENDANT, PROGRESSIVE NORTHERN INSURANCE Michael G. McAtee, Esquire Christine B. McInnes, Esquire McAtze & Woops, P.C 410 Northwest 13" Street ‘Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73103 Telephone: (405) 232-5067 Facsimile: (405) 232-0009 Email: mikem@meatecandwoods.com christinem@meateeandwoods.com ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT, ‘TRADERS INSURANCE COMPANY Rick Warren Oklahoma County Court Clerk 320 Robert South Kerr Avenue 409 County Office Building Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73102 For the en an