FILED

TARRANT COUNTY
3/25/2025 4:38 PM
THOMAS A. WILDER
141-363070-25
NO._____________________
DISTRICT CLERK

JOHN DOE (“J.N.”), )( IN CIVIL DISTRICT COURT AT LAW

)(
Plaintiff, )(
)(
v. )( NO.
)(
RAFAEL HERNANDEZ, )(
)(
Defendant. )( TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS

PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION AND

REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURE

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE:

COMES NOW Plaintiff JOHN DOE (“J.N.” and/or “Plaintiff”), and files this Original

Petition complaining of Rafael Hernandez (“Defendant”), and would respectfully show:

I.
DISCOVERY CONTROL PLAN

Plaintiff intends to conduct discovery under Level III of the Texas Rules of Civil

Procedure 190.4 because he seeks monetary relief aggregating more than $50,000, and requests

that the Court enter a Discovery Control Plan and place this case on Level III.

II.
PARTIES

1. Plaintiff is over the age of 18 and is a citizen and resident of Dallas County,

Texas. Plaintiff files this action under a pseudonym as a victim of a targeted threat,

vandalism, and property damage. Plaintiff needs anonymity to protect his privacy interests

in this sensitive and highly personal matter throughout the pendency of the criminal case as

well as this civil lawsuit and thereafter. Any such disclosure of his identity would expose

1
Plaintiff to stigmatization, invade his and his family’s personal privacy interests, and would

make him and his family potentially vulnerable to further victimization, retaliation, and/or

harm and damages. Counsel for Plaintiff will inform counsel for Defendant of Plaintiff’s true

name and all circumstances surrounding these causes of action. Plaintiff anticipates seeking

concurrence with Defendant’s counsel for the entry of a protective order in this lawsuit to

prevent unnecessary disclosure of Plaintiff’s real name in the public record.

2. Defendant Rafael Hernandez is an individual residing in Frisco, Collin County,

Texas. Service of process may be had upon said Defendant by serving a citation at his

residence at 10313 Cecile Drive, Frisco, Texas 75035, or wherever said Defendant may be

found. The investigation and related criminal case involving Defendant remains pending.

III.
VENUE AND JURISDICTION

3. Venue is proper in Tarrant County because all or part of the events and/or

omissions giving rise to Plaintiff’s causes of action occurred in Tarrant County, Texas.

4. Jurisdiction is proper because the amount in controversy exceeds the minimum

jurisdictional limits of this Court.

IV.
CLAIM FOR RELIEF

5. Plaintiff seeks, in accordance with TEX. R. CIV. P. 47(c), monetary relief in

excess of $1,000,000.

V.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND

6. Tesla vehicles across the country are being vandalized and damaged as protests

against the company have intensified in recent weeks. Individual owners of Tesla vehicles, like

Plaintiff, are being targeted and victimized by ongoing criminal conduct and action. This has

2
culminated in the “Tesla Takedown” movement, where certain activists are urging consumers to

divest from Tesla products and are organizing protests and other activities that are explicitly or

implicitly urging physical damage and/or violence against Tesla owners and/or their Tesla vehicles.

Plaintiff recently became a target and victim of this criminal conduct and action.

7. On or about March 13, 2025, Plaintiff, who is an owner of a 2022 Tesla Model X

vehicle, parked his Tesla at Terminal A, Level 5, near Gate 17 at Dallas-Ft. Worth International

Airport while he traveled. Upon returning to his parked Tesla on March 16, 2025, Plaintiff

observed significant damage to the passenger side of the vehicle. A deep engraving or indentation

was running along the passenger side of his Tesla vehicle from the rear to the front. Upon review

of video footage from his Tesla’s built-in cameras, Plaintiff was able to identify the cause of the

extensive damage. The camera footage depicted a middle-aged man walking next to the Plaintiff’s

vehicle, holding what appeared to be a key or other instrument in his hand, which he was forcibly

pushing up, down, and across the passenger side of the Tesla as he walked by it. This man was

later identified as the Defendant. Defendant’s actions and conduct were clearly without Plaintiff’s

knowledge or consent.

The incident has captured the attention of nationwide media outlets, including social media.

Recently, the son of the United States President, Donald Trump Jr., “re-tweeted” the incident:

3
Donald Trump Jr.’s statement, “Internet do your thing!”, had 4.7 million views as of March 23,

2025. Knowledge of this particular incident has gone viral and spread throughout the internet, and

to millions of people. The publicity surrounding this particular incident, coupled with that of

countless other similar incidents involving Tesla vehicles across the country, has made Plaintiff a

target and victim of continued harassment and intimidation.

VI.
CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST DEFENDANT

8. Plaintiff would show the Court that violations of local ordinance and statutory

violations by Defendant, civil and criminal, and including the outrageous, targeted actions and

egregious conduct, as set out herein, separately and collectively, or otherwise, were a direct and

proximate cause of the incident and the resulting injuries and damages sustained by Plaintiff.

9. Plaintiff alleges personal property damage and harm to his Tesla vehicle as a result

4
of Defendant’s deliberate, targeted acts, and seeks monetary damages for the loss or reduction of

his vehicle’s value.

10. Further, Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s actions were intentional, extreme,

outrageous, and criminal, and too, were a proximate cause of emotional distress and anguish to

Plaintiff. Defendant targeted and damaged Plaintiff’s vehicle because it was a Tesla. His objective

and intent was to cause not only physical property damage to the vehicle, but also, as an intended

and deliberate consequence, mental and emotional injury and harm to Tesla vehicle owners like

Plaintiff, who would foreseeably and undoubtedly suffer and endure a painful reaction to the

damage, particularly in light of the current Tesla Takedown Movement and related environmental

conditions existing today. Such intended consequences have included threats, intimidation, horror,

shame, humiliation, stress, agony, and worry to Plaintiff and other Tesla owners.

VII.
DAMAGES FOR PLAINFIFF

11. As a proximate result of Defendant’s actions and conduct and the incident in

question described herein, Plaintiff suffered and has sustained injuries and damages, as follows:

a. property damage and pecuniary loss, including diminution of value;

b. past and future severe emotional distress and psychological pain and
suffering;

c. past and future mental anguish;

d. past and future loss of earnings or earning capacity;

e. exemplary and/or punitive damages;

f. attorney’s fees; and

g. court costs, pre- and post-judgment interest.

5
 VII.
CLAIM FOR PREJUDGMENT AND POST JUDGEMENT INTEREST

12. Plaintiff herein claims prejudgment interest and post judgment interest in

accordance with Texas Finance Code §304.001 et set. and any other applicable law.

VIII.
JURY DEMAND

13. Plaintiff tenders the appropriate jury fee and requests that a jury be empaneled to

try all fact issues in this case.

IX.
NOTICE PURSUANT TO T.R.C.P. 193.7

14. Plaintiff provides notice to Defendant pursuant to Rule 193.7 of the Texas Rules of

Civil Procedure that Plaintiff may utilize as evidence during the trial of this lawsuit all documents

exchanged by the parties in written discovery in this case.

X.
REQUEST FOR INITIAL DISCLOSURE

15. Pursuant to Rule 194, Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, Defendant is requested to

disclose to Plaintiff within 50 days of service of this request, the information or material described

in Rule 194.2 to be produced at the Nachawati Law Group, 5489 Blair Road, Dallas, Texas 75231,

during normal business hours.

The Defendant is hereby given notice that any document or other material, including

electronically stored information, that may be evidence or relevant to any issue in this case, is to

be preserved in its present form until this litigation is concluded.

6
 XI.
PRAYER

For these reasons, Plaintiff prays that upon final hearing of this case, that Plaintiff has

judgement against Defendant for damages described herein, for the costs of suit, interest as allowed

by law, and for such other relief to which Plaintiff may be justly entitled.

Respectfully submitted,

NACHAWATI LAW GROUP

/s/ Steven S. Schulte

Steven S. Schulte
TX State Bar No 24051306
Andrew P. Bias
TX State Bar No 24077783
Majed Nachawati
TX State Bar No 24038319
5489 Blair Road
Dallas, TX 75231
Telephone: (214) 890-0711
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]

ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF